🌿ELO System Updates

[ChiefPointThief]

But in reference to the primary remarks:

• Power leveling: we continue to monitor the status and it seems unfair not to be able to win ELO and only suffer the loss, even for players that keep on losing against the very same opponent.
• ELO Decay: based on all of your comments, it appears clear that this was a bad idea and that the leaderboard and arena currently in place allow for the prevention of the mentioned behavior. Consequently, we have chosen not to apply any ELO decay as originally planned.

I was hoping bga would pull the plug on the elo decay before the deadline. Especially considering there was no announcement on the main page so good call.

Power leveling - So the purpose of this is to limit rewarding cheaters with elo. The penalty for cheating still needs to be addressed but I just found a clear example as to why this isn't even serving its purpose.

As I've mentioned before here if you want to find some cheaters just look at bang. Although difficult, it is possible to achieve in the 300s in bang without cheating but it takes luck basically. There are many factors working against you even if you are a phenomenal player. It uses team elo which means you are losing elo to your teammate/s before the game even starts. It is a team game so not only do you have to be good to win but you need a good teammate and it is a three team game in which you rely on another team to also do their job correctly. A 300elo player tried to join my game. They also have 12 reports on them so I declined but in I still received all the messages from that game and saw the other players questioning this players moves. I watched the replay and clearly this person was working with another account at the table.

I looked at this players game history and apparently they wanted to gift themselves with being on the leaderboard for Christmas. It appears that they created a fake account on christmas eve and have been cheating ever since. They went from a 100 elo player to 330 in a short time (in bang that is like being ranked 10,000 to top 5). Why did the system not work even though this person only used 1 burner account?

1. It is a team game so they still got elo from the other players at the table.
2. The consecutive streak resets when they win or lose w/ the burner account. So if they win with the burner account on its team it resets. If they are on the same team and lose it resets. If they are on different teams and lose (there are 3 teams in this game) it resets.

So w/ bang in particular the power leveling actually really does little to discourage cheaters.

[6element]

• Power leveling: we continue to monitor the status and it seems unfair not to be able to win ELO and only suffer the loss, even for players that keep on losing against the very same opponent.

Good that Elo stealing of the 2nd kind has been reverted.

Now let's discuss Elo stealing of the 1st kind.

You introduced a "feature" which steals earned Elo directly reducing enjoyment for people who care about their Elo gains.

It is indirectly implying that stolen Elo has been earned in a somewhat unfair way. It is an insult.

To avoid Elo stealing table creators expel people who have been "marked by Elo stealing", it isn't fun to expel somebody or to be expelled.

Expelling people damages informal player community. Community is about people interactions, if I'm going to see most of the players only a few times, there isn't much point in interaction with them.

For strong players it steadily reduces the available pool of opponents (if I'll keep playing against somebody chances are that I'll eventually get a win streak of 5 or 6 games which puts them in "expel forever" category), increasing wait time during "peak hours" and limiting ability to play at all during "off peak hours".

To sum it up, Elo stealing of the 1st kind is directly targeting strong frequent players and informal gaming community.

PS: And please, please hire / consult a competent game designer if you want to introduce these kind of changes in the future. This time it hasn't been ready for prime time.

PPS: If hiring a game designer is not an option, a replacement for current implementation you might consider is lowering K-factor against relatively frequent opponent (i.e. an opponent who has been at 10-15% of the tables of a particular player). Then reduction in Elo variation would be applied to both winning and loosing against that opponent, which is more fair. Lowered K wouldn't imply cheating, but would be more like "you've played against that opponent so much, and your win rate against them is well known, so you shouldn't be earning / loosing a lot of Elo anymore". Gains / losses would be still non-zero which is good (maybe these players like playing against each other, or it is a game with very limited player base). And it'd have nothing to do with artificial "repeated wins" criteria, just relative % of the games against a particular opponent.

[6element]

Personally, I estimate at least 20 points of ELO lost due to the winning streak penalty in Century: Spice Road. It may not sound like a lot, but it will keep accumulating.

Refunding of stolen Elo is overdue.

[Revenciel]

All seems good to me, but one question - in cooperative games like Hanabi, we are still gaining and losing ELO, right? It's just hidden?

