New version of Backgammon

Forum rules
Please DO NOT POST BUGS on this forum. Please report (and vote) bugs on : https://boardgamearena.com/#!bugs
User avatar
Moof
Posts: 57
Joined: 12 September 2011, 10:36

New version of Backgammon

Post by Moof »

Hello there,
a new version of backgammon will be available soon.

You can already play here : https://boardgamearena.com/gamepanel?game=backgammonmf

Any feedback is welcome :D
User avatar
Remkar
Posts: 453
Joined: 25 March 2021, 22:10

Re: New version of Backgammon

Post by Remkar »

Moof wrote: ↑30 September 2026, 22:38 Hello there,
a new version of backgammon will be available soon.

You can already play here : https://boardgamearena.com/gamepanel?game=backgammonmf

Any feedback is welcome :D
Thanks for the hard work!

Are you looking for feedback in this thread? If so, I'll post some thoughts this week.

I've played a single point match so far, but would love to play some turn based, higher point games so I can use the doubling cube. If anyone is interested, I have 2 games open to join.
User avatar
Moof
Posts: 57
Joined: 12 September 2011, 10:36

Re: New version of Backgammon

Post by Moof »

You can send some feebacks here or make a bug report with suggestions. Thank you :)
User avatar
euklid314
Posts: 714
Joined: 06 April 2020, 22:56

Re: New version of Backgammon

Post by euklid314 »

Moof wrote: ↑12 October 2026, 08:08 You can send some feebacks here or make a bug report with suggestions. Thank you :)
Can you add me as a game tester? It should be possible since it has been done before. I was a game tester by invitation.

I fulfill all requirements except 50 different games on BGA.
User avatar
ZassyA
Posts: 9
Joined: 16 January 2014, 10:53

Re: New version of Backgammon

Post by ZassyA »

I've tested it out with a hotseat player!
Here are my thoughts:

# Improvements over the current version

- The spectator feature is broken in the current version, but works properly in the new version.
- Crashes are much less frequent.

# Regressions compared to the current version

- Once one has selected a checker, switching to a different one requires clicking the Cancel button first, which is unnecessarily cumbersome.
- The clickable area for selecting a checker's destination is too small. I'd like the entire point (column) to be clickable.
- It's no longer possible to combine the values of the two dice to move a checker in a single action.
- There is no option to forfeit other than conceding a single point.
- Checker stacks can grow vertically without limit. I'd like stacks of six or more checkers to be displayed in a more compact way.
- Even after both players have borne at least one checker, forfeiting still requires the opponent's approval.
- The initial board setup animation takes too long.

# Additional improvements I'd like to see in the new version

- The ability to undo individual checker moves, rather than having to undo all moves made during the current turn.

Thanks for all your efforts on the development!
Last edited by ZassyA on 14 October 2026, 19:02, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
euklid314
Posts: 714
Joined: 06 April 2020, 22:56

Re: New version of Backgammon

Post by euklid314 »

ZassyA wrote: ↑14 October 2026, 12:37 # Additional improvements I'd like to see in the new version

- An option to enable or disable the Jacoby rule.
May I ask why you would ever want to disable the Jacoby rule in matchplay?

Because it is too complicated?
Other than that I see only benefits of Jacoby, no downsides at all.

Explanation: In a match, if player A is 1-away from victory, player B gets the huge advantage of free doubles. Usually a double comes always with a risk - since one can win double or lose double. In a 1-away situation doubling has only benefits, no cost. Jacoby takes this advantage for the trailing player away - at least for one game.

Take a match to 3, for instance and let the score be 1-1. The next game is practically worthless without Jacoby. It does not matter if you win or lose, because 1-2 is practically equally good as 2-1. The next game will be doubled anyways, thus these scores are equivalent. If you are leading big at 1-1, you can nevertheless resign as soon as you see that your win won't be a gammon win. Why play it on for a single win if a single loss is the same outcome?

Above arguments are the reason why the Jacoby rule is an integral part of Backgammon matchplay. Since BGA only offers matchplay, I see no reason why "No Crawford" should even be an option...
User avatar
euklid314
Posts: 714
Joined: 06 April 2020, 22:56

Re: New version of Backgammon

Post by euklid314 »

I have not played the new version but if a new version of Backgammon is planned, please address the one wrong rule implementation that exists since the beginning:

Let us assume a match to 7 and player A leads 5-1.

If during the next game player B doubles and A accepts then the doubling cube moves from the middle to player A's side. But it is a dead cube for player A, by rule! The BG implementation must (!) grey out the cube and it is an illegal move for player A to redouble in this situation!

Currently, the BGA implementation will ask player A each move if they want to redouble to a value of 4. This is not only a nuisance and a loss of time, but in case that player A does not pay attention he might make the illegal move and redouble to 4 and will of course immediately face a redouble to 8 from player B. In any tournament the arbiter would undo this (even many moves later!) and the cube would be reset to the correct value 2.

The cube is dead for one player if he will win the whole match with a single win at the current value of the doubling cube (i.e. further doubling has no value for him).

Finally, less important: At the score of 5-1 for player A and an accepted cube to 2, if player A wins a (doubled) gammon, the final score is not 9-1 but it is 7-1. The winner always gets 7 points.

In a match to 7 and score 0:0, if the doubling cube is on value 8 and one player wins a gammon, the final score is 7:0, not 16:0 and not 8:0.

All the best, euklid
User avatar
ZassyA
Posts: 9
Joined: 16 January 2014, 10:53

Re: New version of Backgammon

Post by ZassyA »

euklid314,
I think you’re mixing up the Jacoby Rule and the Crawford Rule.
The Jacoby Rule is a rule under which the score for a gammon or backgammon win remains at 1 point unless one of the players doubles. It is not used on BGA.
It is primarily used in unlimited games to prevent the game from dragging on because players are aiming for a gammon and thus avoid doubling, but I believe it’s worth using in long games with 9 points or more.
User avatar
euklid314
Posts: 714
Joined: 06 April 2020, 22:56

Re: New version of Backgammon

Post by euklid314 »

ZassyA wrote: ↑14 October 2026, 14:34 euklid314,
I think you’re mixing up the Jacoby Rule and the Crawford Rule.
The Jacoby Rule is a rule under which the score for a gammon or backgammon win remains at 1 point unless one of the players doubles. It is not used on BGA.
It is primarily used in unlimited games to prevent the game from dragging on because players are aiming for a gammon and thus avoid doubling, but I believe it’s worth using in long games with 9 points or more.
My bad!!! As I was writing my post I had a feeling of unease - something felt wrong. :-)

You are completely right, I was talking about Crawford.

So you want to introduce the Jacoby rule also in matchplay? Or do you propose to have money game (=unlimited matches) on BGA? Never heard of Jacoby in matchplay, but I have no argument against having it as an option here. :-)
User avatar
ZassyA
Posts: 9
Joined: 16 January 2014, 10:53

Re: New version of Backgammon

Post by ZassyA »

I withdrew it, since it's certainly not standard.
Post Reply

Return to “Backgammon”