₦airaland Forum

Kaczynski:
tried this on a samsung J7 and it worked

That's awesome feedback! I deliberately built the 3D board using lightweight code (simple geometry) instead of heavy textures to ensure it runs smoothly on every device, not just high-end ones. Optimization was a huge part of my focus for this contest. Thanks for confirming it works! (I definitely used AI for advice on the logic too )

BenedictAbajue:
Same with me. I finished and started adding unique features, then I tested again on the morning of the submission day and the pieces couldn't capture each other. I was soooo maddddd.

I had to look for a previous working code and start adding the features again carefully that morning.



If you see my chat with Gemini ehn.....I was cussing and threatening to shut down its server if it made any more mistakes

I actually submitted with the bug without knowing. I was showing off to my students when I noticed that they couldn't enter home. Gemini gives and Gemini takes away.

Based on my little personal observation so far , Let me give you expos .😀

If your game doesn’t have sound , 5 marks reduction 😀

If your game doesn’t represent ludo game morphologic appearance , 5 marks reduction 😀


If your game doesn’t declare winners from your game users that played it , 5 marks reduction 😀


If your game is not mobile responsive , 2 marks ; Athough, Seun did not mentioned it as an instruction in the challenge rule . 😀


If your game script does not well neatly written with comment for easy assessment, 3 marks 😀

BelloP:
I actually submitted with the bug without knowing. I was showing off to my students when I noticed that they couldn't enter home. Gemini gives and Gemini takes away.

Gemini isn’t that great at problem solving “instantly”… you have to guide it step-by-step.

@Seun

I ran updateat.py against my repo and this is the output

python updateat.py https://github.com/dipo1/ludoverse
pushed_at: December 19, 12:55pm WAT
updated_at: December 19, 12:55pm WAT
created_at: December 18, 7:23am WAT

This is misleading because I added a README.md and screenshots.jpg the following day. I thought my code must have be checked by then.

You can confirm manually or use https://api.github.com/repos/dipo1/ludoverse/commits?path=index.html

[
  {
    ...
    "commit": {
      "author": {
        ...
        "date": "2025-12-18T07:04:44Z" // December 18, 8:23am WAT
      },
      "committer": {
        ...
        "date": "2025-12-18T07:04:44Z" // December 18, 8:23am WAT
      },
      ...
    },
    ...
  },
  ...
]

I did not modify my code after the deadline.
I hope adding readme does not disqualify me.

Thanks.

PS: updated_at is also updates when repo settings changes.

doffman:
Based on my little personal observation so far , Let me give you expos .😀

If your game doesn’t have sound , 5 marks reduction 😀

If your game doesn’t represent ludo game morphologic appearance , 5 marks reduction 😀


If your game doesn’t declare winners from your game users that played it , 5 marks reduction 😀


If your game is not mobile responsive , 2 marks ; Athough, Seun did not mentioned it as an instruction in the challenge rule . 😀


If your game script does not well neatly written with comment for easy assessment, 3 marks 😀

Haha, thanks for the expo! 😂

I hope there are also:

10 marks for having an AI that actually thinks and blocks you. 🧠

10 marks for a Save System so you don't lose your game when data runs out. 💾

10 marks for Physics Dice that don't just spin in a loop. 🎲

If missing sound is -5, I believe the Brains + Memory + Physics will carry enough weight to balance the equation nicely, especially since unique features are a priority, @Seun said so. Good luck to us all! 🚀

Nipeks:
@Seun

I ran updateat.py against my repo and this is the output

python updateat.py https://github.com/dipo1/ludoverse
pushed_at: December 19, 12:55pm WAT
updated_at: December 19, 12:55pm WAT
created_at: December 18, 7:23am WAT

This is misleading because I added a README.md and screenshots.jpg the following day. I thought my code must have be checked by then.

You can confirm manually or use https://api.github.com/repos/dipo1/ludoverse/commits?path=index.html

[
  {
    ...
    "commit": {
      "author": {
        ...
        "date": "2025-12-18T07:04:44Z" // December 18, 8:23am WAT
      },
      "committer": {
        ...
        "date": "2025-12-18T07:04:44Z" // December 18, 8:23am WAT
      },
      ...
    },
    ...
  },
  ...
]

I did not modify my code after the deadline.
I hope adding readme does not disqualify me.

Thanks.

PS: updated_at is also updates when repo settings changes.

