• Kui näed ekraanil veateadet, kopeeri see siia.

A player abandoned a game on the last hand. The points awarded to the remaining three players did not reflect the relative scores of the players.

Specifically, the player in first place (me) had an overwhelming lead..."uncatchable" at level 17 of the game...whereas the player in last place had less than half the score of the other players. This last place player and the other remaining player were awarded almost double the points of the player with the highest score.

I understand that points are calculated based on relative strength/elo of the players. However, the calculation needs to better reflect how far the game has progressed. In this case, the game was on the last level, yet the points the leader received were about 25-33% of what he would have received had the game completed.

If the scoring algorithm is not improved, there becomes an incentive for a player to abandon a game at a late stage so that another player is awarded or not awarded the points (s)he would have earned had the game finished. In this particular game, the abandoning player lost points; however, by abandoning the game at the end, he prevented the leader from moving up in ranking and allowed the other two players to move up in ranking more than they would have had the game completed.

I am not claiming that the abandoning player in this game was malicious. His action highlighted a flaw in the scoring algorithm that should be corrected.

Thank you for objectively evaluating!

• Kirjelda, mida sa soovisid teha, mida sa tegid ja mis juhtus

• mis on sinu veebilehitseja?

• Palun kopeeri/kleebi kuvatud tekst inglise keeles, mitte sinu oma keeles. If you have a screenshot of this bug (good practice), you can use a picture hosting service of your choice (snipboard.io for example) to upload it and copy/paste the link here. Kas see tekst on kättesaadav tõlkesüsteemis ? Kui jah, kas see on tõlgitud rohkem kui 24 tundi tagasi?

A player abandoned a game on the last hand. The points awarded to the remaining three players did not reflect the relative scores of the players.

Specifically, the player in first place (me) had an overwhelming lead..."uncatchable" at level 17 of the game...whereas the player in last place had less than half the score of the other players. This last place player and the other remaining player were awarded almost double the points of the player with the highest score.

I understand that points are calculated based on relative strength/elo of the players. However, the calculation needs to better reflect how far the game has progressed. In this case, the game was on the last level, yet the points the leader received were about 25-33% of what he would have received had the game completed.

If the scoring algorithm is not improved, there becomes an incentive for a player to abandon a game at a late stage so that another player is awarded or not awarded the points (s)he would have earned had the game finished. In this particular game, the abandoning player lost points; however, by abandoning the game at the end, he prevented the leader from moving up in ranking and allowed the other two players to move up in ranking more than they would have had the game completed.

I am not claiming that the abandoning player in this game was malicious. His action highlighted a flaw in the scoring algorithm that should be corrected.

Thank you for objectively evaluating!

• mis on sinu veebilehitseja?

• Palun selgita oma ettepanekut täpselt ja lühidalt, et oleks võimalikult lihtne mõista, mida silmas pead.

A player abandoned a game on the last hand. The points awarded to the remaining three players did not reflect the relative scores of the players.

Specifically, the player in first place (me) had an overwhelming lead..."uncatchable" at level 17 of the game...whereas the player in last place had less than half the score of the other players. This last place player and the other remaining player were awarded almost double the points of the player with the highest score.

I understand that points are calculated based on relative strength/elo of the players. However, the calculation needs to better reflect how far the game has progressed. In this case, the game was on the last level, yet the points the leader received were about 25-33% of what he would have received had the game completed.

If the scoring algorithm is not improved, there becomes an incentive for a player to abandon a game at a late stage so that another player is awarded or not awarded the points (s)he would have earned had the game finished. In this particular game, the abandoning player lost points; however, by abandoning the game at the end, he prevented the leader from moving up in ranking and allowed the other two players to move up in ranking more than they would have had the game completed.

I am not claiming that the abandoning player in this game was malicious. His action highlighted a flaw in the scoring algorithm that should be corrected.

Thank you for objectively evaluating!

• mis on sinu veebilehitseja?

• Mis oli ekraanil, kui sind blokeeriti? (Tühi ekraan? Osa mänguliidesest? Veateade?)

A player abandoned a game on the last hand. The points awarded to the remaining three players did not reflect the relative scores of the players.

Specifically, the player in first place (me) had an overwhelming lead..."uncatchable" at level 17 of the game...whereas the player in last place had less than half the score of the other players. This last place player and the other remaining player were awarded almost double the points of the player with the highest score.

