Wow, that's strange.
The server seems to allow all whole-number increments as long as they are between 0 and 180 so anyone can do that, just not with the default lichess UI. I wouldn't consider this a bug since there's no harm in allowing such increments.
The easiest* way (without any non-standard tools/clients) is to right-click on the increment slider, click "Inspect Element" (Firefox) or "Inspect" (Chrome) and find the "input" element with id="increment" (it should be just above the slider element). Then just set the "value" field to whatever increment you want (between 0 and 180). The UI won't show the change immediately, but once you create the game it should show it.
* Probably not actually easy if you've never touched the DOM inspector.
The easiest* way (without any non-standard tools/clients) is to right-click on the increment slider, click "Inspect Element" (Firefox) or "Inspect" (Chrome) and find the "input" element with id="increment" (it should be just above the slider element). Then just set the "value" field to whatever increment you want (between 0 and 180). The UI won't show the change immediately, but once you create the game it should show it.
* Probably not actually easy if you've never touched the DOM inspector.
I was thinking that might be how someone did it. Though I figured it would only work client side. I understand how it works but did not know that it would be able to change the times.
Just tried this - it works perfectly. Just open the create game box, right click on the increment slider, go to "Inspect element" and move the slider around to see where in the console the time number is. Then go to that space and type in the number you want, in this case 62. Whoever discovered this must have been a bit bored. Funny though
A pretty weird time control but not a bug I think.
This has happened to someone without causing it.
en.lichess.org/forum/lichess-feedback/lichess-new-game-bug
If this person is correct, then this is a bug.
en.lichess.org/forum/lichess-feedback/lichess-new-game-bug
If this person is correct, then this is a bug.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.