People from "Antarctica"

[nik592]

When you check the replay, before choosing the player, you'll see that the username is wgwpmqmpmpmp for both accounts. Is this a standard thing on BGA for a closed account, or is it actually the same person? Because in the game replay, the usernames are different (J-IVELY and Feel_Special).

Same player. The name was changed, so, upon viewing game replays, it would appear to be a different player.

I don't think that's the same player - if you hover over the usernames, they are different user IDs. I do think that's just some kind of standard thing where BGA sets the name to that after the account is deleted (I've not seen it before this, but then I don't often look at games with removed accounts).

I doubt anyone in this thread or otherwise would argue with you that it's entirely possible these users had bad intentions or were misbehaving in some way, given their accounts are now gone - I believe if they are banned from BGA, it just looks the same as an account deletion that was initiated by the player. But the point is that they happened to note themselves as being from Antarctica is not relevant. Had they noted themselves as being from somewhere else, they could have done all the same things (if they did anything, which I can't really say from looking at one game), and removing that as a possible country won't stop jerks from being jerks.

It's also possible that you had poor luck in a couple of games in a row, or possibly made some errors in your play that your opponents did not. In any case, THOSE users are gone, your solution of removing Antarctica as a country won't stop similar people from turning up on the platform, but it should be relatively rare. If you come across them, red thumb, move on with your games. Obsessing about the country they're from in the forums won't change the outcome of your next game, whether it's with a jerk or non-jerk player.

[h_illes]

They also had around an 80% win rate on around 11 games. They blew me away by the middle of the second round, hurled insults and whom I suspected of cheating.

I won the first 20+ games of Century: Spice Road when I started playing on BGA. This is because I mastered the game by that time, having played thousands of games on another site and hundreds of games over the board. Once I started playing on BGA, until I got up to an ELO score reflecting my actual skill, I was underrated. So I guess it was unfair against my opponents during that period, but there is nothing I could do about that. That said, this is temporary (and I don't start a new account every week).

But if the account is banned (and it's possibly the same person), I think it's then unfair for a loss against that person to count against your record and whatever ELO you lost to be permanently gone because of that.

The account may have been banned due to the insults; or, rather, my guess is that it was restricted so the player can't use the game chat for several days (that's the first penalty for insults, not an outright ban), and the player didn't like this so they closed this account, and possibly started a new one. Either way, these suggest to me that he is a jerk, and possibly a strong player sandbagging, but not that he is cheating in the actual game.

Sure, losing (and losing ELO) to someone like that hurts, but the actual game may still have been won cleanly by them. My personal idea to solve this issue is a filter for number of games played by the opponent to avoid players who played very few games. After they played more games, their ELO gets close to their actual skill eventually (and there is already a filter for that).

[FrankJones]

okay, I reviewed the game you posted.

1) I see several serious errors in the first round. Making that many major blunders will often result in being in a losing position halfway through the game.

2) The opponent appears to have gotten a somewhat lucky starting hand that had two migratory birds. With two migratory birds, yeah, that player is likely going to win the 3 goals that involve habitat birds/eggs.

3) That player's account has been closed, but the message that appears says the account was closed by the player, not closed down by BGA.

Were there any other allegedly suspicious games against an antarctica player, or just this one?

Yeah, there were two. That first one you saw with the migratory birds and this one.

https://boardgamearena.com/table?table=815091393

What is this game replay supposed to be showing?

In round 1, you and your opponent both got zero points for the end-round goal. I thought your issue was that your opponent was getting perfect cards to win all the end-round goals?

Also, just as with the other game you linked, your R1 play is ... not good.

[Archisian]

When you check the replay, before choosing the player, you'll see that the username is wgwpmqmpmpmp for both accounts. Is this a standard thing on BGA for a closed account, or is it actually the same person? Because in the game replay, the usernames are different (J-IVELY and Feel_Special).

Same player. The name was changed, so, upon viewing game replays, it would appear to be a different player.

I don't think that's the same player - if you hover over the usernames, they are different user IDs. I do think that's just some kind of standard thing where BGA sets the name to that after the account is deleted (I've not seen it before this, but then I don't often look at games with removed accounts).

I doubt anyone in this thread or otherwise would argue with you that it's entirely possible these users had bad intentions or were misbehaving in some way, given their accounts are now gone - I believe if they are banned from BGA, it just looks the same as an account deletion that was initiated by the player. But the point is that they happened to note themselves as being from Antarctica is not relevant. Had they noted themselves as being from somewhere else, they could have done all the same things (if they did anything, which I can't really say from looking at one game), and removing that as a possible country won't stop jerks from being jerks.

It's also possible that you had poor luck in a couple of games in a row, or possibly made some errors in your play that your opponents did not. In any case, THOSE users are gone, your solution of removing Antarctica as a country won't stop similar people from turning up on the platform, but it should be relatively rare. If you come across them, red thumb, move on with your games. Obsessing about the country they're from in the forums won't change the outcome of your next game, whether it's with a jerk or non-jerk player.

Okay, that clears a lot of things up. I just thought it was a way for scammers/hackers to get around bans or something.

[Archisian]

okay, I reviewed the game you posted.

1) I see several serious errors in the first round. Making that many major blunders will often result in being in a losing position halfway through the game.

2) The opponent appears to have gotten a somewhat lucky starting hand that had two migratory birds. With two migratory birds, yeah, that player is likely going to win the 3 goals that involve habitat birds/eggs.

3) That player's account has been closed, but the message that appears says the account was closed by the player, not closed down by BGA.

Were there any other allegedly suspicious games against an antarctica player, or just this one?

