OFB-10

What’s the danger in that? I really don’t understand why, in chess, in Swiss and round-robin tournaments, it’s considered normal for leading grandmasters to play e2-e4 and then immediately offer a draw, agreeing if both are satisfied with the result, but in our case, a draw is only possible according to the judges, and only from some unclear point in time? On what basis can you force people to play until the very end if both are happy with a draw? Either ban draws as a phenomenon in Heroes, or stop coming up with nonsense and allow them at any time with the mutual consent of the players.

I know how to play chess, and I enjoy it. I was surprised by your post, so I decided to look up the chess rules.

Chess draw rules - link

It’s quite interesting that there are rules according to which a draw is awarded even if someone doesn’t agree.
And here is a paragraph from these rules: Players agreed to a draw (draw by mutual agreement), that is, one of the players offered a draw during his move, and the other accepted it. To offer a draw, it is enough to say “draw.” If the opponent makes a move without responding to the offer of a draw, it is considered rejected. Recently, some tournaments have adopted the so-called “Sofia Rules,” which limit the possibility of players agreeing to a draw.

It seems that in chess, not everything is so straightforward.

Sofia Rules - link.

This is exactly the position I tried to establish when drafting the OFB regulations.
I considered a draw as a rare way to end a game in OFB, and not as a way to score points in a tournament.