It shouldn’t disqualify you since you haven’t touched your index.html but I just tried to play your game after rolling a 6 I can’t move or do anything.. why? See screenshots below… your startup screen is clean tho

TotoIsGud4boy:
It shouldn’t disqualify you since you haven’t touched your index.html but I just tried to play your game after rolling a 6 I can’t move or do anything.. why? See screenshots below… your startup screen is clean tho

You can see the green and blue tokens highlighted - it means you can select and move them.
Make sure you are not testing on an outdated browser.

Nipeks:
You can see the green and blue tokens highlighted - it means you can select and move them.
Make sure you are not testing on an outdated browser.

Tried again still same issue.. (I’m using an iPhone safari browser) let me analyze your code to see why this is happening.. I’ll dump analysis here.

Modified:
Analysis:

The Bug: In your CSS, you set height: 100vh for the body. On iPhone Safari, 100vh includes the area covered by the bottom navigation bar. This stretches your 3D canvas slightly taller than the visible screen.

Why it fails: When the user taps a pawn, your Raycaster (Coordinate Mapper) calculates the touch position based on the full canvas height (including the hidden part). This creates a Y-axis offset. Basically, when they tap the pawn, the code thinks they are tapping 20 pixels below it, hitting the empty floor instead.

The Fix: In your CSS, change: height: 100vh; to height: 100dvh; (Dynamic Viewport Height)

Or in your JS initialization, explicitly set the renderer size to window.innerHeight instead of container client height. That should fix the raycast alignment on Safari!

Dear Talented Techies,

We have completed the initial assessment (Stage 0) of the submissions for the 3D Ludo Game Challenge. Our primary criteria for this stage were compliance with the "single HTML file" rule, basic functionality, and whether the board correctly represented a Ludo board.

We received a total of 68 entries. Unfortunately, many excellent attempts had to be dropped due to not meeting the core requirements or suffering from critical visual glitches. If your entry was rejected, please check the decision log for specific reasons—most common issues were incorrect board layouts or non-compliance with the single-file constraint.

To those who passed: Congratulations! You are moving on to the next stage of assessment where we will look closer at gameplay, code quality, and "sweetness."

Below is the status of all processed entries:

Passed (23 Entries):
07 (BenedictAbajue), 10 (TechToyin), 18 (BelloP), 19 (WizEndy1), 25 (3pleo), 34 (abrdgrt), 35 (JasonEmeri), 36 (Bukswag), 37 (Galay), 39 (Horladoyinog), 45 (Ttoby), 46 (Faweezee), 47 (MatrixReloaded), 50 (Nipeks), 51 (KoladeChris24), 53 (donproject2), 55 (elninosft), 57 (Vikkkilee), 61 (Uromgoodluck), 62 (Conestone), 64 (Stephen0mozzy), 68 (johnnieDom), 69 (Horlad)

Rejected (45 Entries):
01 (LegendHero), 02 (AirBere), 03 (showtechedge), 04 (Deasegun19), 05 (InifinteXR), 06 (donsheddy1), 08 (babtaima), 09 (medropoly), 11 (Demurkelly), 12 (Dtalent), 13 (mygee2), 14 (youngyusuff6), 15 (Ndemony), 16 (hobyner), 17 (Bambillo), 20 (Nazgul.Red), 21 (thinkalpha), 22 (faaiz4ever), 23 (Peter), 24 (awakeupcall4all), 26 (walterjnr), 27 (adonainana), 28 (mobileincome), 29 (davidaluu), 30 (MoscoTechh), 31 (NormadTechie), 32 (faboye2), 38 (Moonlight111), 40 (Englishisamust), 41 (Prod1), 42 (Kalatium), 43 (parserqq), 44 (doffman), 48 (akin4true), 49 (emmancipated), 52 (cyberjacker), 54 (AbundantGrains), 56 (jojothegreat), 58 (alikaiwe), 59 (SoludoOpute55), 60 (Bishoppaul205), 63 (valenu), 65 (Jaxman01), 66 (gwashLuck), 67 (darexcoolN)

Thank you all for participating and showcasing your coding talents!

Best regards,
Seun Osewa.

TotoIsGud4boy:
Gemini isn’t that great at problem solving “instantly”… you have to guide it step-by-step.

I would expect that anyone who submitted a working game here knows that.
Gemini actually went back to a version I'd rejected because it was the latest.

Seun:
Dear Talented Techies,

We have completed the initial assessment (Stage 0) of the submissions for the 3D Ludo Game Challenge. Our primary criteria for this stage were compliance with the "single HTML file" rule, basic functionality, and whether the board correctly represented a Ludo board.

