![[us]](/mwf/v12/flags/us.png "United States")
IIRC they've upped the price on this one. i guess the 'free' opening encyclopedia has something to do w/ that. i like supporting chessok, but as a fairly casual user of aquarium 2010 (it is my go-to GUI, but i only occasionally do any intensive analysis) would a purchase be recommended? i've read about the upgrades and while they sound nice, there's not much objective data, so i'm looking for opinions on how much IDeA, IA, the database, everything has really improved over 2010.
![[ca]](/mwf/v12/flags/ca.png "Canada")
I paid for the upgrade just to have access to the new updates following 4.07. Because 4.07 IS still full of bugs and aqua 2011 is much better. But does it worth 40$ ? I don't know its a decision you have to make. But if you look at all the updates you got with aqua 2010, they really stand behind their product so I have a good feeling about upgrading to aqua 2011.
I have to admit I have mixed feelings because I bought CA11 and it is the SAME thing as CA10 except the database. Would I pay for another upgrade of CA ? So far NO because i feel that people who bought the CA11 upgrade from CA10 got severely screwed. But I heard that Chessok honors their guaranteed satisfaction policy so its a risk free try.
All things said, go and try it, if you are not happy, ask for a refund.
For customer support, I found that sometimes Skype is the best way to reach them. If you have problem to reach cust. support, try email, skype and the forum. You should be able to get in touch rapidly (24-48 hours)
I have to admit I have mixed feelings because I bought CA11 and it is the SAME thing as CA10 except the database. Would I pay for another upgrade of CA ? So far NO because i feel that people who bought the CA11 upgrade from CA10 got severely screwed. But I heard that Chessok honors their guaranteed satisfaction policy so its a risk free try.
All things said, go and try it, if you are not happy, ask for a refund.
For customer support, I found that sometimes Skype is the best way to reach them. If you have problem to reach cust. support, try email, skype and the forum. You should be able to get in touch rapidly (24-48 hours)
i have always had -exceptional- customer service from chessok (why i like to support them) but couldn't in good conscience ask for a refund of a product i'd purchased from them (with no way of legitimately returning it). thanks for the advice, but i just spend $30 on the witcher 2 (pc game on sale at almost half price ;D) so i'll probably wait a bit on aquarium 2011.
![[in]](/mwf/v12/flags/in.png "India")
> how much IDeA, IA, the database, everything has really improved over 2010
IDeA - Not much. New bug in "Restore from main tree" is a problem if you use that feature.
IA - Using it to seed IdeA is the main new feature, but I never use it, as I prefer to add positions manually.
Database - Linking of projects and games is good, but not complete (Only one project can be associated with a game, while I use several projects with different engines to analyze each game.) But, wait a minute, was it there in 4.0.6? I am not able to recall.
![[gr]](/mwf/v12/flags/gr.png "Greece")
> IA - Using it to seed IdeA is the main new feature, but I never use it, as I prefer to add positions manually.
this is actually a super huge improvement. You have the engines turned on and evaluations are added while browsing and new alternatives tasks are created and new tasks from moves suggested from other engines. This saves TONS of time
i didn't grasp this from what i read previously. this is a pretty big deal. i recall a video of yours where you showed IA & IDeA working in parallel but the input was manual, can you explain how it's seeded? (or better yet, create another yt video)
![[is]](/mwf/v12/flags/is.png "Iceland")
> this is actually a super huge improvement
I agree. This is one of the most important improvement to IDeA and I use it in all my analysis. The nice thing is that it helps both IDeA users and hard-core IA users (without needing to learn much about IDeA). I think that IA users who try this feature will never go back to their old way of analyzing. I feel sorry for my corr opponents who are still "manually" recording their analysis.
again, a youtube demonstration of this would be nice. (i'll take a link to one of yr pieces tho)
> new alternatives tasks are created and new tasks from moves suggested from other engines.
I have seen this option in the IDeA engine setup window. I assume you have to do this for "pure" IA engines as well (add them to IDeA list even if they are not checked) in order to produce this result?
> assume you have to do this for "pure" IA engines as well (add them to IDeA list even if they are not checked) in order to produce this result?
Man, that never occurred to me! Does it have a big impact?!?
I tried it and I don't see a difference. I guess it's not necessary to add the engines...
> I have seen this option in the IDeA engine setup window. I assume you have to do this for "pure" IA engines as well (add them to IDeA list even if they are not checked) in order to produce this result?
No. It all works in IA mode.
Not add anything in IDEA list.
1) Configure how the engines should behave in Engines mode (where you set up engines) , from the Advanced Engines Options tab (if you do not see it, enable the window from the usual Layout submenu... way down from the arrow)
2)I usually say " Add analysis to IDEA tree and generate alternative tasks" for the engine i use to create my tree
3)I then usue Send positions from analysis line into IDEA queue , for the engines i like to contribute with suggestions to my IDEA tree
4) Its is also important to set the correct "change analysis depth by.." for each engine, since each engine says. (this is used in conjuction with the setting in IDEA project , that says after what depth the program should start putting results into the tree.
5) Now just start IA, with as many engines (at the same time) as you like, always adjusting the max number of cores running. Dont run all engines with max cores. I prefer using the Single Panel with multiple engines.
If you have enabled the "insert infinite analysis from linked games" then everything should work fine.
I use Min time 3sec and Min depth depenging on the engine and the position. 15-16 Most of the times with rybka
Thanks, I was not adding IA engines to the IDeA list. For some reason started to think it may have been necessary. I was confused hoping I could get alternative moves from IA (not used to create the tree) engines.
I use different settings for "insert analysis from linked games": 120 secs and depth of 20. The reason being scores are not substituted for moves chosen early in the analysis. For example, move A may be scored +1.0 at depth 14 but move B is found to be +0.8 at depth 20. The scored for moves earlier in the depth analysis remain as they were when they originally were inserted in the tree. That's why I start at depth 20, thinking that most scores may mean something more by then.
I use different settings for "insert analysis from linked games": 120 secs and depth of 20. The reason being scores are not substituted for moves chosen early in the analysis. For example, move A may be scored +1.0 at depth 14 but move B is found to be +0.8 at depth 20. The scored for moves earlier in the depth analysis remain as they were when they originally were inserted in the tree. That's why I start at depth 20, thinking that most scores may mean something more by then.
>The scored for moves earlier in the depth analysis remain as they were when they originally were inserted in the tree.
Actually this is half the truth
If i start entering at depth 15 (lets say), when at depth 16 the next ply will be entered in the tree with score = the score at depth 16, when ply reaches 17 another one move is entered (or if the engine changes its mind it will enter 2 new moves)
Now in the first case, there is no problem at all, and i gain that for obvious moves i can browse to the next move very fast and not way 2 minutes or 20plies depth.
Now what happens when the engine finds a refutation. Then indeed the "bad" move will get a score that is misleading, but since i am in INTERACTIVE mode , i can fix it fast by pointing 2plies later (it was 17ply depth) in the line and let the engine run few seconds. It will find the refutation faster and everything would be fine.
I personally will never buy anything that has -major bugs (Especially with the flagship features). I do not know if that is the case here. I b puttin my ear to the ground tho.....
Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill