Check acceptance for a challenge game with handicap

Well, I think it’s hilarious that your first reaction is to argue against me, when it turns out my position is now the same as OGS’s (which I didn’t know until benjito educated me).

What you call “hijack” I would call “relevant comment that adding too many warnings to things, such as this komi example, can lead to devaluing the power of the warning as they become normalised, as could happen with a warning on handicap games as suggested”.

So I wouldn’t put a warning triangle on handicap: yes. Unless it’s more intelligent like only appearing if the challenger has a very low fraction of hanidcap games so it is likely to be of use to them.

I think part of the problems people have with handicap is historically handicap has been off by default on OGS (another one of my beefs!) there is a generation of people raised on OGS who don’t like handicap. Handicap is now on by default in various places (yay! that improvement I am aware of) so that culture of handicap dislike should shift, but it will take years, and the people who already don’t like it may be a lost cause.

1 Like

There are also a couple UI changes I think we could consider besides “extra modal” and "warning triangle.

Change #1 Fix Mobile Layout for Challenge Table

Currently a ton of scrolling is required to even see there is handicap. Of course you can click into the modal, but by that time the challenge is already taken by someone else.

Change #2: Allow filtering on Handicap/non-Handicap games

Pretty straightforward, I bet cancellers would use it. Significant mental overhead removed from selecting challenges.


Oh! That’s news to me!

Handicap culture is critical for a Western server. How else can we pretend we have enough players to always get a quick game?

if handicap is auto and rank of opponent is same as your, such game offer should be seen anyway



I wonder if automatch has this bug or not:
if someone choose handicap on and other chose handicap off. Will they be paired if they have same rank?

1 Like

Given that the current incentive without being able to temporarily claim/reserve an open challenge while you look more closely at the challenge is to accept as quickly as possible before someone else does. Your suggestion would just punish players who respond to that incentive, rather than correcting the incentive like my claim/reserve suggestion would

If implemented, the visibility could also be in the form of some sort of symbol other than a warning triangle, placed next to the “Handicap : Auto” column for better visibility when accepting challenges quickly.

(as well as in the game infos popup if it seems a good idea)

Or something a bit more visible like using symbols in the options in the column, displaying as

"Handicap : None :heavy_equals_sign:
Handicap : Auto (or specific number) :white_check_mark:

Options for filtering out/in handicap games seems it would be very efficient, too.


Both suggestion look complementary anyway.

It’s bad design to let people rush and retract at will like now.

It’s like the exception (sorry, made a mistake) becomes the rule (take whatever, cancel after)

So a claim process (so you have some time to check in what consists the challenge) and a delay before selecting another challenge after having canceled (so you’ll be a bit more cautious when selecting)


Displaying the calculated number of stones next to “Auto” seems a good idea, it’s both useful information, and makes the character count different to 4 for “None” so at a glance is clear it’s different:

Handicap None
Handicap Auto

easier to miss at glance than:

Handicap None
Handicap Auto (6 stones)


That would still be punishing following the incentive

I think of it more as a regulation of the flow, not as a punishement

It is negative reinforcement brought on by following the incentives. However you want to spin it, it is not a solution to the problem like a claim/reserve system would be

In the claim/reserve system I describe, the incentive is to claim as soon as you’re pretty sure you want the challenge, then verify that you want it, and then either accept or cancel. Adding your “improvement” would punish players for following that incentive, thus undermining the entire point of the system: to minimize wasted time by quick acceptances without punishing players for following incentives

Not at all. Delay comes in later, after a cancelation, not after dismissing the claim.

But looks like we are only two here concerned by the wildness whem searching for a game. Other suggestions are more on how to make it more efficient

1 Like

What length cooldown period are you proposing? 30 seconds? 5 minutes?

1 Like

I’d go for a few seconds, maybe like 5 ot 6


Ah, I misunderstood your comment. Thank you for clarifying

1 Like

This would be a nice improvement. Should include the automatic komi (see the recent changes especially on small boards)

Handicap None
Handicap Auto (2 stones + 2.5 komi)


I don’t think so: there’s already a separate row for komi, so would be weird to duplicate, and that’s getting a bit long. 6 stones is very different to even game so it’s worth highlighting, but 6 stones 0.5 komi is not much different to 6 stones 2.5 komi.


Ok, then put the komi information line near the handicap one, as they are still related


I should have said “some people” not just “people”.

I can imagine that your experience is the “happy case”, where the opponent experiences a small handicap and is not “put off”.

I’d guess that the chance of a cancellation based on unexpected handicap goes up dramatically with handicap amount…