All Setups

You can't compare 2pc and 4pc when it comes to this.

Because theoretically black and white can play the same moves. They mostly don't because there is some interaction, but they could. But there is also interaction in 4pc. So there won't happen the same moves as well. But the ability to play the same openings is what matters.

If some castle to the right and others to the left, you just don't have the ability to play the same opening with each color.

If black copied white move for move black would just lose. The ability to play the same opening with every colour isn't something we should want.

In 4pc I think it's beneficial to have that option. In Omatamix in can play Pegasus with every color. In Old Standard I need two Openings and in Bsrti I probably would need four.

How is less variety in the opening beneficial for the game? Less variety is seen as "boring" by some players, which has discouraged them from playing 4pc at all.

I am not talking about less variety. There are a lot of opening lines possible in Omatamix. I am talking about being able to just learn one opening to come out of the opening and play the real 4PC.

You don't need to play it that way. You can vary your openings if you want. But I prefer it that way. And I think a good setup should make both possible.

Black's ability to copy white on move 1 is a big reason for why 2pc is as balanced as it is, I think. Interestingly, some of the most common theoretical lines in 2pc are lines where white forces black to deviate in order to avoid losing material (1. d4 d5 2. c4, 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5). Also, the queens play an important role regarding white's ability to prevent black from continue copying white's moves.

Why is it a problem that you can't play the same opening with every color? Or rather, why is it a problem for players besides yourself?

It's not a problem. It's just beneficial if you can play the same opening with every color.

There are different player types. Different people enjoy different things. Some like trying new stuff, and some like sticking to one thing and perfecting it to the maximum.

High elo players are mostly the 2nd type. So especially for them, it is beneficial if they can play the same opening with every color. But more important: Giving those players the ability to do so, does not take the ability to try stuff from other players.

And I claim that Omatamix has even more opening variety than old Standard. So it satisfies both groups.

There is basically only one group that is not satisfied: Radon
Because what satisfies him about games is being unsatisfied. And as Omatamix is not as unsatisfying as old Standard, he has to be unsatisfied with the change so he can feel the same satisfaction.

Drat I've been foiled, all the other accounts complaining are my multicuentes. Time to abort mission...

Gotcha!

If you wanna know my opinion thought through and backed by arguments click here.

But I am done with being reasonable. Now it's time to bash Radon.

Show me all the different openings you can play in Omatamix vs Old Standard, I really want you to cover all the Team's openings as well.

Radon was crushing the FFA New Standard Arena so he has no problems playing Omatamix.

What is your theory as to why 50% of 4 PC players are no longer playing since the merge? 

Where does the 50% come from? Sure there are less players. Many factors can be involved, including the disparition of 4pc in the menu. Also, maybe some players were addicted to the game and just take the change of starting position as a good moment to stop playing without really bothering learning it. Sure the "boring factor" explain some players stopped playing. There is no one reason for everyone as you know.

The modifications in rating changes in FFA also have an impact. The constant uncertainty in the upcoming starting position is certainly a factor too. Lot of people wants stability and they probably don't want to spend their time learning 4 differents positions until we finally "agree" on one.

Sorry, I can't go into teams openings, I know nothing about teams.

I can't go much into opening theory at all, because I developed Pegasus (1.k4 2.f3 3.Ni3 4.g4) which can be played in almost every game, and I basically only play this. But the fact that I play Pegasus and not the Standard 1.h3 shows that there are different openings to choose from.

My theory why 50% of players left is that there were 4 changes done at once: Setup, Time Format, Rating, Variants Merge. Some players might not have liked a specific change some might not like change at all. 

But I think each of the changes was right, and in the long run, 4PC will benefit from that.

Yup, highest performance rating by a mile of anyone who played more than a couple games.

If I remember right the real good players had a better performance but fewer games...

Im talking about someone playing one game, winning with say rojitto, carlos or myself in the game and having a performance rating of 3100 then not playing again.

I mean, if you want to go there, we can.  After 1.e4 by far the most common choice for Black is one that breaks symmetry (1...c5).  Same for 1.d4 (1...Nf6).  Black, on average, chooses the asymmetric line against White's first move twice as often as the symmetric option.

Not exactly relevant but the most testing line against e4 e5 nf3 nf6 nxe5 nxe4 is qe2 qe7 qxe4 d6 d4 dxe5 dxe5 nc6 nc3! qxe5 (nxe5 nd5!) qxe5 nxe5 nb5! where black hasn't lost any material but is much worse

+1

Having TPR as a qualification method is a poor idea, as there will always be an optimal number of games to play (and then stop playing after) no matter what requirements/restrictions come along with the rule

Luke is streaming live now, here's the clip where the 50% drop in games comes from

https://clips.twitch.tv/VivaciousTsundereGoblinMcaT-U54U4bSV4qYOabvD

If you're subscribed on Twitch, you can watch the full @fourplayerchess stream here

https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1472681437