• 如果可以的話，請轉貼螢幕顯示的錯誤訊息。

A player abandoned a game on the last hand. The points awarded to the remaining three players did not reflect the relative scores of the players.

Specifically, the player in first place (me) had an overwhelming lead..."uncatchable" at level 17 of the game...whereas the player in last place had less than half the score of the other players. This last place player and the other remaining player were awarded almost double the points of the player with the highest score.

I understand that points are calculated based on relative strength/elo of the players. However, the calculation needs to better reflect how far the game has progressed. In this case, the game was on the last level, yet the points the leader received were about 25-33% of what he would have received had the game completed.

If the scoring algorithm is not improved, there becomes an incentive for a player to abandon a game at a late stage so that another player is awarded or not awarded the points (s)he would have earned had the game finished. In this particular game, the abandoning player lost points; however, by abandoning the game at the end, he prevented the leader from moving up in ranking and allowed the other two players to move up in ranking more than they would have had the game completed.

I am not claiming that the abandoning player in this game was malicious. His action highlighted a flaw in the scoring algorithm that should be corrected.

Thank you for objectively evaluating!

• 請說明你當時想做什麼，你做了什麼，然後發生了什麼事

• 你的瀏覽器是什麼？

• 請轉貼未翻譯的英文字句。 如果您有此錯誤的螢幕截圖（這是個好習慣），您可以使用您選擇的圖片託管服務（例如snipboard.io）上傳它，然後將連結複製/貼上到這裡。 這些文字存在於 翻譯系統 中嗎？若為真，其是否已被翻譯超過 24 小時？

A player abandoned a game on the last hand. The points awarded to the remaining three players did not reflect the relative scores of the players.

Specifically, the player in first place (me) had an overwhelming lead..."uncatchable" at level 17 of the game...whereas the player in last place had less than half the score of the other players. This last place player and the other remaining player were awarded almost double the points of the player with the highest score.

I understand that points are calculated based on relative strength/elo of the players. However, the calculation needs to better reflect how far the game has progressed. In this case, the game was on the last level, yet the points the leader received were about 25-33% of what he would have received had the game completed.

If the scoring algorithm is not improved, there becomes an incentive for a player to abandon a game at a late stage so that another player is awarded or not awarded the points (s)he would have earned had the game finished. In this particular game, the abandoning player lost points; however, by abandoning the game at the end, he prevented the leader from moving up in ranking and allowed the other two players to move up in ranking more than they would have had the game completed.

I am not claiming that the abandoning player in this game was malicious. His action highlighted a flaw in the scoring algorithm that should be corrected.

Thank you for objectively evaluating!

• 你的瀏覽器是什麼？

• 請簡明精確地解釋你的建議，以便讓人一目了然。

A player abandoned a game on the last hand. The points awarded to the remaining three players did not reflect the relative scores of the players.

Specifically, the player in first place (me) had an overwhelming lead..."uncatchable" at level 17 of the game...whereas the player in last place had less than half the score of the other players. This last place player and the other remaining player were awarded almost double the points of the player with the highest score.

I understand that points are calculated based on relative strength/elo of the players. However, the calculation needs to better reflect how far the game has progressed. In this case, the game was on the last level, yet the points the leader received were about 25-33% of what he would have received had the game completed.

If the scoring algorithm is not improved, there becomes an incentive for a player to abandon a game at a late stage so that another player is awarded or not awarded the points (s)he would have earned had the game finished. In this particular game, the abandoning player lost points; however, by abandoning the game at the end, he prevented the leader from moving up in ranking and allowed the other two players to move up in ranking more than they would have had the game completed.

I am not claiming that the abandoning player in this game was malicious. His action highlighted a flaw in the scoring algorithm that should be corrected.

Thank you for objectively evaluating!

• 你的瀏覽器是什麼？

• 當你不能動作時，螢幕上顯示什麼？（螢幕全黑？部份遊戲介面？錯誤訊息？）

A player abandoned a game on the last hand. The points awarded to the remaining three players did not reflect the relative scores of the players.

Specifically, the player in first place (me) had an overwhelming lead..."uncatchable" at level 17 of the game...whereas the player in last place had less than half the score of the other players. This last place player and the other remaining player were awarded almost double the points of the player with the highest score.

