0 points for a win - is this common?

[h_illes]

I am no huge fan of the ELO cap but I can understand the idea behind it - because the site administrators have difficulties to identify 2nd accounts.

And please note that the ELO cap is still fair with respect to the fact that it is the same rule for everybody. DField82 is Elo Top30 and lost some Elo points because of the cap. But also all other Top players will have lost ELO points because they also had longer winning streaks within a small player pool. The ELO separation between top players and medium players will be smaller because of the cap but the relative ranking of players is still somewhat ok.

Thus my advice would be to play on normally (without even blocking players you had a longer win streak) and view the "ELO" number as some relative ranking that is close to true ELO but not 100% (but same for all players).

Eh, just no. The ELO cap only considers games played within 1 week (based on my observation, but I'm not sure if it's the same for all players/games). That means that players who play fewer games are less affected by the cap as they are less likely to play the same player again within 1 week. Now among strong players (who win most of their games) this gives an advantage to players who play fewer games. Why? That is complete nonsense, regularity of how often someone plays should not matter in their ranking.

[nik592]

You don't have to keep playing this one person. Say no to starting a game with them or red thumb them. That Simply means you want to avoid the player. Clearly you do because you don't like what happens with your ELO.

You can't say no to a game in Arena (this wasn't an Arena game, but the impact on Arena is one of the big problems with the ELO penalty). You CAN red thumb players to avoid in Arena, but that's also a known behaviour to boost rankings, by red thumbing strong players to ensure you only play the ones you can beat, so I'm not sure it's a behaviour to be encouraged.