My reading of the rules has both players simultaneously placing pawns on starting positions.
Isn’t this problematic? Might’nt I want, from a tactical POV, to wait until my opponent places to finalize my positions? And might’nt my opponent want this as well? Which leaves us at an impasse unless we make a friendly agreement to sort of ignore each others’ placement? Which seems to go against the tactical win-or-lose nature of the game?
I don’t have an answer but this strikes me as a problem.
I’ve seen no drastic advantage in initial placement. But, if you want, make a house rule that, since the black pieces move first, they have to place first. Or place them one at a time, taking turns.
It’s a theoretical problem. Even in highly competitive games, there’s never been a problem with placement. Players develop their preferred starting configuration and roll with it.
I prefer a reverse wedge right now. How about you?
I usually do two pairs on the front row. But, like I dais, I don’t really see any advantage to it. Just like the uniformity. I don’t think you can win the game with initial placement. Smart playing and lucky draws win the game.
Good to know the concerns on paper don’t pan out.
I haven’t played enough to develop a preference. Rather, I usually play 2-4 games in quick succession, trying out new formations, and then don’t play the game for weeks so I forget everything and start all over again. It really is about the time for me to start observing more closely how formations affect the outcome of play.