Not pay to win.
Who else think chess.com is pay to win
Sort:
Feb 5, 2022
0
#43
Samir_7u7 wrote:
i sometimes feel that [another site -- VP] is way better than chess, because i can do analysis for free there, the only good thing in chess.com are the fog of war and 4 player chess
sorry bro analysis is done by the pink squishy thing in between your ears, you should try using it every once in a while
Feb 5, 2022
0
#44
@ChesswithNickolay no they have really bad servers, i heard it from other people as well. Just look at lichess, you can make so many more premoves in lichess then on chess.com
Feb 5, 2022
0
#45
bensonchi wrote:
@ChesswithNickolay no they have really bad servers, i heard it from other people as well. Just look at lichess, you can make so many more premoves in lichess then on chess.com
on lichess their premove system is zero seconds, while chess.com's premoves are 0.1 seconds. It's a difference in design.
Also, you can only do one premove at a time in lichess, meaning if you're the second guy in a time scramble you're at a disadvantage.
Feb 5, 2022
0
#46
@Russell504 my friend @DavidRMerrikin speaks spanish VERY fluently.
Feb 5, 2022
0
#47
technical_knockout wrote:
@Russell504 my friend @DavidRMerrikin speaks spanish VERY fluently.
your friend has a creative profile picture
Feb 5, 2022
0
#48
B1ZMARK wrote:
bensonchi wrote:
@ChesswithNickolay no they have really bad servers, i heard it from other people as well. Just look at lichess, you can make so many more premoves in lichess then on chess.com
on lichess their premove system is zero seconds, while chess.com's premoves are 0.1 seconds. It's a difference in design.
Also, you can only do one premove at a time in lichess, meaning if you're the second guy in a time scramble you're at a disadvantage.
lichess servers are 10x better.
Feb 6, 2022
0
#49
"all the top players have diamond and that is why they are at the top"
they are at the top, so they get free diamond(talking about titled players here)
how is chess.com pay to win? the only thing that is holding you back is yourself. you cant just buy a queen or king, unlike other games where u can buy materials that WILL give you an advantage.
you are sayin chess.com is pay to win only because you have a negetive attitude towards improving and such your ego has taken over and u have started this bu11sh1t
Feb 6, 2022
0
#51
It's not pay to win, it's pay to analyse, which is exactly what differentiates chess.com from it's alternatives, which in turn is exactly why that should cost money.
Generally, charging money for a service is indeed pay to win, and you can choose to stay pessimistic about that forever or just accept how the world is.
Feb 6, 2022
0
#52
you don’t need to pay for a computer analysis on chess.com. You only pay for a slightly stronger engine to Analyse with.
And generally speaking, for most of us we don’t need a depth 30 engine.
Feb 6, 2022
0
#53
Samir_7u7 wrote:
i sometimes feel that [another site -- VP] is way better than chess, because i can do analysis for free there, the only good thing in chess.com are the fog of war and 4 player chess
I analyze after every game I play here. And I have an entirely free membership.
The button is right there, with a little checkered magnifying glass that says, "Analysis":
You can click it after every game.
It gives you an analysis board very similar to the one on Lichess. And it's 100% free.
You can even toggle the settings, to set the engine depth to "Unlimited". You can also change the engine, if you want to see what Komodo thinks, as Komodo has slightly different positional preferences. (Lichess doesn't have this ability. There, you're stuck with Stockfish only).
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
bensonchi wrote:
@ChesswithNickolay no they have really bad servers, i heard it from other people as well. Just look at lichess, you can make so many more premoves in lichess then on chess.com
The premove system is different on both sites. Therefore, the permove speed has nothing to do with the servers. Chess.com has some of the best servers in the world, I am really jealous of them.
Lichess provides the same servers for all the membership. CC provides its’ superior servers for the paying membership while the non- paying membership plays on slower, less stable servers. No doubt CC servers are of the best available (for the premium membership). CC’s most reliable servers are reserved for the Elite players and their cash tournaments. The obvious fact has been repeatedly pointed too- on pay sites … money $ talks / don’t pay walks.
Feb 6, 2022
0
#55
StormCentre3 wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
bensonchi wrote:
@ChesswithNickolay no they have really bad servers, i heard it from other people as well. Just look at lichess, you can make so many more premoves in lichess then on chess.com
The premove system is different on both sites. Therefore, the permove speed has nothing to do with the servers. Chess.com has some of the best servers in the world, I am really jealous of them.
Lichess provides the same servers for all the membership. CC provides its’ superior servers for the paying membership while the non- paying membership plays on slower, less stable servers. No doubt CC servers are of the best available (for the premium membership). CC’s most reliable servers are reserved for the Elite players and their cash tournaments. The obvious fact has been repeatedly pointed too- on pay sites … money $ talks / don’t pay walks.
That is not true. The live server process is the live server process and everyone played in the same system. It's possible they might be able to spin an additional one up for special events, that isn't something normal, if it's even being done.
A simple speed test comparing connections proves the point. Log in and play as a premium member and log in as a non- premium member or play as a guest and a dramatic difference is recorded in connection times and stability.
In days past Staff even advertised paying for premium was a perk as a faster connection was offered. They now deny any differences exist.
if selective expensive training options means something is pay-to-win, then everything worth winning is pay-to-win. my problem with chess.com is how they rub it in your face constantly that you haven't paid for their expensive training options. considering they're fully automated, i don't think they're worth it honestly.
Mar 28, 2023
0
#58
I agree entirely, and it's so stupid that you need to use a credit card to get a free trial, if I was the owner of the world I would make that illegal so that I could learn from the game. This website is ultimately pay to win, the only reason I use it is that it has 4 player chess and more players than any other chess website
bro im so salty, chess.com's trash servers didnt let me play a mate in 1 and i lost on time when i had 30 sec to play it. I also had 4 bars of internet. Does anyone else have this happen to them?
Yes that happens to me too. mate in one or something similar. It's called lagg wins. It's online shenanigans