I understand that points are calculated based on relative strength/elo of the players. However, the calculation needs to better reflect how far the game has progressed. In this case, the game was on the last level, yet the points the leader received were about 25-33% of what he would have received had the game completed.

If the scoring algorithm is not improved, there becomes an incentive for a player to abandon a game at a late stage so that another player is awarded or not awarded the points (s)he would have earned had the game finished. In this particular game, the abandoning player lost points; however, by abandoning the game at the end, he prevented the leader from moving up in ranking and allowed the other two players to move up in ranking more than they would have had the game completed.

I am not claiming that the abandoning player in this game was malicious. His action highlighted a flaw in the scoring algorithm that should be corrected.

Thank you for objectively evaluating!

• 你的瀏覽器是什麼？

• 遊戲規則的哪部分在 BGA 版本有所錯漏？

A player abandoned a game on the last hand. The points awarded to the remaining three players did not reflect the relative scores of the players.

Specifically, the player in first place (me) had an overwhelming lead..."uncatchable" at level 17 of the game...whereas the player in last place had less than half the score of the other players. This last place player and the other remaining player were awarded almost double the points of the player with the highest score.

I understand that points are calculated based on relative strength/elo of the players. However, the calculation needs to better reflect how far the game has progressed. In this case, the game was on the last level, yet the points the leader received were about 25-33% of what he would have received had the game completed.

If the scoring algorithm is not improved, there becomes an incentive for a player to abandon a game at a late stage so that another player is awarded or not awarded the points (s)he would have earned had the game finished. In this particular game, the abandoning player lost points; however, by abandoning the game at the end, he prevented the leader from moving up in ranking and allowed the other two players to move up in ranking more than they would have had the game completed.

I am not claiming that the abandoning player in this game was malicious. His action highlighted a flaw in the scoring algorithm that should be corrected.

Thank you for objectively evaluating!

• 這項違反規則之處可否在遊戲重播中看到？若可以是在哪步？（重播時左上角資訊）

• 你的瀏覽器是什麼？

• 你當時想採取哪個遊戲行動？

A player abandoned a game on the last hand. The points awarded to the remaining three players did not reflect the relative scores of the players.

Specifically, the player in first place (me) had an overwhelming lead..."uncatchable" at level 17 of the game...whereas the player in last place had less than half the score of the other players. This last place player and the other remaining player were awarded almost double the points of the player with the highest score.

I understand that points are calculated based on relative strength/elo of the players. However, the calculation needs to better reflect how far the game has progressed. In this case, the game was on the last level, yet the points the leader received were about 25-33% of what he would have received had the game completed.

If the scoring algorithm is not improved, there becomes an incentive for a player to abandon a game at a late stage so that another player is awarded or not awarded the points (s)he would have earned had the game finished. In this particular game, the abandoning player lost points; however, by abandoning the game at the end, he prevented the leader from moving up in ranking and allowed the other two players to move up in ranking more than they would have had the game completed.

I am not claiming that the abandoning player in this game was malicious. His action highlighted a flaw in the scoring algorithm that should be corrected.

Thank you for objectively evaluating!

• 你想觸發這個遊戲行動時做了什麼？

• 當你試著這麼做時發生了什麼（錯誤訊息、遊戲狀態條訊息...）？

• 你的瀏覽器是什麼？

• 問題發生在遊戲的哪一步？（目前遊戲指示是什麼）

A player abandoned a game on the last hand. The points awarded to the remaining three players did not reflect the relative scores of the players.

Specifically, the player in first place (me) had an overwhelming lead..."uncatchable" at level 17 of the game...whereas the player in last place had less than half the score of the other players. This last place player and the other remaining player were awarded almost double the points of the player with the highest score.

I understand that points are calculated based on relative strength/elo of the players. However, the calculation needs to better reflect how far the game has progressed. In this case, the game was on the last level, yet the points the leader received were about 25-33% of what he would have received had the game completed.

If the scoring algorithm is not improved, there becomes an incentive for a player to abandon a game at a late stage so that another player is awarded or not awarded the points (s)he would have earned had the game finished. In this particular game, the abandoning player lost points; however, by abandoning the game at the end, he prevented the leader from moving up in ranking and allowed the other two players to move up in ranking more than they would have had the game completed.

