ELO is fine. BGA Hearts is a different game than traditional Hearts.

[LuthienCeleste]

Boardgame's arena ELO implementation is fine.
There are alternate ranking systems, like true skill, but changing the ranking system would do nothing to solve the issue many people perceive as "an ELO issue for Hearts".

The real issue is that there are two versions of Hearts.
- Traditional Hearts. There is a winner and everyone else equally loses.
- BGA's Hearts. There is a winner, 2nd, 3rd and 4th.

These are very different games. The same move which is a good move in BGA because it raises you from 4th to 2nd position can be a very bad move in traditional Hearts because it just entrenches you on the losing team. And so they play very different.
What is more fun? What leads to more player engagement?

But even if majority of people were to agree that traditional is more fun. BGA's Hearts has been active for many years. There is no reason at all to deprive players who like that game from it. And there is no reason to play the game as if it were what it is not.

A few months ago we could not play Terraforming Mars. Now we can. Today we can't play traditional Hearts here. Maybe we'll be able to do so in the future. If you would like to play traditional Hearts at BGA then you need to have a look at the FAQ (https://boardgamearena.com/faq)

How do you choose the games you make available online?
In order to publish a game on BGA we need 2 things:

The authorization of the digital rights owner for the game (most of the time, the original publisher).
A software developer volunteering the time and skills needed to build an online version of the game.

The 1st one is moot, there are no copyright issues with Hearts as far as I can tell.
The 2nd one is what is really needed to make it happen. Either get a new developer to develop traditional Hearts. Or kindly ask the one for BGA to add an option for traditional. Bear in mind that many devs are doing volunteer work.
And option? Not really. If we agree that the games are so different then traditional Hearts really needs to be a completely separate game in BGA. With ELO ranking independent of BGA's variant. That would be the best solution for both BGA's and traditional Hearts players. Quite some code could be reused, but that is a technical detail.

There is however one thing BGA should do. Update their game description in https://boardgamearena.com/gamepanel?game=hearts

Hearts is a trick taking game in which the object is to avoid winning tricks containing hearts; the Queen of Spades is even more to be avoided. The game first appeared at the end of the nineteenth century and is now popular in various forms in many countries.

They need to add : "BGA uses a form of the game where players rank 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th. Which is different from traditional Hearts where winner takes all and leads to different game dynamics."

[Waugapapa]

You’re not really saying much here.

“We have altered the game of hearts so significantly, by grafting a ranking system onto it, that it is an entirely different game. You have to ask for a new game, entirely, if you want actual hearts.”

Or, just fix the ranking system? The ranking system does not work. ELO isn’t meant for a team based game dynamic. In each of these “completely different” versions of hearts, you have the exact same reality: at some point, the three players that are behind have to work together to prevent the current leader from running away with the win.

Except, once last place is such an enormous penalty, there is very little cooperation as everyone just claws to keep their spot. You’re right: it’s a completely different game, but you’re leaving out the next part: it’s a *vastly inferior* version of the game.

Just change it. Stop bloviating about how BGA works, and just change it. Wait. Hang on. Let me say one more thing: JUST CHANGE IT.

You don’t even have to revamp the ELO—just leave that, but completely disconnect it from matchmaking. Just match people based on their win percentage. No one cares about ELO, but they’re *forced* to care, because playing with inexperienced players is *miserable*. They don’t know what to pass, how to hold, how to lead—nothing. But as it stands now, high level players seem to be able to never get last, but rarely win.

Just change it. Stop. Making. Excuses.

[LuthienCeleste]

You don’t even have to revamp the ELO—just leave that, but completely disconnect it from matchmaking. Just match people based on their win percentage. No one cares about ELO, but they’re *forced* to care, because playing with inexperienced players is *miserable*. They don’t know what to pass, how to hold, how to lead—nothing. But as it stands now, high level players seem to be able to never get last, but rarely win.

If matchmaking depends only on winning percentage, then being 2nd is the same as being 4th a far as matchmaking is concerned.
So what you are asking for has no significant difference with what I propose: "There is a single winner, everyone else loses equally, use ELO".