Takebacks

[ghost]

1. When someone clicks the takeback button, it takes back one move.

This is impractical when someone requests a takeback after the opponent has moved.

For example, if you're playing a one minute bullet game and you make a false move, you go to click the takeback button. By the time you push the takeback button, your opponent has already moved. Your opponent accepts the takeback, but by doing so has taken back his move and not the move that needed to be taken back.

This creates confusion because it's still the turn of the guy who accepted the takeback. This way, the guy who wanted the takeback never got it, he'd have to click the takeback button twice.

This creates confusion.

It should be: when accepting a takeback, it takes back the false move, and also the immediate move the opponent made. This way, you only need to click the takeback button once.

1. After accepting the takeback, the time does not go back to what it previously was. The that passes between the point where the takeback offer is sent and is accepted should be restored. This is especially important in bullet/blitz games.

[ghost]

I would really like this to happen!

[ornicar]

What about that use case: Your opponent blunders, you propose a takeback. That's how gentlemen use it. Lichess shouldn't take 2 moves back.

[Calinou]

How about a configurable setting (slider) of how much moves to take back?

[ghost]

@ornicar I already do do that. This becomes problematic, however, especially during blitz/bullet games. I send my opponent a takeback request (or vice versa), he takes a few seconds to accept. My time goes down a few seconds, then again when he sends another.

The time is not reinstated and this repels the gentleman behaviour of suggesting a takeback in the first place.

It's also a little confusing because many users (especially new ones) don't expect to have to takeback the move twice, so it often leads to confusion.

:100:

[AdmiralA]

This is positively moronic. Why in tarnation would you ask for takebacks in bullet?! In blitz, okay, perhaps, but in bullet?! I discussed this extensively with static_shadow on IRC: 15:16 AdmiralA: ornicar: how is a two half-move takeback a feature? 15:16 AdmiralA: it wastes time on mouseslips and it'll just allow people to be even bigger dicks 15:16 AdmiralA: "oh this is that the move you were going to make, then? I'll just play this one instead" 15:17 AdmiralA: if the players did actually want to go back two half-moves, they'd request two takebacks just fine 15:18 Static_Shadow: Maybe it's the issue that generally people play moves so quickly that by the time you hit takeback the opponent has played their move? 15:18 Static_Shadow: So then you are having to hit takeback twice all the time? 15:19 AdmiralA: I get that happening, but personally that's a lot more infrequent for me 15:19 Static_Shadow: still I've never seen any server use a a 2-halfmove takeback 15:19 Static_Shadow: It's been a single half-move on takeback for every chess application or server I've played on since the 1990s. 15:20 AdmiralA: if people are playing way quickly, then it's bullet and blitz and takebacks shouldn't be happening anyway 15:20 Static_Shadow: right 15:20 Static_Shadow: But people play fast sometimes even in classical 15:20 AdmiralA: Right, I do 15:20 AdmiralA: and yet I still don't want that happening 15:20 Static_Shadow: I've had you do it to me 15:20 Static_Shadow: I click takeback and you've already moved :P 15:20 Static_Shadow: lol 15:21 AdmiralA: to which I'd gladly allow two takebacks 15:21 Static_Shadow: yea 15:21 Static_Shadow: I think it's how it should be 15:21 AdmiralA: Aye 15:21 Static_Shadow: I don't get the idea behind a a two half-move takeback. I was just saying what the logic might be? 15:21 AdmiralA: I know, I don't get it either 15:21 AdmiralA: it's more annoying than it is useful 15:22 AdmiralA: I'm playing a game with you, for instance 15:22 AdmiralA: "oh whoops, I seem to have misplaced my piece. do you mind if I can play that one again?" 15:22 AdmiralA: "sure, admiral, let's go back two half-moves for that so I can play the same move I played again" 15:23 Static_Shadow: yeah 15:23 Static_Shadow: It sounds a bit obnoxious 15:23 Static_Shadow: And of course then there's the players who will accept the takeback 15:23 Static_Shadow: and decide to play something else 15:23 Static_Shadow: :P 15:23 AdmiralA: Yeah, I pointed that out above 15:23 Static_Shadow: I can see the forum posts now complaining about this new abuse 15:23 AdmiralA: and that's going to happen a LOT 15:23 Static_Shadow: yeah I know, I was just repeating it 15:24 Static_Shadow: We have a saying in the US 15:24 Static_Shadow: If it ain't broke, don't fix it. 15:24 AdmiralA: that's pretty much everywhere 15:24 Static_Shadow: I can't see a flaw with a half-move takeback when it's been that way since the dawn of computer chess 15:24 AdmiralA: but in the words of some random internet user 15:25 AdmiralA: given the opportunity, people will be dicks 15:25 AdmiralA: "but if they're dicks, why would they allow you a takeback anyway?" 15:25 AdmiralA: to play a better move now that they've seen what you wanted to play 15:25 Static_Shadow: and given anonymity, that opportunity rises exponentially

[ghost]

How about:

If his opponent moved after he asked for a takeback, it takes back the opponent's move and the original move.

If the opponent didn't move, it only takes back the original move.

This is how it works on chesscube I think. People do ask for takebacks in bullet and I like to accept them.

[AdmiralA]

That's far more acceptable, although I have no idea if it's technically feasible or not. If it is, it seems like a fair compromise. If it isn't, it should revert to original behavior.

I'm sorry if I came off as abrasive earlier, but it already affected me in a couple of games where my opponent did not hesitate to exploit this to their advantage unfairly. I don't want the same to happen to others.

[ghost]

I'm sure it's feasible; you coders are excellent ;)

About the original behaviour: if there are more blitz/bullet games played on Lichess than standard games, I disagree. If there are more standard than bullet/blitz games played on Lichess, then sure.

Don't worry about your reaction. You wouldn't be human if you only ever replied without emotions.

[ornicar]

done