Pure Chess/Chess Ultra (Video game chess)
Moderators: Harvey Williamson, Steve B, Watchman
Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the fen tag before the upgrade.
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the fen tag before the upgrade.
Pure Chess/Chess Ultra (Video game chess)
This app/program appears to be the only thing going for the current generation of gaming consoles. Pure Chess was first. Chess Ultra is the sequel. The developer is Ripstone. I can't tell who's behind the engine, but I've been fiddling around, testing its strength.
The program emphasizes visuals - photorealistic rendering against fancy backgrounds, clearly aimed at the casual player. I don't think the underlying engine has changed between the two versions. They've just added animations that allow you to play the Grim Reaper in hell - that sort of thing. Ten levels, from idiot to Grandmaster. I top out around level 7. You can adjust time controls, but that's it. A few puzzles. No customization, no position setup, no analysis, none of it. Stockfish and Hiarcs and Shredder kill it dead with minimal trouble.
So I ran Fidelity Designer 2325 against this beast over the weekend, setting Fidelity at default and Pure Chess at "Grandmaster" level. Conditions were casual - if anything, I gave Fidelity extra time.
Pure Chess stomped. It wasn't close. The match score was 2-1. It should have been 3-0. I'll have to try more games, but that surprises me. I didn't expect that level of strength from a "popular" app. The 2325 plays 2000 elo chess, by general reckoning. Anyone have any insight into the developer?
- R.
P.S. - I'm not disciplined enough to do this in any systematic way, but I'd love to see a ranking of the various console/cartridge chess engines. This partial list is what I own, ranked by feel, not stats:
8. Virtual Kasparov (Game Boy Advance)
7. Chessmaster (Super Nintendo)
6. Chessmaster The Art of Learning (Nintendo DS)
5/4. Pure Chess (Xbox One)
4/5. Chess Ultra (Xbox One)
3. Chessmaster II (PlayStation 1)
2. Chessmaster (Playstation 2)
1. Chessmaster (Xbox 360)
I'll just plant my sentimental flag and say the Chessmaster series (on all platforms, and in all dedicateds) remains the best popular chess program ever made.
- R.
The program emphasizes visuals - photorealistic rendering against fancy backgrounds, clearly aimed at the casual player. I don't think the underlying engine has changed between the two versions. They've just added animations that allow you to play the Grim Reaper in hell - that sort of thing. Ten levels, from idiot to Grandmaster. I top out around level 7. You can adjust time controls, but that's it. A few puzzles. No customization, no position setup, no analysis, none of it. Stockfish and Hiarcs and Shredder kill it dead with minimal trouble.
So I ran Fidelity Designer 2325 against this beast over the weekend, setting Fidelity at default and Pure Chess at "Grandmaster" level. Conditions were casual - if anything, I gave Fidelity extra time.
Pure Chess stomped. It wasn't close. The match score was 2-1. It should have been 3-0. I'll have to try more games, but that surprises me. I didn't expect that level of strength from a "popular" app. The 2325 plays 2000 elo chess, by general reckoning. Anyone have any insight into the developer?
- R.
P.S. - I'm not disciplined enough to do this in any systematic way, but I'd love to see a ranking of the various console/cartridge chess engines. This partial list is what I own, ranked by feel, not stats:
8. Virtual Kasparov (Game Boy Advance)
7. Chessmaster (Super Nintendo)
6. Chessmaster The Art of Learning (Nintendo DS)
5/4. Pure Chess (Xbox One)
4/5. Chess Ultra (Xbox One)
3. Chessmaster II (PlayStation 1)
2. Chessmaster (Playstation 2)
1. Chessmaster (Xbox 360)
I'll just plant my sentimental flag and say the Chessmaster series (on all platforms, and in all dedicateds) remains the best popular chess program ever made.
- R.
"You have, let us say, a promising politician, a rising artist that you wish to destroy. Dagger or bomb are archaic and unreliable - but teach him, inoculate him with chess."
