B Side vs. A Side

[I Love You More Than]

I find it very interesting that the top arena scores are so high in comparison to previous seasons. The top 3 scores are out of this world but also the top 20 is much higher.

Is the higher overall arena score due to the top players being absolute maniacs or can it be explained by side B having a more consistent win rate/ less luck? Are there any other interesting factors causing this?

How would you explain it?

(Posting here because I love this thread)

[dschingis27]

I wouldn't interpret too much into it. There's probably a high variance in what final scores the absolute top players achieve, depends on how much they grind, which opponents they happen to match, and how lucky they get in their streaks.

For me, B Side is never ever less lucky than A Side. My personal explanation is that there are more cards involved on B side, particularly more cards when the boards are already filled. The cards are the main source of randomness in Harmonies and more unknown cards drawn means more randomness. However, I am also much less experienced on B side than on A side, so I am a little biased here and maybe not the best reference. Also, I am talking the game without nature spirits.

(We should note that the previous Arena season had nature spirit cards enabled. I think that explains a lot the difference of the current season's top 20 scores vs. previous season.)

Now, why are some players so far ahead in Arena? I think they are indeed absolute maniacs but in a specific way. They play almost all their games in real-time, sometimes with the fastest time limit. I suppose the player pool playing real-time is weaker overall than the player pool playing turn-based (and players are weaker in real-time), hence you can get further ahead of the pack in Arena score if you can maintain your A game. I could never ever maintain the win rate of the top Arena players in real time games, I need my time to analyse and make up my mind. But I think that's the special ability that these guys have, not only being Harmonies maniacs but also being Harmonies real-time maniacs.

[LeLion92]

I agree with this interpretation.
- Higher arena scores for the top players come from a lower luck factor in the arena format.
- The main aspect decreasing the luck factor in the recent change (season 23 to season 24) is not the switch to Side B but the removal of Nature Spirits.

[pahakuukkeli]

Another reason for the higher top ratings in Arena this season could be as simple as people, in general, having less experience with side B. Top players can adapt better and faster, resulting in bigger edge than in more familiar side A format. Back in the day when Harmonies was newer game in BGA, I felt that side B tournaments had lower quality of play, and as majority of tournaments and Arena Seasons have been on side A, I don't see why this would have changed.

[tbhp]

Yes, I think it may play a role that the players at the top are more adaptable or may already have experience with the map. But I don't think those scores should be disregarded as evidence towards side B being less luck based. It's just not conclusive.

It's quite clear the effect that luck has on elo, when I play a lot of spiritless games I can reach master rank but that probably wouldn't be possible with only spirit games, too many games lost because of the imbalance and asymmetry.

Playing real time certainly helps for reaching the top in arena, because you can grind much faster, and with the way the system works, it's advantageous to play a ton of games to climb over time and get on good streaks.

With that said, Frogodo, Ellektra and andyxdz all won their arena seasons playing largely turn based, if I'm not mistaken. While the average level of play may be higher, if you take the time to think of your moves you should still win the large majority of your games. The difference is that you may only have a window of maybe 100 games to do that (depending on how much you play), whereas those who play real time can put out a lot more games.

I think that to win arena you have to be really invested in it. That's why I still haven't taken a real shot at it. My first two seasons I played only like 30 turn based games and was content reaching the top 20. To make it to the top, you'd probably need at least 100 games while maintaining a 90%+ win ratio. It's doable, but the season being only 90 days, you need to be really dedicated to it, remind yourself every day that you need to get a new game going.

[LeLion92]

Side discussion: do you think a future extension will bring a "Face C" board?
If yes, what could be a fun one?

Personnally I imagine a 2-players board where a boundary is shared by each player's territory, so you can rely on your opponent's tiles to complete the patterns of your own animals near this boundary. That would be a way to bring some extra interactivity.
For instance: Player 1 puts two yellow tokens to complete a crop in their side along the shared boundary, and then Player 2 builds a tall tree next to them in their own side to complete their wolf's pattern with less effort than normal

[tbhp]

That's an interesting idea. They could even create a common border that both players can place tiles and animals on. So you'd be able to "claim" a spot by putting an animal there before your opponent can.

The problem I see is that players would probably avoid playing near the border, since that would introduce an element of uncertainty they probably don't want. It would become a game of who is going to risk it first.

[dschingis27]

Is the higher overall arena score due to the top players being absolute maniacs or can it be explained by side B having a more consistent win rate/ less luck? Are there any other interesting factors causing this?

How would you explain it?

I think there is also another psychological aspect that extends to all games on BGA but it is showcased by the current changes in Harmonies Arena top positions. Here is what I think:

The #1 position tends to be far ahead (at least compared to top5 / top10) because he/she is the only one incentivized to not play and instead just stick with their score. If you are close behind, you are incentivized to keep playing, increasing the risk of a big drawdown. Either you overtake, in which case the person you overtook is now in the same position you've been before, or you fall down in which case you are far away from the top again. I think players rarely stop playing when they are close behind the next higher up position. You stop either when you overtook, or when you fell down and call it a day - of course this is not always true but there is a strong tendency. This very effect increases the probability to have Arena scores in the top positions more "scattered out".

The scores in the ranking would be much closer if we were looking at personal season highscores. It's still outrageous how high the Arena scores of the very top players can get (I mean that in a positive way, you have to be terribly good to get into the pool for the top positions). But the realized big gaps in Arena scores are most likely not reflective of similar big skill gaps but rather reflective of incentives in the system.