• Lūdzu nokopē/ielīmē kļūdas ziņu, ko redzi ekrānā, ja tāda ir.

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!

• Lūdzu paskaidro, ko Tu vēlējies darīt, ko Tu izdarīji un kas notika

• Kāda ir Tava pārlūkprogramma?

• Lūdzu iekopē tekstu, kas redzams angļu, nevis tavā valodā. 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. Vai šis teksts ir pieejams tulkošanas sistēmā? Ja jā, vai tas ir ticis tulkots pēdējo 24 stundu laikā?

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!

• Kāda ir Tava pārlūkprogramma?

• Lūdzu, paskaidrojiet savu ieteikumu precīzi un kodolīgi, lai tas būtu pēc iespējas vieglāk saprotams.

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!

• Kāda ir Tava pārlūkprogramma?

• Kas tika attēlots ekrānā, kad Tu tiki bloķēts (tukšs ekrāns? Daļa no spēles interfeisa? Ziņa par kļūdu?)?

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!

• Kāda ir Tava pārlūkprogramma?

• Kura noteikumu daļa netika ņemta vērā BGA versijā?

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!

• Vai noteikumu pārkāpums ir redzams spēles atkārtojumā? Ja jā, tad kurā gājienā?

• Kāda ir Tava pārlūkprogramma?

• Kādu spēles darbību Tu vēlējies veikt?

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!

• Ko tu dari, lai panāktu šo spēles darbību?

• Kas notika, kad veicāt šo darbību (kļūdas paziņojums, spēles informācijas paziņojums,...)?

• Kāda ir Tava pārlūkprogramma?

• Kurā spēles solī problēma parādījās (kas bija tā brīža spēles instrukcija)?

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 notika, kad mēģinājāt veikt spēles darbību (kļūdas paziņojums, spēles informācijas paziņojums,...)?

• Kāda ir Tava pārlūkprogramma?

• Lūdzu aprakstiet radušos problēmu. 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!

• Kāda ir Tava pārlūkprogramma?

• Lūdzu iekopē tekstu, kas redzams angļu, nevis tavā valodā. 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. Vai šis teksts ir pieejams tulkošanas sistēmā? Ja jā, vai tas ir ticis tulkots pēdējo 24 stundu laikā?

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!

• Kāda ir Tava pārlūkprogramma?

• Lūdzu, paskaidrojiet savu ieteikumu precīzi un kodolīgi, lai tas būtu pēc iespējas vieglāk saprotams.

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!

• Kāda ir Tava pārlūkprogramma?