which is more complex,chess or xiangqi(chinese chess)?

You are confusing non-equivalence of mirrored moves in positions where the symmetry is already broken with absence of symmetry. f4 is exactly the same for positions where the King stands on d1 as c4 is in the more common position where the King is on e1 (if the Rooks have already moved). That the symmetric partners of Chess positions are all rarely encountered in games, because people do not like to destroy their castling rights by putting the King on d1, is totally irrelevant for how many positions there exist.

In XQ playing Cb2-b9 is also totally different from playing Ch2-h9, after black has played Af9-e8.

Perhaps it is easier to understand by taking an actual example? Suppose we simplify XQ and Chess such that there are only white pieces, and only 2 Rooks and a King. Chess would have 64*63*62/2 = 124,992 different board positions without castling rights, 62 with only K-side or Q-side rights, and 1 where you have both rights. Not all positions represent different game states, however: for every position without castling rights (say Kg3, Rb2, Re7) there exists an equivalent one that is its mirror image (in the mentioned case Kb3, Rg2, Rd7). This mirror image is never equal to itself, as a piece always moves to another square on reflection, the number of file being even. The two mirror images represent the same game state. So the number of game states is only 62,496 + 2*62 + 1 = 62621.

For Xiangqi there are 9*89*88/2 = 35,244 positions. Of these, 3*40 are symmetric (K on e0, e1 or e2, one Rook in the rectangle a0-d0-d9-a9, and the other Rook in the mirror position, i.e. on f6 if the other was on d6 etc.). All the other positions are asymmetric, (e.g. Kf1, Rb2, Rg7), and transform into a different position when mirrored in the central file (Kd1, Rh2, Rg7 in the mentioned case). These two positions are equivalent,and together represent one game state. So there are (35,244 - 120)/2 + 120 = 17,682 game states.

You see that the division by 2 of the number of positions to get game states occurs both on 8x8 and on 9x10. In XQ there are 60 extra game states compared to a simple dicvision by 2 (0.34%) because of the symmetric positions possible on an odd-width board. Quite negligible. For Chess there were 125 extra positions (0.2%) because of castling.

The lower XQ number is caused by the King confinement. Evenness of the board width hardly enters.

You seem to be fixated on positions that can be reached in just a few moves from the standard opening position. These form a totally negligible fraction of all positions. 'Game-state complexity' refers to all reachable positions, not to the positions that happen to occur frequently in GM games. Actually positions with a King on b1 (which are the mirror image of positions with a King on g1) are not nearly as uncommon as you seem to suggest. There is no magic involved at all in reaching them. Just Q-side castling...

XianQi is certainly much more drawish at the top level, something like close to 90% of the games are draw. This is due to no promotion and half the pieces cannot cross the river.

Xianqi is somewhat more complex, quantitatively. But then that was pointed out many posts back.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_complexity

ive played Xiangqi alot  it is very tactical game but thats part of the ebb and flow and the nature of this game. sharp postions are reached more easyily.postional because the tactics need a good basis for tactics to flourish in the postion. the endgame is intresting althought ide like to increase my expertise in this face of the game. overall xiangqi is a very intresting game just decribeing the game as tactical discredits alot of the sublities in the game. 

I read the entire thread before I made this comment.

I have not played Xiangqi OTB although I have studied it in the past.

I think that what really matters is what happens OTB, so I am not actually able to form an opinion until I play a lot of games.

I did notice however that a few people like to post numbers and talk about game trees etc etc.

Most of these games, chess, shogi, xiangqi, janggi, etc have one starting position, a few of them do allow you to optionally swop some pieces around at the start of the game.

Stratego allows you to place your units how you want but they all basically move the same way (there are some differences)

Here we go...Here is the game that I made.

main board is 9x9, main board is basically EMPTY at start of game, side boards have random game queue for every game.

The total possible game starting positions with only the 2 kings on the game board is:

1,102,701,600 (approx. one billion)

:)

After White has deployed his King, Black plays, then White has 18 options for his second move (Move King = 8, plus deploy to game board = 10)

So the number becomes on Whites second move 18 * 1,102,701,600

Then on Blacks second move he also has 18 choices so the number becomes

18 * 18 * 1,102,701,600 = 357,275,318,400

350 billion after 2 moves (white and black)

Hows that for a game tree 

Regards

Warlord

Final Wars

www.finalwars.com

Here is a link to my youtube lesson 1 of how to play Xiangqi:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8R8a8CqVw0

Why do all the knowledgeable people about these technical things come from the Netherlands? Arisktotle, you and so forth.

I think that another name for 陆战棋 is 军棋.

Due to the fact that Xiangqi has no pawn structure and has a larger battle atea, the game is less strategic but more tactical than western chess

I have played Xiangqi many times now. The main difference is that here is no basic pre-decided plans/opening. So we have no pawn structure games and it increases the demand of positional play. So we can say that Xiangqi is more complex at least for now. By the way, शतरंज (Chess) is Undoubtedly more fun and seems much more better (even BEST) game. And I love Chess. 

   If you like this article, please subscribe my channel Umang Knight on YouTube

I've played both. Chess is far more fun. Xiangqi is largely a tactical game.

In Cantonese, it is Jurng-kay. Did you also know that as a player of the game XiangQi, the best way to checkmate is to sacrifice your knight and use your chariots and cannons to capture the general !

How to play Xiangqi in English:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8R8a8CqVw0&t=91s

Go is the most elegant game.

My Xiangqi set has pictures instead of Chinese characters.  Cannons, wheels, crowns, elephants.  Makes it much easier for an English speaker to play.

There are plenty of books on opening theory for Xiangqi, but most are written in Chinese.  (I haven't read any of them, but I have browsed some articles on the internet about the subject.)

My opinion is this: xiangqi might have much more different positions, but it lacks variety: nearly all Chinese positions contain plenty of tactical shots, while chess has also many very exciting positional games. This makes chess much much more complex. Perhaps this is also something we call in Dutch "comparing apples to pears".

Don't forget Singapore!