#22847: "Allow conceding in tournament matches for games where winning always grants 1 point"
เกิดอะไรขึ้น? กรุณาเลือกจากด้านล่าง
เกิดอะไรขึ้น? กรุณาเลือกจากด้านล่าง
โปรดตรวจสอบว่ามีรายงานในหัวข้อเดียวกันอยู่แล้ว
ถ้าใช่โปรดโหวตสำหรับรายงานนี้ รายงานที่ได้รับคะแนนโหวตมากที่สุดจะได้รับลำดับความสำคัญสูง!
# | Status | Votes | Game | Type | Title | Last update |
---|
คำอธิบายโดยละเอียด
• โปรดคัดลอก / วางข้อความแสดงข้อผิดพลาดที่คุณเห็นบนหน้าจอหากมี
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.• โปรดอธิบายสิ่งที่คุณต้องการจะทำสิ่งที่คุณทำและสิ่งที่เกิดขึ้น
• คุณใช้เบราว์เซอร์อะไร?
Google Chrome v84
• โปรดคัดลอก / วางข้อความที่แสดงเป็นภาษาอังกฤษแทนภาษาของคุณ หากคุณมีภาพหน้าจอของข้อบกพร่องนี้ (แนวปฏิบัติที่ดี) คุณสามารถใช้ Imgur.com เพื่ออัปโหลดและคัดลอก / วางลิงค์ที่นี่
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.• ข้อความนี้มีอยู่ใน ระบบการแปล หรือไม่? ถ้าใช่มันแปลมานานกว่า 24 ชั่วโมงแล้วหรือยัง?
• คุณใช้เบราว์เซอร์อะไร?
Google Chrome v84
• โปรดอธิบายข้อเสนอแนะของคุณอย่างแม่นยำและรัดกุมเพื่อให้ง่ายที่สุดที่จะเข้าใจสิ่งที่คุณหมายถึง
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.• คุณใช้เบราว์เซอร์อะไร?
Google Chrome v84
• สิ่งที่ปรากฏบนหน้าจอเมื่อคุณถูกบล็อก (หน้าจอว่างเปล่าส่วนหนึ่งของอินเตอร์เฟซเกมข้อความผิดพลาด?)
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.• คุณใช้เบราว์เซอร์อะไร?
Google Chrome v84
• ส่วนใดของกฎที่ไม่ได้รับความเคารพจากการปรับตัวด้วย 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.• การละเมิดกฎสามารถมองเห็นได้ในการเล่นซ้ำเกมหรือไม่ ถ้าใช่จะย้ายเบอร์ไหน
• คุณใช้เบราว์เซอร์อะไร?
Google Chrome v84
• แอคชั่นเกมใดที่คุณอยากใช้งาน?
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.• คุณพยายามทำอะไรเพื่อกระตุ้นการกระทำของเกมนี้?
• เกิดอะไรขึ้นเมื่อคุณพยายามทำสิ่งนี้ (ข้อความแสดงข้อผิดพลาดข้อความแถบสถานะของเกม ... )?
• คุณใช้เบราว์เซอร์อะไร?
Google Chrome v84
• ปัญหาเกิดขึ้นที่ขั้นตอนใดของเกม (คำสั่งเกมปัจจุบันคืออะไร)
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.• เกิดอะไรขึ้นเมื่อคุณพยายามทำการกระทำของเกม (ข้อความแสดงข้อผิดพลาดข้อความแถบสถานะเกม, ... )
• คุณใช้เบราว์เซอร์อะไร?
Google Chrome v84
• โปรดอธิบายปัญหาการแสดงผล หากคุณมีภาพหน้าจอของข้อบกพร่องนี้ (แนวปฏิบัติที่ดี) คุณสามารถใช้ Imgur.com เพื่ออัปโหลดและคัดลอก / วางลิงค์ที่นี่
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.• คุณใช้เบราว์เซอร์อะไร?
Google Chrome v84
• โปรดคัดลอก / วางข้อความที่แสดงเป็นภาษาอังกฤษแทนภาษาของคุณ หากคุณมีภาพหน้าจอของข้อบกพร่องนี้ (แนวปฏิบัติที่ดี) คุณสามารถใช้ Imgur.com เพื่ออัปโหลดและคัดลอก / วางลิงค์ที่นี่
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.• ข้อความนี้มีอยู่ใน ระบบการแปล หรือไม่? ถ้าใช่มันแปลมานานกว่า 24 ชั่วโมงแล้วหรือยัง?
• คุณใช้เบราว์เซอร์อะไร?
Google Chrome v84
• โปรดอธิบายข้อเสนอแนะของคุณอย่างแม่นยำและรัดกุมเพื่อให้ง่ายที่สุดที่จะเข้าใจสิ่งที่คุณหมายถึง
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.• คุณใช้เบราว์เซอร์อะไร?
Google Chrome v84
ประวัติการรายงาน
เพิ่มการร้องเรียน
- ID ของโต๊ะอื่น / ID ของตาเดิน
- การกด F5 แก้ไขปัญหาหรือไม่
- ปัญหาเกิดขึ้นหลายครั้งหรือไม่ ทุกเวลา? สุ่ม?
- หากคุณมีภาพหน้าจอของข้อบกพร่องนี้ (แนวปฏิบัติที่ดี) คุณสามารถใช้ Imgur.com เพื่ออัปโหลดและคัดลอก / วางลิงค์ที่นี่