– H.G. Wells
– H.G. Wells
- spacious_mind
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4016
- Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
- Location: Alabama
- Contact:
Re: Pure Chess/Chess Ultra (Video game chess)
R,Reinfeld wrote:
8. Virtual Kasparov (Game Boy Advance)
7. Chessmaster (Super Nintendo)
6. Chessmaster The Art of Learning (Nintendo DS)
5/4. Pure Chess (Xbox One)
4/5. Chess Ultra (Xbox One)
3. Chessmaster II (PlayStation 1)
2. Chessmaster (Playstation 2)
1. Chessmaster (Xbox 360)
- R.
You are missing a bunch of stuff
Sega's, Atari, Activision, Colecovision, Intellvision.....etc
Regards
Nick
mclane said:
The Pure Chess and Chess Ultra engines are available at the Xbox store. I'm fairly sure they're the same engine with different graphics - I prefer the simpler interface of Pure Chess.
nick said:
royb said:
1. establish the relative strengths of these console-based games (not too hard);
2. Arrive at a reasonable, rough estimate as to ELO ratings rather than relying on promo materials (harder). Place them in context with known machines;
3. and with help from friends here, learn something about the identities of developers (hardest, though the Chessmaster games are all de Koning variants, and Fritz is well known).
Many of these console games have limited feature sets. No ponder options, and time controls are limited in other ways. Only a few have position setup capabilities, so it's pretty hard to rely on Nick's testing suites (but I'll try.) Thus, the conditions are going to be a bit loose, though the higher-end offerings offer more varied testing opportunities.
The only way I see to reach a ratings reckoning is the fun part: pitting the console games against dedicated machines (!) with previously established ratings, and using relative values to get to a decent number. For instance, how does Chessmaster DS stack up against GK 2100 or Super Constellation? I'm working on this, but it involves playing a good number of games.
Some of this won't be mysterious. The Chessmaster offerings will tend to be stronger, escalating with each higher-powered console. But *how much* stronger? That's the ticket. And who are the weakies?
Separately, since Pure Chess/Chess Ultra is the ONLY option for XBox One/PS4, I am especially interested in learning more about its strength, guts and origins. Information is sketchy - it's endorsed by GM Simon Williams, but that tells me nothing about the developer. The limited details are available here: http://www.purechess.com/
https://ripstone.com/game/chess-ultra/
The other interesting thing is levels of skill. Generally speaking, I suspect we prefer to set our dedicateds at the strongest levels for best play. Console games, aimed at more casual players, tend to have fuzzier levels. I find it interesting to grade/rate them on a sliding scale. This is especially useful for Pure Chess/Chess Ultra, which leans on a basic 10-level setting. How does its level 7 compare to Mephisto Milano, for example?
I know hardcore players who rely on Hiarcs, Stockfish, PCs, etc., aren't going to give a rip about this, but it's fun from my standpoint, and it gives me another excuse to test-drive various dedicateds.
(I'm also a hypocrite, because I told Steve in the other thread that I don't do cartridges. Obviously I do console cartridges. They're modules. I concede the legitimacy of modules.)
So far, I've built a little database of about 25 games. I will share some of that material later, when I can be more definitive about my conclusions. For now, some general observations:
1. At its peak "Grandmaster" level, Pure Chess/Chess Ultra is pretty strong. Stronger than Designer 2325, slightly stronger than Star Diamond. I had to break out the RISC 2500 to obtain a decisive win.
2. Chessmaster Live (for Xbox 360) is substantially stronger than Pure Chess/Chess Ultra. The first game I played ended with a mate in 26 moves.
3. Virtual Kasparov is probably the weakest player of all these on the list, which surprises me a a bit. It's going to be tricky to find its range in the low end of the wiki-elo pantheon.
4. The tiny little Chessmaster cartridge for the GameBoy Advance (just acquired today) is a strong little sucker. One of the best matches ahead will pit it against Fritz for DS (soon to arrive).
More to come, friends. Thanks for indulging me. Next update will include actual chess.
