Another idea for "non-teaming" gameplay

Sort:
GustavKlimtPaints

This idea involves completely eliminating any system of points for one. The idea is simple: when a person gets checkmated, the attacker gets first place and the person who got checkmated gets last place. Both of their pieces become grayed out and the remaining two people remain to fight for second place.

GustavKlimtPaints

Some things I see happening with this and some offshoot ideas:

- checkmating your opposite doesn't put you at a disadvantage as you win the game on the spot, so it wouldn't be discouraged.

- it encourages active play, because if you play passively and defensively you will miss out on first place; encourages play against the kings

Some possible ideas: 

- To discourage players from playing solidly and building up a better position so that they can have an advantage in the fight for second after two others are gone, one possible scoring would be + points for 1st, 0 points for 2nd, - points for 3rd and 4th. Then you are really motivated to go for first.

- Another possibility is that when one person gets checkmated the game is simply over and only the person who won \ got checkmated have any changes to their ratings, while the other two stay put. Kind of weird and very different, more similar to Teams mode, but two players were essentially bystanders. I think this could lead to some really fun situations though, where two players are in a terrible position and trying to hold on as long as possible to save themselves.

- I think some variation of this could be a decent system in the case of all four players trying to win and being committed but I think it can become very problematic when players resign \ make huge blunders and hand somebody the win etc. How do you handle somebody leaving \ disconnecting? Perhaps one idea is you keep their pieces on the board and as long as there is a mate \ forced moves (so no ambiguity of what they would play) you keep them alive and have that move be played until they are checkmated. This can handle cases when people leave one or two moves before they are about to be mated, but what about the rest? I don't really have a good answer and maybe it's problematic enough that this wouldn't work at all. I suppose you could make it a race to capture the king like it is currently but that's pretty advantageous to the player following in order! 

- Of course someone allowing a friend to checkmate them would be terrible sad.png

- I haven't thought about all the possible ramifications and don't know if this is a good idea at all, but I think it's an obvious one and should be discussed! 

Skeftomilos

It will be an interesting idea in its own right when the "Resign" scenario will be resolved in a reasonable manner. Until then the idea will remain incomplete. Unfortunately I have nothing to suggest as a solution either.

As an anti-teaming measure I think it would perform poorly. Teaming, if allowed, would remain the optimal strategy. Just avoid checkmating any of the two non-teamed players too early, ensure that they are both extremely weak, and then toss a coin to determine which member of the team will deliver the first checkmate and which the second.

BroncoB

I believe there may be a thread from about a year ago that suggested no points.

If I find it I'll post here. 

I would value serious thoughts on this thread if you wouldn't mind.

https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/lower-the-point-value-for-king-checkmate-a-discussion-2018-11-03

BroncoB

Here's that thread.  Somewhat related.

https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/idea-to-replace-the-points-system

GoodKnight0BadBishop

Interestong idea

BabYagun

Sounds good as a new variation. You are the 1st one who dared to offer to gray out winner's pieces  Creative and brave.

Handling resignations (and disconnections) is a problem, because (if not handled) it converts your idea to "the last man standing". Red is going to be checkmated, so, he resigns (or imitates disconnect). He is the 4th. Other 3 players continue playing. Then Blue resigns. He is the 3rd. Yellow and Green fight for the 1st place. As a result, we have a pure "the last man standing".

tommerrall949

What about when there's an extremely incompetent player who get's checkmated with ease? Surely this would mean that the winner won't necessarily deserve the win?

BroncoB

I first read your post last night and it was rather early in the a.m. so didn't have much time to think on it.

1st off... congratulations on making the leaderboard in FFA.  Unfortunately I witness it first hand frustrated.png

We have such a small fraternity of very active FFA players right now and even a smaller one that write in the forums.  Perhaps more people read them however.

I say that because I see some good things in this idea but the team mentality has taken hold and is the law of the land per se.  I'm afraid that 2 opposites who know and trust each other will quickly attack the same player and they will have "fun" as to see who will mate him first.  They may stay and watch or may go to another game quickly and attempt the same thing to move up the leaderboard since more games could become available.

We have an even smaller fraternity of high rated very active players. When they are all on the same board I will guarantee that it is a team game in the beginning much like it is now.

BabYagun

So, we should remove FFA leaderboard? And/or make all games unrated?

BroncoB

@BabYagun

No I wouldn't advocate that.

But Skeftomilos has put up some very good comments in another thread that frankly I'm in agreement with.  Although he doesn't appear to play much.   I think the point value put on the King is what is skewing this to a team game.  I just need other folks opinions on that because maybe it's wrong.  And no I'm not trying to promote a thread I started.  I am not a person who seeks pomp and circumstance