#22847: "Allow conceding in tournament matches for games where winning always grants 1 point"
מה קרה? אנא בחר מהרשימה מטה
מה קרה? אנא בחר מהרשימה מטה
בבקשה בדוק אם יש כבר דוח על אותו נושא
אם כן, הצביעו בעד הדיווח הזה, דיווחים עם הכי הרבה קולות נחקרים ראשונים
# | Status | Votes | Game | Type | Title | Last update |
---|
תיאור מפורט
• אנא העתק/הדבק את הודעת השגיאה המופיעה במסך, אם יש כזו.
When you have clearly lost a tournament match, you are forced to play out the rest of the game. There are two justifications for this:
1. The winner might get more than 1 point.
2. The winner wants the experience of playing out their win in full.
In the case of certain games like Chess, where you can score at most 1 point, the first point doesn't apply.
In the case of Chess, there can't be very many people for whom the second point applies. It can be frustrating to have to play a Chess match to conclusion for both the winner and the loser, to the point where some would consider it rude not to resign.
However, even for games where it is fun to play out your win, I believe it is not worth the frustration experienced by the loser, and to force the loser to play til they are beaten into the dirt is quite a selfish way to approach board-gaming.
As such, it should be possible to concede tournament matches wherever a win would only grant 1 point.• בבקשה הסבר מה רצית לעשות,מה עשית ומה קרה
• מה הדפדפן שלך?
Google Chrome v84
• בבקשה העתק והדבק את הטקסט המוצג באנגלית במקום בשפה שלך. אם יש לך צילום מסך (מומלץ) אתה יכול להשתמש ב Imgur.com כדי להעלות אותו להדביק קישור לכאן.
When you have clearly lost a tournament match, you are forced to play out the rest of the game. There are two justifications for this:
1. The winner might get more than 1 point.
2. The winner wants the experience of playing out their win in full.
In the case of certain games like Chess, where you can score at most 1 point, the first point doesn't apply.
In the case of Chess, there can't be very many people for whom the second point applies. It can be frustrating to have to play a Chess match to conclusion for both the winner and the loser, to the point where some would consider it rude not to resign.
However, even for games where it is fun to play out your win, I believe it is not worth the frustration experienced by the loser, and to force the loser to play til they are beaten into the dirt is quite a selfish way to approach board-gaming.
As such, it should be possible to concede tournament matches wherever a win would only grant 1 point.• האם טקסט זה זמין במערכת התרגום? אם כן, האם היא תורגמה במשך יותר מ -24 שעות?
• מה הדפדפן שלך?
Google Chrome v84
• אנא הסבר את ההצעה שלך במדויק ותמצית כדי שיהיה קל ככל האפשר להבין למה אתה מתכוון.
When you have clearly lost a tournament match, you are forced to play out the rest of the game. There are two justifications for this:
1. The winner might get more than 1 point.
2. The winner wants the experience of playing out their win in full.
In the case of certain games like Chess, where you can score at most 1 point, the first point doesn't apply.
In the case of Chess, there can't be very many people for whom the second point applies. It can be frustrating to have to play a Chess match to conclusion for both the winner and the loser, to the point where some would consider it rude not to resign.
However, even for games where it is fun to play out your win, I believe it is not worth the frustration experienced by the loser, and to force the loser to play til they are beaten into the dirt is quite a selfish way to approach board-gaming.
As such, it should be possible to concede tournament matches wherever a win would only grant 1 point.• מה הדפדפן שלך?
Google Chrome v84
• מה הוצג על המסך כאשר נחסמה (מסך ריק? חלק ממשק המשחק? הודעת שגיאה?)
When you have clearly lost a tournament match, you are forced to play out the rest of the game. There are two justifications for this:
1. The winner might get more than 1 point.
2. The winner wants the experience of playing out their win in full.
In the case of certain games like Chess, where you can score at most 1 point, the first point doesn't apply.
In the case of Chess, there can't be very many people for whom the second point applies. It can be frustrating to have to play a Chess match to conclusion for both the winner and the loser, to the point where some would consider it rude not to resign.
However, even for games where it is fun to play out your win, I believe it is not worth the frustration experienced by the loser, and to force the loser to play til they are beaten into the dirt is quite a selfish way to approach board-gaming.
As such, it should be possible to concede tournament matches wherever a win would only grant 1 point.• מה הדפדפן שלך?
Google Chrome v84
• איזה חלק של הכללים לא היה מכובד על ידי עיבוד BGA
When you have clearly lost a tournament match, you are forced to play out the rest of the game. There are two justifications for this:
1. The winner might get more than 1 point.
2. The winner wants the experience of playing out their win in full.
In the case of certain games like Chess, where you can score at most 1 point, the first point doesn't apply.
In the case of Chess, there can't be very many people for whom the second point applies. It can be frustrating to have to play a Chess match to conclusion for both the winner and the loser, to the point where some would consider it rude not to resign.
However, even for games where it is fun to play out your win, I believe it is not worth the frustration experienced by the loser, and to force the loser to play til they are beaten into the dirt is quite a selfish way to approach board-gaming.
As such, it should be possible to concede tournament matches wherever a win would only grant 1 point.• האם אפשר לראות את הפרת החוק בשידור החוזר? אם כן, באיזה מספר מהלך?
• מה הדפדפן שלך?
Google Chrome v84
• מה היה המהלך במשחק שרצית לבצע?