We received a total of 68 entries. Unfortunately, many excellent attempts had to be dropped due to not meeting the core requirements or suffering from critical visual glitches. If your entry was rejected, please check the decision log for specific reasons—most common issues were incorrect board layouts or non-compliance with the single-file constraint.

To those who passed: Congratulations! You are moving on to the next stage of assessment where we will look closer at gameplay, code quality, and "sweetness."

Below is the status of all processed entries:

Passed (22 Entries):
10 (TechToyin), 18 (BelloP), 19 (WizEndy1), 25 (3pleo), 34 (abrdgrt), 35 (JasonEmeri), 36 (Bukswag), 37 (Galay), 39 (Horladoyinog), 45 (Ttoby), 46 (Faweezee), 47 (MatrixReloaded), 50 (Nipeks), 51 (KoladeChris24), 53 (donproject2), 55 (elninosft), 57 (Vikkkilee), 61 (Uromgoodluck), 62 (Conestone), 64 (Stephen0mozzy), 68 (johnnieDom), 69 (Horlad)

Rejected (46 Entries):
01 (LegendHero), 02 (AirBere), 03 (showtechedge), 04 (Deasegun19), 05 (InifinteXR), 06 (donsheddy1), 07 (BenedictAbajue), 08 (babtaima), 09 (medropoly), 11 (Demurkelly), 12 (Dtalent), 13 (mygee2), 14 (youngyusuff6), 15 (Ndemony), 16 (hobyner), 17 (Bambillo), 20 (Nazgul.Red), 21 (thinkalpha), 22 (faaiz4ever), 23 (Peter), 24 (awakeupcall4all), 26 (walterjnr), 27 (adonainana), 28 (mobileincome), 29 (davidaluu), 30 (MoscoTechh), 31 (NormadTechie), 32 (faboye2), 38 (Moonlight111), 40 (Englishisamust), 41 (Prod1), 42 (Kalatium), 43 (parserqq), 44 (doffman), 48 (akin4true), 49 (emmancipated), 52 (cyberjacker), 54 (AbundantGrains), 56 (jojothegreat), 58 (alikaiwe), 59 (SoludoOpute55), 60 (Bishoppaul205), 63 (valenu), 65 (Jaxman01), 66 (gwashLuck), 67 (darexcoolN)

Thank you all for participating and showcasing your coding talents!

Best regards,
Seun Osewa.

Congrats to the qualifiers! As Entry 33 ('Narrowly rejected'), could I ask a quick favor? I'd love to know what the specific board glitch was (e.g., z-fighting, overlapping tiles, or layout error?). I tested on low-end devices without issue, so knowing the failure point would be a huge learning opportunity for my next three.js project. Thanks for hosting!

edit: testing multiple Three.js entries in the same browser session can sometimes cause WebGL context conflicts or rendering artifacts. btw on GitHub log: Entry 08 narrowly passed this stage. (I'm confused) which number am I? @seun

Well done Mr Osewa! Can we get your challenge schedule, you hinted that you had more in mind.

Seun:
The red and yellow sides have 2 entry points each. The green and blue sides have none. You were also unable to remove the 'home' 'tiles'

Okay thanks for clarity.

Seun:
Dear Talented Techies,

We have completed the initial assessment (Stage 0) of the submissions for the 3D Ludo Game Challenge. Our primary criteria for this stage were compliance with the "single HTML file" rule, basic functionality, and whether the board correctly represented a Ludo board.

We received a total of 68 entries. Unfortunately, many excellent attempts had to be dropped due to not meeting the core requirements or suffering from critical visual glitches. If your entry was rejected, please check the decision log for specific reasons—most common issues were incorrect board layouts or non-compliance with the single-file constraint.

To those who passed: Congratulations! You are moving on to the next stage of assessment where we will look closer at gameplay, code quality, and "sweetness."