I understand that points are calculated based on relative strength/elo of the players. However, the calculation needs to better reflect how far the game has progressed. In this case, the game was on the last level, yet the points the leader received were about 25-33% of what he would have received had the game completed.

If the scoring algorithm is not improved, there becomes an incentive for a player to abandon a game at a late stage so that another player is awarded or not awarded the points (s)he would have earned had the game finished. In this particular game, the abandoning player lost points; however, by abandoning the game at the end, he prevented the leader from moving up in ranking and allowed the other two players to move up in ranking more than they would have had the game completed.

I am not claiming that the abandoning player in this game was malicious. His action highlighted a flaw in the scoring algorithm that should be corrected.

Thank you for objectively evaluating!

• mis on sinu veebilehitseja?

• Millist osa BGA kohandamisest ei järgitud

A player abandoned a game on the last hand. The points awarded to the remaining three players did not reflect the relative scores of the players.

Specifically, the player in first place (me) had an overwhelming lead..."uncatchable" at level 17 of the game...whereas the player in last place had less than half the score of the other players. This last place player and the other remaining player were awarded almost double the points of the player with the highest score.

I understand that points are calculated based on relative strength/elo of the players. However, the calculation needs to better reflect how far the game has progressed. In this case, the game was on the last level, yet the points the leader received were about 25-33% of what he would have received had the game completed.

If the scoring algorithm is not improved, there becomes an incentive for a player to abandon a game at a late stage so that another player is awarded or not awarded the points (s)he would have earned had the game finished. In this particular game, the abandoning player lost points; however, by abandoning the game at the end, he prevented the leader from moving up in ranking and allowed the other two players to move up in ranking more than they would have had the game completed.

I am not claiming that the abandoning player in this game was malicious. His action highlighted a flaw in the scoring algorithm that should be corrected.

Thank you for objectively evaluating!

• Kas reeglite rikkumist on mängu taasesitusel näha? Kui jah, siis mitmendal käigul?

• mis on sinu veebilehitseja?

• Milline oli mängu tegevus, mida tahtsid sooritada?

A player abandoned a game on the last hand. The points awarded to the remaining three players did not reflect the relative scores of the players.

Specifically, the player in first place (me) had an overwhelming lead..."uncatchable" at level 17 of the game...whereas the player in last place had less than half the score of the other players. This last place player and the other remaining player were awarded almost double the points of the player with the highest score.

I understand that points are calculated based on relative strength/elo of the players. However, the calculation needs to better reflect how far the game has progressed. In this case, the game was on the last level, yet the points the leader received were about 25-33% of what he would have received had the game completed.

If the scoring algorithm is not improved, there becomes an incentive for a player to abandon a game at a late stage so that another player is awarded or not awarded the points (s)he would have earned had the game finished. In this particular game, the abandoning player lost points; however, by abandoning the game at the end, he prevented the leader from moving up in ranking and allowed the other two players to move up in ranking more than they would have had the game completed.

I am not claiming that the abandoning player in this game was malicious. His action highlighted a flaw in the scoring algorithm that should be corrected.

Thank you for objectively evaluating!

• Mida püüdsid teha, et seda mängu tegevust käivitada?

• Mis juhtus, kui seda proovisite (veateade, mängu olekuriba teade, ...)?

• mis on sinu veebilehitseja?

• Millises mängu etapis esines probleem (Mis oli selle mänguetapi instruktsioon)?

A player abandoned a game on the last hand. The points awarded to the remaining three players did not reflect the relative scores of the players.

Specifically, the player in first place (me) had an overwhelming lead..."uncatchable" at level 17 of the game...whereas the player in last place had less than half the score of the other players. This last place player and the other remaining player were awarded almost double the points of the player with the highest score.

I understand that points are calculated based on relative strength/elo of the players. However, the calculation needs to better reflect how far the game has progressed. In this case, the game was on the last level, yet the points the leader received were about 25-33% of what he would have received had the game completed.

If the scoring algorithm is not improved, there becomes an incentive for a player to abandon a game at a late stage so that another player is awarded or not awarded the points (s)he would have earned had the game finished. In this particular game, the abandoning player lost points; however, by abandoning the game at the end, he prevented the leader from moving up in ranking and allowed the other two players to move up in ranking more than they would have had the game completed.

