yep. eurgh I hate long threads haha, I must have been looking at a different one… hmm, two thirds is not inconsiderable I guess… for something so arguably inconsequential in the grand scheme, I guess two thirds might be enough for the switch to be flipped… but probably not too soon
it shows which regions are painted and which are not. Close to endgame it often paints most of the board, so result is mostly correct. And so, its possible to resign without wasting time on endgame.
It’s even more if you put away the i don’t care or i don’t know
I may be misremembering, but I think there was a decision to keep the rubbish score estimator, because a better one gave too many hints. Even a rubbish score estimator is useful for counting: it counts a lot of the board and you can then add and subtract where it’s made a mistake or where you are more confident. I still would prefer no score estimator and a better informed binary “should I resign?” button (the answers would be “yes” or “can’t say”).
IF your chances to win are less than 2% and you are more than 10 points behind, you will automatically resign after pressing that button. So you can’t use that information to start playing aggressively.
ELSE: you may be 9 points behind or 19 points ahead, you don’t know. So again no way to use that information to play differently.
So, time will not be wasted.
Such button would be perfect.
Bumping this thread as once again this issue comes up and creates a very bad reputation for OGS… This should have been fixed since a long time.
Edit: Sorry I now see this discussion is also going on elsewhere so perhaps bumping this was not necessary. But eh at least it’s the main thread so I guess it’s relevant.
Apparently I’d written a reply but never sent it. So… here’s my 2-year-old reply:
I’m with Uberdude on this one.
I’m seeing a lot of back and forth, but it’s mostly people disagreeing what the basis for a decision should be:
Normative (based on principle) vs Descriptive (based on what we observe).
“Allow, but disable by default” changes nothing about what people can do in their games, but follows the principle of sane defaults, based on OTB . OTB matches are difficult to analyze separately and
There ya go. No idea where I was going with that.
Currently situation is bad for analysis haters.
But if we just change default, situation will be bad for analysis likers.
So, I got idea how to make analysis off by default, but don’t do situation bad for analysis likers:
no preference is default and it means:
“no preference” player + “no preference” player = no analysis for both
if player1 left it as “no preference”
but player2 chose “require On”,
then player1 and player2 will be able to play game, but player1 will have analysis
If player1 will hate it, player1 can always change setting to “require Off” and don’t have analysis ever again.
That way wait time will not be increased for analysis likers, because most users don’t change any settings anyway.
Edit: I misread something. Disregard. (post below kept intact merely for reply context)
That’s a patently bad idea. You’re incentivizing live analysis against the preferences of most players (according to the admittedly non-random forum sample).
with my idea most games will have no analysis and anyone can do it so that they never encounter game with analysis. But those who like analysis will not suffer.
Poll was about default , not about forced
(answer for previous version of post above)
What you mean by “bad”? You wish to those who like analysis to suffer?
I was aware that it’s about the default. Currently 71% for OFF.
But yes, a “no preference” option would apparently increase the potential player pool for OFF by ~14% and the potential ON player pool by a whopping 50%. Doesn’t sound so bad.
Another thread about this, on facebook
@anoek, please address this, it’s pretty farcical now. If all the time people have been spent talking about this on various forums had instead been spent working a minimum wage job and donating the proceeds to OGS, you’d probably have received more money than subscriptions in a year.
Please make analysis disable in auto match.
FWIW folks I hear ya, and the change will be made, looking at a couple of weeks out at the moment.
You are a hero! Really appreciate the effort that goes into this site.
6 posts were merged into an existing topic: Ranked games should have the “Disable analysis” box checked as a requirement
Closing so that anoek’s answer doesn’t get buried with further discussion.
So shall it be written; so shall it be done.