• يرجى نسخ / لصق رسالة الخطأ التي تراها على الشاشة ، إن وجدت.

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!

• يرجى توضيح ما تريد القيام به ، ماذا فعلت وما حدث

• ما هو متصفحك؟

• يرجى نسخ / لصق النص المعروض باللغة الإنجليزية بدلاً من لغتك. إذا لديك لقطة شاشة عن هذا الخطأ (من المفضل)، يمكنك استخدام خدمة إستضافة للصور من اختيارك (snipboard.io مثلاً) لتحميلها و نسخ/لصق الرابط هنا. هل هذا النص متاح في translation system ؟ إذا كانت الإجابة بنعم ، فهل تمت ترجمتها لأكثر من 24 ساعة؟

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!

• ما هو متصفحك؟

• يرجى توضيح اقتراحك بدقة وإيجاز بحيث يكون من السهل قدر الإمكان فهم ما تعنيه.

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!

• ما هو متصفحك؟

• ما الذي تم عرضه على الشاشة عندما تم حظرك (شاشة فارغة؟ جزء من واجهة اللعبة؟ رسالة خطأ؟)

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!

• ما هو متصفحك؟

• أي جزء من القواعد تم مخالفته في تصميم التبني لدى BGA

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!

• هل انتهاك القواعد مرئي عند إعادة اللعب؟ إذا كانت الإجابة بنعم ، فبأي رقم؟

• ما هو متصفحك؟

• ما هو نشاط اللعبة الذي أردت القيام به؟

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!

• ماذا تحاول أن تفعل لتحريك هذا العمل اللعبة؟

• ماذا حدث عند محاولة القيام بهذا (رسالة خطأ ، رسالة شريط حالة اللعبة ، ...)؟

• ما هو متصفحك؟

• في أي خطوة من اللعبة حدثت المشكلة (ما هو تعليمة اللعبة الحالية)؟

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!

• ماذا حدث عند محاولة إجراء هذه الحركة داخل اللعبة (رسالة خطأ ، رسالة شريط حالة اللعبة ، ...)؟

• ما هو متصفحك؟

• يرجى وصف مشكلة العرض. إذا لديك لقطة شاشة عن هذا الخطأ (من المفضل)، يمكنك استخدام خدمة إستضافة للصور من اختيارك (snipboard.io مثلاً) لتحميلها و نسخ/لصق الرابط هنا.

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!

• ما هو متصفحك؟

• يرجى نسخ / لصق النص المعروض باللغة الإنجليزية بدلاً من لغتك. إذا لديك لقطة شاشة عن هذا الخطأ (من المفضل)، يمكنك استخدام خدمة إستضافة للصور من اختيارك (snipboard.io مثلاً) لتحميلها و نسخ/لصق الرابط هنا. هل هذا النص متاح في translation system ؟ إذا كانت الإجابة بنعم ، فهل تمت ترجمتها لأكثر من 24 ساعة؟

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!

• ما هو متصفحك؟

• يرجى توضيح اقتراحك بدقة وإيجاز بحيث يكون من السهل قدر الإمكان فهم ما تعنيه.

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!

• ما هو متصفحك؟