user15223: Obviously a lot is going to depend on the exact position, but I'm asking if there are any general signposts - e.g. bishops usually get better than knights if the position is open, or in an endgame, but I can't say the same about Q vs 3 minors.

user19861: Generally speaking the queen is going to be better when the opponent's king is exposed to checks and/or when the position is "loose" ie pieces and pawns hanging, pawn weaknesses etc.
If the side without the queen can hold the position together and push a passed pawn there isn't really anything the queen can do.

user10380: According to the Syzygy tablebase, the position is likelier to be winning for the queen than for the minor pieces.

in KQ v KBBN, 48.9% of positions are wins for KQ, a further 2.3% are frustrated wins for KQ, 26.2% are drawn, and 22.6% are wins for BBN. (Frustrated wins are positions which are theoretically won, but in practice drawn because the defending side can get a 50-move draw.)

in KQ v KBNN, 49.7% of positions are wins for KQ, 30.4% are drawn, and 19.9% are wins for BNN.

in KQ v KNNN, 38.3% of positions are wins for KQ, 47.8% are drawn, and 13.8% are wins for NNN.



user13074: A lot depends on whether there are other pieces involved and the pawn structure.
If you mean positions with Q alone vs three minor pieces then relative king safety comes into play. The side with the Q tries to expose the opponents king and harass it.
The Q alone side may need to create connected passed pawns to make progress since the pieces should easily cope with a single passed pawn by twice covering the square in front of the passed pawn.
However, the side with three pieces may need to only create a single passed pawn to create winning chances.
Also, the three pieces side would find it easier to create fortress type positions at least to avoid defeat.
Personally, I would prefer to play the three pieces for the previous two reasons.
But (there's always a but!) in blitz time formats I would prefer the Q!
(As an aside, I once drew a strong IM in a regular tournament game with only two pieces v Q and equal pawns by setting up a fortress.)
I don't have a chess database but someone who does may be able to research positions with just Q vs three minor pieces and provide some statistics.

user4362: The queen does a good job when there are a lot of weaknesses to attack, especially if the opponent's king is out in the open, so there are a lot of options for double  attacks.
The pieces are generally stronger if they can coordinate and the king is still relatively safe. Earlier in the game that's usually the case.

15223: <p>Obviously a lot is going to depend on the exact position, but I'm asking if there are any general signposts - e.g. bishops usually get better than knights if the position is open, or in an endgame, but I can't say the same about Q vs 3 minors.</p>
 19861: <p>Generally speaking the queen is going to be better when the opponent's king is exposed to checks and/or when the position is &quot;loose&quot; ie pieces and pawns hanging, pawn weaknesses etc.</p>
<p>If the side without the queen can hold the position together and push a passed pawn there isn't really anything the queen can do.</p>
 10380: <p>According to the Syzygy tablebase, the position is likelier to be winning for the queen than for the minor pieces.</p>
<ul>
<li><p>in <a href="https://syzygy-tables.info/?fen=1nb1kb2/8/8/8/8/8/8/3QK3_w_-_-_0_1" rel="nofollow noreferrer">KQ v KBBN</a>, 48.9% of positions are wins for KQ, a further 2.3% are frustrated wins for KQ, 26.2% are drawn, and 22.6% are wins for BBN. (Frustrated wins are positions which are theoretically won, but in practice drawn because the defending side can get a 50-move draw.)</p>
</li>
<li><p>in <a href="https://syzygy-tables.info/?fen=1nb1k1n1/8/8/8/8/8/8/3QK3_w_-_-_0_1" rel="nofollow noreferrer">KQ v KBNN</a>, 49.7% of positions are wins for KQ, 30.4% are drawn, and 19.9% are wins for BNN.</p>
</li>
<li><p>in <a href="https://syzygy-tables.info/?fen=1nn1k1n1/8/8/8/8/8/8/3QK3_w_-_-_0_1" rel="nofollow noreferrer">KQ v KNNN</a>, 38.3% of positions are wins for KQ, 47.8% are drawn, and 13.8% are wins for NNN.</p>
</li>
</ul>
 13074: <p>A lot depends on whether there are other pieces involved and the pawn structure.</p>
<p>If you mean positions with Q alone vs three minor pieces then relative king safety comes into play. The side with the Q tries to expose the opponents king and harass it.</p>
<p>The Q alone side may need to create connected passed pawns to make progress since the pieces should easily cope with a single passed pawn by twice covering the square in front of the passed pawn.</p>
<p>However, the side with three pieces may need to only create a single passed pawn to create winning chances.</p>
<p>Also, the three pieces side would find it easier to create fortress type positions at least to avoid defeat.</p>
<p>Personally, I would prefer to play the three pieces for the previous two reasons.</p>
<p>But (there's always a but!) in blitz time formats I would prefer the Q!</p>
<p>(As an aside, I once drew a strong IM in a regular tournament game with only two pieces v Q and equal pawns by setting up a fortress.)</p>
<p>I don't have a chess database but someone who does may be able to research positions with just Q vs three minor pieces and provide some statistics.</p>
 4362: <p>The queen does a good job when there are a lot of weaknesses to attack, especially if the opponent's king is out in the open, so there are a lot of options for double  attacks.</p>
<p>The pieces are generally stronger if they can coordinate and the king is still relatively safe. Earlier in the game that's usually the case.</p>
