Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[ashersky]

I have a feeling this has been answered somewhere (most likely in the mega-civility declination tread), but a scan of topics going back six months didn't yield an answer, so...

Is it poor form to not end the game when you are assured of the win?

The situation would be when you are able to buy the last province/colony/third-pile card, and either already have the lead or would be ahead after the purchase, but don't.  Whether the point counter is on/off would play into this, I suppose, since not everyone is good at keeping track of points without it.

I run into this very often--I do not like to resign and will play a game out even though I'm way behind or even mathematically eliminated.  That said, I will help move a game to conclusion buy buying out piles when I can, so when I buy the penultimate province/colony/third pile card, I am ensuring my opponent's victory.  These generally aren't cases where acheivements are in play, either.  And yet, another another Gold instead of the final Village/Estate/Curse?

Is there a community consensus on this?

[Captain_Frisk]

I don't know that there is a consensus, but I do consider it to be poor form to be achievement hunting instead of ending the game.

That said, I'm sure that over my 5,000+ games, you'll probably find at least a hundred where I failed to end the game early.

*Edit* - Oh how I've missed pressing the edit button.  Added the word "find" to make my last sentence readable.

[pingpongsam]

In my opinion it is poor form. sometimes people are not aware they can end it by buying out a pile. Other times they are actively avoiding the last province or the last pile while accumulating VP with a substantial lead and a superior deck.

I'm certain I have overdone it a few times when I was truly uncertain of the score otherwise I don't see the point in continuing to play it out when I know I've won. Winning is the goal after all.

[GendoIkari]

Here's a discussion on this from a while back: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=2261.0

In my opinion, taking any extra turns after you could have ended with a win is rude (if it's on purpose; obviously you might not see that you can end it, or might not be sure that you are winning). But taking a bunch of extra actions on your last turn before ending it, or buying a bunch of pointless Copper with your extra buys after ending it, is not.

[Fabian]

It annoys me when people do it by mistake, but I try to stifle it since, well, it's a mistake.

If someone did it on purpose I would consider it a huge huge dick move.

[Captain_Frisk]

Here's a discussion on this from a while back: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=2261.0

In my opinion, taking any extra turns after you could have ended with a win is rude (if it's on purpose; obviously you might not see that you can end it, or might not be sure that you are winning). But taking a bunch of extra actions on your last turn before ending it, or buying a bunch of pointless Copper with your extra buys after ending it, is not.

Agreed, but if I'm about to go off on another KC / scrying pool madness turn, if I have an option to simply buy the last province and win (and I notice) - I'll do that.  Might as well save us both 3 minutes.

[Kahryl]

It is definitely poor form. Extending the game is fine if you're maximizing your chance to win - for example, relentlessly village/torturing your opponent even after he's way behind is okay. But if you pass up a chance to end the game in your favor in order to max your score or something, that is a dick move. Always end the game in your favor if you have the chance.

I don't like to resign - I think if someone has set up a win he deserves to see it through completely - but I would definitely resign if I think he were intentionally stretching the game for no strategically valid reason.

[Eevee]

Doing it accidentally is just poor play. Doing it on purpose is poor etiquette for sure.

[rls22]

But taking a bunch of extra actions on your last turn before ending it, or buying a bunch of pointless Copper with your extra buys after ending it, is not.

I'm not sure I agree with this fully.  I mean, buying extra stuff with your extra buys is fine (e.g., a Province and a Duchy, if you only needed the Province to win).  But, at least a few times, I've been on the receiving end of someone who played out "a bunch of extra actions" when they had enough $ near the start of their turn to buy the last province and end it.  My philosophy tends to be, if you unnecessarily prolong the game on your last turn by more than 5-10 seconds, I will be (silently) annoyed with you.  I understand how tempting it is to want to play with your fun engine deck just one more turn (it's certainly tempting for me too), but begin respectful of your opponent's time is a good thing.

