When preventing castling doesn't compensate for a 960 King’s Gambit
I agree that the castling rules in some Schnargls are more off-putting than they are in 518, so I think the Schnargls which put the rooks on the a- and h-files are a fair compromise (I'd joke "Chess960 Lite", but maybe there's some connotation of "960 is a variant") — people can suss castling in those positions more readily, especially when the kings start on the e-file.
The positions where the king and rooks are set unusually present a novel problem: While an opening pawn sacrifice in 518 is usually justified if the opponent is prevented from castling, that might not bother the opponent at all in some Schnargls.
The positions where the king and rooks are set unusually present a novel problem: While an opening pawn sacrifice in 518 is usually justified if the opponent is prevented from castling, that might not bother the opponent at all in some Schnargls.
