Just a quick note:
Your comment is appreciated, and we definitely need opinions from different perspectives; however, it's still best to write the response in the discussion forum for the change here: https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/variants-poll-what-changes-to-chaturaji-do-you-prefer rather than creating a new thread in a different club.
@Spartakkus, I 100% agree with you.
Also agree with ChessMasterGS, please post it in the main thread so it gets more views.
@Spartakkus
Your assessment is quite accurate from the point of view of a player who acts in good faith, and is sporting. Clearly there are also many honest players on the circuit.
We put a lot of work into investigating cheats and discussing various game situations throughout the year, rest assured.
In my vision and opinion, I would not like FFA to stop existing because of SFA, but rather, I would like there to be the alternative option of having the SOLO option, since it is definitely very proven, which changes the dynamics of the game a lot. in terms of capture decisions, inclination in non-anonymous games, materialism that often harms a player who is doing things well on the board, both in the strength of his game and his solid position, since the points on the board They are a highly important factor.
We can continue talking about this in the other thread of the official forum:
https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/variants-poll-what-changes-to-chaturaji-do-you-prefer
What I am about to say refers to 4pc FFA/general game dynamics, not Chaturaji, but I post it because I think it provides a useful perspective on what you are saying.
I would first like to make a semantic distinction: the issue is not any rating system, but rather that there will always be a drive towards optimal strategies under any system, even if these optimal strategies are detrimental to the game.
You see this with people being passive, whether because of solo or not (in 4pc), I don't know. It leads to an objectively funner game, active, attacking play, but because it isn't optimal, it's rare to play like this, especially among people who are "good". In the end, it makes it a worse game for everyone.
The same with opposite teaming, and then opposite teaming till the end.
It would probably be better for the game if everyone played like you, played for a fun game, not for a win, but too many people are competitive. But people don't, and decisions have to be made off of that.
The problem with 2nd +1 in FFA, under this framework, (and this is what happened when this was the scoring system, or the system was similar, I can't remember) is that the optimal strategy (4pc) is to team with your opposite till the end. It doesn't matter that leads to a one-dimensional and different game than what FFA is intended to be and what people want to play, and that's why I disagree with your argument. People won't play "for risky [and dynamic] strategies", at least at higher levels, they'll just team with their opposite.
That's why I oppose 2nd: +1 in FFA. As for Chaturaji, I don't know the dominant strategy, but the above is the framework I would use for looking at it.
Note: You could potentially make the argument that we make decisions for the 1%, or 10%, of top players to the detriment of everyone else, but that is a different discussion. I will say that strategies seem to trickle down...i.e most 2300 kinda team with their opposite, and kinda are passive. I also don't know how much I'd agree that Solo causes passivity...not even disagreeing necessarily, but that is also a different discussion from my point.
Caleb
I appreciate that you incorporate your opinion and vision, the truth is, you have been quite accurate in your words.
In the past we played FFA with a rating system similar to the one that exists today in chaturaji, where there were 2 winners. It is for this same reason that it was modified to improve the quality of the game, especially at higher levels. It is true that some players only come with the sole interest of having fun, but there are a large number of other users who take it in a more competitive way.
All of this is mainly intended for new competitions for this year, in 2023 we will hold Chaturaji competitions and we will be able to appreciate good games, and at the same time we will share debates on how to perfect and improve the quality of the games.
It is for this reason that this initiative was born, since from a general point of view or order of priority, Quality should always exist above everything else.
Hi everyone,
There is a highly welcome poll about FFA vs solo mode in Chaturaji. However, since the comments in that forum are so strictly positive about the coming change I wanted to supply a few words of caution.
1. I don't necessarily churn playing for 2nd place as a mark of poor play or "bad quality" as most of the commentators (and also admin) seem to see it. Rather, many in many situations in both chaturaji and 4PC you can opt for risky strategies that are dynamic and add life to the game. Mostly in solo mode, such strategies are immediately punished, which makes for a more cautious and also more predictable game. I for one do no see those qualities as the sole qualities in any type of chess. Solo play in 4player variants has its value, but I think it would be a great shame to "phase out" the FFA-mode among strong players, which is what most players (and also admin) seem to want. I am around (2200) and I think the FFA mode is fun to play and leaves room for daring ways of attack that will be stifled by monopolizing the solo mode.
2. The anti-cheating argument is brought up against the FFA mode in general. If the two winners of an FFA-match are a secret team, they can handily share the points for the two top positions. This is a real problem, I've seen it happen and it is of course vastly irritating. The same goes for the FFA mode in 4PC where cheating becomes even more obvious, when people are letting their friends' pieces hang while they capture yours. However, I suggest that we should not let the cheaters dictate ways to play chess. Cheating can and will occur however the rules are set. Me, I am a recreational player who don't take rating so seriously (especially not in variants), so I just block those who I perceive as cheaters and go on to play with a lot of nice (not cheating) opponents.
All in all, I think FFA should be kept and defended. It has a lot to teach about 4player strategy and dynamic. I also think I have earned second place many times as a part of very ambitious play and creative but daring calculations. As for cheating in FFA 4PC and Chaturaji, I think there might exist interesting ways of countering it by adding some rules that disable lopsided play.
Thanks for the word, please tell me what you think in this matter!
All the best to all you honest players out there, and I wish you all a good chess year 2024!
Yours
Johannes Spartak