[O]

I think finishing your final turn is often helpful in postgame analysis ("But you were only two points ahead in the end!" "Yea, I chose not to play that KC-KC-BridgeX3 I could have drawn").

Taking 1-2 extra turns when there's a clear way to win is slightly rude. Taking an extra turn instead of spending two minutes figuring out the optimal combination of Haggler gains and Border Village buys.. I really don't mind.

[Kahryl]

I think completing your turn even if it's unnecessary is fine. Wraps up the game more cleanly. And I'm not forced to slog through another turn of my own just to extend his enjoyment which is the main thing that would annoy me.

[ecq]

It's a very nice gesture to end your last turn ASAP, even if you have more actions to play.  It's annoying to sit through 2 minutes of engine wankery when the other guy could end it immediately.

It's less of a big deal to me when people don't end things on their turn when they could.  If they don't see it, there could a tiny chance I can still pull off a win.  If there's no chance for me to win, I resign, so there's no extra waiting.  I definitely don't think it's bad form to resign in a situation when they should have won outright the previous turn.

[GendoIkari]

Here's a discussion on this from a while back: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=2261.0

In my opinion, taking any extra turns after you could have ended with a win is rude (if it's on purpose; obviously you might not see that you can end it, or might not be sure that you are winning). But taking a bunch of extra actions on your last turn before ending it, or buying a bunch of pointless Copper with your extra buys after ending it, is not.

Agreed, but if I'm about to go off on another KC / scrying pool madness turn, if I have an option to simply buy the last province and win (and I notice) - I'll do that.  Might as well save us both 3 minutes.

Quite an odd strategy that you are playing if your hand is KC, Scrying Pool, Gold, Gold, Silver.

[Captain_Frisk]

Here's a discussion on this from a while back: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=2261.0

In my opinion, taking any extra turns after you could have ended with a win is rude (if it's on purpose; obviously you might not see that you can end it, or might not be sure that you are winning). But taking a bunch of extra actions on your last turn before ending it, or buying a bunch of pointless Copper with your extra buys after ending it, is not.

Agreed, but if I'm about to go off on another KC / scrying pool madness turn, if I have an option to simply buy the last province and win (and I notice) - I'll do that.  Might as well save us both 3 minutes.

Quite an odd strategy that you are playing if your hand is KC, Scrying Pool, Gold, Gold, Silver.

Hows this?  KC, HorseTraders, Scrying Pool, X, X

[GendoIkari]

Here's a discussion on this from a while back: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=2261.0

In my opinion, taking any extra turns after you could have ended with a win is rude (if it's on purpose; obviously you might not see that you can end it, or might not be sure that you are winning). But taking a bunch of extra actions on your last turn before ending it, or buying a bunch of pointless Copper with your extra buys after ending it, is not.

Agreed, but if I'm about to go off on another KC / scrying pool madness turn, if I have an option to simply buy the last province and win (and I notice) - I'll do that.  Might as well save us both 3 minutes.

Quite an odd strategy that you are playing if your hand is KC, Scrying Pool, Gold, Gold, Silver.

Hows this?  KC, HorseTraders, Scrying Pool, X, X

Touché. I also lol that in that hand (depending on the cards that are X, I suppose), playing KC-Scrying Pool could cost you the game. Just playing Scrying Pool is safe, though.

[DG]

I don't think there's a consensus but you should probably try to finish games quickly once they're won. I think I recently told an opponent "if you don't reveal your province when I play my next tournament, I'll be able to end the game this turn" and sure enough no province was shown .

[DStu]

I also liked finishing my last turn, even if I could end it before, but this game reminds me not to.

[jhkokst]

This thread compelled me to sign up and make my first post.  I'm level 29 on isotropic - competent, but not great.  I know when I make bad plays, when I'm lucky, and when my opponent is outplaying me etc.

