Win but loose

[BananaHarambe]

I just wanted to add this little testimony, related to the case :

https://imgur.com/a/TrQWVJJ

It's a way to arrive to the final of a tournament with no game finished. I'm sorry but the guy has the proper name indeed . I don't know him and he actually played well in the game i had with him, but i'm not sure it's a coincidence when it's happening 3 times in all your games, And BTW, in the 4th he got skipped for ranking, 1st of the 1st in all other games, and arrived to the final... Lol !

In multiplayer, that is so wrong... Hopefully things will change for the best.

The tournament you are talking about is such a mess that this could have happened to almost any player in the tournament. Look at the game logs here https://boardgamearena.com/tournament?id=398096

The last TEN GAMES IN A ROW ended in skips or maximum duration despite being rounds 2 and 3, meaning most slow players would normally be removed in round 1. Only 3/16 games have finished on time. This is an example of terrible tournament settings, game duration, and has nothing to do with multiplayer.

Oh wait actually BOTH skipped players haven't even finished a game. One of them is the highest rated player remaining and one is lower rated. And how did the #1 Elo player perform? They won the first game, then got removed despite the other player getting kicked, since that's how multiplayer elimination works when more than 1 player needs to be eliminated.

I wouldn't take this tournament seriously and I would be upset with the tournament organizer if I joined it by mistake.

[Meeplelowda]

The last TEN GAMES IN A ROW ended in skips or maximum duration despite being rounds 2 and 3, meaning most slow players would normally be removed in round 1. Only 3/16 games have finished on time. This is an example of terrible tournament settings, game duration, and has nothing to do with multiplayer.

....

I wouldn't take this tournament seriously and I would be upset with the tournament organizer if I joined it by mistake.

As happens occasionally, there is poetic justice in which the tournament organizer falls victim to their own poor settings: https://boardgamearena.com/table?table=682041443

But addressing the broader issue, it seems like there ought to be a way to use site metrics to determine minimum reasonable time settings for tournament rounds and block anyone from creating tournaments that fall below that threshold.

[ABG onlyrevenge]

why always me? it happened to me MULTIPLE times, and it's even not random? can we at least make it to random so it's at least fair?

[Meeplelowda]

why always me? it happened to me MULTIPLE times, and it's even not random? can we at least make it to random so it's at least fair?

You have a fairly young account, so yes you are unfairly affected. There is suggestion in the bugs/suggestions database to make it random. Upvote that. (I too lazy to find it right now)

[DeCante BGTT]

I've run many tournaments of all types. I'm going to summarize how BGA deals with timeouts and how they should be fixed:

1. In a swiss tournament, if the player times out, all players are given a placement according to how much time they have left.
2. In a Swiss tournament, if a player is kicked, the kicked player gets the lowest possible points. Then the other players' score is the sum of the remaining points divided by the number of remaining players. For instance, in an 8 player max tournament, if a player is kicked from a 7 player game, that kicked player would get 2 points. The other players would all get 7 points.

-My proposed fix for Swiss format would be an option to give players over time 0 points and give all remaining players the number of points that would be awarded to a player who gets a bye. We need to consider unfinished games as skipped games. This way players can set the points that players would get in skipped games by changing the points a "skipped" player gets. (Personally I give skipped players the points allotted for a win.)

3. Skipping a player in a Multiplayer elimination game is worse. If that happens, all other players get first and BGA picks a random one of those players to advance to the next round (it's basically based on the age of the account, but to me that is quite random). This is VERY unfair because someone who is losing could kick a player if they are losing and take their chances on advancing.

-My FIX: Have an option in tournaments to advance ALL TIED PLAYERS if there is a timeout or a true tie in the game.

[FSKFSK]

In a Swiss tournament, if a player times out, they should be kicked from the tournament. The problem with Swiss tournaments is you can have 25% absent players, and due to "you can't play the same player twice", the absent players wind up polluting most of the bracket.

[nik592]

1. In a swiss tournament, if the player times out, all players are given a placement according to how much time they have left.

This isn't true. If a player times out, nothing happens unless other players choose to kick them. If the game reaches maximum time, the above happens, and yes, that generally means one or more players exceeded their time. But it's completely possible for a game where a player has exceeded their time to still complete within the maximum table time and award placings normally (depending on the time used by other players).

-My FIX: Have an option in tournaments to advance ALL TIED PLAYERS if there is a timeout or a true tie in the game.

Isn't this going to cause problems with the number of matches or the number of players per game? I guess it depends on how many you start with and how many are eliminated each round, but I thought I'd heard that this wasn't a viable solution.

In a Swiss tournament, if a player times out, they should be kicked from the tournament. The problem with Swiss tournaments is you can have 25% absent players, and due to "you can't play the same player twice", the absent players wind up polluting most of the bracket.

A player who times out is not necessarily an absent player. Sometimes their placement in turn order just means they exceed their time faster than their opponents, but as I said, it's still entirely possible for a game to complete normally with a timed out player. I agree absent players cause issues, but you can't identify them purely on timeouts. Such a setting would make tournament play unviable for many (including me, who has never deserted a tournament I've been involved in, despite most of the time and kick penalties I've ever received coming from tournament play).

[Mathew5000]

In a Swiss tournament, if a player times out, they should be kicked from the tournament.

I don't like this idea, for the reason given by Nik592. It is true that absent players are a real problem in Swiss tournaments, especially where "try to prevent same players to be opponents twice" is checked — which it usually is, since it's the default. (On that topic, see https://boardgamearena.com/bug?id=170168 )

Here's a thread with some ideas I set out for improving the "absent players" problem in Swiss tournaments: viewtopic.php?p=218319#p218319

[FSKFSK]

There should be a distinction between someone who runs out of time by a little (you should finish the game normally) and someone who flat-out isn't playing or is way to slow (one move every 2 days). The current system doesn't allow a distinction between those two possibilities. The people who are obviously never going to finish a game should be kicked from the tournament.