Can we revisit Red Thumb in Arena? Some ideas for improvement

[RazorOz]

Haven’t looked into it but after seeing this thread looks like formula d has the same problem as heat.

https://boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=47032

There's probably something in pure racing games being very explicit that you've lost, rather than a point counting exercise at the end of the game. What made it particularly excruciating at Heat, is the majority of the quits were at the very end, where either you've already finished on the podium, or it's the last turn where the result is decided, but someone behind decides to disappear or quit, so you effectively played the whole game, just for someone at the end to void the result, and it's not like Heat is a 10 minute game either, it's like a 40 minute game, and when that happens several times a week, you can soon see why I would be sceptical of having a no red thumb system for Arena without having other solutions in place.

Formula D is going to be the same category, it's a game that takes a while, and indeed you can be in a position where you've lost a lot earlier a lot more often than Heat, and it's a game that plays best at > 2 players so predominantly will be played at higher player counts where it matters more (because the games are voided).

[Ceaseless]

1 — Disable RT filtering for nearby or top-ranked players

Disable RT matchmaking filters for players within ±Y ELO or within the top X% of the ladder.
This prevents players near the top from selectively avoiding strong opponents and shaping the ladder. It also improves queue health for games with smaller player pools.

Matching filters only let you filters relative to your own range, and can't be used to filter out your range, only those further away, though Arena Leagues are a joke, so the Arena filters don't do a lot since even 100 level players can reach the so-called "Elite League".

If by filters you meant red thumb effects are disabled, I could see it to some extent, though you probably have it backwards. Letting them filter obvious rising accounts/alts seems fine.

6 — Disable RT above a certain ELO

Above a certain rating, Arena becomes strictly competitive. Safety tools (mute/report) remain, but matchmaking filters are disabled.
If both players are highly rated and searching, they should be able to face each other.

This is the better one, after they hit a certain point red thumbs shouldn't prevent matchmaking. So if a top rated player red thumbed a nonsense account that's one thing. Maybe it's someone clearly not their rating rising through the ranks, or a troll account, etc. But once they've reached a legitimate rating, those issues are far less likely and it's more likely an avoidance issue.

I could see this system being applied either through an absolute (rating X is no longer affected by red thumbs) vs relative (red thumbs don't work between players within Y rating), perhaps above a certain additional absolute value Z to avoid this happening at the bottom ratings.

2 — Remove RT in Arena and rely more on karma

If RT is mainly used to avoid quitters, then a stronger karma requirement could discourage quitting directly by preventing immediate re-queueing and making quitting feel more costly.

Sure. 100% Karma is the norm anyways.

3 — Prevent or limit conceding in Arena

A common complaint is that players concede early, denying the opponent the chance to actually play out the game. If this is a real problem, conceding could be limited or disabled in Arena (as it is in some tournaments).

Timeouts would still remove inactive players so games don’t stall.

No. If anything, the game progression feature should be disabled for all games, it's nothing but a wasteful system and the 50% meter being the slot for concession should be done away with. Conceding should be given more leeway, not less.

4 — Add RT cooldown or expiry
Avoids lasting forever feels extreme in a competitive mode. RT could expire after some time, or only block matchmaking for a limited period.

If you want to choose your opponents, casual mode already exists — Arena should prioritize competitive integrity.

No. The point of red thumbs are to stop pairings from happening. It's one thing to have an optional timer feature for tactical red thumbs due to rating decay, I could see there being a feature that allows you to give red thumbs set to last as long as the rating decay does. That's about it. Any legitimate red thumb has no reason to be forcefully removed, if a player wanted to be paired, they'd remove the red thumb. If we're worried about people forgetting about red thumbs a list of who you've red thumbed could be useful.

As for illegitimate red thumbs, the issue wasn't about temporary vs permanent, it was about them happening in the first place. They'd just reapply them in any case, though I suppose it could get annoying for them to have to keep doing it if they keep using it on several users.

5 — Make RT a soft filter, not a hard block

Instead of completely preventing matches, RT could just reduce the likelihood of a pairing.
After a certain queue time, the system could ignore RT to avoid queue starvation and complete avoidance.

No. They were being avoided for a reason, if it was legitimate enough to avoid playing in the first place, I see no reason to rescind it.

7 — Moderator / Dev RT powers

Give moderators the ability to apply Arena bans or restrictions to abusive players directly, rather than relying on players to self-police through RT.

I'm pretty sure moderators can already manually penalize players. I don't know about arena specific penalties, though I doubt it's needed, generic penalties should be sufficient.

[ChiefPointThief]

A problematic player shouldn't have 100% karma though, at least at the time you red thumbed them.