- R.
Thorsten,I do have Xbox one s at home. So if I can help you Smile))
Where to get these engines??
The Pure Chess and Chess Ultra engines are available at the Xbox store. I'm fairly sure they're the same engine with different graphics - I prefer the simpler interface of Pure Chess.
nick said:
Yeah, yeah:) - I know about those oldies, though I wasn't aware of Sega Chess. I'll have to find a ROM to check that one out. I also just acquired Chessmaster for the Game Boy Advance, and the rather rare Fritz for the Nintendo DS, as well as the original Xbox Chessmaster (a CM 10 variant), which should fill out my roster nicely for a full team of 10 players.You are missing a bunch of stuff
Sega's, Atari, Activision, Colecovision, Intellvision.....etc
royb said:
OK, Roy - here's a partial answer. I intend to:I'm no console hater, but I am very curious as to what your next update to this thread will be!
1. establish the relative strengths of these console-based games (not too hard);
2. Arrive at a reasonable, rough estimate as to ELO ratings rather than relying on promo materials (harder). Place them in context with known machines;
3. and with help from friends here, learn something about the identities of developers (hardest, though the Chessmaster games are all de Koning variants, and Fritz is well known).
Many of these console games have limited feature sets. No ponder options, and time controls are limited in other ways. Only a few have position setup capabilities, so it's pretty hard to rely on Nick's testing suites (but I'll try.) Thus, the conditions are going to be a bit loose, though the higher-end offerings offer more varied testing opportunities.
The only way I see to reach a ratings reckoning is the fun part: pitting the console games against dedicated machines (!) with previously established ratings, and using relative values to get to a decent number. For instance, how does Chessmaster DS stack up against GK 2100 or Super Constellation? I'm working on this, but it involves playing a good number of games.
Some of this won't be mysterious. The Chessmaster offerings will tend to be stronger, escalating with each higher-powered console. But *how much* stronger? That's the ticket. And who are the weakies?
Separately, since Pure Chess/Chess Ultra is the ONLY option for XBox One/PS4, I am especially interested in learning more about its strength, guts and origins. Information is sketchy - it's endorsed by GM Simon Williams, but that tells me nothing about the developer. The limited details are available here: http://www.purechess.com/
https://ripstone.com/game/chess-ultra/
The other interesting thing is levels of skill. Generally speaking, I suspect we prefer to set our dedicateds at the strongest levels for best play. Console games, aimed at more casual players, tend to have fuzzier levels. I find it interesting to grade/rate them on a sliding scale. This is especially useful for Pure Chess/Chess Ultra, which leans on a basic 10-level setting. How does its level 7 compare to Mephisto Milano, for example?
I know hardcore players who rely on Hiarcs, Stockfish, PCs, etc., aren't going to give a rip about this, but it's fun from my standpoint, and it gives me another excuse to test-drive various dedicateds.
(I'm also a hypocrite, because I told Steve in the other thread that I don't do cartridges. Obviously I do console cartridges. They're modules. I concede the legitimacy of modules.)
So far, I've built a little database of about 25 games. I will share some of that material later, when I can be more definitive about my conclusions. For now, some general observations:
1. At its peak "Grandmaster" level, Pure Chess/Chess Ultra is pretty strong. Stronger than Designer 2325, slightly stronger than Star Diamond. I had to break out the RISC 2500 to obtain a decisive win.
2. Chessmaster Live (for Xbox 360) is substantially stronger than Pure Chess/Chess Ultra. The first game I played ended with a mate in 26 moves.
3. Virtual Kasparov is probably the weakest player of all these on the list, which surprises me a a bit. It's going to be tricky to find its range in the low end of the wiki-elo pantheon.
4. The tiny little Chessmaster cartridge for the GameBoy Advance (just acquired today) is a strong little sucker. One of the best matches ahead will pit it against Fritz for DS (soon to arrive).
More to come, friends. Thanks for indulging me. Next update will include actual chess.
- R.
