#17: Calling me out for my lack of speed chess experience is rude, as well as more than a little misleading.
FYI, I used to play bullet and faster controls quite often anonymously-- I stopped when my touchpad (yes, touchpad) broke.
I played anonymously because I was ashamed by playing fake chess :)
When you realize how seriously people take chess on Lichess. Jeez.
It seems that at #11 I've been accused of being an alt account of someone else. The falacious ways you try to impose yourself and discredit others opinions is noted.
Btw, I guess I won't waste my time on this anymore, not without praising Lichess for thinking about equality in first place.
Look at hiperblabla opening of this issue at #1 : "Hey, I have a PERFECT internet and would like antilag not to work for my opponents."
Grossly selfish.
Should've written: "Hey, I have a PERFECT internet and would like my opponents to be heavily HANDICAPPED so my results would be better"
And let me tell you something else. Your point of saying that just opinions of whomever plays hyper and ultrabullet should be considered is completely nonsense (as if it was up to you to decide which opinion is valid) as some blitz games, for instance, end up in time scramble as well. If removing antilag would be tremendously unfair in such cases, imagine in hiper and ultra games.
As the point was clear in message #1, the person just wanna all advantages for him/herself. There is no sense arguing about this anymore.
The only problem I see with lag compensation is that it's nearly impossible to see whether you'll flag someone. Then, you get over confident after the time hits 0, not realizing that lag compensation just occurred, and you take too much time on your move and lose. But most of us can adjust to that.
I don't see why we should be complaining about lag compensation. Currently, it's the best tool we have to give a fair field.
@HyperCloxy lichess would gladly remove lag compensation if you would pay for a server on every continent except Antarctica :)
Yeah agree @l-____-l
i completely understand where #1 is coming from, as well as the replies from people living in places far away from europe, having been on both sides of this..
so, now, speaking as a player, not as a lichess representative: wasn't "competitive ultra" a mistake?
the playing experience is so ridiculously sensitive to lag and different input methods (small differences in either of those can have a big impact), it's clear that's impossible to have a reasonable amount of the playerbase compete in "fair" conditions.
maybe it should be reduced to the likes of correspondence, without leaderboards and "recognition" :)
hyperbullet (and any no-inc time scramble in any time control i guess) obviously suffers from similar issues, but it isn't felt nearly as much as in ultra. let's keep it to ultra for now..
I agree and disagree @Rise but me personally living in the USA (1000s of miles form Europe) I still have 4 bars unless I am doing e-learning in which I have 3. It is impossible to play as they gain more time. and I did lose my 2200 because of a couple laggers :/
I agree with @Magirly ( and before u ping me with a joke saying " oh u have played 60 UB games with a 1500 rating, this is 1 of my 3 accs( idk why i have so many, i may delete some) and my 1st one @JWchess21 got banned :(). I agree beacuse i play a lotta UB and it is terrible when laggers win. I see both sides of this, but I dont know how anyone can just wave this off. Lagging should be illegal, as it is not fair.
From now I should open 5 youtube videos so that I can gain time!
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.