About this:
instead of “Waiting for Rengo players”, I suggest a message like “waiting for (game creator) to start the game”.
Other remark: when a rengo is created, the person who considers joining may want to know the list of players who are already there.
I think a major flaw is chat disappearing or wrong chat appearing (I have submitted a fix for this).
Having to set handicap initially is a minor inconvenience.
I think I already described that I think that initially the most sensible sounding way of approaching this is to discuss with your potential team-mates that you would like to play a game. (I’ve also submitted an update that adds a global “Rengo” channel). This means that it’s rather more likely that you will be playing with a pre-agreed set of people than waiting around for random folk to show up. Which in turn means you’ll know if you wanted a team to have a handicap.
That said, there is no reason other than “design and effort” why you could not change the parameters of the game as you are assembling the teams. You’ll have to tackle the problem of “wait a minute, I didn’t agree to that change” though. Sounds like a can of worms to me 
If I join the waiting room for two rengo games at once, it only shows the one that’s highest listed (doesn’t matter which one I join first)
same experience on desktop
Well i used to set the handicap according to the levels, not the reverse.
I can see that this is what you would do.
But I’m still not sure if you’re appreciating that you can agree with your team-mates who will play on what teams, then set up the challenge the way you want, with a suitable handicap.
However, I was mostly responding to the idea that this is a “major flaw”, which strikes me as a major overstatement 
It’s putting away flexibility. One change of player and you have to restart your game offer. Of course you can discuss of the setting in a dedicated chat but then it put away the player who just want to launch a rengo offer and adapt it to the people passing by. When you are in that tab making the pairing you have all the necessary information (levels) when the 4 players join to fix the handicap so why make it necessary to go chat before that?
I call it major flaw because it seems very illogical to me.
Well, it’s the way it is because that was the logical smallest step from normal matchmaking.
For sure editable handicap during rengo team forming makes sense to me.
I understand that this may involve more work or way to find with a different system as 1x1 go.
But i m still trying to suggest the best we could have for rengo in our interest!
Yes - we could actually do with two lists though.
One is “what things are showstoppers for this even being ready to use”,
and the other is
“what is the best we can have for the rengo experience”
I’m more focussed on the first list at the moment. That’s where “major flaws” go, to get fixed 
Nice improvements are great to think about as well, of course.
What you did is already amazing, it works!
Hah - I’m glad that it seems promising.
The chat is a “major flaw” (fortunately fix is on its way) and there are a few other things as well, before it’s actually ready.
Your formal document should remain the minimum standard, all else on top is nice extras.
Yeah - that’s a thing.
In fact the are these immediate targets:
FWIW a fix for Chat is deployed - fingers crossed on that. 
There’s also a “Rengo only” filter on the Games page.
Hmm - maybe chat isn’t fixed yet though. Working on it …
… it appears that chat is still disappearing when the opponent(s) play a turn, but at least “who sees what” has improved when it is actually displayed.
In the thumbnails (games page, list of games in chat page etc… ) Only 2 names arround the board. (Should be 4 for a 2x2 players )
That’s either true or very much a lie. 
I wonder if that’s because they have crummy implementations?
Am I allowed to say that? 
Maybe in a couple of weeks you’ll be able to come back and point out how dead it is after the initial splurge of interest and say “I told you so” … that will be interesting to see … 