I had this game the other day, that I thought exemplified poor form/etiquette on behalf of my opponent. It was the first time I really felt this way. http://councilroom.com/game?game_id=game-20120605-133551-e301ffed.html

I went minions, he went with a more elaborate engine involving KC (edit - I was wrong, no KC, just SP), scrying pool, and some other various cards.  By turn 15 or so, my deck ran out of steam and I began to focus on buying gardens.  At this point I did have a point lead.  However my opponents deck was finally clicking, and he was capable of purchasing 2 provinces a turn and running them out, perhaps with a garden or duchy ( or 2 to ensure his win, but a significant margin).  However, instead, on turn 17, he buys 3 sabatuers and proceeds to extend the game, trashing my deck each turn.  Effective - incredibly, but I also thought it was incredibly rude.  His turns took forever (scrying pool/KC), and then he would close each turn by trashing 3 of my cards.  He doesn't even end the game draining the provinces...

I can understand someone wanting to finish their last turn, or buying extra VPs during there last buy to ensure their win.  But making a conscious decision to prolong a game in order to trash your opponents deck...that kinda pushed me to the edge.  He said he was "playing it safe"...but there were many quicker ways to play it safe.

[pingpongsam]

I always use veto mode.

It used to be for Possession. Today it is for Scrying Pool.

And to go further off-topic; I like to veto out the actions. Folks who will tear you a new one in an engine game tend to really flounder with a lack of actions.

[Cadence20]

This thread compelled me to sign up and make my first post.  I'm level 29 on isotropic - competent, but not great.  I know when I make bad plays, when I'm lucky, and when my opponent is outplaying me etc.

I had this game the other day, that I thought exemplified poor form/etiquette on behalf of my opponent. It was the first time I really felt this way. http://councilroom.com/game?game_id=game-20120605-133551-e301ffed.html

I went minions, he went with a more elaborate engine involving KC (edit - I was wrong, no KC, just SP), scrying pool, and some other various cards.  By turn 15 or so, my deck ran out of steam and I began to focus on buying gardens.  At this point I did have a point lead.  However my opponents deck was finally clicking, and he was capable of purchasing 2 provinces a turn and running them out, perhaps with a garden or duchy ( or 2 to ensure his win, but a significant margin).  However, instead, on turn 17, he buys 3 sabatuers and proceeds to extend the game, trashing my deck each turn.  Effective - incredibly, but I also thought it was incredibly rude.  His turns took forever (scrying pool/KC), and then he would close each turn by trashing 3 of my cards.  He doesn't even end the game draining the provinces...

I can understand someone wanting to finish their last turn, or buying extra VPs during there last buy to ensure their win.  But making a conscious decision to prolong a game in order to trash your opponents deck...that kinda pushed me to the edge.  He said he was "playing it safe"...but there were many quicker ways to play it safe.

That opponent was me first of all.

You accused me of dragging out the game by buying 3 saboteurs. Keep in mind that at that point in the game you were up 2 provinces to none, and had more minions than me (7 to 3). I was absolutely making sure I would win the game.

I could've bought two provinces instead of 3 saboteurs but that would put us at even with me at a minion disadvantage.

Look at the final graph - I was only ahead in score for the final 3 turns (and I was buying out the provinces when possible, though there was one turn where I made a mistake and played a terminal before my +action cards). I felt you were being overly sensitive, considering you were ahead for almost all of the game.

[jhkokst]

I don't want to turn this discussion into an argument between the two of us.  But I think it is unfair to associate a point lead with who was actually in the dominant position.  You were choosing to buy more pools, more nobles, and more engine cards, and your engine was finally popping.  Your light houses resulted in constant hand defense, and you were pulling 16+ coin per turn.  I was barely making 4 -6 coin per turn, despite my minions, hence my choice to go gardens.  Had you drained the provinces instead of buying saboteurs, you would have had 36 points + your nobles + whatever other VP you had chosen to buy.  You probably could have cleaned the provinces in 3 -4 turns and picked up a few duchys to boot. Please note that most of my points at the end of the game were my gardens and estates, which were only the end result of you sabing my other victory points and minions.  I was lucky to even muster that much.  The odds of me getting all of the gardens to maximize points were slim to none.  Perhaps it wasn't clear to you, but you had the game won prior to the sabateurs.  Maybe because my deck was losing steam, only I realized this...hence my reaction when your strategy shifted to wrecking my deck.  I thought it was superfluous.