Below is the status of all processed entries:

Passed (23 Entries):
07 (BenedictAbajue), 10 (TechToyin), 18 (BelloP), 19 (WizEndy1), 25 (3pleo), 34 (abrdgrt), 35 (JasonEmeri), 36 (Bukswag), 37 (Galay), 39 (Horladoyinog), 45 (Ttoby), 46 (Faweezee), 47 (MatrixReloaded), 50 (Nipeks), 51 (KoladeChris24), 53 (donproject2), 55 (elninosft), 57 (Vikkkilee), 61 (Uromgoodluck), 62 (Conestone), 64 (Stephen0mozzy), 68 (johnnieDom), 69 (Horlad)

Rejected (45 Entries):
01 (LegendHero), 02 (AirBere), 03 (showtechedge), 04 (Deasegun19), 05 (InifinteXR), 06 (donsheddy1), 08 (babtaima), 09 (medropoly), 11 (Demurkelly), 12 (Dtalent), 13 (mygee2), 14 (youngyusuff6), 15 (Ndemony), 16 (hobyner), 17 (Bambillo), 20 (Nazgul.Red), 21 (thinkalpha), 22 (faaiz4ever), 23 (Peter), 24 (awakeupcall4all), 26 (walterjnr), 27 (adonainana), 28 (mobileincome), 29 (davidaluu), 30 (MoscoTechh), 31 (NormadTechie), 32 (faboye2), 38 (Moonlight111), 40 (Englishisamust), 41 (Prod1), 42 (Kalatium), 43 (parserqq), 44 (doffman), 48 (akin4true), 49 (emmancipated), 52 (cyberjacker), 54 (AbundantGrains), 56 (jojothegreat), 58 (alikaiwe), 59 (SoludoOpute55), 60 (Bishoppaul205), 63 (valenu), 65 (Jaxman01), 66 (gwashLuck), 67 (darexcoolN)

Thank you all for participating and showcasing your coding talents!

Best regards,
Seun Osewa.

Dear Seun and the Organizing Team,

I am writing to express my dissatisfaction regarding the disqualification of Entry 03 (showtechedge) at this initial stage. While I respect the need for quality control, disqualifying a fully functional, feature-rich entry solely because "pieces didn't stay on the designated holes" feels incredibly harsh—especially when compared to other decisions made in this same round.

I noticed in the decision log that Entry 37 was passed with the remark: "narrowly passed this round despite pieces not sitting in place."

If Entry 37 was granted a pass despite alignment issues, I strongly appeal that the same standard be applied to Entry 03. My board layout is correct and looks like a Ludo board, the single-file rule was obeyed, and the game features (AI, Save System, Physics) are robust.

The quality of the game’s engineering has not gone unnoticed by the community. @XploraBen specifically testified to the game's strength, stating:

"Not discrediting the effort of others, but among the 3D Ludo games I have tried here, these two wins it for me. I like the implementation of this one better because of its movable Ludo interface, 2 dice, player stats, and nice game play."

Even @TotoIsGud4boy, who correctly pointed out the visual misalignment ("why does the objects not sit on the rounded icons?", still acknowledged the engineering effort, stating: "You packed good features."

The original grading criteria explicitly stated that "Unique Features (very important)" would be a major factor. It seems unfair to prioritize a minor visual alignment issue over engineering effort that the community is already enjoying, especially when precedents for leniency exist with Entry 37.

To demonstrate that this is a trivial fix and not a structural flaw, I have corrected the visual alignment (by removing the confusing hole markers entirely) in under 2 minutes. I have attached the screenshot of the updated look below alongside the old look for comparison.

I kindly ask you to reconsider this decision and allow Entry 03 to proceed to the next stage where gameplay and code quality can be properly assessed.

Thank you.

Seun:
Dear Talented Techies,

We have completed the initial assessment (Stage 0) of the submissions for the 3D Ludo Game Challenge. Our primary criteria for this stage were compliance with the "single HTML file" rule, basic functionality, and whether the board correctly represented a Ludo board.

We received a total of 68 entries. Unfortunately, many excellent attempts had to be dropped due to not meeting the core requirements or suffering from critical visual glitches. If your entry was rejected, please check the decision log for specific reasons—most common issues were incorrect board layouts or non-compliance with the single-file constraint.

To those who passed: Congratulations! You are moving on to the next stage of assessment where we will look closer at gameplay, code quality, and "sweetness."

Below is the status of all processed entries:

Passed (23 Entries):
07 (BenedictAbajue), 10 (TechToyin), 18 (BelloP), 19 (WizEndy1), 25 (3pleo), 34 (abrdgrt), 35 (JasonEmeri), 36 (Bukswag), 37 (Galay), 39 (Horladoyinog), 45 (Ttoby), 46 (Faweezee), 47 (MatrixReloaded), 50 (Nipeks), 51 (KoladeChris24), 53 (donproject2), 55 (elninosft), 57 (Vikkkilee), 61 (Uromgoodluck), 62 (Conestone), 64 (Stephen0mozzy), 68 (johnnieDom), 69 (Horlad)

