If you have a short game you can't rematch the opponent, I assume it's to prevent people losing on purpose over and over. In three check, I often win or lose in 5 or 6 moves and then have to find someone else (in a small pool). Is there a way to remove this limiter on just 3+ games?
yes I agree!!!!!!!!
I too assume its to prevent people from repeatedly losing quickly. That being the case... the site seems to be working the way the code's author intended. :-/
OP has a fair point, it is much easier to lose quickly in 3+ than standard. However, I am not convinced that removing the limit is a good idea anyway
How does inability to rematch prevent people from losing quickly? It would only apply if two people use two accounts to sandbag one of them, but then you can just see (detect with whatever anticheat system you have) that they are losing on purpose.
It is often the case that sometimes atomic game ends in 3 to 5 moves in the opening and it is impossible to rematch the opponent, who would (possibly) want the rematch with me.I remember it was the case like few weeks ago,when i actively played atomic. And sandbaggers will always find a way how to sandbag :) My suggestion would be to at least minimise the limit to (2 or 3 moves) ?
What is the point of the game length minimum in any variant?
If one player loses quickly because of some early blunder, then why prohibit a rematch hoping for a proper game?
I
In a tournament there are limits to how often you will play the same player. So this limit must also be helping to give you a different player.
#7 You'd need to have a conversation with whoever wrote that code to understand what they are thinking. However, we do know that any feature which exists can and will be abused:
https://youtu.be/iHP5AdRlRNY
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.