#161133: "Didn't agree about dead stones, resumed play, then game didn't count dead stones."
Hva handler denne rapporten om?
Hva har skjedd, eller hva gjelder det? Vennligst velg
Hva har skjedd, eller hva gjelder det? Vennligst velg
Vennligst sjekk om det allerede er en rapport om samme emne
Hvis ja, vennligst STEM på denne rapporten. Rapporter med flest stemmer er gitt PRIORITET!
| # | Status | Votes | Game | Type | Title | Last update |
|---|
Detaljert beskrivelse
-
• Vennligst kopier/lim inn feilmeldingen du ser på skjermen, om mulig.
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. -
• Vennligst forklar hva du ønsket å gjøre, samt hva du faktisk gjorde og hva som skjedde
My opponent and I didn't agree about the marking of dead stones, so we resumed play. My opponent selected "No" to the question, "Do you want to have a stage of designate dead stones after next series of passes?" He was losing, and by selecting "no", he almost won the game, as the game didn't mark the dead stones, and didn't give my the resulting 36 points I should have received.
I only won because I was far enough ahead in points. However, Go is usually so close in score that every point makes a huge difference. This prevents people from playing by the rules. • Hvilken nettleser bruker du?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• Vennligst kopier / lim inn teksten som vises på engelsk i stedet for språket ditt. Hvis du har et skjermbilde av denne feilen (alltid lurt) kan du bruke Imgur.com for å laste det opp og kopiere inn lenken til bildet her.
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. -
• Er denne teksten tilgjengelig i translation system? Hvis ja, har den blitt oversatt i mer enn 24 timer?
My opponent and I didn't agree about the marking of dead stones, so we resumed play. My opponent selected "No" to the question, "Do you want to have a stage of designate dead stones after next series of passes?" He was losing, and by selecting "no", he almost won the game, as the game didn't mark the dead stones, and didn't give my the resulting 36 points I should have received.
I only won because I was far enough ahead in points. However, Go is usually so close in score that every point makes a huge difference. This prevents people from playing by the rules. • Hvilken nettleser bruker du?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• Vennligst forklar ditt forslag nøyaktig og konsistent slik at det er så enkelt som mulig å forstå hva du mener.
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. • Hvilken nettleser bruker du?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• Hva ble vist på skjermen når du ble blokkert (Tom skjerm? Del av spillgrensesnittet? Feilmelding?)
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. • Hvilken nettleser bruker du?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• Hvilken del av reglene ble ikke respektert av BGA-tilpasningen
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. -
• Er regelbruddet tydelig i spilloggen? Hvis ja, Hvilket trekknummer?
My opponent and I didn't agree about the marking of dead stones, so we resumed play. My opponent selected "No" to the question, "Do you want to have a stage of designate dead stones after next series of passes?" He was losing, and by selecting "no", he almost won the game, as the game didn't mark the dead stones, and didn't give my the resulting 36 points I should have received.
I only won because I was far enough ahead in points. However, Go is usually so close in score that every point makes a huge difference. This prevents people from playing by the rules. • Hvilken nettleser bruker du?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• Hva var spillhandlingen du ønsket å gjøre?
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. -
• Hva prøvde du å gjøre for å trigge denne spillhandlingen?
My opponent and I didn't agree about the marking of dead stones, so we resumed play. My opponent selected "No" to the question, "Do you want to have a stage of designate dead stones after next series of passes?" He was losing, and by selecting "no", he almost won the game, as the game didn't mark the dead stones, and didn't give my the resulting 36 points I should have received.
I only won because I was far enough ahead in points. However, Go is usually so close in score that every point makes a huge difference. This prevents people from playing by the rules. -
• Hva skjer når du prøver å gjøre dette (feilmelding, meldingsstatus for meldingsfelt, ...)?
No errors, the game simply ended without allowing use to mark the dead stones. The game didn't identify the dead stones correctly, and didn't even ask if we agreed with the counting result. As several stones were not marked as dead, I lost the stones and the territory they were in.
In my recent table, #642822106, my opponent selected "No" to the question, "Do you want to have a stage of designate dead stones after next series of passes?", which almost cost me the game. This violates the rules of the game. • Hvilken nettleser bruker du?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• På hvilket tidspunkt i spillet oppsto problemet (hva var den daværende spillinstruksjonen)?
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. -
• Hva skjer når du forsøker å gjøre en spillhandling (feilmelding, spillstatusfeltmelding, ...)?
My opponent and I didn't agree about the marking of dead stones, so we resumed play. My opponent selected "No" to the question, "Do you want to have a stage of designate dead stones after next series of passes?" He was losing, and by selecting "no", he almost won the game, as the game didn't mark the dead stones, and didn't give my the resulting 36 points I should have received.
I only won because I was far enough ahead in points. However, Go is usually so close in score that every point makes a huge difference. This prevents people from playing by the rules. • Hvilken nettleser bruker du?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• Vennligst beskriv visningsproblemet. Hvis du har et skjermbilde av denne feilen (alltid lurt) kan du bruke Imgur.com for å laste det opp og kopiere inn lenken til bildet her.
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. • Hvilken nettleser bruker du?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• Vennligst kopier / lim inn teksten som vises på engelsk i stedet for språket ditt. Hvis du har et skjermbilde av denne feilen (alltid lurt) kan du bruke Imgur.com for å laste det opp og kopiere inn lenken til bildet her.
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. -
• Er denne teksten tilgjengelig i translation system? Hvis ja, har den blitt oversatt i mer enn 24 timer?
My opponent and I didn't agree about the marking of dead stones, so we resumed play. My opponent selected "No" to the question, "Do you want to have a stage of designate dead stones after next series of passes?" He was losing, and by selecting "no", he almost won the game, as the game didn't mark the dead stones, and didn't give my the resulting 36 points I should have received.
I only won because I was far enough ahead in points. However, Go is usually so close in score that every point makes a huge difference. This prevents people from playing by the rules. • Hvilken nettleser bruker du?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• Vennligst forklar ditt forslag nøyaktig og konsistent slik at det er så enkelt som mulig å forstå hva du mener.
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. • Hvilken nettleser bruker du?
Firefox v133.0.3
Rapporthistorikk
imgur.com/a/olkcuJm
In bug ID #14642, this problem is marked as fixed, but it actually doesn't fix anything. Rather, it only allows for cheating to continue happening.
This is still happening. Because of my first experience with this, I managed to save my game in this way:
My opponent & I passed. My opponent refused to mark the dead stones. When the question came, "Do you want to have a stage of designate dead stones after next series of passes?", I naturally answered, "yes". I kept playing and killed enough groups to make the game clearly won, and when we both passed, there was no re-counting of dead stones.
Sure enough, my opponent had selected "no", as I suspected he would.
This clearly promotes cheating. The proposed solutions are as follows, going from best to worst:
1) An algorithm that automatically designates dead stones.
2) NO QUESTION about having another stage for designating stones. Since there was already one stage, but the players COULDN'T AGREE, that means that there AUTOMATICALLY needs to be another round of dead stone designation. This should just happen every time.
3) If the question remains like it does now, it should be that if EITHER or BOTH of the players answers "yes", then there should be a stone counting stage.
Legg til noe i denne rapporten
- En annen bord ID / flytt ID
- Løste F5 problemet?
- Oppstod problemet gjentatte ganger? Hver gang? Tilfeldig?
- Hvis du har et skjermbilde av denne feilen (alltid lurt) kan du bruke Imgur.com for å laste det opp og kopiere inn lenken til bildet her.
