Bishops are worth more than Rooks in 4-Player

Bishops are more powerful than rooks. And, obviously, Queen points should be increased too for the same reason bishops are deemed more valuable. Maybe Queens should be just 10 but look at it this way - in standard chess R + B = 8 and Q = 9. in 4-player B + R = 10; so Q = 11 is way more reasonable than the current 9.

I think they should go with -

bishops = 7 (at least 6)

rooks = 5

queens = 11

And the pawns? What about the pawns? It is much easier to promote a pawn in 4-player chess, because you don't have to overcame the barrier of the enemy pawns like in normal chess. And when promoted they retain their value. They are becoming super pawns with the mobility of a queen. I would say that their constant value should be at least 2. So...

Pawns: 2 points
Knights: 3 points
Rooks: 5 points
Bishops: 7 points
Queens: 13 points
Kings: 25 points
Pawns promoted to Queens: 2 points
Dead (gray) pieces: 1 point

Bishops are limited to 1 color. Rooks can move to a square of any color. Why is a bishop more powerful?

Let's say it is an endgame. Player "A" has a king and a rook. Player "B" has a king and a bishop. Who is most likely to win?

@BabYagun at the endgame the rooks are more powerful, but before the endgame the Gods have placed the middle game. Lets suppose that at the start of the game you were given an one-time option to replace your two rooks with bishops (with the current value of the pieces). Would you take it or not?

1 point for dead pieces is too much

Yeah, dead pieces should be worth 10% of what they would be if they were live

I agree it should be about either 10%

Rooks can help a pawn promote so they are worth a lot in the beginning/middle game.

@Skeftomilos, I agree with Zezombye.

@ Skeftomilos

I know the question was directed at BabYagun but I would take 2 more Bishop's in  a heartbeat for my rooks at the beginning of the game. Bishops are more powerful in the beginning and the middle of the game IMO the end game I will give it to the rooks but by then I would rather have that promoted queen then either the bishop or the rook and that is typically (from my limited experience) I have seen. If the higher levels have only 1 queen at end game I.e. no one during game promotes (and KEEPS) a second queen then I would give more weight to the rooks.

I disagree that bishops are worth more because rooks are vital for pawn development and the bishops only look better as they are more dominant in early attacks. The balance is good. The 1 point queen is a little odd but can be a deterant for people to trade off there rooks for them.

I like the points with no changes. Bishops are better than rooks, but could be the same difference than knight and bishops in normal chess. In certain situations rooks are better. I also think than dead grey pieces should remain with no points

Another reason that bishops are preferable to rooks is because your rooks are targeting your best friend, and you don't want that. You want to target your backstabber and worst enemy first, and only after these two are eliminated to proceed with fighting against your friend.

If pawns worth 2 points, so knight 4 points and grey pieces don't worth any points

But if knights worth 4 points, then pawns worth 3 points. Because you can promote pawns to queens, but you can't promote knights to anything!
And if grey pieces worth zero points, I should be able to jump over them.

A colorful position. Blue tried to prove that his rooks were more powerful than my bishops, and caused me great trouble in my first and second rank. Luckily Red intervened by exploiting his own back rank problems, forcing Blue's king to search for a shelter at my right flank. But it was a death trap.



In this position I delivered the checkmate with my knight.

Not really, rooks are definitely the better piece in the endgame. The bishop is better in the opening while in the middlegame, it depends on the situation. Bishops are mode ideal if you want to launch an attack and rooks are more ideal if you want to promote pawns.

One value which should be changed is that of the queen to 11 points as the queen’s diagonal abilities are even more effective in 4 player than at regular chess.

I agree

@Skeftomilos, you have a strong logic usually, but now you show us some irrelevant example. In that checkmate the following pieces participated: 2 red queens, 1 red bishop, 1 yellow queen and 1 yellow knight. How is it related to "my 2 bishops are stronger than his 2 rooks"?

You play in a sandbox with another child and try to grab his scoop. But he does not allow. Your older brother comes, snatches the scoop and gives it to you. Then you say: "I am stronger than that boy!"

The rooks help promote your pawns in the opening and/or middle game. I still think bishops are better though. Easier to activate. You'll need three moves to activate your rook whereas you only need one move to activate your bishop. Right off the bat he's aimed at the heart of your enemies' camp. When fianchettoed he's pointed at their weak knight-pawn. It's usually either the bishops or the queen that manage to bring an opponent to his knees early on. Bishops are monsters in the opening phase. The rooks are pretty much irrelevant until at least one player is eliminated. Games are usually decided before the endgame anyway, so bishops are unquestionably a much more crucial part of your army than your rooks.

Let dead pieces remain worthless. There doesn't need to be an incentive to clean the board from dead pieces other than for the purpose of making way for your pieces.

When are team games coming back?