Puzzle algorithm change?

That's a bug. Are you on one of the app and are you doing regular rated puzzles (not puzzle points)?

I had a similar drop today in my puzzle rating. I dropped from about 2100 to about 1700, WITHOUT doing any puzzles to warrant that.

https://www.chess.com/news/view/announcing-new-puzzles-rating-system

Me too. My rating seems to have gone from 2800 to 1670 without doing any puzzles. What happened?

It reminds me of the UK Post Office scandal if people know what that was! 😂

Hope no one's going to prison over this...

See the article in my previous post

Roller Coaster

I am very disappointed in this move at the moment , what chess.com has basically said is that by me reaching my peek by spending hours and hours / night and day and even waking up during the night to do a few more puzzles is that i have 'Created a False Reading and false puzzle rating this is after completing over a 1000 lessons to learn how the puzzles are formatted from different opening coming into middle games to endgames , What this tells me is that chess.com 'Has gone Rogue' and what they are actually saying is ' We Got Your Money Sunshine and Now we are going to Tell you 'How this is Going to Play Out'

I don't know what happened but my rating in puzzles were 2700 a day ago but now it's only 1800. Are there any changes in the rating policy?

https://www.chess.com/news/view/announcing-new-puzzles-rating-system

This is really bad. I stopped paying premium membership because of such erratic changes that shows not really any good thought e2e. Also the ui sucks for blitz or bullet. The most amount of mouse slips happen on this site or their mobile app.

my puzzle rating is 982 but the difficulty on extra hard is still checkmates in 2

The difficulty setting means the puzzle will be closer to your rating, on average. At lower levels mates in 1 and 2 will be common as will hanging pieces.

reading the comments there doesn't seem to be a soul out there trying to understand the psychology & mindset of chess.com puzzle executives that motivated them to make this shift. What was going around in their heads wasn't a flippant whim but a long term vision that they discussed, agreed on, built, debugged, and in a coordinated effort refined for months; and the top brass was, over months of weighing the pros and cons, convinced to salary this long term project as a financially lucrative alteration to the business.
The only thing that makes sense to me is alignment of puzzle rating with positions found in games. Like everyone else the puzzles I get now rarely warrant the term 'puzzle'. Half of them aren't even 3-move combination, but just simple check-sequences or on-prise takes, or basic forks. But looking at my ~1750elo rapid games, they are often won or lost on blunders and mistakes and misses that involve such simple positions. I still see queen en-prise blunders in games at my elo, presenting the player with ~100 elo positions 'find the queen capture'.
When this is the norm in games, to improve a players skill it makes sense to focus on consistency rather than brilliancy with a system that gives little points for correct solutions but large losses for incorrect, thereby rewarding players who get long streaks of correct simple solutions.
Anyone else wondered this or am I the only one in the whole community trying to understand the apparent madness inside chess.com employees skulls?

Yes but i want them to be harder because mates in 1 or 2 are like the easiest thing ever (unless its one of those "hard mate in 2" puzzles you can find online), there's no option for me to make it harder.

Hardness is mostly dependent on ratings. You could do unrated instead, under Custom, and set a higher rating range.