Yeah, there were two. That first one you saw with the migratory birds and this one.

https://boardgamearena.com/table?table=815091393

What is this game replay supposed to be showing?

In round 1, you and your opponent both got zero points for the end-round goal. I thought your issue was that your opponent was getting perfect cards to win all the end-round goals?

Also, just as with the other game you linked, your R1 play is ... not good.

I misremembered about the first round goal in this game. My apologies on that.

But essentially, this account and the other account have both Japanese as their board language and listed their residence as Antarctica. So, I guessed these two accounts were the same player, but someone else told me they were different IDs. I'm not sure if it shows up different if the same person makes different accounts.

[FrankJones]

When you check the replay, before choosing the player, you'll see that the username is wgwpmqmpmpmp for both accounts. Is this a standard thing on BGA for a closed account, or is it actually the same person? Because in the game replay, the usernames are different (J-IVELY and Feel_Special).

Same player. The name was changed, so, upon viewing game replays, it would appear to be a different player.

I don't think that's the same player - if you hover over the usernames, they are different user IDs. I do think that's just some kind of standard thing where BGA sets the name to that after the account is deleted (I've not seen it before this, but then I don't often look at games with removed accounts).

Whoops. I'm posting while half asleep here. I misread the post, I thought the question was whether "wgwpmqmpmpmp" and "J-IVELY" were the same player, and I answered "yes" becasue in the game history for the first game, the name appears as "wgwpmqmpmpmp" but then upon beginning the replay, the name appears as J-IVELY.

So, that's also the case in the other game that as posted?
In that case, you're probably correct; the system changes the name to "wgwpmqmpmpmp" in the game history after the account is deleted? What function does this serve?

[Archisian]

Sure, losing (and losing ELO) to someone like that hurts, but the actual game may still have been won cleanly by them. My personal idea to solve this issue is a filter for number of games played by the opponent to avoid players who played very few games. After they played more games, their ELO gets close to their actual skill eventually (and there is already a filter for that).

I apologize, but what is sandbagging? Like intentionally trying to drop people's rank/ELO by making new accounts?

[FrankJones]

So, this is all rather odd. As has been noted, the two opponents in question have different player IDs.
Both are high-numbered account IDs, indicating recent creation. Most likely, as suggested earlier in this thread (I forget by whom), the player gets moderation penalties for rude conduct in the chat, and then just deletes the account and starts a new account.

So, it's probably the same person, writes "antarctica" as home country, which is irrelevant, but is rude and seems to delete and create accounts for whatever reason. If it is to avoid dealing with moderation penalties or bans, that's obviously not allowed.

But, there is nothing to indicate any actual in-game cheating.

I generally dislike playing against people with a low total of games played. Did someone say there is a way to filter that out? I don't recall ever seeing such a filter when I create game tables.

[FrankJones]

Sure, losing (and losing ELO) to someone like that hurts, but the actual game may still have been won cleanly by them. My personal idea to solve this issue is a filter for number of games played by the opponent to avoid players who played very few games. After they played more games, their ELO gets close to their actual skill eventually (and there is already a filter for that).

I apologize, but what is sandbagging? Like intentionally trying to drop people's rank/ELO by making new accounts?

Pretty much. Someone who is experienced and skilled at a game might start a new account just to mess with people by playing as a "beginner" with 0 Elo and then winning a bunch of games in a row, quickly getting the new account Elo up (while also unfairly lowering opponents' Elos).

It is annoying. Often, it is unavoidable. There are a few games I play here that I was strong or expert in before ever playing here. Not much I can do about that. I've been on the other end of it too.

What's irritating is when people do it with a second account. In one game (in which I am not an expert, but I am "Strong"), I was getting crushed by an opponent with a similar Elo. I commented on it, and the opponent said, "Don't feel bad, I have a master level Elo on my other account". WTF?? I mean, WTF for doing it, and double WTF for admitting to it in the in-game chat.

[nik592]

So, that's also the case in the other game that as posted?
In that case, you're probably correct; the system changes the name to "wgwpmqmpmpmp" in the game history after the account is deleted? What function does this serve?

I would guess so the username can be reused? But no idea really.

I generally dislike playing against people with a low total of games played. Did someone say there is a way to filter that out? I don't recall ever seeing such a filter when I create game tables.

No, h_iles said it'd be nice if there was one. Which, yeah, probably. Is there a suggestion for this? Not that I hold out much hope on suggestions happening, but as I always say, they ignore 100% of the suggestions you don't raise.

I'm not sure if it shows up different if the same person makes different accounts.

No, user id would just be related to when they created that account - nothing about their IP or anything connected to the person at the end of the computer. They COULD be the same person, and yes, it's supposed to not be allowed to keep creating new accounts to get around bans, and there's supposed to be ways to detect that. But, if they are using VPNs or something, then it's more difficult to prove two players are the same person, and possibly whatever safeguards BGA has in place don't work.

As with many situations, you cannot make enough rules to force a jerk to behave themselves in all cases. More jerky jerks will seek loopholes and exploit them. And the rules you put in place often impact legitimate users who aren't trying to do the wrong thing in the first place. I guess it's just fortunate here that the stakes are low - cause I've seen people do the same patterns of behaviour to really make another person's life miserable (unrelated to board games - I used to work in a job where I saw a lot of this and what I would say there was you can't LEGISLATE to stop some people being jerks. Only I didn't use the word jerk). You've gotta decide if it's worth your time to get justice against your jerk or just leave it be. I figure it can't be that much fun to be constantly having to change VPNs, recreate new accounts, etc. Or maybe it is. I'd rather just play games.