Separate leaderboards for 2p/3p/4p/5p games

[jjl22]

Crossing the +500 ELO threshold playing 4p or 5p is significantly more challenging than crossing +500 ELO playing 2p or 3p.

I would like to see separate leaderboards for 2p/3p/4p/5p games.

For those who like to specialize in 2p/3p/4p/5p, this would show other players who also specialize and generate good competition.

What do others think?

[Ceaseless]

I don't know if harder is the right word. There's more variance with higher player counts, as more factors are out of your control than in 2 player. So even if you play better than everyone else, you're less likely to win than in 2 player.

[thoun]

It would be a lot of work for BGA, as it's currently very designed for 1 Arena / 1 ELO ranking per game. So unlikely to happen

[jjl22]

It would be a lot of work for BGA, as it's currently very designed for 1 Arena / 1 ELO ranking per game. So unlikely to happen

What about simply sorting the current ELOs into lists based on those who play exclusively in 2p/3p/4p/5p? No need to interfere with the current setup. For example, take, based on the past month's play, anyone who has played exclusively 2p/3p/4p or 5p, collect them in the relevant list and rank them. If someone plays a mix (e.g. 2p and 4p) in the past month they do not make a list.

[thoun]

The risk is some players will refrain to play a game of 3p to not be removed of the list of 4p for example we don't want players to force themself to play only one type of game. And even if we did that "filter", some will argue it should also be separated by expansion setting, and we'll have a lot of boards not meaning a lot of things

[Jellby]

Someone could get a high elo playing e.g. 2-player games, then stop playing for a couple of months and then play a single 5-player game. They'd appear with a high elo as if playing exclusively 5-player games.

[ExaltedAngel]

Crossing the +500 ELO threshold playing 4p or 5p is significantly more challenging than crossing +500 ELO playing 2p or 3p.

Are you sure? I almost only play 2p and I'm 600 Elo, but when I play 3-4p I usually win as much as I do in 2p. Iirc Shimon achieved 800 Elo and top1 by playing a lot of 5p, so I'm not sure the level of challenge is significantly higher as you say. Games take longer and variance is somewhat higher, but apart from that I'd say it's pretty similar

(I'm talking only about base TTR, no clue about expansions)

[thg0724]

I think it would be nice to keep rankings based up how many players and which variant. I recognize it would be difficult for BGA to make the change to effectively treat them as different games, but it seems appropriate to me. Not really that important because ELO is not really that important to me.

It would also be nice to see player stats not combine 2p, 3p, and 4p. They *are* different games, how often you win longest train or how many points you score on average will vary by number of players.

[ExaltedAngel]

Stats definitely should be separate because as of now they are just total nonsense. This is probably true for a lot of games, not only TTR