"You have, let us say, a promising politician, a rising artist that you wish to destroy. Dagger or bomb are archaic and unreliable - but teach him, inoculate him with chess."
– H.G. Wells
– H.G. Wells
Back to this topic, with a few little tidbits of actual chess.
As mentioned, I'm fiddling around with console chess games, attempting to derive ratings by pitting them against dedicated machines, and where possible, using Nick's test suite.
In some cases, it can't be done, because the cartridge offerings sometimes don't allow features such as position setup. But one of them does: The Chessmaster for Game Boy Advance.
This program is cumbersome in certain ways. It allows time controls, but in a very limited way. For instance, 30s/move means exactly 30s/move, unless the program sees something more quickly. Without further ado, here is Chessmaster GBA playing Nick's Test Game 1. I hope someone (Nick) can double-check and calculate the base rating for me, and see where it lands. I'm also interested in similarities to other dedicateds. I am pitting Chessmaster GBA against dedicateds (i.e., actually moving pieces), but those results will come later. For now, the moves, plus points.
Test Game 1 (Botvinnik v Grob):
Chessmaster Game Boy Advance
7. Bb5
8. Bg5
9. Bxf6
10. Qd2
11. e5
12. 0-0
13. Bc4
14. Qc2
15. Nxh4
16. Bc4
17. Nxe5
18. h3
19. d5xe6
20. Qxa4+
21. Rc4
22. b4
23. Rd3
24. d5xe6
25. exf7+
26. Rc8+
27. Qc7+
28. Bc4+
29. Bf5+
30. Qc5+
More to come regards,
- R.
As mentioned, I'm fiddling around with console chess games, attempting to derive ratings by pitting them against dedicated machines, and where possible, using Nick's test suite.
In some cases, it can't be done, because the cartridge offerings sometimes don't allow features such as position setup. But one of them does: The Chessmaster for Game Boy Advance.
This program is cumbersome in certain ways. It allows time controls, but in a very limited way. For instance, 30s/move means exactly 30s/move, unless the program sees something more quickly. Without further ado, here is Chessmaster GBA playing Nick's Test Game 1. I hope someone (Nick) can double-check and calculate the base rating for me, and see where it lands. I'm also interested in similarities to other dedicateds. I am pitting Chessmaster GBA against dedicateds (i.e., actually moving pieces), but those results will come later. For now, the moves, plus points.
Test Game 1 (Botvinnik v Grob):
Chessmaster Game Boy Advance
7. Bb5
8. Bg5
9. Bxf6
10. Qd2
11. e5
12. 0-0
13. Bc4
14. Qc2
15. Nxh4
16. Bc4
17. Nxe5
18. h3
19. d5xe6
20. Qxa4+
21. Rc4
22. b4
23. Rd3
24. d5xe6
25. exf7+
26. Rc8+
27. Qc7+
28. Bc4+
29. Bf5+
30. Qc5+
More to come regards,
- R.
"You have, let us say, a promising politician, a rising artist that you wish to destroy. Dagger or bomb are archaic and unreliable - but teach him, inoculate him with chess."
– H.G. Wells
– H.G. Wells
- Steve B
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10145
- Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 10:02 am
- Location: New York City USofA
- Contact:
This topic pops up every now an again
heres one thread that might be of interest:
http://hiarcs.net/forums/viewtopic.php? ... ht=gameboy
Forum Searching Works Regards
Steve
heres one thread that might be of interest:
http://hiarcs.net/forums/viewtopic.php? ... ht=gameboy
Forum Searching Works Regards
Steve
Steve said:
In the thread linked above (from 2008), Monsieur Plastique provides a key baseline for this conversation. He guesstimated Chessmaster GBA's strength as follows:
Hm. That's pretty strong - roughly 1800-1900, depending on the source. So we're talking about the peak of the 4 Mhz performers - but we don't have data yet. I don't own the MM IV, but I do own the Super Mondial II, which appears to have the same program by Schroder. I was thinking on similar lines when it comes to testing strength. Looks like it's time for a little match with Chessmaster GBA and/or Chessmaster DS.