[Robz888]

I don't want to turn this discussion into an argument between the two of us.  But I think it is unfair to associate a point lead with who was actually in the dominant position.  You were choosing to buy more pools, more nobles, and more engine cards, and your engine was finally popping.  Your light houses resulted in constant hand defense, and you were pulling 16+ coin per turn.  I was barely making 4 -6 coin per turn, despite my minions, hence my choice to go gardens.  Had you drained the provinces instead of buying saboteurs, you would have had 36 points + your nobles + whatever other VP you had chosen to buy.  You probably could have cleaned the provinces in 3 -4 turns and picked up a few duchys to boot. Please note that most of my points at the end of the game were my gardens and estates, which were only the end result of you sabing my other victory points and minions.  I was lucky to even muster that much.  The odds of me getting all of the gardens to maximize points were slim to none.  Perhaps it wasn't clear to you, but you had the game won prior to the sabateurs.  Maybe because my deck was losing steam, only I realized this...hence my reaction when your strategy shifted to wrecking my deck.  I thought it was superfluous.

It looks to me like Cadence was just trying to win the game and took a reasonable approach to doing so. It's frustrating watching your opponent play a Scrying Pool deck when you don't, but... it's definitely legitimate.

I agree it's frustrating when an opponent extends the game for no reason. But the object is to win, not to win in the nicest way possible. Cadence's end-game strategy, brutal as it was, seems sound to me. And even if it wasn't a sound strategy, it was done for strategic reasons, not for spite.

[WanderingWinder]

So, I don't have a problem with just about anything in this area, except not ending the game in a win on a given turn, when you could do that, on that given turn. i.e. if there's some like 'well you can buy out the last 3 labs over the next 3 turns' to end it, forget it; 3 turns is a long time, even if I'm up a lot. I will continue to build my lead, if I think that gives me best winning chances. And it's very hard to have any kind of evidence that somebody thinks that they're buying more VP for some reason other than to increase their chances of winning. Indeed, even in most of the 'they could have ended it this turn' scenarios, I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they didn't realize that they could do that. Except when they play a mega-engine and with like 30 buys and a billion money, don't buy the last province, but just sit on you.
tl;dr - I give the benefit of the doubt.

[olneyce]

I'm really perplexed by your strategy in the linked game.  Why buy Gardens when you have a Minion deck???  Gardens wants bloated decks and Minion wants exactly the opposite.  I guess you had some unlucky distribution and didn't get to use your Minions for money a few times.  But it seems like once you have a Spice Merchant you can trash your deck down, buy two Lighthouses and get up to $8 pretty regularly.  And, you can have a revolving Lighthouse play which means most turns you can't get hit by the attacks.

[jonts26]

In regards to not ending the game when you can win:

Hanlon's razor - Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

[ashersky]

I appreciate all the commentary on the topic, and see the valid viewpoints from many here.  The type of situation I was asking about on particular resemble games like:

http://councilroom.com/game?game_id=game-20120606-130506-13ac44d7.html

I was clearly beaten, so I bought the Penultimate Border Village after having bought the last card in two other piles to open the door to a final victory for my opponent.  Instead of ending it, he/she bought another colony, which padded the lead, sure, but was unnecessary since the game could have ended there.

I seem to run into that a lot and have to lose the game myself so I can move on to another.

[WanderingWinder]

It's frustrating, but I would just post the comment jonts made in the post before yours.
And if it's really THAT frustrating, resign.

