OTB, we do remove dead stones 
5 Likes
I know, I know. But to me they look like someone from a neighboring table where they are playing othello or something has put their stones on our board.
But this all sounds too much as if I’d care a lot. Even though I do dislike the smaller stones, it wouldn’t be much of an issue for me. I’ll get used to it quickly no matter what the decision will be. (Even including red crosses. Has anyone considered animations? Expoding stones, dissolving stones etc. 
)
2 Likes
As a still picture this one looks the nicest, but i wonder how this looks when you’re manually marking large groups dead. Would it be possible to make a gif on how these look when you’re changing the status of stones, espesially in a situation where marking some stones dead will make other stones alive?
ps. if you make that gif, can you also use the chinese rules for it? With area scoring all stones have some marking on them, would be interesting to see how it looks when marking the status back and forth ^___^
3 Likes
I was just thinking the same.
Edit :
It’d be helpful to see what stones being toggled/mis-marked looks like too (for example toggling entire large groups dead/alive) to see whether it still looks good.
(The size variation contrast might look different, and if it does make more of an odd impact visually, during the scoring removal/un-removal selection process.)
Might be too much visual noise ?
(Edit : Also, some people, like those with certain types of photosensitive epilepsy, are sensitive to many types of repeating animations, or things like stones repeatedly fading in/out or exploding.
It could be difficult encountering that unexpectedly, or not being able to turn that off.)
But it’s a fun idea. It reminds me of the AI Sensei animations or OGS Kids’ Server animations, with happy/sad/in danger/dead stones with faces.
3 Likes
A board with two prisoners. As Black I am content with the D3 prisoner and definitively less happy with the H4.
I have no problem with the red crosses, but that the prisoner I have taken (D3) and the one I lost (H40) are identical crosswise does bother me.
I would prefer that the prisoner I am happy with (D3) would get a green cross (positive) and that the one I lost in hostile territory (H4) is red (as it is now).
Different colours for prisoners taken and prisoners lost.
Taken=green, lost=red.
And yes, if there are forumistas who doubt if is this a serious post, I say: yes, it is serious.
2 Likes
and what other players (who didn’t play that game) should see?
1 Like
just as it is now?
Ok looks like it’s a pretty clear win for reduced sizes, but folks are fairly split on the X’s. Tallying up both reduced/original sizes, we have 13 for X’s and 15 for score points.
For now I’ve released a version that has the X’s, I think in the future we’ll make that something folks can set as a theme option, with of course an option to not have anything and just have the score points.
13 Likes
The crosses really do look cheap. Was there something wrong with the usual previous design?
For a zen sort of game I really do not understand it and it seems to be encouraging addictive behaviours and rewarding lack of attention, by catering to that. The visual noise seems unnecessary.
1 Like
There is something strange with the post game estimator now @anoek.
I was reviewing a game played yesterday and we got some strange results where the AI review bar says one thing (probably correct) but the board markings and the estimated score are wildly different.
In analysis mode when you go off the main branch you can see things like
Where somehow half of a connected group is being marked dead:
It’s possibly something to do with the group most likely being dead in a correct variation of the main branch maybe but yeah, something not right there.
Then the same in the game review:
It just meant that we couldn’t really trust the estimates at all while reviewing.
This game if you want to play around with it.
1 Like
Think it’s probably the same bug another user reported last week. Good to have more data 
2 Likes
I knew that was back up there somewhere, just wasn’t sure where to find it, thanks 
2 Likes
Yep, this is being tracked in Wrong prisoners count · Issue #2735 · online-go/online-go.com · GitHub . I thought I had a quick fix, but it was not.
2 Likes
https://forums.online-go.com/t/stone-removal-and-scoring-updates/52055/216?u=stone.defender
that still works wrong
after I place move 1 in analysis, pass, move 3, click estimate
Its not connected in actual game, stone “4” appeared in analysis and I see blue squares, so
Can I track this bug somewhere?
1&3 are so clearly the nicest to me.
The new Xs being used on the website are far better than the original red Xs, though I still think 1&3 are superior.
But this seems strongly like something that could easily just be a user preference? If people really want Xs, let them choose it in user preferences?
Yes, Wrong prisoners count · Issue #2735 · online-go/online-go.com · GitHub
The positions change as votes come in, so please use other descriptive language such as “small with x” or “big with square” for greater clarity.
2 Likes
Actually, @anoek, are you sure wrong prisoner count and the score estimator bug are the same bug? 
it isn’t immediately obvious to me that they are…
1 Like
95% sure, the issue is that the stone removal matrix state from the end game is being used during analysis and SE for prior moves, hence the partially removed stones and in the prisoner count, the incorrect incrementing of a prisoner (that was later captured) during analysis. So yeah, might not seem related, but pretty sure it’s the same root issue.
2 Likes
Handy. Two birds deal 