This is still only worth 2 points. We will generally toss the hand in one the 3rd trick has been taken, since there's no point in finishing the hand.

I've never played Farkle online, so I'm not sure what "x2 + B" means. There are really only a couple rolls that make sense to score 2100 points: four 1s (for 2000) + two 5s (for 50 each), or five 5s (for 2000) and one 1 (for 100).

When you roll no scorable dice, that's called "farkling out", because you lose your turn, and you get no points.

No, each roll is evaluated independently. Your first roll was 100 points for the 1, and the second roll is worth 50 points for the 5.

500 points (200 for the three 2s, and 300 for the three 3s).

I've never heard of such a rule. I can understand how it might be helpful to differentiate between cards played in the current run up to 31 from cards that were previously used. You could also argue that turning the cards down forces players to remember what was played rather than being able to look, but given how little of the deck is in the players hands, I can't imagine this is particularly valuable.

Ashkan, thanks for the feedback. As I mentioned previously, we evaluated NEST and decided to write ElasticLINQ instead. We didn't think there was any value for us to layer one abstract on top of the other. We didn't really give transitioning any thought, because we weren't using NEST, and we really had (have) no idea how many people are using it now (and which of those might be interested in switching to ElasticLINQ). We will be supporting facets in our 1.1 release. The code is already in the "dev" branch today if you'd like to take a look.

Ah, I see. Contains is supposed for containers, but not strings. I've opened up a feature request: https://github.com/CenturyLinkCloud/ElasticLINQ/issues/20

Haim, the "dev" branch (our main working branch) has some facets-related work done by Damien that will likely be part of our 1.1 release. Feel free to pull the source and look, or grab interim NuGet packages from our CI machine at (for example, http://teamcity.tier3.com/viewLog.html?buildId=137&tab=artifacts&buildTypeId=ElasticLINQ_CI )

It was inappropriately auto-linked by the blog. Try this instead: http://www.slideshare.net/mastoj/getting-started-with-elasticsearch-and-net

Contains is supported. Can you show the code, and the resulting error?

We evaluated NEST when we started on this path 15 months ago, and decided that we would've rather had a pure LINQ implementation rather than the custom fluent API.

Damien is working on mapping many of the LINQ statistical methods into the appropriated facet requests. He has it in its own branch right now, and is working to merge it into "dev" for the next release. I've opened up feature requests for both administrative APIs as well as write APIs.

There are a lot of these local variations (in general, I don't like playing with them, but that's just me). As for why they wanted to throw the cards in before you finished... to their mind, you'd already picked trump, and there's no point waiting for you to discard. This "efficient play" is pretty common with Euchre, but it can be pretty off-putting to new players who may feel like they're being hurried through the game.

Standardized bidding systems are a huge benefit to Bridge, but never seem to have caught on in Pinochle (at least, not with the people I played with).

Good question! I've never played this way, but hopefully others will contribute their opinions and experiences. :)

Yes, the game is over in this case. You win. :)

I have not played that way, but it sounds like a fun addition to help reign in any runaway players. :)

It's 600 points. Scoring is done per roll.

Yes, I can verify that it's whole files. The WHS system isn't like RAID. It's done at a much higher level, on top of the existing NTFS file system. When a file is placed onto a WHS server, the entire contents of that file will reside on a single disk (not spread across multiple disks like you might expect with a RAID system). When the folder in question is set for duplication, then WHS ensures that for each affected file, two complete copies exist on two separate disks. This is why my ROBOCOPY process works as well as it does, because the file is either there or not. There is no joining process necessary.

No, the 500 point requirement is only when you have no score yet. Every time thereafter, you can stop whenever you want.