🌿ELO System Updates

[ChiefPointThief]

omg I'd missed the arena red thumb change. FFS yes, red thumbing quitters is essential. Also rude players, i can think of one in particular I never want to play because they;re just so awfully rude. The whole point of red thumb is to help you avoid these obnoxious folk. Don't change that!

I think an example might be useful: In some games eg ticket to ride you can get some very aggressive players who are just unpleasant to have to play with. Eg in TTR they don't try to build routes, only to block yours.

I don't want to turn this into a ttr discussion. There are already enough of those. But this isn't a legitimate reason to not face someone in arena and originally why I didn't see a problem w/ bga making this change.. This strategy is within the rules. This is like ppl who complain about the starvation strategy in stone age. You should take it up with the person who created the rules of the game. Now if they were blocking you from the start in a 4p game and making both of you lose that would be different. Considering the testimonies of agricola players here though I can understand them wanting the red thumb option and honestly I would've stopped playing a game w/ such a widespread problem. I have not encountered an influx of quitters in the only long game I play (terra mystica). In fact most of the arena players are really solid.

If you read the whole of my post that is exactly the case I'm describing. Not trying to win just trying to make both players negative score in the hope their routes were lower value than yours. I don't mind tactical blocking. I do mind pointless kamikaze play. Isn't it up to me who I do and don't like playing with? I'm here to have fun, not endure unpleasant games. Anyway thanks for your comment. It's nice to know someone reads them.

The topic at hand was arena and red thumbs. Ttr has remained 2p outside of the few weeks after it was first launched. Basically what I was saying was that as long as they don’t kingmake it is fine. You can’t kingmake in a 2p game. By using the legal strategy of blocking they are trying to win by not allowing you to complete destination tickets because you probably received better ones than them. So while blocking may be frustrating to you it is tactical.

You absolutely have the right to have fun and play w/ who you want to in regular games. What I believe you shouldn’t have the right to do is avoid an entire group of ppl in the “competitive” format because they use a legal strategy that you don’t approve of.

[Mr_Magic]

Its a constant point of contention in TTR forums.

[LesserJester]

I don't want to turn this into a ttr discussion. There are already enough of those. But this isn't a legitimate reason to not face someone in arena and originally why I didn't see a problem w/ bga making this change.. This strategy is within the rules. This is like ppl who complain about the starvation strategy in stone age. You should take it up with the person who created the rules of the game. Now if they were blocking you from the start in a 4p game and making both of you lose that would be different. Considering the testimonies of agricola players here though I can understand them wanting the red thumb option and honestly I would've stopped playing a game w/ such a widespread problem. I have not encountered an influx of quitters in the only long game I play (terra mystica). In fact most of the arena players are really solid.

If you read the whole of my post that is exactly the case I'm describing. Not trying to win just trying to make both players negative score in the hope their routes were lower value than yours. I don't mind tactical blocking. I do mind pointless kamikaze play. Isn't it up to me who I do and don't like playing with? I'm here to have fun, not endure unpleasant games. Anyway thanks for your comment. It's nice to know someone reads them.

The topic at hand was arena and red thumbs. Ttr has remained 2p outside of the few weeks after it was first launched. Basically what I was saying was that as long as they don’t kingmake it is fine. You can’t kingmake in a 2p game. By using the legal strategy of blocking they are trying to win by not allowing you to complete destination tickets because you probably received better ones than them. So while blocking may be frustrating to you it is tactical.

You absolutely have the right to have fun and play w/ who you want to in regular games. What I believe you shouldn’t have the right to do is avoid an entire group of ppl in the “competitive” format because they use a legal strategy that you don’t approve of.

why not? there's enough people in arena for us to avoid each other. 8105 players currently. Me red thumbing one or two people is hardly swaying the stats. Especially when I'm outside the top 1000 players.

[Travis Hall]

why not? there's enough people in arena for us to avoid each other. 8105 players currently. Me red thumbing one or two people is hardly swaying the stats. Especially when I'm outside the top 1000 players.

One or two people? You’re talking specifically 2-player Ticket to Ride here, right?

Keeping low tickets, drawing cards to complete long tracks to block the opponent and finish the game before they can complete any tickets has been the pre-eminent 2-player Ticket to Ride strategy for 20 years, going back to when Days of Wonder hosted the only online implementation themselves. If it’s not 4000 of those 8105 players employing that strategy, it’s only because the BGA player pool is still relatively new to the game. If you’re red thumbing players for playing that way, it will be far more than one or two of them.