I am not claiming that the abandoning player in this game was malicious. His action highlighted a flaw in the scoring algorithm that should be corrected.

Thank you for objectively evaluating!

• 當你試著進行遊戲動作時發生了什麼（錯誤訊息、遊戲狀態條訊息...）？

• 你的瀏覽器是什麼？

• 請描述顯示問題。 如果您有此錯誤的螢幕截圖（這是個好習慣），您可以使用您選擇的圖片託管服務（例如snipboard.io）上傳它，然後將連結複製/貼上到這裡。

A player abandoned a game on the last hand. The points awarded to the remaining three players did not reflect the relative scores of the players.

Specifically, the player in first place (me) had an overwhelming lead..."uncatchable" at level 17 of the game...whereas the player in last place had less than half the score of the other players. This last place player and the other remaining player were awarded almost double the points of the player with the highest score.

I understand that points are calculated based on relative strength/elo of the players. However, the calculation needs to better reflect how far the game has progressed. In this case, the game was on the last level, yet the points the leader received were about 25-33% of what he would have received had the game completed.

If the scoring algorithm is not improved, there becomes an incentive for a player to abandon a game at a late stage so that another player is awarded or not awarded the points (s)he would have earned had the game finished. In this particular game, the abandoning player lost points; however, by abandoning the game at the end, he prevented the leader from moving up in ranking and allowed the other two players to move up in ranking more than they would have had the game completed.

I am not claiming that the abandoning player in this game was malicious. His action highlighted a flaw in the scoring algorithm that should be corrected.

Thank you for objectively evaluating!

• 你的瀏覽器是什麼？

• 請轉貼未翻譯的英文字句。 如果您有此錯誤的螢幕截圖（這是個好習慣），您可以使用您選擇的圖片託管服務（例如snipboard.io）上傳它，然後將連結複製/貼上到這裡。 這些文字存在於 翻譯系統 中嗎？若為真，其是否已被翻譯超過 24 小時？

A player abandoned a game on the last hand. The points awarded to the remaining three players did not reflect the relative scores of the players.

Specifically, the player in first place (me) had an overwhelming lead..."uncatchable" at level 17 of the game...whereas the player in last place had less than half the score of the other players. This last place player and the other remaining player were awarded almost double the points of the player with the highest score.

I understand that points are calculated based on relative strength/elo of the players. However, the calculation needs to better reflect how far the game has progressed. In this case, the game was on the last level, yet the points the leader received were about 25-33% of what he would have received had the game completed.

If the scoring algorithm is not improved, there becomes an incentive for a player to abandon a game at a late stage so that another player is awarded or not awarded the points (s)he would have earned had the game finished. In this particular game, the abandoning player lost points; however, by abandoning the game at the end, he prevented the leader from moving up in ranking and allowed the other two players to move up in ranking more than they would have had the game completed.

I am not claiming that the abandoning player in this game was malicious. His action highlighted a flaw in the scoring algorithm that should be corrected.

Thank you for objectively evaluating!

• 你的瀏覽器是什麼？

• 請簡明精確地解釋你的建議，以便讓人一目了然。

A player abandoned a game on the last hand. The points awarded to the remaining three players did not reflect the relative scores of the players.

Specifically, the player in first place (me) had an overwhelming lead..."uncatchable" at level 17 of the game...whereas the player in last place had less than half the score of the other players. This last place player and the other remaining player were awarded almost double the points of the player with the highest score.

I understand that points are calculated based on relative strength/elo of the players. However, the calculation needs to better reflect how far the game has progressed. In this case, the game was on the last level, yet the points the leader received were about 25-33% of what he would have received had the game completed.

If the scoring algorithm is not improved, there becomes an incentive for a player to abandon a game at a late stage so that another player is awarded or not awarded the points (s)he would have earned had the game finished. In this particular game, the abandoning player lost points; however, by abandoning the game at the end, he prevented the leader from moving up in ranking and allowed the other two players to move up in ranking more than they would have had the game completed.

I am not claiming that the abandoning player in this game was malicious. His action highlighted a flaw in the scoring algorithm that should be corrected.

Thank you for objectively evaluating!

• 你的瀏覽器是什麼？