Nit: Lichess does play different sounds between captures and moves.
Chess.com vs. Lichess
211–220 of 221 posts
Re: Chess.com vs. Lichess
#212If you've been following these two products for the last few years it's definitely clear to see that Lichess is slowly eating chess.com's lunch ... They're not fast at development, but slowly and surely improving and innovating on the space via being open source. For example, Lichess puzzles aren't quite of the same quality yet and their puzzle games are new (BUT) they've built and are improving the tech to create ne…
Interesting perspective. I have subscriptions to both and my first reaction was the exact opposite of yours. Chess.con is so far ahead of lichens that it wasn’t debatable. What in your opinion leads you to believe that lichess is eating chess.com’s lunch. For me games are far easier and quicker to setup with chess.com. The drills are better at chess.com and so are the lessons, both in-depth and breadth. I can’t reall…
I don't see anything that chess.com does better than Lichess except for having more players on the site. Aside from time to start game, which is usually a difference of only a couple seconds unless at high Elo, Lichess is equally good or better in all aspects. I'm not saying Lichess has better puzzles or other such things, but it is 100% equally good, while being free.
Re: Chess.com vs. Lichess
#213I personally find the Lichess board cleaner and more beautiful. Using circles to highlight squares is clearer, and drawing knight moves as straight lines is clearer, as well. I also just prefer the pieces and the board colour.
Re: Chess.com vs. Lichess
#214Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just went on playok to play couple of games of xiang qi and... I also got murdered...
Those guys are too good. Did you ever win? Know what I mean by you lost in the first few moves?
I played three games and lost them all. It's as you said, I felt that in the opening they knew something I didn't and they entered quickly in my camp. The strange thing is that when I played last year, I didn't have that feeling at all, the games felt pretty even - I won one game because my opponent resigned after I declined his draw offer.
If you want we can play some games some day. My email is in my profile if you're interested.
Re: Chess.com vs. Lichess
#215Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah but what does “far” mean. You have experience with loss of pawns but not distance to optimal play
100% is only best moves (my record is 99.8%), anything above 90 is awesome, etc. I'm not sure what 15 ACPL means, but if you tell me 95% perfect it's more intuitive to me personally. But it might be because I'm not a very good and sophisticated player...
I think the percentage give you a sense of familiarity. You're used to be graded 0-100 in exams and such. However, that grade is actually not that useful or intuitive as you may think, since you don't know how your game is scored. You don't understand the metric. For instance, it could mean the number of moves you got perfectly divided by the total number of moves in the game. It could be the number of moves you lost at most 30 centipawns by the number of moves. It can mean anything, the point is just that it's a black box and no one truly understands that metric outside of chess.com. Whereas average centipawn loss is a tried metric which everyone uses, except for chess.com.
Re: Chess.com vs. Lichess
#216Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm not sure how you have a subscription to Lichess when it's a free site A subscription can just be an account - it doesn’t necessarily have to be a paid subscription.
No, then you would just say you have an account. If you subscribe to a YT channel, you would just say you subscribe to the channel or you are a subscriber. You wouldn't say you have a "subscription" with the channel. That makes no sense.
This is way beyond the original point being made, but in the YT app, the button to view channels that a user has subscribed to is indeed labelled "subscriptions".
I agree that in this context, the natural interpretation of the word is that money has been invested.
Re: Chess.com vs. Lichess
#217Lichess is so much better. It's free. chess.com thinks its facebook and it looks really childish (they probably copied things from chesskid). They have like a billion developers (why? its chess.. and already done). Lichess is like 1 guy (who I think used to work for chesscom until the ceo was a dick or something)
haha no he never worked for chess.com, wonder where you heard that one :D lichess is not one guy either, there's a whole community of developers, moderators etc.
i have sources. lots of old employee posts who quit also talking shit about the ceo
Re: Chess.com vs. Lichess
#218Earlier quoted context omitted.
I requested this a few months ago as my server was sitting unused and I wanted to help. Never got an answer back, maybe because the server's specs aren't great. Either way now I've got nextcloud running so unfortunately too late :(
You probably had the "laptop mode" toggled on in the setup. With it on you will rarely get games to analyse. This will only send you games when the network is stressed. If you toggle it off you should get one game after another almost constantly. I doubt it's speed. I was getting constant games with an i3-5100.
I never even received a response when I filled out the Google Forms, so I don't have an API key to use.
Re: Chess.com vs. Lichess
#219Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I have subscriptions to both I'm not sure how you have a subscription to Lichess when it's a free site. Do you donate? > My Elo rank on lichess is a full 500 points higher on lichess than chess.com The ratings difference on lichess is arbitrary. Everyone starts higher (1500 vs 1200), so the average is higher. > For me games are far easier and quicker to setup with chess.com Unless I've missed something on chess.com…
Yes I donate to lichess. But as others have pointed out you can subscribe to YouTube channels with no money paid. You really are trying very hard to find something wrong with my comment so you can defend lichess…..why? > Unless I've missed something on chess.com this makes no sense at all Yes you have:) Not sure why you typed so much about the game setup. All I said was that chess.com games start much faster than lic…
> All I said was that chess.com games start much faster than lichess:) That's it:)
No, you didn't say that. You said:
> For me games are far easier and quicker to setup with chess.com
which the other poster refuted. I don't know if you understand how disagreements work, but typically one would provide evidence to their claim, which is what the other poster did. It seems you take offense and are confused by this.
Re: Chess.com vs. Lichess
#220Here’s an advantage of chess.com that I haven’t heard discussed yet. When playing against the computer I can request hints when I’m stumped. If lichess supports this then I haven’t found it yet. As a mediocre player I find it very instructive.