In the same 2008 thread, Cubeman correctly noted that GBA Chessmaster is a pain when it comes to just playing, which is right. Convenience factors are crap: The controls are cumbersome and slow, yet the time controls are ruthless. Thus you can't push the buttons fast enough to run a match at active time with Chessmaster DS, or any other machine, let alone record the game separately. DS is easier to play, and the piece set, while crummy, is easier to see.
Cubeman also says this:
I thought the same, but I'm no longer certain. I think DS is barely stronger than GBA. Without question it's faster. Much faster. I've been bashing these two against each other for the past few days. Every game so far at unlimited time ends in a draw, with GBA Chessmaster taking far, far longer to move, and both systems befuddled by endgame choices.
OK, so big deal. We already know DS and GBA are closely related. But that's still worth understanding as part of the de Koning pantheon, which also includes the various PlayStation and XBox games. Among programmers, de Koning dominates the consoles, yes?
Within that frame, what's worth knowing? For one thing, the handheld Chessmasters represent the weakest de Koning versions, released when his Cadillac programs (CM 9000, X and XI), reached their peak. That they were devised in part with children in mind is irrelevant to their absolute strength.
What else? It's interesting to consider that Virtual Kasparov and Pure Chess/Chess Ultra appear to represent rare console-based options that aren't de Koning programs (when you move beyond ancient consoles).
I am very curious about the developer of Virtual Kasparov. It is not quite as strong as the Chessmaster players, but it's stronger than I've allowed in earlier posts, and its play is sneakily amusing - fun in a unique, counterattacking way. The literature is nonexistent on this programmer - who the heck is it? Come on, forum sleuths - help me out. The peak player is a Kasparov avatar, but the program also allows a teensy bit of tuning for a customized player - unique feature?
I'm still building my little database of games, but that's for later. My next move: Virtual Kasparov v. Super Constellation.
- R.
Definitely of interest. Leave it to the forum elders to cover me in shame. I did look around a bit before posting, but didn't see this. Thank you. (Side philosophical question to Steve - do console cartridges/discs rank above software on your legitimacy tree?)heres one thread that might be of interest:
http://hiarcs.net/forums/viewtopic.php? ... ht=gameboy
Forum Searching Works Regards
In the thread linked above (from 2008), Monsieur Plastique provides a key baseline for this conversation. He guesstimated Chessmaster GBA's strength as follows:
it will play a very competant game - about as strong as the 4 Mhz Mephisto Exclusive IV program.
Hm. That's pretty strong - roughly 1800-1900, depending on the source. So we're talking about the peak of the 4 Mhz performers - but we don't have data yet. I don't own the MM IV, but I do own the Super Mondial II, which appears to have the same program by Schroder. I was thinking on similar lines when it comes to testing strength. Looks like it's time for a little match with Chessmaster GBA and/or Chessmaster DS.
In the same 2008 thread, Cubeman correctly noted that GBA Chessmaster is a pain when it comes to just playing, which is right. Convenience factors are crap: The controls are cumbersome and slow, yet the time controls are ruthless. Thus you can't push the buttons fast enough to run a match at active time with Chessmaster DS, or any other machine, let alone record the game separately. DS is easier to play, and the piece set, while crummy, is easier to see.
Cubeman also says this:
Skill wise I have to agree that GBA version was stronger
I thought the same, but I'm no longer certain. I think DS is barely stronger than GBA. Without question it's faster. Much faster. I've been bashing these two against each other for the past few days. Every game so far at unlimited time ends in a draw, with GBA Chessmaster taking far, far longer to move, and both systems befuddled by endgame choices.
OK, so big deal. We already know DS and GBA are closely related. But that's still worth understanding as part of the de Koning pantheon, which also includes the various PlayStation and XBox games. Among programmers, de Koning dominates the consoles, yes?
