While this works for live games if you disable the ‘undo-question mark’ appearing upon a request, it doesn’t solve the situation for correspondence games where you’d see the request before going into zen mode. I don’t know whether it works if you simply play all waiting moves in a row all the time (thus perhaps never leaving zen mode…?), but that’s not how I go about my correspondence games.
1 Like
You mention lichess a lot. I have a question though, are real misclick something happening in chess as often as in go? (I’m not a chess player)
1 Like
Has there been any reason why this would NOT be a good addition?
It’s not interesting why some people do not find this something they want. There will always be people who aren’t interested in some feature.
The real question is "why shouldn’t we add this? What would be wrong with having a “no undos” option in matchmaking?
5 Likes
Don’t know how often compared to go, but yes it does happen in online chess.
2 Likes
Misclicks certainly abound on chess servers as well, especially with the clock ticking down and two clicks (or a click followed by an accurate drag and release) have to be made rather than just a single one as is the case with go. For correspondence chess, I’d say the situation is very similar to that of correspondence go.
3 Likes
Depends, are we getting the "github is over there 
" treatment if we say “yep, that could be useful”? 
Personally, as I person who accepts undos and doesn’t ask them, I wouldn’t mind that addition at all.
2 Likes
Unfortunately this feature is back-end, so the only way it will get implemented is if @anoek does it … github won’t help 
FWIW I’d definitely consider clicking the “prefer undo-disabled games” checkbox.
2 Likes
thx. And do you think it’s more difficult in chess to distinguish between the real and the fake misclick?
1 Like
Oh, we gettin’ the “other things are priority for our programmer” version then 
(OT, could there be a way in correspondence games (inb4 not the ranked ones, but maybe the teaching stuff) to accept bulk undo? For example, my opponent in a learning game could say in chat “you know, that hane didn’t work for me, can I try it the other way? This means 6 undos in total, 3 for you and 3 for me, so basically let’s undo back up to F6 or sth” and I could just click OK and our game could go back 6 moves, without having to wait for each of us to log in in correspondence timing to do the whole thing 6 times.)
2 Likes
Or we could just get the back arrow active.
Because options don’t fall from the sky, there should be a quantity of players interested in it so that the OGS team takes interest to spend time to implement it and with some level of priority.
Another option is to create a new id like: IHateUndoNoResignChatSandbaggerAndAllOfYou
2 Likes
If anything, I’d say it’s generally easier to distinguish genuine misclicks during a chess game, it’s been a long while since I had to deal with takeback requests on lichess however since I only have them allowed for non rated games.
Yes, and in order to ascertain whether there is an interest among the OGS users one might for example start a topic on the subject and get the discussion going.
1 Like
Well now from what I read it seems to me that
People won’t care that option to be implemented
But
People have many example in which the use of this option would have altered the quality of their game.
That doesn’t say that you don’t have players who wants that option, I’m waiting to see them coming
1 Like
I count 5 out of 14 users who’ve written in this thread stating themselves positive to making this an option, that sits just above 1/3 of everyone who’s responded. What kind of ratio is needed to make something a priority I reckon is up to the developers, with difficulty of implementation probably having a lot to say as well.
edit: spelling
1 Like
You can write something like “no undos” on your profile intro like Julko has done.
Tho that doesn’t mean that your oppos are going to check your profile, nor that they wouldn’t ask for undos, but at least they can understand why are you just ignoring the request. And maybe that will reduce the amount of undo requests at least a little bit. I guess thats the best option until there’s an actual feature for this.
PS. Importantly, I’ve as of yet seen no arguments as to why this should not be an option. There is certainly a difference between being indifferent as to an option being made available, or outright critical of it. As of yet, I’ve seen no real critique of the idea of having optional takebacks.
1 Like
I count only 2 posts: 11 and 33. Others don’t have stated they want that feature, but some are not against.
There are some kind of arguments in the form of individual positive experiences with undos, whose won’t happen with the option activated .
I can see I misread one post, but users
Fornbogi
GreenAsJade
Knyttet
Samraku
have all stated themselves being positive to the idea, so that makes it 4/14, still about 1/3. Again, no arguments against the idea have been brought forth.
1 Like
Ok I forgot your own voice.
It’s not so much about ratio (no virulent objection here) but about how large the will is . 4 people is a start