It would be really nice if we could see the amount of ELO we win/lose at the end of our game, even if it is only visible to us (we can't see how much ELO other players won/lost).

[TricksyFox]

All seems good to me, but one question - in cooperative games like Hanabi, we are still gaining and losing ELO, right? It's just hidden?

It would be really nice if we could see the amount of ELO we win/lose at the end of our game, even if it is only visible to us (we can't see how much ELO other players won/lost).

Yes, this! Please bring back visibility of ELO for co-operative games. It's a great communication tool in Hanabi for setting expectations for how experienced your team-mates are, as has been discussed extensively in other posts on this thread.

And it's also currently hidden in Hardback, which has a cooperative mode but is mostly competitive!

[shermanator822]

regarding power leveling:

When people have 2nd accounts to cheat with, are they playing from the same IP as the original account? If so, you could just hold ELO constant for any players in a competitive game from the same IP (they neither gain nor lose, other players are calculated as if they weren't there). That is difficult for players who are actually in the same household playing honestly against each other, but they will also have an idea about which of them is the better player, and can still gain ELO playing against opponents from elsewhere.

[Patrick of the Isles]

I suggest changing the decision making process in the future. The best would be consulting the player base before applying any changes in the future.

I agree with this suggestion. BGA is more than just a content provider, it has been the genesis of many communities of users with shared interest, and that building of community spirit is one of the best parts of this site. Site leaders can lean on that advantage by consulting users more than might be the norm on other entertainment sites.

[Travis Hall]

When people have 2nd accounts to cheat with, are they playing from the same IP as the original account?

BGA does detect players using the same IP address, but serious cheaters can change the IP address they connect with from one device, or potentially even from one browser window. Using a VPN is one way, or a proxy server is another.

Edit: Two players from the same IP address is quite likely to just be two players in the same house. Like my wife and I when we play together on BGA.

[moonandstarsabound]

Thanks for these updates! I would also love to see an evaluation of how ELO is calculated for games that have no players at ELO higher than strong. This is especially rampant is partnered card games. The way it is calculated players are unable to attain a high ranking without power ranking. This should be reviewed as well.

[LesserJester]

I just played two arena games against someone with much lower ranking. They won both, and admitted they were getting help by a much better player. I red thumbed them. This is what red thumb is for, stopping cheaters trying to skew the rankings. I wouldn't be surprised if it was a 2nd dummy account as the way they play was akin to 600 ELO not 200. This is vetoed in the site rules and I have no interest in playing this person again. BGA please don't take this option away from us. It benefits the cheaters not the honest players.

I would like to thank you all for your feedback on this subject.

I continue to regularly read your messages.
It goes without saying that any regression that occurs may need to be examined and dealt with.

But in reference to the primary remarks:

• Power leveling: we continue to monitor the status and it seems unfair not to be able to win ELO and only suffer the loss, even for players that keep on losing against the very same opponent.
• ELO Decay: based on all of your comments, it appears clear that this was a bad idea and that the leaderboard and arena currently in place allow for the prevention of the mentioned behavior. Consequently, we have chosen not to apply any ELO decay as originally planned.
• Red Thumbs: an attractive suggestion surfaced regarding the potential trade-off of having decaying red thumbs.

thank you for the feedback. Regarding the last item, I would welcome the addition of a decaying/temporary orange thumb but not the removal of a hard-block red thumb. It would certainly make it easier to say "i've played you enough today now, time for someone else" without having to take the nuclear option of never playing someone again. However there are two players in Next Station London who I never ever want to play again. Not due to who won (I beat them) but their outright unpleasant rudeness. I want to keep them red thumbed forevermore.

The way around that being abused could simply be to make the top 20 or appropriate x% of arena ranking go into an end of season arena tournament where they all have to play each other. Since tournies are exempt from red thumbs it helps bypass a cheater simply red thumbing the better ranked players, and it stops someone amassing a quick lead at the start of the season then refusing to play for the rest of it just to keep their 1st place. Especially if going into the tournament a negative starting score is applied for anyone who hasn't played an arena game in the last X days.