Forum

just look at this game first 6 moves https://www.chess.com/variants/4-player-chess/game/33081079

I don't understand now i am playing on mobile but there's no 4PC How??? [Changes Corrected Title]

4 Player Chess League Teams & FFA Finals FFA Premier League FinalsSunday, December 18th - 18 UTC @jbolea@Radon @rojitto @martinaxo Format: FFA Points System. 1st - 3 points 2nd & 3rd - 1 point4th - 0 points First to 10 points puts the lobby in Check, and must win again to win the first FFA Premier League Final. Teams Premier League has reached the Final Brackethttps://4playerchessleague.com/teams-premiere-league-championships/Final Bracket Elimination game today between LazyLegend & 4PlayerChessyClub December 17 - 23 UTC LazyLegend @LazyImp @Legend-007@JCrossover_14 4PlayerChessyClub@ChessyClub @fourplayerchess @Matttin More info about the 4 Player Chess League can be found here: https://4PlayerChessLeague.com

why is it saying that someone on my network joined i dont have 2 accounts...

I played a game yesterday https://www.chess.com/variants/4-player-chess/game/32984567/84/1 On move 25, I was probably winning. Soon, I made some terrible moves and if green didn't spare me, I wouldve died. Any tips on how to play these positions?

[Edit: screenshots removed] Admin 4pc pls doing something with this alt account!

After server restarttried to come back but shows this error

The primary purpose of blocking in 4PC is to make sure that idiots don't mess up your game, NOT to make sure that the blocked person can't message you, or post in your forums. If one person blocks another within 4PC it should be a 4PC block, which is different from a regular block.

To make 2nd-4th lose equally and HEAVILY - for example, for 4 people with the same rating, if 1 wins, they win 100 but if the other 3 lose they lose 33.3 each. If it doesn't work, make the loss heavier, for example winner wins 150 while losers lose 50. This will make sure that everyone plays for 1st as the win is HUGE and everyone will want to play for the huge win. If people are still complaining, make the wins bigger and the losses bigger, so that more people will want to win and not lose. Also the losses are HEFTY, so everyone will play for 1st. No more playing to avoid 4th, No more gifting points to an undeserved 2nd, No more playing for 2nd or 3rd!

Vibgyor2 wrote: Play-banned wrote: "Blocking doesn't work for anonymous, but in anonymous you don't know who your opponents are so there's no point in blocking. I would say that it remains this way otherwise people will block pros on purpose so that only noobs will be in the anonymous game, and it makes rating farms easier. Btw I got blocked by the user, come on why! This means I can't post on that thread so I have to create a new thread. We should make blocking not affect posting on the blocking user's thread" The problem is not that a player may not target/throw on you. The point is that I don't want any noobs who're in my blocklist. Say for example this game :- " https://www.chess.com/variants/4-player-chess/game/32899114/82/1 " that dude threw like anything for no reason...and that might be the key reason for him to get into my blocklist at 1st place! And the thing you told later that "rating inflation" and high rated players inflating without getting high competition...that's completely baseless and senseless I get that there are going to be noobs in your blocklist who you don't want in your games. They can be annoying indeed. Maybe make it so that 2 people who are already in the game have to be blocking that specific user for him to not be able to join that anonymous game. That makes sure that its a well-known noob and not 1 player blocking every pro there that no one else has blocked. I get that its getting ridiculous about me responding to another thread in this way, I apologise, I have to do it this way if a person has blocked me. I know that its 3 responses in a row. Sorry admins, but I feel like this thread will become locked/deleted even.

Those are the pieces on each side. Does anyone want to test this out?

Blocking doesn't work for anonymous, but in anonymous you don't know who your opponents are so there's no point in blocking. I would say that it remains this way otherwise people will block pros on purpose so that only noobs will be in the anonymous game, and it makes rating farms easier. Btw I got blocked by the user, come on why! This means I can't post on that thread so I have to create a new thread. We should make blocking not affect posting on the blocking user's thread

there are a lot of reasons of why it would be useful, my main reasons are: 1. as i like playing variants that you have to wait a lot of time for people to join, you would be more motivated to stay on the page and not going to do something else and abort the game when it starts 2. you can ask/explain to other people how a variant works, or also explanations about the standard game that beginners could ask, like "why my opponent stalemated and won?" etc

I would like to start off this post by stating that I am very glad that the rating system has been updated to have last place lose the most points. I was not at all surprised that players voted the solo rating system out as it was widely disliked. People understand the importance of having last place lose the most points as an incentive to play the best you can and not get the least points. Also the satisfying feeling you get after taking out an opponent and avoiding the big rating loss of last place. That being said, I still very much dislike the fact that 2nd and 3rd lose equally. I understand the rationale for why 2nd place was no longer awarded + points. People taking the lazy route and ending the game early to get 2nd and a 1st place winner throwing away pieces to usually their opposite or whoever helped them get 1st ( a pretty scummy thing to do to cheat someone out of a hard fought 2nd place victory even if it was well intentioned to reward someone for helping you get 1st ) etc. But I will list what I see are the important reasons for there being a difference between 2nd and 3rd place. 1. As far as I am concerned if you earn more points, you played better and should be rewarded accordingly. That is taken away if ANY place loses equally. 2. People need incentives to stay in the game as long as possible. I have posted before about a handful of games that I have had where I hemorrhaged material early on in the game, but managed to stay alive with only 1 or 2 pieces left and was able to be an asset to my opposite ( or it could be your right or left opponent as well) and managed to pull out a 2nd place victory. There was no path to 1st save a series of unlikely blunders from the other players, but there is a path to 2nd with the right play. 3. Related to point 2 is that there does come a point in the endgame with 3 players left where 1st is no longer possible for 1 or 2 players, but they can get 2nd by teaming up at the right time with the player who will win. One of the key factors in 4PC is mutual benefit. If 2nd and 3rd lose equally, that is lost. On the issue of how to dole out the 2nd and 3rd rating points if awarding + points for 2nd is permanently off the table, then why not have 2nd lose 0 or only 2-3 rating points and have 3rd lose 4-5 if 2nd is 0 or 7-8 rating points if 2nd is 2-3? So those are my thoughts I would like to hear all of yours. The bottom line is that I really HATE the idea of any place losing equally. It leaves me with a very unsatisfied feeling.

if there is solo why does in ffa there is a loss for second place?

Hey guys! Just wanted to see if anyone would consider the idea of making the solo rating system a playable option. Both scoring systems would have the same rating, but there would be two different options. I think that some people have suggested this and I hope the idea is employed, since many people prefer solo.

Just wanted to post about the change I have noticed in the rating system. Comment and let's work to keep it. PS here is a game that illustrates that if you refuse to give 2nd + points AT LEAST have a difference between 2nd and 3rd. https://www.chess.com/variants/4-player-chess/game/32003608/245/1 UPDATE What happened? I played a game earlier https://www.chess.com/variants/4-player-chess/game/32330180/187/3 where there was a difference between 2nd and 3rd. Did I imagine that or have the rating systems been changed around?

there are so many topics about FFA points where somebody say it should be with all the points to the winner and small difference for other places, and others saying there should be significant difference between 2nd 3rd and 4th. so why not bring back the separation between solo and FFA? they are totally different games to me, each one is good at his own way, and they should have separated ratings