When you have clearly lost a tournament match, you are forced to play out the rest of the game. There are two justifications for this:
1. The winner might get more than 1 point.
2. The winner wants the experience of playing out their win in full.
In the case of certain games like Chess, where you can score at most 1 point, the first point doesn't apply.
In the case of Chess, there can't be very many people for whom the second point applies. It can be frustrating to have to play a Chess match to conclusion for both the winner and the loser, to the point where some would consider it rude not to resign.
However, even for games where it is fun to play out your win, I believe it is not worth the frustration experienced by the loser, and to force the loser to play til they are beaten into the dirt is quite a selfish way to approach board-gaming.
As such, it should be possible to concede tournament matches wherever a win would only grant 1 point.• מה ניסית לעשות שגרם לפעולה הזו
• מה קרה כאשר את/ה מנסה לעשות את זה (הודעת שגיאה, הודעת פס סטטוס משחק, ...)?
• מה הדפדפן שלך?
Google Chrome v84
• באיזה שלב במשחק הבעייה קרתה (מה היו ההוראות הנכונות)
When you have clearly lost a tournament match, you are forced to play out the rest of the game. There are two justifications for this:
1. The winner might get more than 1 point.
2. The winner wants the experience of playing out their win in full.
In the case of certain games like Chess, where you can score at most 1 point, the first point doesn't apply.
In the case of Chess, there can't be very many people for whom the second point applies. It can be frustrating to have to play a Chess match to conclusion for both the winner and the loser, to the point where some would consider it rude not to resign.
However, even for games where it is fun to play out your win, I believe it is not worth the frustration experienced by the loser, and to force the loser to play til they are beaten into the dirt is quite a selfish way to approach board-gaming.
As such, it should be possible to concede tournament matches wherever a win would only grant 1 point.• מה קרה כאשר את/ה מנסה לבצע פעולת משחק (הודעת שגיאה, הודעת פס סטטוס משחק, ...)?
• מה הדפדפן שלך?
Google Chrome v84
• אנא תאר/י את הנושא המוצג. אם יש לך צילום מסך (מומלץ) אתה יכול להשתמש ב Imgur.com כדי להעלות אותו להדביק קישור לכאן.
When you have clearly lost a tournament match, you are forced to play out the rest of the game. There are two justifications for this:
1. The winner might get more than 1 point.
2. The winner wants the experience of playing out their win in full.
In the case of certain games like Chess, where you can score at most 1 point, the first point doesn't apply.
In the case of Chess, there can't be very many people for whom the second point applies. It can be frustrating to have to play a Chess match to conclusion for both the winner and the loser, to the point where some would consider it rude not to resign.
However, even for games where it is fun to play out your win, I believe it is not worth the frustration experienced by the loser, and to force the loser to play til they are beaten into the dirt is quite a selfish way to approach board-gaming.
As such, it should be possible to concede tournament matches wherever a win would only grant 1 point.• מה הדפדפן שלך?
Google Chrome v84
• בבקשה העתק והדבק את הטקסט המוצג באנגלית במקום בשפה שלך. אם יש לך צילום מסך (מומלץ) אתה יכול להשתמש ב Imgur.com כדי להעלות אותו להדביק קישור לכאן.
When you have clearly lost a tournament match, you are forced to play out the rest of the game. There are two justifications for this:
1. The winner might get more than 1 point.
2. The winner wants the experience of playing out their win in full.
In the case of certain games like Chess, where you can score at most 1 point, the first point doesn't apply.
In the case of Chess, there can't be very many people for whom the second point applies. It can be frustrating to have to play a Chess match to conclusion for both the winner and the loser, to the point where some would consider it rude not to resign.
However, even for games where it is fun to play out your win, I believe it is not worth the frustration experienced by the loser, and to force the loser to play til they are beaten into the dirt is quite a selfish way to approach board-gaming.
As such, it should be possible to concede tournament matches wherever a win would only grant 1 point.• האם טקסט זה זמין במערכת התרגום? אם כן, האם היא תורגמה במשך יותר מ -24 שעות?
• מה הדפדפן שלך?
Google Chrome v84
• אנא הסבר את ההצעה שלך במדויק ותמצית כדי שיהיה קל ככל האפשר להבין למה אתה מתכוון.
When you have clearly lost a tournament match, you are forced to play out the rest of the game. There are two justifications for this:
1. The winner might get more than 1 point.
2. The winner wants the experience of playing out their win in full.
In the case of certain games like Chess, where you can score at most 1 point, the first point doesn't apply.
In the case of Chess, there can't be very many people for whom the second point applies. It can be frustrating to have to play a Chess match to conclusion for both the winner and the loser, to the point where some would consider it rude not to resign.
However, even for games where it is fun to play out your win, I believe it is not worth the frustration experienced by the loser, and to force the loser to play til they are beaten into the dirt is quite a selfish way to approach board-gaming.
As such, it should be possible to concede tournament matches wherever a win would only grant 1 point.• מה הדפדפן שלך?
Google Chrome v84
היסטוריית דיווחים
הוסף לדוח הזה
- מספר שולחן/מהלך אחר
- האם לחיצה על F5 פתר את הבעיה?
- האם הבעיה הופיע כמה פעמים? בכל פעם? באופן אקראי?
- אם יש לך צילום מסך (מומלץ) אתה יכול להשתמש ב Imgur.com כדי להעלות אותו להדביק קישור לכאן.