Don't play with *

[Tabletop Polish]

The player *

However, * is also using time jokers to avoid ending games where they are about to lose.

In quite a few tables, only one more move is remaining for * to make, the Confirm of their final roll. Yes, they often did all or some of the roll, but then stopped playing.

My game with * got to that point and then they disappeared. 12 hours later they used a time joker. They have been online since then.

*Moderation Edit: please do not use the Forums to call out specific tables or players by name, this is what the Moderation Reports are for. The Forums should remain a general discussion.

[Meeplelowda]

However, * is also using time jokers to avoid ending games where they are about to lose.

In quite a few tables, only one more move is remaining for * to make, the Confirm of their final roll. Yes, they often did all or some of the roll, but then stopped playing.

My game with * got to that point and then they disappeared. 12 hours later they used a time joker. They have been online since then.

1) The forums aren't the place for calling out users for bad behavior. If you think they have actually violated a rule, then you can report it. But they haven't. You can use time jokers any way you want.
2) You only get 4 jokers per year. If they want to waste them for this purpose, so be it. You are not required to stop logging into BGA just because you've used a time joker.
3) If they are truly about to lose, all the joker does is delay the loss anyway. It's not like it is a way to avoid the loss.

[Tabletop Polish]

The highest rank player in the game is using delays at multiple tables that are clearly over in order to prevent their loss, thus boosting their ELO. And I shouldn't report this? I shouldn't tell people to avoid sitting with this player and wasting their time?

[Meeplelowda]

The highest rank player in the game is using delays at multiple tables that are clearly over in order to prevent their loss, thus boosting their ELO. And I shouldn't report this?

You can try reporting it if you want. Just keep it out of the forums.

I shouldn't tell people to avoid sitting with this player and wasting their time?

They aren't "wasting their time." It's a turn-based game. It's not like they are sitting in front of their computers staring at the screen during the entire time joker period. They will eventually get the win.

[Jellby]

The highest rank player in the game is using delays at multiple tables that are clearly over in order to prevent their loss, thus boosting their ELO.

It will also boost their loss and the gain for other players when the game finally ends.

[Meeplelowda]

The highest rank player in the game is using delays at multiple tables that are clearly over in order to prevent their loss, thus boosting their ELO.

It will also boost their loss and the gain for other players when the game finally ends.

I understand the concern. Even though this anomaly will be corrected in time, they temporarily appear to have a higher rating than they should given "normal" play. Also, I'm not sure if the K-factor is based on the number of games you have played at the time the game concludes or the number you had played when it began. If the former, then their Elo adjustments for the losses of the games they are sitting out will be made with an artificially low K-factor.

I agree that they have figured out a way to temporarily boost their Elo. But they are doing it in a way that uses a functionality BGA provides, so it's going to be difficult to argue it violates any terms. Is it exploiting a known bug? I can see how someone could make that argument. I can pretty much guarantee BGA didn't consider this edge case. But regardless, the specific accusation doesn't belong here.

A more general discussion of what BGA can do to prevent this exploit in the future is fair game though.

[Jellby]

Also, I'm not sure if the K-factor is based on the number of games you have played at the time the game concludes or the number you had played when it began. If the former, then their Elo adjustments for the losses of the games they are sitting out will be made with an artificially low K-factor.

If it's within their first 20 games (or whatever), yes. After that the K-factor is constant.

[Meeplelowda]

Also, I'm not sure if the K-factor is based on the number of games you have played at the time the game concludes or the number you had played when it began. If the former, then their Elo adjustments for the losses of the games they are sitting out will be made with an artificially low K-factor.

If it's within their first 20 games (or whatever), yes. After that the K-factor is constant.

The point is that if they delay the completion of their losing games until they have finished 20 winning games, they can avoid the higher K-factor adjustments on their losing games.

[Jellby]

And the winners of those delayed games will get a larger "reward" if the elo of the losing player is higher (deserved or not).