Forum

Ok, so the server got fixed (not really) I just lost a game due to disconnecting (more than twice). (I lost 11 points for my bullet rating if you can restore it) This brings me to another issue, when I went to the archive to look for the game to take an ss, it's busted and It only shows bullet arena games for me, and when I try to clear the filters, it doesn't work.

answer pls

I participated in almost all arenas except the 00:00 AM ones, I also highly suspect that someone has been cheating today, but whatever it just succ for those who actually came to play seriously, but they got disturbed. Anyway, I got some great experience playing the qualifier #8 where I got a nice winning streak, I wasn't expecting this at all, especially when I saw who my opponents were (a1t19 , carlos and typicalmove) those games were really hard I still can't believe I won 3 games in a row. I won't be playing next week, good luck to all the participants.

This is an answer(s) to any complaints about the first three qualifiers. 1. Luke couldn't postpone the qualifiers because he probably had already told @icystun that he would have the world championship cycle before icy went sailing. (June 26th or so). Would you rather have rojitto, Radon etc..., or the world champ himself. 2. Why were the qualifiers not 2200+? Maybe because Luke wanted to let the weaker players have a chance, to grow the playerbase. Or maybe he simply couldn't enforce a rating requirement on the test server, I don't know. But I think it was interesting and I personally found higher rated games easier to win. 3. All players that qualified in these arenas are as much qualified as anyone else who will qualify. They didn't cheat, hack or hypnotize. They simply played an arena that was setup by the director, and won.

Have you ever tried to join a game only to see a player has blocked you? My main issue is the fact that some people block without a solid reason, and it affects my ability to join certain queues. Just now someone blocked me after getting 3rd place. This might sound like I'm just complaining, but this is just an issue for multiple people. I won't say who blocked me because that isn't allowed here.

Ok, so we all know by now the Leaderboard was removed right? To fix lag I think? So here's the deal: It made the server worse. There are several other minor bugs. Sometimes you don't actually gain a rating when winning a match due to a bug. The disconnects are more common. I don't know how many more players we're going to lose because of this. Variants is heading towards destruction with these unnecessary changes.

Fsr i am winning but not getting rating but those who lose, lose rating . can i get my rating bcs i won but it said i din't - https://www.chess.com/variants/4-player-chess/game/27254067/23/4

Some people might know that if you simply type /all in chat in a teams game and send it, everyone gets a message like this: (Player name): (Everyone): and thats the whole message that appears, now it looks false if you never have seen someone do it, it is only possible in teams mode, sodont attemptto replicate it in ffa, unless it id diplomacy mode, whaere /r, /b, /g and /y can do it as well. https://www.chess.com/variants/4-player-chess/game/27230997/3/2 this match has aninstance of anempty message.

I got on here the other day and old standard was back so I played a few. Now its back to new standard? Do the admins have any sort of plan? Why do they make changes people don't want? Then flip flop? Now there are votes to change to newer starting positions? All the while this forum is full of complaints and there seems to be a lot less people playing.

so, you've lost nearly every piece. You got 3v1ed and those damn bishops are zipping through and killing you. Do you give up? Hell no. Everyone, take a look at this game where I ended up prevailing after such a scenario happened. Always remember to NEVER GIVE UP https://www.chess.com/variants/4-player-chess/game/27142544/177/4

https://www.chess.com/variants/4-player-chess/game/27188557/137/4 Figure this out lol. Lets see how many people will make fun of me.

Why are titled players allowed to have a alt. If you go to report and press "multiple accounts" it says "The player uses multiple accounts without permission from Chess.com. Note that titled players are allowed to have a secondary account and some players may have requested permission to use a secondary account for e.g. blindfold games or a speedrun."

