Chess pieces' values

There is no problem of the pieces' values right now. But, it needs to be rechecked again for future terms. Are the pieces' values actually right? Do they need to be calculated by formulas? 

For example, a pawn may be one point, but it can be promoted into a greater value.

A king could be equal to 64 queens.

A queen can control 28 squares, a knight controls 8 squares, a king controls 8 squares, a rook controls 14 squares and a bishop controls 14 squares if they are placed in the center.

If the pawn is on the second or seventh rank (according to color), then it is 4 moves (counting all possibilities).

Andrew Soltis offers a good overview of the different values that have been assigned to each piece over the past two centuries.

A queen controls a maximum of 27 squares. The bishop 13.

Maybe a pawn is 1.5 points.

A knight is sometimes more valuable than a bishop sometimes. All the pieces' values depend on the game.

Each piece in a position has a relative value depending on its position. Sometimes a knight or bishop is more valuable than a rook, other times a pawn is more powerful than a queen.

A pawn is more valuable than a queen if it is a passed pawn.

well, it depends on the position of a pawn. Just because it's passed does not mean it's going to promote.

Makes sense. It depends on how much the attack or defense does the player maintain with its pieces.

Center pawns are worth more, except in certain endgame positions.

True.

What?

If the passed pawn isn't stopped and it soon gets promoted to a queen, it is more valuable than a queen.

Why would a future queen be more valuable than a queen? It doesn't make any sense.

Not to mention that your original statement didn't even have the "isn't stopped and it soon gets promoted" part in it.

I am explaining to you and the others as well who will read this. Maybe the opponent queen is weak or overloaded or doesn't have a defense or counterattack. Maybe our passed pawn will promote and give material advantage to us.