[jonts26]

So in regards to playing out a full last turn when it's unnecessary -

For megaturn engines, it's extremely satisfying when everything comes together and you just buy out the provinces and duchies or spend 30 buys on coppers with 6 goons in play. In those kinds of situations, I will sit idly by while my opponent spends an extra minute or two buying everything, even if it's painful to sit though, because I enjoy it when I'm on the good side. When it's something less impressive, like a scry/hamlet engine which will just net me a province to end it, well I might just try to end it once I draw enough cash, but I still won't mind if my opponent plays it out, because that might still be something more fun for him.

I guess I'm mostly arguing from a utilitarian point of view. I don't think my time is really any more valuable than anyone elses in the world of dominion, so a little un-enjoyment for me is more than made up for by a lot of enjoyment for my opponent. And if you're the type of person to be extremely frustrated by someone playing out their last turn, man, lighten up.

[Kahryl]

I appreciate all the commentary on the topic, and see the valid viewpoints from many here.  The type of situation I was asking about on particular resemble games like:

http://councilroom.com/game?game_id=game-20120606-130506-13ac44d7.html

I was clearly beaten, so I bought the Penultimate Border Village after having bought the last card in two other piles to open the door to a final victory for my opponent.  Instead of ending it, he/she bought another colony, which padded the lead, sure, but was unnecessary since the game could have ended there.

I seem to run into that a lot and have to lose the game myself so I can move on to another.

Consider the possibility that your opponent just didn't notice the 3-pile opportunity. I'm rated 25 or so and I miss that all the time.

[jhkokst]

I definitely did not play that game well.  When I purchased my first gardens, Cadence was consistently hitting 16, and I saw the game ending soon.  Although he only had 3 minions, he was generally playing them every turn and I was playing most hands with 4 cards.  I found myself cycling minions rather than building up money from them.  Perhaps that was bad luck, but it didn't feel like it. 

[jonts26]

Scrying Pool + Minion, well sometimes it's a nombo, but if you can play the actions you draw with the pool, then you don't mind discarding with minion. When you can use Minion for the discard once per turn though, it's incredibly mean. After several pools, you can ensure a bad card on top of the deck before you minion, meaning the other guy has effectively an outpost hand to work with each turn.

[jhkokst]

Last comment - re: Cadence, I swear.

He kicked my @$$.  I guess I felt that it was clear that he was winning pre-sabing me, hence the reason I posted in this thread.  I'll concede that it was not as obvious to him, because he wasn't playing my hands.  But to me, it did feel as if it was being dragged out.  Perhaps I should have resigned.

[Captain_Frisk]

In regards to not ending the game when you can win:

Hanlon's razor - Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

In researching that quote for Mafia III - it's apparently really attributed to Napolean!

I can say for sure -

The  # of times that I have failed to end a game because I failed to notice it (or was unsure) divided by the # Of times I kept playing because I either wanted to play with my shiny engine, or wanted to screw my opponent over is not a number, and that includes games against some opponents who I will leave nameless.

Even those players, I don't think they would intentionally do it.

[Tombolo]

And then there's this game:
http://dominion.isotropic.org/gamelog/201206/25/game-20120625-094217-c68b77b2.html

I probably should've just resigned but decided to be nice.  He never said anything though, and in retrospect I regret my decision.

[ashersky]

Not to resurrect my own topic, but man this is still frustrating.

It's like you are in a sword fight, and your opponent disarms you.  But instead of the noble beheading, he stabs you in both kidneys with daggers, then seals the wounds with fire, allowing all that waste that would have been filtered by those kidneys to now slowly fill your abdomen and poison you painfully, slowly from the inside.

Just three-pile, for mercy's sake.  Put me out of my misery.  If you are ranked higher than me, you do not fail to notice the opportunity to win.  Never.

[ipofanes]

There's always resigning.

