#161133: "Didn't agree about dead stones, resumed play, then game didn't count dead stones."
Despre ce este vorba acest raport?
Ce s-a întâmplat? Te rugăm alege de mai jos
Ce s-a întâmplat? Te rugăm alege de mai jos
Verificați dacă există deja un raport privind același subiect
Dacă da, te rugăm VOTEAZĂ pentru acest raport. Rapoartele cu cele mai multe voturi au PRIORITATE!
| # | Status | Votes | Game | Type | Title | Last update |
|---|
Descriere detaliată
-
• Te rugăm copiază/lipeşte mesajul erorii pe care îl vezi pe ecran, dacă apare vreunul.
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. -
• Explică, te rugăm, ce ai vrut să faci, ce ai făcut, și ce s-a întâmplat
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. • Care e browserul tău?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• Va rugam copiati/lipiti textul afisat in engleza in locul limbii dumneavoastra. Dacă ai o captură de ecran cu acest bug (ceea ce îți sugerăm), poți folosi Imgur.com pentru încărcarea imaginii și pentru a pune link-ul aici.
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. -
• Este textul acesta disponibil în sistemul de traduceri? Dacă da, a fost tradus mai recent de 24 de ore?
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. • Care e browserul tău?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• Vă rugăm să explicați sugestia exact și concis, astfel încât să fie cât mai ușor de înțeles.
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. • Care e browserul tău?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• Ce a fost afișat pe ecran atunci când ai fost blocat (Ecran gol? O parte din interfața jocului? Mesaj de eroare?)
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. • Care e browserul tău?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• Care parte din reguli nu a fost respectată de adaptarea BGA
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. -
• Se observă frauda când derulați reluarea? Dacă da, la a câta mutare?
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. • Care e browserul tău?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• Care a fost acțiunea pe care ai vrut să o faci?
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. -
• Ce ai făcut de ai produs această reacție/eroare?
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. -
• Ce se întâmplă atunci când vrei să faci asta (apare o eroare, un mesaj din partea jocului in partea de sus a ecranului, ...)?
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. • Care e browserul tău?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• În ce etapă a jocului a apărut eroarea (care era instrucțiunea din acel moment) ?
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. -
• Ce se întâmplă atunci când vrei să acționezi în joc (apare o eroare, un mesaj din partea jocului in partea de sus a ecranului, ...)?
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. • Care e browserul tău?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• Descrieți, vă rugăm, problema de afișaj. Dacă ai o captură de ecran cu acest bug (ceea ce îți sugerăm), poți folosi Imgur.com pentru încărcarea imaginii și pentru a pune link-ul aici.
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. • Care e browserul tău?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• Va rugam copiati/lipiti textul afisat in engleza in locul limbii dumneavoastra. Dacă ai o captură de ecran cu acest bug (ceea ce îți sugerăm), poți folosi Imgur.com pentru încărcarea imaginii și pentru a pune link-ul aici.
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. -
• Este textul acesta disponibil în sistemul de traduceri? Dacă da, a fost tradus mai recent de 24 de ore?
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. • Care e browserul tău?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• Vă rugăm să explicați sugestia exact și concis, astfel încât să fie cât mai ușor de înțeles.
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. • Care e browserul tău?
Firefox v133.0.3
Raportează istoric
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.
Adaugă ceva la acest raport
- Alt identificator de masă / de mutare
- A rezolvat F5 problema?
- Această problemă a apărut de mai multe ori? De fiecare dată? Ocazional?
- Dacă ai o captură de ecran cu acest bug (ceea ce îți sugerăm), poți folosi Imgur.com pentru încărcarea imaginii și pentru a pune link-ul aici.