I am not claiming that the abandoning player in this game was malicious. His action highlighted a flaw in the scoring algorithm that should be corrected.

Thank you for objectively evaluating!

• Mis juhtus, kui proovisite sooritada seda mängu käiku (veateade, mängu olekuriba sõnum, ...)?

• mis on sinu veebilehitseja?

• Kirjelda kuvamise probleemi. If you have a screenshot of this bug (good practice), you can use a picture hosting service of your choice (snipboard.io for example) to upload it and copy/paste the link here.

A player abandoned a game on the last hand. The points awarded to the remaining three players did not reflect the relative scores of the players.

Specifically, the player in first place (me) had an overwhelming lead..."uncatchable" at level 17 of the game...whereas the player in last place had less than half the score of the other players. This last place player and the other remaining player were awarded almost double the points of the player with the highest score.

I understand that points are calculated based on relative strength/elo of the players. However, the calculation needs to better reflect how far the game has progressed. In this case, the game was on the last level, yet the points the leader received were about 25-33% of what he would have received had the game completed.

If the scoring algorithm is not improved, there becomes an incentive for a player to abandon a game at a late stage so that another player is awarded or not awarded the points (s)he would have earned had the game finished. In this particular game, the abandoning player lost points; however, by abandoning the game at the end, he prevented the leader from moving up in ranking and allowed the other two players to move up in ranking more than they would have had the game completed.

I am not claiming that the abandoning player in this game was malicious. His action highlighted a flaw in the scoring algorithm that should be corrected.

Thank you for objectively evaluating!

• mis on sinu veebilehitseja?

• Palun kopeeri/kleebi kuvatud tekst inglise keeles, mitte sinu oma keeles. If you have a screenshot of this bug (good practice), you can use a picture hosting service of your choice (snipboard.io for example) to upload it and copy/paste the link here. Kas see tekst on kättesaadav tõlkesüsteemis ? Kui jah, kas see on tõlgitud rohkem kui 24 tundi tagasi?

A player abandoned a game on the last hand. The points awarded to the remaining three players did not reflect the relative scores of the players.

Specifically, the player in first place (me) had an overwhelming lead..."uncatchable" at level 17 of the game...whereas the player in last place had less than half the score of the other players. This last place player and the other remaining player were awarded almost double the points of the player with the highest score.

I understand that points are calculated based on relative strength/elo of the players. However, the calculation needs to better reflect how far the game has progressed. In this case, the game was on the last level, yet the points the leader received were about 25-33% of what he would have received had the game completed.

If the scoring algorithm is not improved, there becomes an incentive for a player to abandon a game at a late stage so that another player is awarded or not awarded the points (s)he would have earned had the game finished. In this particular game, the abandoning player lost points; however, by abandoning the game at the end, he prevented the leader from moving up in ranking and allowed the other two players to move up in ranking more than they would have had the game completed.

I am not claiming that the abandoning player in this game was malicious. His action highlighted a flaw in the scoring algorithm that should be corrected.

Thank you for objectively evaluating!

• mis on sinu veebilehitseja?

• Palun selgita oma ettepanekut täpselt ja lühidalt, et oleks võimalikult lihtne mõista, mida silmas pead.

A player abandoned a game on the last hand. The points awarded to the remaining three players did not reflect the relative scores of the players.

Specifically, the player in first place (me) had an overwhelming lead..."uncatchable" at level 17 of the game...whereas the player in last place had less than half the score of the other players. This last place player and the other remaining player were awarded almost double the points of the player with the highest score.

I understand that points are calculated based on relative strength/elo of the players. However, the calculation needs to better reflect how far the game has progressed. In this case, the game was on the last level, yet the points the leader received were about 25-33% of what he would have received had the game completed.

If the scoring algorithm is not improved, there becomes an incentive for a player to abandon a game at a late stage so that another player is awarded or not awarded the points (s)he would have earned had the game finished. In this particular game, the abandoning player lost points; however, by abandoning the game at the end, he prevented the leader from moving up in ranking and allowed the other two players to move up in ranking more than they would have had the game completed.

I am not claiming that the abandoning player in this game was malicious. His action highlighted a flaw in the scoring algorithm that should be corrected.

Thank you for objectively evaluating!

• mis on sinu veebilehitseja?