Except there isn't. You cannot resign during your opponent insisting on playing each Horse Trader and Border Village he drew with the Scrying Pool, only to resurrect them with the next Scrying Pool until the cows come home, instead of picking up the last Pearl Diver and be done with it.

[Drab Emordnilap]

There's always resigning.

Except there isn't. You cannot resign during your opponent insisting on playing each Horse Trader and Border Village he drew with the Scrying Pool, only to resurrect them with the next Scrying Pool until the cows come home, instead of picking up the last Pearl Diver and be done with it.

You can hit the exit link on the bottom of the page. It'll resign for you when your turn comes up.

[ashersky]

There's always resigning.

Except there isn't. You cannot resign during your opponent insisting on playing each Horse Trader and Border Village he drew with the Scrying Pool, only to resurrect them with the next Scrying Pool until the cows come home, instead of picking up the last Pearl Diver and be done with it.

You can hit the exit link on the bottom of the page. It'll resign for you when your turn comes up.

This is true.  But then I feel that exiting/resigning is generally disrespectful to your opponent if the game has been otherwise civil and of a normal speed.  I know some will resign once the game is lost, even if it isn't endable on the current turn--that's not a great policy, either.

[ConMan]

If I know I can win, I'll take the win rather than dragging it out. On the other side of things, if I know I can't win - my opponent has gotten half the points in the game or my engine is completely unable to fire - I will post an acknowledgement and resign because I figure both of us have better things to do with our time than watching the inevitable.

[Archetype]

If I know I can win, I'll take the win rather than dragging it out. On the other side of things, if I know I can't win - my opponent has gotten half the points in the game or my engine is completely unable to fire - I will post an acknowledgement and resign because I figure both of us have better things to do with our time than watching the inevitable.

Exactly. Saying GG and then exiting is a better way to quit than just exiting.

But ashersky has a point: Don't just mess around with a secure win and only 1 Province left. Just end it already.

[ipofanes]

There's always resigning.

Except there isn't. You cannot resign during your opponent insisting on playing each Horse Trader and Border Village he drew with the Scrying Pool, only to resurrect them with the next Scrying Pool until the cows come home, instead of picking up the last Pearl Diver and be done with it.

You can hit the exit link on the bottom of the page. It'll resign for you when your turn comes up.

Thanks. Didn't know that. But my first statement still holds.

Much has been written about resigning. As a former chess and go player, I've never seen the point of not resigning when you've lost.

[greatexpectations]

As a former chess and go player, I've never seen the point of not resigning when you've lost.

i think there is much that can be learned by playing out the game. watching and learning from what your opponent does, observing how your deck played out, practicing adjusting strategies while behind, etc.

[Davio]

As a former chess and go player, I've never seen the point of not resigning when you've lost.

i think there is much that can be learned by playing out the game. watching and learning from what your opponent does, observing how your deck played out, practicing adjusting strategies while behind, etc.

Maybe there should be an option once a player has won mathematically (or will be able to do so during his current turn): "John wins, play on?" to which players can either answer yes or no. Game only continues if all players answer yes.

Still, I can somewhat understand it if you've built a beautiful engine that you want to enjoy it to the fullest so you'll play your entire turn to get as most points as possible. Heck, there are lots of players that don't check the score so they only know they've won or lost after their last turn. It doesn't make sense to start from a hand with $2, play 20 actions and buy 1 Pearl Diver to end the game though.

I don't find it to be a big problem in reality. Once I've drawn my deck, I'll stop playing useless - not providing any money -cantrips, like Lab, Great Hall, etc.

[ipofanes]

Still, I can somewhat understand it if you've built a beautiful engine that you want to enjoy it to the fullest so you'll play your entire turn to get as most points as possible.

In which case I find resigning mildly annoying at times, but defendable.

It is a bit like a go match with full handicap against a much stronger player. I tend to resign during midgame even if I am not behind yet, but the dan will overtake me in the endgame with ease.

