Can you please show me an example of what you're talking about? Screenshot it.
Knight move arrows in analysis
Sort:
Here is how chess.com currently does it: 
Here is how it is done everywhere else I've seen:
If the arrow apears with any piece, it's a great idea.... But the fields are different colour already....
Well we were going to save Greenland but i guess we could make the arrows look better instead.
I think the simpler, more direct arrows are better. Another option, instead of arrows, would just be green highlights on spaces where the piece could land, which would further simplify the picture. (Picture a centralized Knight that could land on 8 squares. Would you rather have a cloverleaf of 8 green arrows that cover 1/4 of the board's squares and mask other pieces, or just 8 highlighted squares?) Admittedly, I live in a world of shiny objects, so simpler is always better, and I would want to minimize anything that could distract me from the pieces.
jaypac wrote:
I think the simpler, more direct arrows are better. Another option, instead of arrows, would just be green highlights on spaces where the piece could land, which would further simplify the picture.
Well, picking up a piece where it can land? Well, this is Chess.com and not Fritz. You must realize that this is a webbased chesscommunity. It takes too much effort and costs to let the website recognize that you are picking up a piece and then must think where it can land. There are hundreds or thousends games in one time. The site would become slow. Bad idea.
The arrows are funny, but only when the move has made.
I fundamentally object to the use of an arrow altogether, whether straight or bent.
You see, arrows are not a culturally universal symbol. I've read accounts of aboriginal tribes in Australia, for example, who interpret arrows as indicating movement in the opposite direction to which most of us are accustomed. The leading theory for this particular interpretation being that the arrow looks much like the footprint of an Emu, which, of course, travels with its toes facing forward.
Might I suggest something far more intuitive than an arrow, such as bare human footprints?
SV_De_Kentering wrote:
jaypac wrote:
I think the simpler, more direct arrows are better. Another option, instead of arrows, would just be green highlights on spaces where the piece could land, which would further simplify the picture.
Well, picking up a piece where it can land? Well, this is Chess.com and not Fritz. You must realize that this is a webbased chesscommunity. It takes too much effort and costs to let the website recognize that you are picking up a piece and then must think where it can land. There are hundreds or thousends games in one time. The site would become slow. Bad idea.
The arrows are funny, but only when the move has made.
The background of a piece already changes color when you select the piece, so it wouldn't be much more to also change the background color of spaces where it could land. Another option could be a setting in the user profile, where the user could enable/disable this feature. My guess is newer players would like the highlights to learn how the pieces move, and more experienced players would likely disable it, to more closely simultate OTB games.
Did anything ever happen about this? I can't find any option to choose straight arrows, which are much better IMO than the L-shaped ones...
I know I prefer the diagonal arrows. I can only presume that some folks prefer the L's. Perhaps it would be nice if an option in the settings were provided so that those who want the L's can have them and those who want the diagonal arrows could have them. It can't be that difficult to program that.
10 years and they are still L shape?!? is there really no option to change this to straight arrows?
jaypac wrote:
I think the simpler, more direct arrows are better. Another option, instead of arrows, would just be green highlights on spaces where the piece could land, which would further simplify the picture. (Picture a centralized Knight that could land on 8 squares. Would you rather have a cloverleaf of 8 green arrows that cover 1/4 of the board's squares and mask other pieces, or just 8 highlighted squares?) Admittedly, I live in a world of shiny objects, so simpler is always better, and I would want to minimize anything that could distract me from the pieces.
Chess.com does let you do that with the little dot thingies. Idk what they were called.
For me, the dot things are not a satisfactory replacement for proper arrows. And, oh, how I long for proper arrows.
One place where the L-shaped thingies are particularly inferior is where someone is showing a series of potential moves and the knight's bent movement arrow overlaps it's own or another piece's up-and-down or sideways movement arrow. When that happens it can become visually unclear what is happening. While the visual obscurity of overlapping arrows cannot always be avoided, that obscurity absolutely would be avoided in these cases if the knight move were represented by a straight arrow.
What is frustrating is that the settings allow me to generate straight arrows from anywhere to anywhere-- except along a knight move! It took extra work for the programmers to create this negative "feature" that impedes the arrows from functioning in the way I prefer.
It would not be difficult to add an option to allow users choice.
I opened this post 10 years ago...Still no straight arrow option. Wow, I am dissapointed chess.com 
wow.
apparently the developers at chess dot com do not read these messages. Nobody likes the L arrows. I am guessing it is a developer that doesn't won't to loose face.
I think the way arrows work for knight moves in live chess analysis is kind of weird - they draw in an "L" shape which is very clunky and takes up a ton of space on the board. I vote that the arrow draws straight from the knight to the destination square, as is the norm on every chess site that lets you draw arrows I've seen.