[i]posted by undu[/i] [quote][i]posted by muhvn[/i] I don't really agree with this, non-VIP players get an advantage here. They can simply overstay their welcome. VO would be easier to prohibit closing Xist and also let the non-VIP computer play the given session to the end. However, if the second timeout occurs, the non-VIP tournament would automatically end. This would prevent a situation where you accidentally close Xist by playing two tournaments on the wrong window, a good game. [/quote] You can't prohibit closing Xist
So why not, the possibility of leaving the tournament still remains?-100 points for 1000 interruptions in the game
104 ユーザーによる読み取り
In chess, it is allowed to give up and get 0 before the end of the round, but now they want to ban it in card games (!?). Even in checkers, it is allowed.
Toots tore Tali's bride to dance - as a result, schools and kindergartens in Estonia must be closed
[i]posted by janina[/i] If a user blocks the table from X during a game in a thousand tournament, that user should receive -100 points in the tournament table for that round. This should not apply to online games when the time is ticking to zero or when the computer plays for him on a VIP. Who is on his side?
I completely agree with your sanctions! But I have a question, how do you determine who has an online game, who has a so-called "wrong" click when moving between tabs. And who does it on purpose? Forgive me people, but the statement of some character who multiplies three times a minute that he is not stupid or born yesterday does not apply here.
So for now, I'll just dislike this "idea".
There is no "erroneous" closing of the table. When closing the table during the game, a separate window appears, where confirmation is also asked. Internet junkies are not touched at the first opportunity. Whoever loses their internet connection, the time will tick to zero and they will lose the game. For VIP users (80% of the participants in the thousand tournaments are VIP users), the computer will continue to play.
In this tournament https://www.vint.ee/turniiritabel/?id=97135 the games were played to the end and this took away Lauri's chance to win the tournament. Players who play to the end of the games should be punished. The rules of a thousand tournaments should be made such that 99.99999999999999% of the tournaments are won by Lauri3885
Okay, there can't be a game that was accidentally closed. How do you tell if it's network issues vs. intentional? Network issues CAN happen, and they can also be intentionally created. The same goes for a game being closed when the time limit is exceeded if you're not a VIP. In this case, all game interruptions, -100 tournament points, regardless of whether it's from the network or not, and this autoplay for all users.
Figaro, if you didn't bid with a big whole (or even wholes) and AlQaholic then closed the table, did you have collusion with Lauri3885? Even a fool like me bids with a big whole.
Maamiis has commented in "Õhtulehte~": When the people of Kungla once sat down to drink on the golden ale, the crutch of Vanemuine went to get beer from Latvia