Yes, consensus seems to be that most are overrated by several hundred points. It's almost as if the programmers are doing this deliberately to make us feel better about our games. Still, they can be useful practice.
Question about computer opponents
Sort:
Jun 20, 2021
0
#3
baddogno wrote:
Yes, consensus seems to be that most are overrated by several hundred points. It's almost as if the programmers are doing this deliberately to make us feel better about our games. Still, they can be useful practice.
That's what I thought. The 700 player I just played (a real person) was stronger than the 1000 lvl computer character. 
Ah well.
They are heavily overrated in several thousand points, i just beated easily 2000 expert level 16, and i usually get destroyed here by 1100 rating humans:
Off course, i played in challenge mode.
Why did chess.com say computer level 16, is 2000 rating??! why do they lie to us this way?? it's not funny, now i don't have any idea of the real rating of the computer levels 
I think the bots are hardcoded to deliberately blunder when certain conditions are met.
dikmasterson wrote:
I think the bots are hardcoded to deliberately blunder when certain conditions are met.
Only the low levels behave that way, blundering a piece, because it's difficult for engines to simulate low chess levels.
However, engines at high levels don't give away pieces, only simulate strategic and tactical mistakes.
Yesterday, I played two of the computer opponents (the highest was 1000 in rating). I managed to beat both. Are computer opponents generally easier to beat than a real person of the same level?