Feedback about the new 4PC version

I said eta 1-2 months (eta = estmated time of arrival)

Like, daily? or just longer live games?

any time control except daily. eg only "live" games.

sigh

Can you make 4pc daily as well???

I am not fond of the idea of getting banned for talking about teaming in a free-for-all. To me, it makes no sense. No matter what people will team. You don't have to talk to team there can be a non-verbal team and they won't get chat-banned for it. Technically a chat-ban should only be used for profanity or bullying or scamming. Teaming doesn't fit under any of those. It is a strategy among many that should be allowed to win a game.

How can I observe other games? When I move the pointer to a game it shows the position but I do not see the position change. Also sometimes other players kiebitz during my games (which I usually don't mind). How do they do it? 

There is a more libertarian group among the admins, but so far the anti-teaming group has prevailed  I am in favor of offering as an option a 'free chat' or 'diplomacy' variant, where teaming per chat is perfectly acceptable.

Click on the far right of the game where the points or team icons are.

Yes that would be nice. I don't see any problem against teaming. It's a natural thing. Even in other types of games people will team up with each other than at the end take the other out. I like that kind of game it brings more to it if you know what I mean.

thanks VAOhlman.

As teaming is concerned, teaming with a random partner might be ok, but if there are gangs who cooperate against everybody outside the 'family' I don't like it. They should be honest and play the team variant.

It is not a matter of honesty. It has long been recognized my FFA theorists that players across from each other form natural teams in FFA. There are several reasons for this, perhaps the most significant is that they recognize that if the player across from you is defeated first, your own chances of winning go down greatly.

I believe in "natural teams" and in a total ban of chat in case one of the player wants it - exactly the way things are now. Much wisdom and love was put into this new way (for me!) of playing. 

On another note, I have my thoughts about the "obligatory WTA" feature for players rated 1550 and up.

Is it the case that the obligatory WTA was born (for 1550+ players) because of a fear of "collusion"? So you take two points from the 2nd player finisher (give him -1 rather than +1) and give them to the winner (+4 instead of +3) and to the 4th player finisher (-2 instead of -3)?

All the rage is against that poor 2nd place finisher... he's accused of many nasty things... :-) and finally they also take his points - as they say "second place is the first loser"...

- - - - - - - - - 

I think that some form of "collusion" is at the heart of the game - and that penalizing second place might be a bit harsh on those players who made 1550 because they have some talent, but who are still relatively inexperienced in the game.

I suggest another system:

When you have four 1550+ players - let them VOTE whether they want the game to be WTA or regular FFA - and decide by a majority vote (anonymous or otherwise). 

If 2:2 - let the vote of the lowest-rated player decide. 

This way play won't get monotonous and overly harsh all the time once you (and all of your opponents) cross this magical 1550 threshold. 

What do you guys think?

1550+ players won't be forced to play WTA. But the World Championship games will be WTA (Solo Play).

Nice!

Nevertheless, wouldn't it be better to implement my suggestion (voting once the game begins)?

The reason I say this is that it might take a long time until four people show up, who want exactly the option that I selected.

Already in the existing state, sometimes the waiting times exceed 30 seconds or even 1 minute. 

So get four people who already want to play, and THEN ask them which variation they want. 

Another thing, I don't see the currently employed playing mode (+3 / +1 / -1 / -3), which is the one I like the most - because it creates even spaces of two points between the four different results. 

If it depended on me, I would only give these two options: +3 / +1 / -1 / -3 (standard, but no STD please) - and +4 / -1 / -1 / -2 (WTA). I would give them inside the game (before move 1) - as described in my previous post. 

The problem with the non wta mode is that it favours going for second place and not fighting over first in most situations. The two players in the strongest position will likely take out the weak links and take 1st and second (or who are the two best players).

This creates anti competitive gameplay. It is usually just about who has the better opposite or is willing to work together to get 1st and 2nd. Wta for players who understand how to play it is a lot more dynamic. Weak players will not necessarily be targeted because they can be used to work against the winning player. You constantly need to shift priorities of who you attack. You dont want to be winning too much, otherwise you will be teamed against.

These are very good arguments for selecting WTA. 

I simply want it to be elective, not obligatory. The discussion between me and BabYagun is about **how** to do it - through a drop-down menu before the game (which might increase waiting times for the games due to multiple variant and not that many players), or by voting after the game starts (before move 1 - which is my preference). 

By the way - at some point when you are winning too much it's REALLY too much - you can no longer be effectively teamed against by players with no teeth left...

Personally I see nothing wrong with pragmatically playing for 2nd and even 3rd place to limit damages - but these are slightly different flavors of basically the same ice cream. Personally I could have it either way (I just played my first WTA game, btw - here's the effort, with an entertaining chat after it with the blue player: https://www.chess.com/4-player-chess?g=957878)

By the way - I see that you have tons of experience in WTA and you definitely know what you're talking about... I'm still very new to the game and only played this variant (WTA) once. Still so much to learn...