I think 4 player chess would be more balanced if blue and greens queens and kings were switched. [StartFen4 "R-0,0,0,0-1,1,1,1-1,1,1,1-0,0,0,0-0-3,yR,yN,yB,yK,yQ,yB,yN,yR,3/3,yP,yP,yP,yP,yP,yP,yP,yP,3/14/bR,bP,10,gP,gR/bN,bP,10,gP,gN/bB,bP,10,gP,gB/bQ,bP,10,gP,gK/bK,bP,10,gP,gQ/bB,bP,10,gP,gB/bN,bP,10,gP,gN/bR,bP,10,gP,gR/14/3,rP,rP,rP,rP,rP,rP,rP,rP,3/3,rR,rN,rB,rQ,rK,rB,rN,rR,3"][Variant "Teams"][RuleVariants "EnPassant"][CurrentMove "0"]

We can experiment with O(-x2) and/or O(-x10) It only works for the 4 player stage, so idk if it's possible to make (the default version of this option) to last only until someone reaches 20 points or until we reach the 40 moves. It's only the question what rating system to use. I would try Solo with either default +20 promotion 8th or +10 promotion 11th I would like to try O(-x10) because you can get your opposite mated with capturing only 1 pawn, so no one would do it for the cost of -10 and not knowing if it will result into a checkmate even.

Im not exactly a good 4pc player lol https://www.chess.com/variants/4-player-chess/game/27140523

In the past few days I have disconnect and lost in at least 5 4pc games. First I get a message asking me if I want to stay or leave on the page. Then all the sudden everyone clocks freeze and reloading doesn't work. I try a lot of stuff and finally I exit and reopen the page. But then I come back to me finding my clock at 0.0 and a message that says "Squealingnickel has disconnected" and another message that says "Squealingnickel has forfeited on time. Is this my connection or is this just the 4pc server because it really needs to stop. Thank you. -Squealingnickel

UPDATE: The following ideas are meant to generate a discussion and not to suggest an immediate change. To my knowledge, most agree that the optimal FFA scoring system has a discrepancy between 2nd and 3rd, and 4th. If we are to follow through with this system, I think the next question is what the optimal values for 2nd and 3rd are. I don't think that the answer to this question is obvious given multiple pros and cons. So far, I have seen the following suggestions: 2nd 3rd +0 / +0 +0 / -1 +1 / +0 +1 / -1 -1 / -1 (UPDATE) Potential cons of +1 / +0: players playing for second place when they could play for 1st UPDATE: Will this cause players to team to the end? As I state in a later post, I wonder if giving 2nd a + may, ironically, prevent teaming by allowing not only the strategy to play for second, but also allow the strategy to punish one who plays for 2nd into 3rd (I sincerely do not know if this alternative is true and do not mean to suggest that it is. I just want to raise it as a consideration). Potential pros of +1 / +0: the option to play for second place as a means of punishing others playing for 2nd These cons and pros also exist for +0 / -1, but may further dissuade playing for second place. Still, one could choose to play for 2nd out of spite for or fear of 3rd in such a setup. Potential cons of +0 / +0: constant shifts in 2 vs 1 alliances in the 3-player stage, which may result in duller play. UPDATE: At the same time, +0 / +0 may also result in more interesting FFA play if players are crafty. Potential pros of +0 / +0: the benefits of playing for 2nd place are nullified Potential cons of +1 / -1: playing for 2nd place may become a viable strategy Potential pros of +1 / -1: the viability of playing for 2nd place may encourage players to prepare for safeguarding against 3rd place during the 4-player stage (and may thus reduce "strong" teaming with sacrificial play against a player with a passive opposite) Potential cons of -1 / -1: As stated, I think this leads to duller play and prevents the capacity to punish foolhardiness when one plays for 2nd. Potential pros of -1 / -1: Others believe that this may help to prevent foolhardy teaming. What are your thoughts?

What do you like most about 4pc?

https://www.chess.com/game/live/473076080114 Like no..

Four player Chess should have a strategy guide for beginners in addition to the rules. There is not really a good one at the moment for beginners to my knowledge.I would think one for ffa and one for teamsMy questions are a. if one were created would it be put in the variants interface somewhere, so it would be seen? In other words, are the four player chess admins interested in this being around?b. if admins, or anyone else for that matter, have a particular care for who does it?--- I also am interested. Does 4pc collect data such as retention rates on it's players? If not, can that be considered?