Heck, there are lots of players that don't check the score so they only know they've won or lost after their last turn.

In which case resigning is the appropriate answer.

[GendoIkari]

There's always resigning.

Except there isn't. You cannot resign during your opponent insisting on playing each Horse Trader and Border Village he drew with the Scrying Pool, only to resurrect them with the next Scrying Pool until the cows come home, instead of picking up the last Pearl Diver and be done with it.

You can hit the exit link on the bottom of the page. It'll resign for you when your turn comes up.

I'm not sure, but does doing this give up your first-turn advantage for the next game though? Seems it would...

[zahlman]

Maybe there should be an option once a player has won mathematically (or will be able to do so during his current turn): "John wins, play on?" to which players can either answer yes or no. Game only continues if all players answer yes.

There are probably relatively few boards on which this can easily be proven by a computer algorithm.

Anyway, just wanted to note that I sometimes have to take a couple of extra turns in spots where I'm pretty sure I have a lock, but where I'm aware that certain surprises could come up if I "almost end" it now. City games and Goons are probably the most obvious cases.

That said, I do check the score all the time, and sometimes I'll be sitting there seemingly forever at the beginning of my Buy phase on a late-game turn, because I have to calculate whether I can actually pile out and also grab enough VP, and also decide, if I can't, whether I want to just take as many VP as possible, do something funky with the PPR (or PPPR, etc.), get more engine components and let the other guy bring it close enough to ending that I can end it, etc. etc. Some games are just deep like that.

I don't find it to be a big problem in reality. Once I've drawn my deck, I'll stop playing useless - not providing any money -cantrips, like Lab, Great Hall, etc.

Yeah, I have an issue with that sometimes... "oh yeah BTW I still have 5 more Scrying Pools, I still want you to keep that Curse".

It is a bit like a go match with full handicap against a much stronger player. I tend to resign during midgame even if I am not behind yet, but the dan will overtake me in the endgame with ease.

Since we're on the topic and Go players are hard to find: speaking from personal experience, it is totally possible to get to shodan without really doing that "counting" thing.

[Mic Qsenoch]

There's always resigning.

Except there isn't. You cannot resign during your opponent insisting on playing each Horse Trader and Border Village he drew with the Scrying Pool, only to resurrect them with the next Scrying Pool until the cows come home, instead of picking up the last Pearl Diver and be done with it.

You can hit the exit link on the bottom of the page. It'll resign for you when your turn comes up.

I'm not sure, but does doing this give up your first-turn advantage for the next game though? Seems it would...

Hitting Exit does give up that advantage.

[ipofanes]

Since we're on the topic and Go players are hard to find: speaking from personal experience, it is totally possible to get to shodan without really doing that "counting" thing.

That's what I love about the game, you can get very far playing on a whim if you have a good eye for shape and much experience what works and what doesn't. I don't know if you can reach actually shodan without even really doing that "reading" thing, but 5k is not a problem (according to my personal experience). I'd suspect that unnecessary gote for that group in the corner which was alive anyway is going to bite if it happens too often.

[zahlman]

Since we're on the topic and Go players are hard to find: speaking from personal experience, it is totally possible to get to shodan without really doing that "counting" thing.

That's what I love about the game, you can get very far playing on a whim if you have a good eye for shape and much experience what works and what doesn't. I don't know if you can reach actually shodan without even really doing that "reading" thing, but 5k is not a problem (according to my personal experience). I'd suspect that unnecessary gote for that group in the corner which was alive anyway is going to bite if it happens too often.

I can't say I know, but I will say that the time I don't spend counting is time I spend reading. And with sufficient training, you'd be amazed what you can read in 10 or 20s

[ycz6]

The only time I really get annoyed at an opponent's last-turn engine wankery is when the engine contains a card like Oracle or Margrave, where I have to make decisions repeatedly during the turn.