What happens in an endgame where only elephants, advisors and soldiers are left on both sides, with no major pieces?
These answers restate the rules implemented by our open-source engine, which follows the WXF laws and is regression-tested against the official 110-diagram repetition casebook. Where an answer refers to a specific position, that position lives on the linked reference page, where the build verifies it against the engine before publishing.
Direct answer
With no chariots, horses or cannons on either side, neither general can be attacked directly, since advisors and elephants can never leave their own half of the board to help. The game turns entirely on the soldiers: whether either side's pawns can advance far enough to threaten the palace against a defence that is otherwise completely intact.
Why this is a genuinely different problem from a normal soldiers-only endgame
A pure soldiers-and-generals endgame, with advisors and elephants already gone, is mostly a race; here, both defensive corps are still fully in place, so a soldier reaching the enemy side faces two elephants and two advisors ready to block it, not an empty board. Breaking through at all, rather than simply outrunning the opponent, is the real question.
What actually decides it
Look for a soldier that can reach a point the defence cannot cover, most often by advancing where the elephant's fixed diagonal points do not reach, since elephants only guard specific squares rather than the whole approach. If neither side's soldiers can find such a gap, the position is often simply a draw, regardless of how many soldiers either side still has.
Related questions
Is this endgame common in real games?
Uncommon; it requires an unusually complete trade of every attacking piece on both sides, which most games do not reach.
Does having more soldiers automatically help here?
Only if they can actually reach a gap in the defence; extra soldiers that cannot break through add little on their own.
.