Rejected (45 Entries):
01 (LegendHero), 02 (AirBere), 03 (showtechedge), 04 (Deasegun19), 05 (InifinteXR), 06 (donsheddy1), 08 (babtaima), 09 (medropoly), 11 (Demurkelly), 12 (Dtalent), 13 (mygee2), 14 (youngyusuff6), 15 (Ndemony), 16 (hobyner), 17 (Bambillo), 20 (Nazgul.Red), 21 (thinkalpha), 22 (faaiz4ever), 23 (Peter), 24 (awakeupcall4all), 26 (walterjnr), 27 (adonainana), 28 (mobileincome), 29 (davidaluu), 30 (MoscoTechh), 31 (NormadTechie), 32 (faboye2), 38 (Moonlight111), 40 (Englishisamust), 41 (Prod1), 42 (Kalatium), 43 (parserqq), 44 (doffman), 48 (akin4true), 49 (emmancipated), 52 (cyberjacker), 54 (AbundantGrains), 56 (jojothegreat), 58 (alikaiwe), 59 (SoludoOpute55), 60 (Bishoppaul205), 63 (valenu), 65 (Jaxman01), 66 (gwashLuck), 67 (darexcoolN)

Thank you all for participating and showcasing your coding talents!

Best regards,
Seun Osewa.

Are you judging on desktop or mobile

Pls where is the complete result logs , I can’t see where to check the complete log

Seun:
Seen and noted.

Is it possible a user's profile on NL shows a last seen earlier than his posts?
Check it out.
https://www.nairaland.com/love+800
(Remove the plus sign, i added it to avoid trigerring his/her mention)
Last seen : 8:09 AM
Posts at : 9:19 AM

Seun:
Dear Talented Techies,

We have completed the initial assessment (Stage 0) of the submissions for the 3D Ludo Game Challenge. Our primary criteria for this stage were compliance with the "single HTML file" rule, basic functionality, and whether the board correctly represented a Ludo board.

We received a total of 68 entries. Unfortunately, many excellent attempts had to be dropped due to not meeting the core requirements or suffering from critical visual glitches. If your entry was rejected, please check the decision log for specific reasons—most common issues were incorrect board layouts or non-compliance with the single-file constraint.

To those who passed: Congratulations! You are moving on to the next stage of assessment where we will look closer at gameplay, code quality, and "sweetness."

Below is the status of all processed entries:

Passed (23 Entries):
07 (BenedictAbajue), 10 (TechToyin), 18 (BelloP), 19 (WizEndy1), 25 (3pleo), 34 (abrdgrt), 35 (JasonEmeri), 36 (Bukswag), 37 (Galay), 39 (Horladoyinog), 45 (Ttoby), 46 (Faweezee), 47 (MatrixReloaded), 50 (Nipeks), 51 (KoladeChris24), 53 (donproject2), 55 (elninosft), 57 (Vikkkilee), 61 (Uromgoodluck), 62 (Conestone), 64 (Stephen0mozzy), 68 (johnnieDom), 69 (Horlad)

Rejected (45 Entries):
01 (LegendHero), 02 (AirBere), 03 (showtechedge), 04 (Deasegun19), 05 (InifinteXR), 06 (donsheddy1), 08 (babtaima), 09 (medropoly), 11 (Demurkelly), 12 (Dtalent), 13 (mygee2), 14 (youngyusuff6), 15 (Ndemony), 16 (hobyner), 17 (Bambillo), 20 (Nazgul.Red), 21 (thinkalpha), 22 (faaiz4ever), 23 (Peter), 24 (awakeupcall4all), 26 (walterjnr), 27 (adonainana), 28 (mobileincome), 29 (davidaluu), 30 (MoscoTechh), 31 (NormadTechie), 32 (faboye2), 38 (Moonlight111), 40 (Englishisamust), 41 (Prod1), 42 (Kalatium), 43 (parserqq), 44 (doffman), 48 (akin4true), 49 (emmancipated), 52 (cyberjacker), 54 (AbundantGrains), 56 (jojothegreat), 58 (alikaiwe), 59 (SoludoOpute55), 60 (Bishoppaul205), 63 (valenu), 65 (Jaxman01), 66 (gwashLuck), 67 (darexcoolN)

Thank you all for participating and showcasing your coding talents!

Best regards,
Seun Osewa.

Thank you for the update.

Congratulations to my fellow talented techies who also moved forward, and well done to everyone who participated.

Looking forward to the next stage of the assessment.

