Feedback about the new 4PC version

This aborting thing is good and all but can you make the timeout a bit faster? Because we have  to wait smth like 70 seconds. (and there are lots of afk people)  I believe it wouldn't be a problem if you resemble timeout like in live chess. Thanks

In the new release the wait will be 30 seconds instead of 75. Also those who abort too often will get a playban, the more they abort the longer playban.

That sounds nice

Could you please store the rating range in the account and not in the browser? I play using a browser in private mode and I have to set it every time. Thanks!

Well, you have to survive if you want to win or to ge 2nd place, nothing wrong with that

@kapitancho, 

> Could you please store the rating range in the account and not in the browser?

Thank you for the suggestion. It should be done in the next 4PC release.

Also there will be separate rating range selectors for FFA and Teams.

Make a vote on how many people are satisfied with the current system 1 minute, 15 second increment, then process your way. Adding filters in game for 75sec and 30 sec will take a longer time to get 4 players on the board.

Yeah that's why this game is called Free For All, you would need little bit of luck in every game

@stoppromotion Well,  I think it would be nice to try the 9th rank promotion idea for a while.  I think it would contribute to make it so the better player has a higher chance to win.  Even though your arguments sound correct, it's hard to fully vizualise everything that this new approach would create;  you just have to try it.   

> Promotion on the 9th Rank and not the 8th (Feedback Part 1)

We can test it when 4PC players pool is big enough to split it up.

> 1) Please add the colors white and black to the colors of arrows that can be drawn. 

On our test server you can draw arrows of 5 different colors. Did you try it? In the new version this feature will be available on production server too, of course.

> 2) Please add a symbol that can be drawn on-screen.

Can you show some screenshot? From, some chess software like ChessBase, for example. From some chess video or whatever.

> 3) the glitch still exists when a player clicks to "exit" a room after observing a game

Please send that video and description to chess.com support.

> 4) I know this would be a lot of work to correctly implement, but would it be possible to "invite" a person online

Please send this suggestion using "Help - Make a Suggestion" menu.

> 5) Please consider making it a feature for premium members to have access to the "archive" of all played 4 player chess game as well as the chat.

This is included to the next release. As I know, it is going to be a free (not premium) feature. But I cannot promise it will stay free forever.
The private (team) chat will be hidden. FFA chat and (Everyone) Team chat will be visible. 

> 6) Please make a "play replay" feature for premium members.

> 7) Please make a feature for premium members to watch "4 Player Chess TV."

Please send these suggestions using "Help - Make a Suggestion" menu.

> 8) Oh, I almost forgot. Is there a way to search members of this forums posts?

Honestly, I have no idea how to do that. Maybe Google can help.

> 9) Is there a way to see player's peak rating in 4 player chess? When I click on a player's profile, I think that would be useful to have displayed. Peak rating and date.

No, there is no way to see it now. In future we will integrate 4PC ratings (both FFA and Teams) into chess.com statistics, so you'll see rating change history.

Thank you for the ideas!

Probably you have noticed, sometimes pieces create illusion and you can't tell which one is real. And illusion acts together with real one till captured.  

@alynurly, it is a known bug, listed here: https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/list-of-known-bugs
You should refresh browser page or press Shift+Ctrl+R to remove the illusion.
We fixed this bug on our test server. In September it will be fixed on production.

Some more games, if you need it:

#94840

#94951

#95104

Thank you, it may help to find the reason.

Actually, it looks like the range is just completely ignored for opponents and only works for finding random teammates. Both our ranges were set to 1600 by the way.

I've just played a game with CaiusMersa and our average rating is 2000+ between us (even after losing many points on both our behalves). We were against 2 low level players (a 1500+ and a 1300+) and lost due to a lag on Caius' phone. We lost nearly 80 points between us. Game number is #95995 if you're interested.

Our position was very strong and there's no question we were going to win, yet due to this rating system, we lost a crazy number of points. This wouldn't be so bad, but we played about 30 games before this, and gained about 11 points. (We average an increase of 0.4 points for every win). I have to say, expecting us to win 1 game in 100 is crazy, because wifi disconnectivity alone will make your rating go down.

So I vote to bring back the -30 cap limit, or at least make this glicko a little more sympathetic to bad wifi. Thoughts?

well it's  2100 vs 1450.  you and your teammates deviation was higher (86 and 83) than theirs (66 and 68). 

i think the problem at the moment is that the old teams rating system produced overrated players. the new leaderboard requirements (3 games in two weeks, after next release) should help speed up ratings being balanced (glicko does a good job of this once ppl start playing)