Within that frame, what's worth knowing? For one thing, the handheld Chessmasters represent the weakest de Koning versions, released when his Cadillac programs (CM 9000, X and XI), reached their peak. That they were devised in part with children in mind is irrelevant to their absolute strength.
What else? It's interesting to consider that Virtual Kasparov and Pure Chess/Chess Ultra appear to represent rare console-based options that aren't de Koning programs (when you move beyond ancient consoles).
I am very curious about the developer of Virtual Kasparov. It is not quite as strong as the Chessmaster players, but it's stronger than I've allowed in earlier posts, and its play is sneakily amusing - fun in a unique, counterattacking way. The literature is nonexistent on this programmer - who the heck is it? Come on, forum sleuths - help me out. The peak player is a Kasparov avatar, but the program also allows a teensy bit of tuning for a customized player - unique feature?
I'm still building my little database of games, but that's for later. My next move: Virtual Kasparov v. Super Constellation.
- R.
"You have, let us say, a promising politician, a rising artist that you wish to destroy. Dagger or bomb are archaic and unreliable - but teach him, inoculate him with chess."
– H.G. Wells
– H.G. Wells
- Steve B
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10145
- Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 10:02 am
- Location: New York City USofA
- Contact:
As A collector and player of dedicated chess computers only ..all other forms of computer chess are all the same to me..they are simply not in my area of interest and I have no opinion or knowledge about themReinfeld wrote:. (Side philosophical question to Steve - do console cartridges/discs rank above software on your legitimacy tree?)
One Track Mind Regards
Steve
Quoting myself:
Virtual Kasparov for GBA appears to be a variant of an engine devised by French programmers Marc-François Baudot and Jean-Christophe Weill, known as Virtua and/or Virtual Chess. It's also the basis for a Nintendo 64 program I don't own called Virtual Chess. Here's a link for verification:
https://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com ... ophe+Weill
To judge from the literature, the programmers fiddled around with null-move approaches, and did rather well in the late '90s. That's cool - but my interest, as usual, is determining exact measures of strength. I'm running a little match between Virtual Kasparov and Super Constellation. Results to come.
- R.
OK, I think I've solved this little Virtual Kasparov mystery to my own satisfaction, and surprisingly, I find our old friend mclane has knowledge he hasn't mentioned.I am very curious about the developer of Virtual Kasparov. It is not quite as strong as the Chessmaster players, but it's stronger than I've allowed in earlier posts, and its play is sneakily amusing - fun in a unique, counterattacking way. The literature is nonexistent on this programmer - who the heck is it? Come on, forum sleuths - help me out. The peak player is a Kasparov avatar, but the program also allows a teensy bit of tuning for a customized player - unique feature?
Virtual Kasparov for GBA appears to be a variant of an engine devised by French programmers Marc-François Baudot and Jean-Christophe Weill, known as Virtua and/or Virtual Chess. It's also the basis for a Nintendo 64 program I don't own called Virtual Chess. Here's a link for verification:
https://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com ... ophe+Weill
To judge from the literature, the programmers fiddled around with null-move approaches, and did rather well in the late '90s. That's cool - but my interest, as usual, is determining exact measures of strength. I'm running a little match between Virtual Kasparov and Super Constellation. Results to come.
- R.
"You have, let us say, a promising politician, a rising artist that you wish to destroy. Dagger or bomb are archaic and unreliable - but teach him, inoculate him with chess."
– H.G. Wells
– H.G. Wells
Aha! I should have known that Nick fiddled around with this console chess topic in previous threads, especially since I replied in 2015. So here's a link:
http://hiarcs.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=7192
The thread above is focused primarily on Chessmaster programs for the PlayStation 2 and original Xbox, and Nick seems to have run a couple of consoles through his test game suite. He also took a look at Virtual Chess for Nintendo 64, which relies on the same base program as Virtual Kasparov for GameBoy Advance. However, the testing, such as it is, seems to exclude the handheld versions - my focus at the moment.