CodeTemplarr:
Is it possible a user's profile on NL shows a last seen earlier than his posts?
Check it out.
https://www.nairaland.com/love+800
(Remove the plus sign, i added it to avoid trigerring his/her mention)
Last seen : 8:09 AM
Posts at : 9:19 AM

Noticed this a couple of hours ago too.

I was going to post about it but Nairaland was not allowing me to post.

Nipeks:
Noticed this a couple of hours ago too.

I was going to post about it but Nairaland was not allowing me to post.

I hope Seun takes note. This particular account is operated by a sports fan who looks 25 by profile picture but is obviously 40 by content. In one of his thread, he is comparing Filipo Inzaghi of Italy to Nistlerooy of Netherlands. Two footballers most 25 year olds cannot relate to. His is also a troll and monitors me across so many account.

CodeTemplarr:
Is it possible a user's profile on NL shows a last seen earlier than his posts?
Check it out.
https://www.nairaland.com/love+800
(Remove the plus sign, i added it to avoid trigerring his/her mention)
Last seen : 8:09 AM
Posts at : 9:19 AM

Yes. The cron task that updates last seen was stuck.

showtechedge:
I noticed in the decision log that Entry 37 was passed with the remark: "narrowly passed this round despite pieces not sitting in place."

If Entry 37 was granted a pass despite alignment issues, I strongly appeal that the same standard be applied to Entry 03. My board layout is correct and looks like a Ludo board, the single-file rule was obeyed, and the game features (AI, Save System, Physics) are robust..

I've determined that Entry 37 should also have been rejected. I understand how you feel about having focused on the gameplay only to get kicked out for the board design. Sorry for this mixup.

Im sorry but who won abeg

Seun:
I've determined that Entry 37 should also have been rejected. I understand how you feel about having focused on the gameplay only to get kicked out for the board design. Sorry for this mixup.

Dear Seun,

Thank you for the honest response. I truly appreciate you acknowledging the situation.

At the end of the day, we are all human, and I definitely don't want my appeal to be the reason another developer (Entry 37) gets disqualified. That wasn't my intention at all.

My point—and my plea for all of us—is that disqualification at Stage 0 feels too harsh for visual alignment issues, provided the core rules were followed. If a participant respected the hard constraints:

Single HTML file.

Correct Tech Stack (Three.js/JS).

No post-deadline edits.

A recognizable Ludo board.

Then they should pass Stage 0.

Visual misalignment (like pieces not centering on holes) feels like something that should incur a grade penalty (e.g., losing marks for UI/UX) rather than an outright disqualification. If I lose 5 or 10 marks for "Bad Alignment," I can accept that and try to make up for it with my AI and Save System code in the next stage. But being kicked out entirely for a UI tweak feels like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

I am appealing not just for myself, but for the spirit of the contest. Please consider converting these "visual alignment disqualifications" into "point deductions" instead. It keeps the competition richer and allows the effort put into the actual coding logic to be seen and judged.

I hope you can reconsider Entry 03 (and Entry 37) under this light. We are eager to compete!

Thanks.

showtechedge:
Dear Seun,

Thank you for the honest response. I truly appreciate you acknowledging the situation.

At the end of the day, we are all human, and I definitely don't want my appeal to be the reason another developer (Entry 37) gets disqualified. That wasn't my intention at all.

My point—and my plea for all of us—is that disqualification at Stage 0 feels too harsh for visual alignment issues, provided the core rules were followed. If a participant respected the hard constraints:

Single HTML file.

Correct Tech Stack (Three.js/JS).

No post-deadline edits.

A recognizable Ludo board.

Then they should pass Stage 0.

Visual misalignment (like pieces not centering on holes) feels like something that should incur a grade penalty (e.g., losing marks for UI/UX) rather than an outright disqualification. If I lose 5 or 10 marks for "Bad Alignment," I can accept that and try to make up for it with my AI and Save System code in the next stage. But being kicked out entirely for a UI tweak feels like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

I am appealing not just for myself, but for the spirit of the contest. Please consider converting these "visual alignment disqualifications" into "point deductions" instead. It keeps the competition richer and allows the effort put into the actual coding logic to be seen and judged.

I hope you can reconsider Entry 03 (and Entry 37) under this light. We are eager to compete!

Thanks.

I think you misunderstood. I don't think there is another competition between the passed 23. Just a closer look at gameplay, code quality, and "sweetness.".
Passing you for passing sake will not make a difference.
I'm sure the judges have tried their best to be fair. Try to see it as learned lesson, not injustice.
Try to focus on how you can improve on your weak areas.