Four Player Chess is The Best.

I just want to tell all the people here that four player chess is awesome, I love how the game is played I've played Four times I believe, I've won three times even tho my kind was checkmated all three times, which is why I love the point system, because it allows anyone who's strategic enough to play! and you can even use your opponents pieces to checkmate someone! (I Checkmated Red when yellow and and blue had their pieces just right!

This is My favorite Chess.com variant, Thank you Chess.Com Staff for getting this here!

(If you haven't played it yet, I Recommend it!)

yep, it is amazing

here's the link : https://www.chess.com/4-player-chess

I wanted to say that I agree. This mode of play is excellent. Too bad this is spoiled by individuals who spend their time giving blows to others when they are in a desperate situation. It's simply cheating. And this is very common. So I suggest removing the cat to avoid these detestable behaviors.

i disagree entirely zorba69, since the point of four player is points not checkmate, in addition you get positive rating points for placing second and first.  if you are in danger of being checkmated, maximizing your point gain is strategic, not detestable.

One, It's not cheating at all. And two its how the game is played. BTW the new "team" version is WAY better then solo, if you and your teammate work together you can win easily, I played 5 games and my team won 4 games in a row, Although you need to be on red and yellow

Really awesome and dynamic
I would play four player with daily moves though! Right now it's really hard to think about good tactics and any game is full of everyone's blunders because of clock

Ye, well I stand corrected because 4 times in a row my teammates resigned which brought me from 1290 to 1150, ive recovered that rateing tho

#8

It sounds interesting, but I think it's not realistic since it'll take too much time (maybe years) and almost all games will be end in time up for one or more players (you know how often this happens even in normal daily games).

There needs to be some way to end the game if neither of the last two players can do anything.  We had K+Q vs. K+Q and if my opponent hadn't slipped and allowed a cross-check we'd have been there forever.  Either of us would have lost on points if we'd resigned, there is no way to offer a draw (he wouldn't have taken it anyway as he was behind) and as far as I can tell there is no repetition or 50-moves rule.

True true, but typically that does not happen

This really is an awesome mode, and I hope it becomes popular, maybe even acknowledged by FIDE!

It does require a completely different approach, compared to the regular chess. "Divide and conquer" is the way to play it. I see a lot of players starting some dubious early attacks against another player, or spending too much time trying to quickly get a promoted queen - the chaos ensues, and the involved players lose a lot of material. You can at the same time sit back and carefully maneuver your pieces, not engaging into a battle with anyone - and striking quickly when one of the other players is about to fall and the king hunt starts.

Good tactic Idea.

Well, in elo, sum of the points is always the same no matter what, so if your statement is true, that means there are a lot of rubbish 4p players out there. 

I'm usually targetted in my gamez.

Experience suggests that being the first person to queen is not really a good plan, because you become #1 target....

I have trouble resisting taking those promoted-pawn queens, but they aren't worth much!

i don't really like four player chess, since i get confused who's turn is it.

The timer box gets brighter when it's your turn.

The basic idea is very good. It is the intellectual equivalent of doubles match in table tennis where players of the same team have to take turns in returning the ball. In China, there are quite a lot of 4- player xiangqi ( Chinese chess ) friendly tournaments . Usually, a female player teams up with a male player.