I know im not the only one with this problem. The other guy was gonna lose and he was just waiting forever because it was rated game. I don't care about the game but i care about the principle. If you will lose, just accept that...
http://fr.lichess.org/analyse/ee1ipjnz/blackNever play unlimited games. Never. If you want the game to be "unlimited," then play 30+30. This is almost unlimited, but with the addition that the other player must move eventually.
I find that 10+30 is always more than enough; I cannot think of any games where you would need more time. However, if you want to play 30+30, although you may wait for a long time, at least it is a finite amount.
The "unlimited" option is there for people who want to play correspondence or other long games on lichess. It is not for people who want to finish a game in less than an hour. However, you may play unlimited causal games as you will not lose points if the other player quits.
I propose to Thibault to remove the unlimited option for rated games and keep it for casual. So that way, if someone want to play "correspondence", they can do it for casual games. I think people from lichess would agree with this.
Playing unlimited for rated games is more annoying than anything. Even playing rated games on "correspondence", you can "force resignation" by waiting a little bit so its still unfair...
Yeah at least that would shut people up about points.
It used to be that whoever's Internet connectivity failed first could be marked as "having left the room", thus the other player had an option to declare win by default. This ability was mostly removed in favor of discouraging people from playing unlimited-time games, but all it succeeded in doing was giving people more to complain about XD (i.e. once it happens and they find out).
I personally think that the "force resignation" should be removed for unlimited games, so that people can play correspondance without having the option to force the other player to quit.
However, it is useful on timed games, since they would run out of time anyway.
@someonesomewherei dont think removing "force resignation" will solve the problem. Imagine there is a checkmate coming next move, the player will just not play and he wont lose points. The problem is that nobody can "force" a player to play on unlimited game.
The problem is that nobody can "force" a player to play on unlimited game.
This is true, but not a problem. Unlimited games are to be played with people that you trust. People can easily cheat on Unlimited rated games, gaining points for themselves. Therefore, you should not play Unlimited games with people that are not your friends or are not prominent players here at lichess, as they may not finish them.
True, removing "force resignation" on Unlimited games will not solve the problem you describe, but if you are playing with someone you have no knowledge of, you should not be playing Unlimited in the first place. However, removing "force resignation" on Unlimited will solve a different problem: people can force the other player to leave on a correspondance game. Besides, this feature will not force people to make a move on Unlimited either; people will just leave their browser open in the background if they want the points that badly.
"However, removing "force resignation" on Unlimited will solve a different problem: people can force the other player to leave on a correspondance game."
@someonesomewhereLike you said, if you play with people you know, they won't "force resignation" so it doesnt really matter.
I suggest to keep unlimited time only for not rated games. So it wouldn't matter if a player left a game without giving up
Don't play unlimited time.
It means the opponent has unlimited time.
30/30 is an excellent option for slow game. If that isn't enough, use 60/60
I don't think unlimited should be essentially limited because some players don't understand what unlimited means.