This is why I’ve avoided 2-player since the game was first published. High player counts make the game much more interesting because blocking might give you the win, but even a successful block might actually cost you a loss to a different opponent. I’ve long said that blocking in TTR is playing for second-last place - but in 2-player, second-last is first.

[LesserJester]

why not? there's enough people in arena for us to avoid each other. 8105 players currently. Me red thumbing one or two people is hardly swaying the stats. Especially when I'm outside the top 1000 players.

One or two people? You’re talking specifically 2-player Ticket to Ride here, right?

Keeping low tickets, drawing cards to complete long tracks to block the opponent and finish the game before they can complete any tickets has been the pre-eminent 2-player Ticket to Ride strategy for 20 years, going back to when Days of Wonder hosted the only online implementation themselves. If it’s not 4000 of those 8105 players employing that strategy, it’s only because the BGA player pool is still relatively new to the game. If you’re red thumbing players for playing that way, it will be far more than one or two of them.

This is why I’ve avoided 2-player since the game was first published. High player counts make the game much more interesting because blocking might give you the win, but even a successful block might actually cost you a loss to a different opponent. I’ve long said that blocking in TTR is playing for second-last place - but in 2-player, second-last is first.

We're going down a rabbit hole here. I don't red thumb just because someone blocks. I red thumb when ALL they do is block without any attempt to build something themselves. And I have nowhere near 4000 people blocked. You're being ridiculous suggesting that.

[alexwjb]

Hi mods - throwing my voice in. Please don't make some of these changes.

Red thumbs - being able to avoid people you have bad experiences with online is very important. Please please do not dilute this. It makes the site a less fun and safe place to be.

Power levelling - as others have said, this should not apply in situations where you can't choose your opponent (Arena). I'm against the change in general, but it's egregious in Arena.

Elo decay - Arena already gives you good up to date info on someone's skill. I played Race for the Galaxy a lot a few years ago and was pretty good. Not clear who my current elo is hurting?

[6element]

So, here is how I'm playing now.

When I win a game I roll mouse over the Elo change and check number of consecutive wins against each player. If it is five - add a personal note regarding this player. Then expel them before the start of the next game, with apologies in the chat. I appreciate all opponents and like playing against most of them, but that's the new way of playing on BGA, apparently

PS: All live game developers sometimes release updates which aren't well received. This is unfortunate, but expected and normal. What is not expected and totally not normal, is not releasing a quick hotfix to correct the issues for over a week.

[anykidrated]

So, here is how I'm playing now.

When I win a game I roll mouse over the Elo change and check number of consecutive wins against each player. If it is five - add a personal note regarding this player. Then expel them before the start of the next game, with apologies in the chat. I appreciate all opponents and like playing against most of them, but that's the new way of playing on BGA, apparently

If you like them just play friendly games with them.

[6element]

So, here is how I'm playing now.

When I win a game I roll mouse over the Elo change and check number of consecutive wins against each player. If it is five - add a personal note regarding this player. Then expel them before the start of the next game, with apologies in the chat. I appreciate all opponents and like playing against most of them, but that's the new way of playing on BGA, apparently

If you like them just play friendly games with them.

I wasn't looking for an advice, but thank you.

I guess I'll play with them after the reported issue is fixed.

[alsozatch]

Chiming in with my 2 cents:

Punishing people for playing many games is bad for player retention. I'm sure many other suggestions have been made, but there are 2 major flaws that are very easily addressed I want to talk about.

1) Quick global elo deflation, especially with regular play groups or small player pools. As you play the same opponents the consecutive winners will gain less elo while the consecutive losers still lose the same amount. This leads to a rapid loss of overall elo in the pool, which will just turn a lot of players away from playing more games since it will seem that they are getting worse when they actually are not. To easily fix this, make the consecutive losers also lose proportionally less elo so total elo remains the same.

2) Good players are punished for winning. This all but eliminates the reward of winning as a high elo player against a low elo player, while the risk of losing remains the same. If you often win games then you stand to gain next to nothing yet stand to lose a great deal, just completely disincentivizing you from playing. To easily fix this, make the diminishing ELO swing go both ways. That is, the consecutive win ELO swing penalty applies to both gaining and losing ELO.

Now, I'm sure there are better anti-power leveling strategies entirely which others will mention, but if you decide to go through with the original strategy at the very least please implement these 2 very simple fixes.