Separately, I've just acquired Fritz Deep Silver for Nintendo DS, which at first blush, absent testing, appears to be kickass strong - MUCH stronger than Chessmaster for GBA and DS. More later.
- R.
http://hiarcs.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=7192
The thread above is focused primarily on Chessmaster programs for the PlayStation 2 and original Xbox, and Nick seems to have run a couple of consoles through his test game suite. He also took a look at Virtual Chess for Nintendo 64, which relies on the same base program as Virtual Kasparov for GameBoy Advance. However, the testing, such as it is, seems to exclude the handheld versions - my focus at the moment.
Separately, I've just acquired Fritz Deep Silver for Nintendo DS, which at first blush, absent testing, appears to be kickass strong - MUCH stronger than Chessmaster for GBA and DS. More later.
- R.
"You have, let us say, a promising politician, a rising artist that you wish to destroy. Dagger or bomb are archaic and unreliable - but teach him, inoculate him with chess."
– H.G. Wells
– H.G. Wells
- spacious_mind
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4016
- Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
- Location: Alabama
- Contact:
Hi Reinfeld,
The only console programs that I had tested are in that list in the forum post link you provided. I never got a around to testing others.
The link below is download for a spreadsheet that shows what I had tested so far, which will help you see where they stand with other programs.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/urkba88nxvsc2 ... .xlsx?dl=0
Best regards
The only console programs that I had tested are in that list in the forum post link you provided. I never got a around to testing others.
The link below is download for a spreadsheet that shows what I had tested so far, which will help you see where they stand with other programs.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/urkba88nxvsc2 ... .xlsx?dl=0
Best regards
Nick
I play against Ultra Chess on my PS4.
According to developer, Ultra Chess in Grandmaster level (PC Steam version) plays like a 2400 elo player.
I think, PS4 version has weaker strength than PC version.
My strength is around 2000 elo and I can win against Master (2000) and less against World Master (2200) but I did.
Below UCH levels, and if Grandmaster has 2400 then:
Grandmaster 2400
World Master 2200
Master 2000
Professional 1800
Scholar 1600
Expert 1400
Challenger 1200
Amateur 1000
Appretice 800
Novice 600
In PS4 version UCH my feels is World Master plays as 2100-2150, Master 1900, Professional 1700.
Btw, Ultra Chess is good option for play chess on Playstaion 4 + big tv screen
---
Oh, elo rating in Ultra chess is wierd, because on PS4 Grandmaster has around 1750 elo (?!).
Developer said (Steam forum)
"(...) Each AI level has a set difficulty rating, so Amateur will play at the same level every time. BUT, Amateur's ELO will change depending on how the community is performing against that specific level. So if more players are losing to Amateur than winning, the ELO will increase. This explains why the rating shown for Amateur was temporarily higher than that of Expert. Let me know if you would like more info, I can see why that was confusing without an explanation "
According to developer, Ultra Chess in Grandmaster level (PC Steam version) plays like a 2400 elo player.
I think, PS4 version has weaker strength than PC version.
My strength is around 2000 elo and I can win against Master (2000) and less against World Master (2200) but I did.
Below UCH levels, and if Grandmaster has 2400 then:
Grandmaster 2400
World Master 2200
Master 2000
Professional 1800
Scholar 1600
Expert 1400
Challenger 1200
Amateur 1000
Appretice 800
Novice 600
In PS4 version UCH my feels is World Master plays as 2100-2150, Master 1900, Professional 1700.
Btw, Ultra Chess is good option for play chess on Playstaion 4 + big tv screen
---
Oh, elo rating in Ultra chess is wierd, because on PS4 Grandmaster has around 1750 elo (?!).
Developer said (Steam forum)
"(...) Each AI level has a set difficulty rating, so Amateur will play at the same level every time. BUT, Amateur's ELO will change depending on how the community is performing against that specific level. So if more players are losing to Amateur than winning, the ELO will increase. This explains why the rating shown for Amateur was temporarily higher than that of Expert. Let me know if you would like more info, I can see why that was confusing without an explanation "