Players can be unpleasant to play with for reasons other than being kicked out of games. They may be rude in chat or complain about luck or the like without straying into moderation territory. Some players RT people with a playstyle they don't enjoy - while this isn't something I would do I think it's reasonable for them to be able to limit who they play with outside Arena.

This. I’ve blocked another high ranking player before for this reason so I don’t agree w/ #6.

[Meeplelowda]

Conceeding in a 3+ player arena game should be treated differently imo and not be allowed since it alters the result.

You can't concede a 3+ player game, inside or outside of Arena. Open the hamburger menu and you won't even see the option.

[FrankJones]

Haven’t looked into it but after seeing this thread looks like formula d has the same problem as heat.

https://boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=47032

There's probably something in pure racing games being very explicit that you've lost, rather than a point counting exercise at the end of the game. What made it particularly excruciating at Heat, is the majority of the quits were at the very end, where either you've already finished on the podium, or it's the last turn where the result is decided, but someone behind decides to disappear or quit, so you effectively played the whole game, just for someone at the end to void the result, and it's not like Heat is a 10 minute game either, it's like a 40 minute game, and when that happens several times a week, you can soon see why I would be sceptical of having a no red thumb system for Arena without having other solutions in place.

Formula D is going to be the same category, it's a game that takes a while, and indeed you can be in a position where you've lost a lot earlier a lot more often than Heat, and it's a game that plays best at > 2 players so predominantly will be played at higher player counts where it matters more (because the games are voided).

Notably, there is a 20-page thread about players conceding on the final turn (thus voiding the result and stats and end-game state of the game).

The Argument in favor goes something like this: "Well, why should someone be forced to spend one extra minute of life finishing a game that will just be a loss anyway?"

That argument holds little weight from my vantage point, but that's the argument.

[FrankJones]

As for the topic at hand:

I have a much easier solution: Red thumbs should simply be disregarded in the Arena.

It's absurd that someone could be at the top of the Arena ladder and then just red-thumb the players in positions 2-20 (or 2-whatever).

[Encripta]

As for the topic at hand:

I have a much easier solution: Red thumbs should simply be disregarded in the Arena.

It's absurd that someone could be at the top of the Arena ladder and then just red-thumb the players in positions 2-20 (or 2-whatever).

This is my opinion.
You cannot have a mode called Arena and let a Top1 play only against 100 elo players to farm 4-5 points each game rather than face Top10 players.
In my case, I play Captain Tsubasa and unfortunately we are small community in there, 180 active games, meaning that it is quite easy to reach top1 and farm low elo players.

We have 1 player that has been ELO reset already previous season because of multiaccount, however he just oppened 17 games, 12 of them against 100 ELO people which he will definitely win. Meanwhile he got me blocked as well as many other players that he sees as a danger.

To put this is context, have you seen a Football league where Real Madrid refuses to play vs Barcelona just in case they lose? Non sense.

If I don't see changes I will just cancel my subscription out of frustration, Arena should be fearless, red thumbs are if you get annoyed by someone playing dumb or being toxic.

[Countes-Olivia-Manny]

I completely agree with the previous player's comments.

Red Thumbs in Arena should either be disabled or a separate League should be created.

Players often say they give Red Thumbs because of rude chat or quitters.
If that is the case, then those players should be reported immediately and banned for the remainder of the season!

[El_Guigui_13]

As for the topic at hand:

I have a much easier solution: Red thumbs should simply be disregarded in the Arena.

It's absurd that someone could be at the top of the Arena ladder and then just red-thumb the players in positions 2-20 (or 2-whatever).

This is my opinion.
You cannot have a mode called Arena and let a Top1 play only against 100 elo players to farm 4-5 points each game rather than face Top10 players.
In my case, I play Captain Tsubasa and unfortunately we are small community in there, 180 active games, meaning that it is quite easy to reach top1 and farm low elo players.

We have 1 player that has been ELO reset already previous season because of multiaccount, however he just oppened 17 games, 12 of them against 100 ELO people which he will definitely win. Meanwhile he got me blocked as well as many other players that he sees as a danger.

To put this is context, have you seen a Football league where Real Madrid refuses to play vs Barcelona just in case they lose? Non sense.

If I don't see changes I will just cancel my subscription out of frustration, Arena should be fearless, red thumbs are if you get annoyed by someone playing dumb or being toxic.

Same problem with the game Bonsai, small community, and a Top1 player block all players in the Top20, even he's never played against them.
He also blocks any player who beats him even once.
That's not fair to the other top players, who face a greater risk of defeat and the resulting loss of points.

[Encripta]

I already cancelled my subscription and stopped playing that game. And to put it in context I was so active that my games represented 40% of the total arena games during the previous season.
No point trying till BGA does something about.