As a veteran of chess.com, I see that they're puzzles offer much more than just what lichess tactics offer. As a result, they are much more difficult.
Why does lichess tactics always involve a move that checks the king first? Oddly, at least 4/5 tactics involve just scoping out a move that checks the king, which leads to a predictable string of moves. Chess.com offers the catergory of attack as well (when you finish the tactic) such as "fork" or "xray" or "perpetual check".
I have not seen a tactic yet that tries to put a lose into a tie, or a move that actually just increases your overall position on the board. Its always checkmates.
If the software you use to create these tactics can not detect moves that involve positions other than "attack the king" than I'm afraid it becomes a very boring and harmful deterrent to actual chess training.
TL;DR Tactics need to be revamped
Why does lichess tactics always involve a move that checks the king first? Oddly, at least 4/5 tactics involve just scoping out a move that checks the king, which leads to a predictable string of moves. Chess.com offers the catergory of attack as well (when you finish the tactic) such as "fork" or "xray" or "perpetual check".
I have not seen a tactic yet that tries to put a lose into a tie, or a move that actually just increases your overall position on the board. Its always checkmates.
If the software you use to create these tactics can not detect moves that involve positions other than "attack the king" than I'm afraid it becomes a very boring and harmful deterrent to actual chess training.
TL;DR Tactics need to be revamped