Points to quitter's (or disconnectee's) opponents

[qzhdad]

Sorry if this is a rehash, I didn't see it in the front page of discussion.

Yesterday, I inadvertently frustrated an opponent (possibly two) when I became disconnected from a game and couldn't get back in.
In at least one case, I think the frustration was more because he lost the ELO points.

Why don't the players that remain in the game get ELO points when someone leaves (on purpose or because of disconnection.)

I play at lunch at work (and occasionally on a break). Sometimes (twice in last few months) something comes up because breaks are not formally regulated and I have to leave. Other times our Internet connection is lost. Usually, it is restored in time, but not always. And, yesterday at home, my computer locked up and I couldn't get back to a Haggis game (always seems to be Haggis).

In the case where I must quit the game or where I lose connection, why aren't ELO points awarded to my opponent. I am here to have fun and play competitively. The ELO is interesting, but I don't avoid games because of it. However, some people seem to take it very seriously, so for their sakes, why aren't points awarded for players remaining in a game.

And, apologies and sincere thanks for patience to all who have been delayed while I reconnected and/or lost ELO points.

[zfm]

This will increase the possibility of cheating.

Let's say I play with myself (using two computers maybe), where one of them just a dummy user.

The game starts, and the dummy user quits the game, do it like 10 times, you will get, maybe, more than 150 points.

[qzhdad]

If people care enough about ELO to cheat, won't they take the extra couple minutes per game to play them out anyway?

Maybe only award points in a ratio with the percent of the game that is completed when someone drops?

[kreikkaturkulainen]

This happened to me too, I thought I was winning too! I got reported, found not guilty.

In general I think ELO ratings and rankings poison the atmosphere with competitiveness and nastiness. I wish it was otherwise. Perhaps a non-ranking option or separate room, like at AsoBrain?

[sourisdudesert]

zfm explains exactly why there is no points to quitter's.

We want that the ELO score reflect the real level of each player. This is the reason you can only win ELO points when the game has come to a normal end.

[redneck84]

Hi, I'm quite newcomer and was playing GOSU in a Duel with an american player few minutes ago. I understand what you want to avoid (double accounts for boosting one's ranking) but this game configuration gives me the impression that this can create a problem in the other sense too. I mean, my opponent had had no connexion problem till then but he was disconnected just at a very moment when it became obvious that he was about to lose the game. Maybe it's a coincidence but I could not help thinking that he might have left on purpose.

This asks the question, for someone that would not be fair player (I actually don't care much about ranking but the idea that someone could cheat in such a system bothers me though, by principle): what would be the interest for such a player to play till the end in a game he's gonna lose?

[BennyD]

I agree with the alternate problem that redneck stated. I have been involved in at least two games in which a clearly losing opponent quit in the middle of the game. These were not connection problems, as the players began or joined new games after the fact and never attempted to contact me regarding their inexplicable disappearances. It's just as easy to game the system in this way, since players who are overly-concerned with their ELO scores can quit at any point at which they believe they will lose a game, and just suffer reputation points.

If points were still awarded for the opponents of quitters/disconnectors, the downside of setting up dummy accounts would not be much worse than a player who joins matches against clearly inferior opponents. Either way, the outcome is fairly certain, and the ELO gains are minimal. At least this way, they're not directly affecting any other players' ratings.

[zfm]

And that's what reputation is for... Quitting person will get -20 for his/her reputation. Don't just agree to play with everyone...

[redneck84]

Ok but how can you recognize quitters?

For exemple: I actually did not intentionnally quit any game but in a few days I was disconnected several times (seems resolved as i changed navegador for firefox) and am regularly taking penalties because I'm too slow (know the rules of the games I play but still got to read some specificities about buildings (puerto rico) or cards (Gosu), in addition to interface discovery: as a result i now have got more than 100 points of bad reputation.

So, what you are recommending is to avoid playing with people like me just in case they would be quitters?
(I can't believe i'm the only one to be a bit slow, and for instance I took penalties in Gosu few minutes ago because I took the time to explain the game rules to a player who had not played yet)
I know you can set time limits before playing but maybe there is kind of a disproportion in penalties?

[Meowcate]

There is no perfect system. Every online board game (and nearly every online game) have to do with leavers. And so, you need a good internet connection to play. If you have many disconnections during a day, don't play for the moment. And about your reputation, don't forget it's about the last 60 days, it'll pass. But time is here because if leavers are a problem in online games, campers are another one, people who stay and don't play anymore when they cannot win, waiting to the other player leaves.

By the way, each player should know the rules (it's there for a reason), you don't have to loose all your time by explain it. If you want to do this, explain during HIS time, not yours.