[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ][ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ][ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]Single Comment Ideal Values and Practical Values (part 4). Additional details on the values of Chess pieces.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Jeremy Lennert wrote on 2011-04-13 UTCExcellent ★★★★★Can anyone explain to me why color-switching it supposed to be a disadvantage? The colors of squares have no inherent mechanical significance. Color-boundness results in some squares being unreachable, and this can be generalized in a way unrelated to colors; e.g. D plus narrow knight can reach only half the ranks, while D plus wide knight can reach only half the files, and thus presumably have an equal disadvantage even though they can change colors. Trying to generalize 'color-switching', I've come up with: 1. Any series of moves that returns the piece to its starting square will involve an even number of moves, never an odd number. I don't see any obvious reason this would be a disadvantage. 2. The piece does not attack any of the same squares both before and after any move. I can see situations where this would be a disadvantage, but it also seems like an advantage, since it means you can attack more new squares after a move, and thus increases 2-move mobility and (presumably) forking power. By #2, I think NA, ND, and WA are also 'switching' despite having color-preserving moves, as are F, D and A alone.