Marmot
Auto-translated
Automatic transfer of the opponent's password after the end of the match is an excellent and probably feasible solution. Worse is when an opponent rage-quits.
To Al Feyn:
The comment about logging in through the public services portal was a joke, but not an empty one: it's an example of a barrier that cannot be bypassed (or at least is difficult to bypass).
You misunderstood or didn't read carefully regarding the qualification process. Read it again. Once more, in more detail: the contender is given a save file, from which they directly defeat the opponent in front of the referee on Skype (or whatever platform they use), preferably with voice commentary explaining their actions. No cheater or unskilled newbie will pass this. For everyone else, this shouldn't be a problem. If anyone has a better idea, please share it; I spoke up to encourage a discussion and generate sound ideas that can be implemented.
I agree with =Lizard=: if the opponent is clearly weak, based on all visible signs, but is "stalling," few people will want to continue playing against them. However, they will never admit that they are weaker, even though they won't be able to prove the opposite. And what, should you spend 2-3 hours "enduring the agony" so that YOU aren't considered a rule-breaker and YOU don't get a technical loss? This is wrong from the perspective of evaluating the behavior of specific people in a specific situation. The rules need to be refined in this regard. Discuss and decide what and how. At least even I, an offline player, see a problem here.
Regarding the list of violators/cheaters: there should be a link in the table next to each nickname that allows you to find out when and what specific violation occurred. Rage-quitting is, yes, not a major sin, especially if it happens only once, but cheaters should be highlighted with a color.
To Al Feyn:
The comment about logging in through the public services portal was a joke, but not an empty one: it's an example of a barrier that cannot be bypassed (or at least is difficult to bypass).
You misunderstood or didn't read carefully regarding the qualification process. Read it again. Once more, in more detail: the contender is given a save file, from which they directly defeat the opponent in front of the referee on Skype (or whatever platform they use), preferably with voice commentary explaining their actions. No cheater or unskilled newbie will pass this. For everyone else, this shouldn't be a problem. If anyone has a better idea, please share it; I spoke up to encourage a discussion and generate sound ideas that can be implemented.
I agree with =Lizard=: if the opponent is clearly weak, based on all visible signs, but is "stalling," few people will want to continue playing against them. However, they will never admit that they are weaker, even though they won't be able to prove the opposite. And what, should you spend 2-3 hours "enduring the agony" so that YOU aren't considered a rule-breaker and YOU don't get a technical loss? This is wrong from the perspective of evaluating the behavior of specific people in a specific situation. The rules need to be refined in this regard. Discuss and decide what and how. At least even I, an offline player, see a problem here.
Regarding the list of violators/cheaters: there should be a link in the table next to each nickname that allows you to find out when and what specific violation occurred. Rage-quitting is, yes, not a major sin, especially if it happens only once, but cheaters should be highlighted with a color.
Воскресайте, камінні душі, Розчиняйте серця і чоло, Щоб не сказали Про вас грядущі: їх на землі не було…
(Василь Симоненко. Люди – прекрасні)
(Василь Симоненко. Люди – прекрасні)
