BGA has a serious bully problem

[Hervor]

It is unfortunately very common in cooperative games and a huge reason why I usually don't play them here anymore. I just don't understand why players, who value winning at any price, don't restrict their tables in such a way that they no longer play with beginners.

[FrankJones]

It is unfortunately very common in cooperative games and a huge reason why I usually don't play them here anymore. I just don't understand why players, who value winning at any price, don't restrict their tables in such a way that they no longer play with beginners.

How much would that help?

When I play Spades, I set the table to > 200 Elo, and I still see all sorts of beginner moves. There are only 44 players on the sit rated above 300, so, restricting the game to above 200 is fairly restrictive.

I would occasionally set the filter to 300 and above, which would take a very long time for the table to fill, and, although the level of play was generally good, the level of vitriol was also high. In one game, my partner tore into me and would not stop berating me over some sort of perceived mistake. I was the 9th highest rated player on the site at the time. My partner was, I think, 7th. Or something like that.
One of the opponents even observed and commented on how this partner of mine was, as usual, berating a teammate almost immediately after the game started. This was a long time ago, but I still have a top 20 ranking, and the player who has been berating me is barely in the top 100. For whatever that's worth.

I generally avoid such games because of the frustration factor. I'm not perfect either. I was penalized one time in a game of spades for rudeness to a partner. Upon reviewing the in-game chat after being penalized, I realized the penalty was strict but not unreasonable - I could have phrased my statement more politely and avoided the penalty.

As others have noted though, sometimes people are a bit overly sensitive. On one occasion, I made a bit that created a 13-bid, also known as "locking it up". Meaning, there are no bags possible unless a team gets set on their bid. a 13-bid is rare, and means "take as many tricks as we can and set them". Usually making a 12-bid would suffice to drive that point home, but a 13-bid leaves no doubt. My partner missed this somehow, and made a passive play, allowing the opponents to take a trick they had no business taking. I politely pointed out the problem with that play and explained what my bid meant. Nobody was moderated, no cursing occurred, but nevertheless, my partner didn't seem to take kindly to the advice.

Was my advice "bullying"? At this point, I no longer know where the line is, so I just avoid it altogether.

[RicardoRix]

Is spades a co-op game?
Just because it didn't work for you once, it can't work for anyone ever?
Seems like simple, good practical advice to me.


So this is not the first time someone has brought this up, specifically with Hanabi. There is a community group called friendly and social hanabi players, or some such name. I would seek that out.

[Hervor]

It is unfortunately very common in cooperative games and a huge reason why I usually don't play them here anymore. I just don't understand why players, who value winning at any price, don't restrict their tables in such a way that they no longer play with beginners.

How much would that help?

When I play Spades, I set the table to > 200 Elo, and I still see all sorts of beginner moves. There are only 44 players on the sit rated above 300, so, restricting the game to above 200 is fairly restrictive.

I would occasionally set the filter to 300 and above, which would take a very long time for the table to fill

So you have a handful of choices, not playing at all, waiting for a really long time to fill the table with only high ELO players or risking being paired with a bad player/beginner. It is completely fair to take any of these options, BUT if you (or anyone else) chose to risk playing with a bad player you have to deal with the consequences when that bad player does indeed show up and not make it their problem.

[FrankJones]

Is spades a co-op game?
Just because it didn't work for you once, it can't work for anyone ever?
Seems like simple, good practical advice to me.


So this is not the first time someone has brought this up, specifically with Hanabi. There is a community group called friendly and social hanabi players, or some such name. I would seek that out.

Spades is a partnership game. Unlike Hearts, which is 1vAll.

Also, why are you rearranging what I wrote?

1) I never said spaded "didn't work for me once." I detailed multiple instances in which Spades did not work for me.
2) Where did I say Spades can't work for "anyone"? I explained why I avoid the game, and illustrated some of the issues that can arise because those issues are relevant to this thread.
3) Yes, I agree that any advice I gave in my post was good and practical.

As for Hanabi, yeah, personally I wouldn't touch that game with a 10-foot pole. I haven't played it on this site, but I've read enough posts to know that I would likely be lambasted by my fellow players. Apparently there are pre=agreed-upon conventions, and I don't know them, so that would be a disaster for me. In "real life" I buried my game of Hanabi deep enough where none of my guests would find it, because, I haven't seen anyone have an enjoyable experience with that game.

[FrankJones]

It is unfortunately very common in cooperative games and a huge reason why I usually don't play them here anymore. I just don't understand why players, who value winning at any price, don't restrict their tables in such a way that they no longer play with beginners.

How much would that help?

When I play Spades, I set the table to > 200 Elo, and I still see all sorts of beginner moves. There are only 44 players on the sit rated above 300, so, restricting the game to above 200 is fairly restrictive.

I would occasionally set the filter to 300 and above, which would take a very long time for the table to fill

So you have a handful of choices, not playing at all, waiting for a really long time to fill the table with only high ELO players or risking being paired with a bad player/beginner. It is completely fair to take any of these options, BUT if you (or anyone else) chose to risk playing with a bad player you have to deal with the consequences when that bad player does indeed show up and not make it their problem.

Agreed. I didn't realize I said anything to the contrary.

[Hervor]

As for Hanabi, yeah, personally I wouldn't touch that game with a 10-foot pole. I haven't played it on this site, but I've read enough posts to know that I would likely be lambasted by my fellow players. Apparently there are pre=agreed-upon conventions, and I don't know them, so that would be a disaster for me. In "real life" I buried my game of Hanabi deep enough where none of my guests would find it, because, I haven't seen anyone have an enjoyable experience with that game.

I have played a couple of fun rounds of Hanabi here when the game was new and before the player base became so toxic and had a lot of fun games IRL. You should give it a chance with your friends, it is actually a nice game.

[FrankJones]

We did try it - but we all found it frustrating; we thought we were giving good clues, and we didn't get much accomplished. Granted, we weren't using any agreed-upon conventions, which apparently makes it possible to win every time, but then, why bother?

For our player group, we decided to pursue other games that were inherently completive rather than cooperative.

Hanabi has an interesting game design, but it just didn't click for us.

[WhiskyJoe]

If one cannot stand to play cooperative games with inexperienced players than one should not play in those games. If you cannot refrain from insulting beginners than get into different games.

[FrankJones]

If one cannot stand to play cooperative games with inexperienced players than one should not play in those games. If you cannot refrain from insulting beginners than get into different games.

Agreed.

Keep in mind, "pointing out what a bid meant from a strategic standpoint" is not the same thing as "insulting a beginner".