#161133: "Didn't agree about dead stones, resumed play, then game didn't count dead stones."
Hvad handler denne rapport om?
Hvad skete der? Vær venlig og vælg nedenunder
Hvad skete der? Vær venlig og vælg nedenunder
Vær sød at undersøge, om der allerede er sendt en besked om emnet
Hvis ja, venligst STEM for denne rapport. Rapporter med flest stemmer er dem der får PRIORITET!
| # | Status | Votes | Game | Type | Title | Last update |
|---|
Detaljeret beskrivelse
-
• Venligst kopier/indsæt fejlmeddelelsen du ser på din skærm, hvis der er en.
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. -
• Venligst forklar hvad du ønsker at gøre, hvad du gjorde og hvad der skete
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 browser bruger du?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• Venligst kopier/indsæt tekst vist på engelsk i stedet for dit sprog. Hvis du har et skærmbillede af denne fejl (god øvelse), kan du bruge Imgur.com til at uploade den og kopiere/indsætte linket her.
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. -
• er der adgang til denne tekst i oversættelsessystem? Hvis ja, er det blevet oversat inden for 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 browser bruger du?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• Forklar venligst dit forslag præcist og sammenfattende, så det er så let som muligt at forstå, hvad du mener.
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. • Hvilken browser bruger du?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• Hvad blev der vist på skærmen, da du blev blokeret (Blank skærm? Noget af spilbrugerfladen? Fejlmeddelelse?)
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. • Hvilken browser bruger du?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• Hvilken del af reglerne blev ikke respekteret ved BGA-tilpasningen
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. -
• Er regel-brudddet synligt i e
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 browser bruger du?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• Hvad var den spilhandling du ønskede at udføre?
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. -
• Hvad forsøgte du at gøre for at udløse denne spilhandling?
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. -
• Hvad skete der, da du forsøgre at gøre dette (fejlmeddelelse, meddelelsesstatusbjælke, ...)?
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 browser bruger du?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• I hvilket stadie af spillet opstod problemet (hvad var den daværende spilinstruktion)?
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. -
• Hvad skete der, da du forsøgte at udføre denne spilhandling (fejlmeddelelse, meddelelsesstatusbjælke, ...)?
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 browser bruger du?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• Venligst beskriv display problemet. Hvis du har et skærmbillede af denne fejl (god øvelse), kan du bruge Imgur.com til at uploade den og kopiere/indsætte linket her.
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. • Hvilken browser bruger du?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• Venligst kopier/indsæt tekst vist på engelsk i stedet for dit sprog. Hvis du har et skærmbillede af denne fejl (god øvelse), kan du bruge Imgur.com til at uploade den og kopiere/indsætte linket her.
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. -
• er der adgang til denne tekst i oversættelsessystem? Hvis ja, er det blevet oversat inden for 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 browser bruger du?
Firefox v133.0.3
-
• Forklar venligst dit forslag præcist og sammenfattende, så det er så let som muligt at forstå, hvad du mener.
Table #642822106
Have the game count the dead stones to give the proper score to both players. • Hvilken browser bruger du?
Firefox v133.0.3
Rapporthistorik
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.
Tilføj noget til denne rapport
- Et andet bord-ID / træk ID
- Løste F5 problemet?
- Skete problemet flere gange? Hver gang? Tilfældigt?
- Hvis du har et skærmbillede af denne fejl (god øvelse), kan du bruge Imgur.com til at uploade den og kopiere/indsætte linket her.
