|
|
| From | Message |
|
Help/FAQ
The outdated translations into several languages (Dutch/Spanish/Italian/French/German) have been removed...
|
|
gameknot.com » Players online: 1,359 Apparently is now updated in real-time
|
|
I love the new click and drag feature! It's a minor change that makes a big difference.
|
|
The new "new message" icon is totally trippy, I thought I was fuzzy s.ichess.com
|
|
Just noticed this
Please note: in order to add more meaning to the mini-tournament points, and make the overall mini-tournament competition more exciting, there is now a point cost for joining and starting mini-tournaments. I.e. a number of points (based on the mini-tournament size) will be deducted from your total when you join or start a new mini-tournament. No worries however, even if you don't have enough mini-tournament points to join a particular mini-tournament, you will still be able to join it. Also, to level the playing field for newer players vs older players (who have been accumulating mini-tournament points for many years) everyone's points have been adjusted 10 to 1.
|
|
Blitz Chess
Somewhat more promoted by a supersized link on "start game" & "join game" pages » Real-time / Blitz Chess gameknot.com
|
aijp 01-Feb-10, 15:29
|
The way mini-tournament point costs are calculated is illogical. For example, in my 11 player gameknot.com the cost of entry is five points, so players lose a total of 55 points, but the total number of points given out is only 36. The total awarded should equal the total cost.
|
|
mini points
on that reasoning aijp, if it was used in the old system, the total pts given out would be zero....
|
|
re: mini points
you have to remember also that there will be players that have zero mini pts, who can also enter into tournaments, so you have a potential pool points range from 0-55, on an 11-player tourney going in...i do agree with you, there is no logic in the mini points system
|
|
Mini-tournament list
gameknot.com & Online green dots at the message center gameknot.com
|
|
New visual change
The 'pawn' icon for premium subscribers looks quite different to me, also, the button for 'Sign Up' on both the home page and tournament pages have changed, the same as 'Join' for both the Fast and Slow Ladders. (the button now looks orange). Either that, or I've gone completely blind (which is quite possible).
|
|
And to show how behind-the-times I am. . .
How long has this been there? On the Premium Subscribers page, there is a nice statement for a "Money Back Guarantee! If within the first 10 days, you are not completely satisfied with your premium membership, we will refund your payment - no questions asked! (Limited to one refund per person)." As I haven't been to that page in a very long time, since when has it popped up?
|
|
New visual change
also your rating on your home page is changed visually
|
|
Also, under settings you have the option of a light or dark (regular) background for the site.
|
|
Whuw
Many changes. Some things that haven't even changed look different too. ) The "light" background is the biggest change it seems - the whole layout is new
|
|
A conditional move has been triggered
New color? Wasn't that yellow?
|
|
My first impression of the upper stat bar in the players profile(rating,wins ect.)seems aliitle too "compressed"to me,even though its very readable...smaller than i'm used to or perhaps smaller than it should be,even with the stronger highlighted rating.But perhaps this is just an illusion and nothing has actually changed in "length"but thats not what my "eye"s see.
|
|
Many pages look different, I believe because a slightly different font is used. It all looks somewhat smaller/more compressed. Not sure if I like it, I suppose we need to become used to the new looks
|
maca 21-Mar-10, 12:00
|
Some of the Captains' interfaces that have to do with challenging other teams have been changed. The list of captains currently on-line now has both the team rating and the team ladder position listed for each team. I like that, but the list itself seems far too constricted now. The list of team's pending challenges is much narrower, and doesn't take the entire width of the page any more. To me, it seems they may be testing how to make the site more accessible for handheld devices. Regards, MaCa.
|
|
The "light background" interface surely suggests an iPhone/Blackberry thingy is on its way.
|
|
I know,I won't be using the light background.Its too bright for me and I find it distracting,but to each his own.I agree with Heinzkat to some extent,I do not like the compressed look,but one has to get use to it I suppose.I also prefer the gold icon aside of my name on my profile rather than off to the side somewhere,but then,thats me,not necessarily the next guy.To each his own.
|
|
Default avatar
Has the default "Knight" avatar (for those who choose not to upload their own) disappeared?
|
|
Hmmmmm.... I just noticed that the "refresh","autorefresh" area when you click on to it to get an incoming opponent move alert(with different sounds) or incoming message sound alert does not have that "rotating arror circle"anymore moving around..it no longer exists...atleast not for me. Hmmm..I miss the circle!Bye bye circle!
|
|
"Hello, heinzkat! " Has turned into: "Hello, heinzkat, " :'(
|
|
GameKnot Blitz v1.08
I don't know what has changed compared to v1.07
|
garos 07-May-10, 05:46
|
database
Now restricted to the first eight moves for those who are not subscribers. How long has it been like this? I haven't been able to visit GK so much recently.
|
|
No it hasn't...
GK are really wanting subscribers around here, aren't they?
|
|
Silly restriction if you ask me, but it seems to follow the "standard" of online databases. I'd rather see GK fix some shortcomings in the GK-DB... rather than adding more restrictions.
|
chessnovice 07-May-10, 17:27
|
Sort of a strange restriction, in my opinion. I don't like the idea of premium memberships giving any sort of advantage in a person's gameplay.
|
|
GK-Database
Yes, thinking about this more... really an annoying restriction for non-premium members. All the chess playing functionality "should be" the same for all.
|
|
|