Relative piece values in Chaturanga?

Obviously the pieces are weaker in this variant (Reminds me a lot of Xiangqi), which results in much slower games. But I am not sure how good the pieces are in relation to each other. I will post what my initial impression is according to the standard chess scale (Queen = 9, pawn = 1), if there are any experienced players reading, I would love your input!

Chariot-5

King-3.5 (Based on power) 

Knight-2.5 

Ferz-1.5

Alfil-0.5

Pawn-0.5

One interesting thing to note is that your king is the 2nd strongest piece so you must use it to attack!

Pawns are much worse because they cannot promote or move 2 squares on turn 1

Alfils are just as useless only having access to 8 squares

Knights are worse because they can't occupy outposts as easily

I don’t really agree with the knight as knight can have a great outpost if you trade well

the alfil should worth 0,it blocks your pieces and is of litheral no use,recommend that it trade with a pawn

the ferz is too weak,I would not like to give my rook for 3 ferz or my knight for 2,not to mention 3 pawns is actually much stronger than 1 ferz

I like the scale proposed by @KykSoHod (basically recalculation of values form Wikipedia):

a/h-pawn 1

b/g-pawn 1.3

c/f-pawn 1.6

d/e-pawn 2

Alfil 2

Ferz 2.8

Knight 5.3

Rook 8

King 4.8

I would modify it slightly, the way it is done in chess-playing engines, splitting values between midgame and endgame. I have impression that game phase is the most important source of controversies about alfil value. In the middlegame, no pawn is stronger than alfil, and alfil takes defended pawn is actually a sacrifice (which often works because of disruption it causes in enemy pawn structure). In the endgame, passed pawn is slightly stronger than alfil, because ferz > alfil, and alfils do not control that many squares useful for blocking a passed pawn.

oh??

I agree with nescitus. If one player conquers a good outpost for the alfil in the middlegame, it can become a very annoying piece. However, as pieces get traded the alfil's value decreases. Eventually, as the match approaches the endgame it starts being more of a hinderance, and trading with a pawn becomes the obviuous choice.

I wouldn't object to trading an alfil for a central pawn from the get-go, however I'd treat it as a pretty aggressive playstyle, maybe similar to how you'd consider someone playing the King's gambit, the Bird or Danish gambit in normal chess. Thread carefully,

Also, no way a King is stronger than a Knight. Although I'd say they aren't too far apart in value, maybe like a point or so.

I think alfil=ferz=pawn=1. It's just a modifications of pawn

Knight=3, Chariot=6 or 7 (There is no stronger piece, queen. Chariot and king can checkmate without other help, other pieces can't do it)

I don't know how to attack with king => King=2,5

Why does everyone like to overrate alfil

How much does it even do?

I usually just trade it off a pawn

alfils together on e3 and d3 control many squares.

you mean 4...

If you put them behind pawns. that would be all the squares on the 5th rank. However, alfils are terrible in the endgame.

I absolutely hate chaturanga alfils. Making them move 1 OR 2 squares diagonally would buff the alfil a lot. This version of the alfil should be 2.5 points.