ChessConquest - official discussion thread

yotta said:
<snip>

(Only active players can enter tournaments).
Click to expand...

What about INactive players: those that haven't moved for months. Are they going to be treated differently?

BTW, it seems a bit sad that we have players on the ratings list even though they haven't played for a long time. How long will we keep them on the list?
 
tallfred said:
What about INactive players: those that haven't moved for months. Are they going to be treated differently?
Click to expand...

I won't be tampering with tournament games where at least one of the players is currently active. It is up to the discretion of the active player to decide if he/she wants to claim a timeout victory on a tournament game. If the active player however does not take a timout vic in a reasonable time period, we might interfere and force a timeout. (We've built in a new "Tournament Stoppers" tool in our administration interface that instantly lists all the tournament games that is holding up a tournament).

tallfred said:
BTW, it seems a bit sad that we have players on the ratings list even though they haven't played for a long time. How long will we keep them on the list?
Click to expand...

Yeah, there is other players that also requested that inactive players should not be shown on the rankings, and I thought 3 months to be a fair time. No moves in 3 months, no ranking. It is a feature we plan to eventually implement and has been added to our ever-growing todo list.

Just a heads up... ChessConquest version 2 development is taking much longer than anticipated, and there is lots of players putting pressure on me to roll out a proper mobile interface for iPhones, iPads, Android devices etc.

We decided to have an interim release before the v2 roll-out (ChessConquest Mobile), that is a customized mobile interface (no downloads required).

So, if those players who have been waiting a really loooooong time to see their requests appear on ChessConquest, please just bear with me...
 
Last edited:
The first ChessConquest Championship Final is under way. 45 players originally entered the championship and has been battling it out for almost nine months. Congratulations to Jakkals and TallFred for reaching the top of the mountain peak. Good luck to both of you and may the best player claim his victory.

For those of you who would like to follow the games, here are the links:

Game 1
Game 2

ChessConquest 2011 Championship Knockout Tree
 
Last edited:
The development of ChessConquest Mobile and ChessConquest v2 is now gaining momentum fast... to give you guys an appetizer of what to expect from the ChessConquest Mobile interface, here is a couple of screenshots.

sc1.jpg


sc2.jpg


sc3.jpg
 
I had a bad experience today. Naboodgar challenged me to a game a while ago. I accepted without noticing that it was a 1 day no time bank game. I was getting the better of him when he overstepped the time limit. Concerned, I sent him a message asking if he was OK. After this he made his move, which I overlooked in the rush of weekend activities. He instantly claimed the game and gloatingly announced "I am better than you!" and added "Ha ha!"

Wow! He has such a lot to be proud of.
 
I noticed something similar against willie by our old "friend" fanard (note the quotes)... Not the gloating part, but something happened to willie over the weekend and he thus haven't moved in over a day. I noticed that the timeout victory is an option on our game, so I went into his profile to see when he last made a move and what do I find... 3 timeout victories against him by fanard. The sneaky bastard :)
 
Quick question. Winning a game by checkmate and winning a game by timeout... Does it carry the same weight / effect on player's rating?
 
ViperGTI said:
Winning a game by checkmate and winning a game by timeout... Does it carry the same weight / effect on player's rating?
Click to expand...

Yes it does. But an interesting point that you're bringing up ViperGTI. Perhaps timeouts should carry less weight than true victories, this will motivate players to rather go for real wins instead of timeouts...
 
It makes it a bit difficult though.

For instance I played tournament games against um I think her name was check mate and as soon as it became apparent that I would win she just wouldn't move anymore. She continued moving against other players but not against me. So I waited and waited but eventually I claimed the timeout victories. I don't know if she does that to other people too.

So if timeout victories don't count for as much in the rating then there will probably have to be checks. If a player continues to move against other players but not in your game and you claim the timeout victory then give full points...

Or maybe even better. Give full points if the timeout victory is claimed after 5 days or so.

I don't know. It's not that the rating really matters anyway. :)
 
yotta said:
Yes it does. But an interesting point that you're bringing up ViperGTI. Perhaps timeouts should carry less weight than true victories, this will motivate players to rather go for real wins instead of timeouts...
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but the reason why I'm asking is because I'm in a situation now against a strong player where I'm in a "definite" winning position, but now he simply stopped making moves even though he continues making moves regularly in his other games. I usually only claim time-out victories against players with P-ratings, but I think I'll claim this one since it has been 3 days already that I could claim the victory.

Implementing the idea to have different weightings for the two kinds of victories might be a good idea, although just keep in mind the situation above. Perhaps if the person claims a time-out victory, the win carries less weight but then also add an automatic time-out function which occurs two days the player's timebank has lapsed which will then still grant full weight for the win. This should perhaps address the issue where someone who doesn't want to lose, simply waits for a time-out.
 
I think timeout victories should carry less weight, you havent done anything really to deserve the win. I claim most timeout victory opportunities as in many cases they will hold up a tournament if not claimed i.e. I claimed against Sohel Rana last night (highly ranked player) after waiting almost 30 days to move.
 
Fivel said:
I think timeout victories should carry less weight, you havent done anything really to deserve the win. I claim most timeout victory opportunities as in many cases they will hold up a tournament if not claimed i.e. I claimed against Sohel Rana last night (highly ranked player) after waiting almost 30 days to move.
Click to expand...

I suggest that having timeout victories count less than resignation and checkmate victories leaves the system open to abuse. For example, if I were vindictive I might let a game time out rather than resign, thereby depriving my opponent of some rating points. Not only that, my rating would take less of a hit with a timeout loss than with resignation.

My view is simple. A win is a win, whether it be by timeout, checkmate or resignation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top