Modern Military Analogues for Chess Pieces

Originally, chess pieces were to represent different branches of ancient military:  represented chariotry,  cavalierly,  elephantry, and  infantry.  was the prime-minister of the .  Imagine you have invented the game of  chess in 2017 . What would be the most accurate modern military analogues for chess pieces now?  Let's brainstorm! My take:

 Artillery

 Helicopters

Tanks

Infantry

 Airforce

 Can represent the Country as whole! 

Yours seem quite well-conceived. King could simply be commander-in-chief.

Rook- missilery

Knights- tanks

Bishops- airforce

Queen- the Marines, since they also contain their own planes, and artillery

King- commander in cheif

Rook- Tanks

Pawns- Infantry

Knights- Drones

Bishops- Snipers

Queen- Special forces

King- Leader of the nation

Magnus Carlsen- Napoleon Bonaparte/Julius Ceaser           

the thing is knights are relatively slow moving pieces

They are slow moving but they can go over other pieces. Hence, me calling them drones (Also, as far as I'm aware drones aren't that fast but I'm no expert)

Rooks - Elephants - Towers - Tanks

Bishop - Camels - Chariots - Artillery

Knights - Cavalry - Helis/Drones

Pawns - Infantry 

Queen - Minister - Air Force

King - GHQ or Capital or civilian leaders

My concept is based on an Army skirmish. They can be based on real opposing armies (example cold war US Army vs Soviet Army). Since I have been viewing Tamiya models so the scale of the board could be insanely 1:35ish.

Pawns - attacking/advancing Infantry units. And squad groups could be used to make the whole battlefield more realistic. Different squads could be mounted on larger square base and placed on a large terrain board square.

Bishops - could be a Machine gun unit or Machine gun nest.

Knights- knowing the movement/attacking mode of the knight, a Mortar team could be used.

Rooks- a Battle tank or light armored vehicle could be used (ex. Humvee).

Queen- in a modern setting, an attack helicopter could be used (ex. a Huey, or Blackhawk vs a Hind, etc.). But if you were to make a WW2 scenario, a main Battle tank could be Queen and lesser armored vehicles could be Rooks (ex. Machine gun Half Track units).

King- an Army HQ unit or a Mobile HQ units (with the General in command).

Like I have said, looking at Tamiya, Hasegawa or Airfix models have given me this vision of a modern army for chess.

I believe it gets more comprehensive when you look at how the pieces interact with each other. Could you imagine a situation where a pawn defends a bishop? I imagine two things... 

Perhaps a machine gun or a sniper nest? AA guns? 

What if we looked at castling for example... the "bodyguard" says to his protectee "Get down!" 

I can imagine the queens mobility, speed and range closest to a battleship. 

That also being said... 1 turn in chess is technically simultaneous....

Cheers!

Excellent, this is very good insight

Pawn: foot solider

Knight: attack drone (?)

Bishop: Sniper

Rook: Tank

Queen: Bomber

King: Commander/General

Pawn: soldier (reason is obvious)

Knight: Attack helo (only piece that can jump, just like how choppers are the only army units that can fly - I’m thinking of Apaches)

Bishop: Jeeps (Lightly armored, mobile units; bishops are restricted to one color, just like how Jeeps are restricted to dry land)

Rook: APC (Something heavier than a bishop, and able to go places they can’t - an APC fits that pretty well - fast moving, heavily armored, can swim, but clunky - the BTR series is excellent)

Queen: Tank (Even heavier than an APC, and can swivel its turret to fire in all directions - but a real army is likely to have more than 1 tank - perhaps because of cost? If that’s the case then nothings more expensive than the M1 Abrams)

King: General

It helps to look at this as a single unit, like a brigade or division, rather than the whole army

Also, a pawn that promotes is now a soldier that has raided the enemy arms depot - not sure how castling would fit though

A knight blocking a pawn is now a helicopter hovering, ready to strike, an outpost is an airfield, and a bishop backing a pawn, possibly blocking the enemy’s passed pawn, is a reinforced barricade of jeeps and men, and so on...

If we should seek professional help solely because we are comparing chess to real life, what are you doing on a forum that is comparing chess to real life?

My grandfather was in the navy. Every year I visit CFBs to practice my marksmanship. In ’19 I stayed 2 weeks at a military airport to receive advanced training. There are real, healthy-minded people, there for a reason. The military is not a mental asylum.

There is a memorial outside my high school, with a real military vehicle (forgive me, but I don’t know the exact type - though my guess is a LAV-25) and a cenotaph. To call the people whose sole legacy are these markers psychopaths is disrespectful to say the least.

Please refrain from making wild, unsupported statements in an attempt to derail our discussion.

Mr. Harding, I am going to try to be polite.  You have no idea what you are talking about and eveidently have watched too many movies.  Speaking for U.S. military people are not psychopathic killers.  They are honest, patriotic, hard working, honorable people. They are fathers, mothers, sons and daughters.  I have never met a crazed blood thirsty, psychopathic killer in the military, not one.  If they exist, they are probably about as common to the military as the are to civilian society. 

War is a last option and it is a disgusting business.  It is no call of duty game.  No one who ever goes to war and experiences it first hand comes back unscathed.  Our VA hospitals are full of folks missing limbs, disfigured, blind, paralyzed, and suffering psychological problems.   They serve to protect us, even though so many put them down and would be the first to cower if they ever had to face an armed enemy.  Yeah, I served for 21 years.

Military camp?  Were you a prisoner?  Where exactly?  waiting....