There is something wrong here.

[Ranier]

In this game of tichu, my partner and I were winning 910 vs -110 when one of the opponents deliberately allowed there clock to run into minus time and so his partner kicked him out after -5 seconds of time. However, the worst is that my partner and I received +1 and 0 elo respectively, and one of the opponents gained 14 elo.


https://boardgamearena.com/table?table=392625831

It is bad enough not to be able to finish the game in this way, but then to see the opponent gain so much more is demoralising.

Now, I have a reasonable understanding of how the elo score is calculated under normal circumstances, so please don't reply explaining how it works. This is something else and it stinks.

Just another reason why I am not incentivised to pay for premium membership.

[JoysJoy]

They player who went overtime has done so 37 times in recent history, many for games of Tichu. But they are not followed by the game being ended except for the one you are talking about. If this were some ongoing, evil strategy every time over would have ended with the player being booted and the ELO problems you described. It is clear looking at the evidence this player, for whatever reason, has a habit of going over time on games in general but zero proof of any type of malicious cheating as you describe. The player that booted probably just saw this player has a habit of doing this and was not going to put up with it. When people I play go over, I often look if it is a pattern and am much more likely to boot them if they do it carelessly and often. *Not* because they ganged up to deprive you elevating your ELO in this one game.

Maybe you need to ask yourself why your ELO is this type of important on a platform you don't even support?

Sometimes things happen, and this appears to be one of them. Thumbs down the player so you don't play them again, or find a place to play games that doestn' piss you off so badly. Why let your game playing become bitterness for you?

[Romain672]

The problem is to find a solution which resolve all problems, and spoiler, there is none.

I tried to resolve the problem somehow some months ago, but you can't have an elo system for a team game.
Mostly because with AB vs CD, as A, the elo of B should matter. If B is a new player, or if B has 700 elo, A should won different elo. If it's not the case, then A should leave all games where A is paired with a new player.

And actually, since A tied against B, if A has 200 elo, and B has 700 elo, not only A will have a better time because he played with a good player, but he will get inflated elo because he tied with B.

.

But I agree the system actually doesn't work well.
Not Alone which is 1 vs All is one of the worst one, you can have game where if you lose you lose lots of elo, but if you win you are supposed to win negative elo points (because you tied with your teammates). Here it was adjusted manually to not make you lose elo, but it's not great.

[ChiefPointThief]

There is a solution. Either give the player who was winning and has higher elo better compensation in unfinished games or all players who didn’t quit receive no elo.

Why is the logic that the game wasn’t finished so you shouldn’t get any elo for strong players acceptable but also at the same time it is ok for a losing player to get +14 elo because they are weaker in the same unfinished game?

[dschingis27]

There is a solution. Either give the player who was winning and has higher elo better compensation in unfinished games or all players who didn’t quit receive no elo.

Why is the logic that the game wasn’t finished so you shouldn’t get any elo for strong players acceptable but also at the same time it is ok for a losing player to get +14 elo because they are weaker in the same unfinished game?

It is not ok for the losing player to get +14. That is an unwanted artifact of the current system. And the strong players got Elo for the game, the problem is they got tied with the weak player (compared to them), that's why they got very little (and not because the game didn't finish). The problem is that there is no easy automatic way in unfinished games to determine who is winning. To program this would require a lot of effort for only little gain. And that's the main reason why everyone not expelled just get tied. It's the most straight-forward alternative in favor of just nullifying the game. However, in team games like Tichu, nullification might be the better way.

[dschingis27]

I suggest whenever one part of a team is expelled (by anyone), this team loses the game and the winner team gets Elo accordingly. The expelled player gets the usual Elo loss plus the usual penalty. The team mate(s) of the expelled player however, should get no Elo change. (Their team didn't win so they shouldn't gain, however, it's not their fault they lost so they shouldn't lose.)

[ChiefPointThief]

I’ve been in several 4p solo games that I was winning and someone rage quit. Because I was the highest elo I got 0 maybe 1pt if I’m lucky and other lower elo players received pts. Even though they were losing.

If it is hard to program the system for change then that is understandable (the average person probably doesn’t know what it takes). But the replies to topics like this saying basically “So what? You’ll live.” I don’t understand. As long as there are players participating in a system that is flawed it’s reasonable for them to address the flaws within the system.

[Jellby]

There's no way to know who's winning, at least not a way that works for all games. Even if there was, and scores were updated accordingly, the players that are "losing" would complain saying that "I had a super-mega-combo just ready to win" or "there was still a chance I would win", and indeed it would be unfair to them to rank them as losers just because someone else quit mid-game. So I believe the current choice of considering every remaining player as a (tied) winner is reasonable. The only other reasonable alternative is to just apply a penalty to the quitter and 0 ELO to everyone else, but that still wouldn't solve the problem of someone quitting so that someone else doesn't lose ELO.

[dschingis27]

If it is hard to program the system for change then that is understandable (the average person probably doesn’t know what it takes). But the replies to topics like this saying basically “So what? You’ll live.” I don’t understand. As long as there are players participating in a system that is flawed it’s reasonable for them to address the flaws within the system.

Topics like this are often posted in a negative tone and with a seriousness that doesn't fit the matter. It's fine if people point out things that do not work but it is often with the lingering expectation, "Why is this not fixed already? This is so stupid and easy to fix."

80% of the time, the answer to "Why is it not fixed?" is that there are more important things to do. And people often assume that the problem they found is very important and quick to fix.

To give you an example: If the OP opened the topic in a very factual way like, "There is an exploit/loophole in the Elo system for Team games.", rather than, "something wrong here, it stinks", I promise you that reactions were different.

[Meeplelowda]

To give you an example: If the OP opened the topic in a very factual way like, "There is an exploit/loophole in the Elo system for Team games.", rather than, "something wrong here, it stinks", I promise you that reactions were different.

I'd settle for writing a topic that actually describes the content of the post, rather than the the generic "there is something wrong" that could literally apply to anything (except, I guess, something with which nothing is wrong).