Diminishing ELO

[ColShaw]

I understand the reason for getting less ELO for defeating the same opponent(s) multiple times. It prevents people from using cloned accounts to artificially inflate their ratings.

But the system as it exists is a bit silly. I just played a game against a player whose ELO was 549 (Expert rank). I won the game... and received +0 ELO in return. That just does not seem right. It's quite obvious we're both real players, playing real games, and defeating another Expert should give SOME reward at least.

Or, if the people running the site are unwilling to do that, how about notifying players, before they start a game, that they will receive no ELO bonus for a win? That seems only fair.

[ertewr]

I totally agree with you. I only hope some day i get ELO 500...

[FrankJones]

I understand the reason for getting less ELO for defeating the same opponent(s) multiple times. It prevents people from using cloned accounts to artificially inflate their ratings.

But the system as it exists is a bit silly. I just played a game against a player whose ELO was 549 (Expert rank). I won the game... and received +0 ELO in return. That just does not seem right. It's quite obvious we're both real players, playing real games, and defeating another Expert should give SOME reward at least.

Or, if the people running the site are unwilling to do that, how about notifying players, before they start a game, that they will receive no ELO bonus for a win? That seems only fair.

This seems like an easy interface improvement to make. At the game start screen before players confirm, it could display what the ELO for each player would be after a win or loss.

Winning against a 549 ELO player and getting +0? That's absurd.

I've never played on a site where ELO starts at 0. I am accustomed to ELO starting at some relatively low number and then going up or down as one wins or loses. It seems like it would take forever to get to 500 ELO in a game, let alone 1700 or whatever I see in Terraforming Mars.