BETA: Arena mode (Season 0 - BETA)

[Raining Tacos]

thanks for changing arena back!! 10 minute start times was brutal, even for a day...

[Helger]

Почему в калахе только 4-ка? Почему некоторые игроки потеряли рейтинг без игры?

[Rico Cordova]

I'm happy to hear there will be a clear delineation between competitive and casual play. I would LOVE to see this taken a step further and remove ELO altogether. I don't want to know about it and I don't care to play with players who care about that. I have absolutely no interest in playing competitively or with people who care about such things.

Would it be possible to have a "care bear option" that pools people who are SUUUUUPPPEEERRR not into ELO crap just so we can have a more casual experience? Or, as an alternative, have a profile option that removes all reference of ELO from my experience. I don't want to know what my ELO is, I don't want to know about other player's ELO, how much I gained/lost, nothing. Not only am I not interested in such things, it decreases my enjoyment of the BGA experience having that information available. Don't care, don't care, don't care, don't care.

[Polegge]

What happens at the end of the season?

For each game, the best players will receive the BGA world champion trophies for the season depending on their final rankings.

May I ask how many players will receive a trophy for each game?
The best three players for game? The best 10 players? The best 20 players?

Will these trophies increase prestige on BGA?

Thank you

[Veikko]

I'm happy to hear there will be a clear delineation between competitive and casual play. I would LOVE to see this taken a step further and remove ELO altogether. I don't want to know about it and I don't care to play with players who care about that. I have absolutely no interest in playing competitively or with people who care about such things.

Would it be possible to have a "care bear option" that pools people who are SUUUUUPPPEEERRR not into ELO crap just so we can have a more casual experience? Or, as an alternative, have a profile option that removes all reference of ELO from my experience. I don't want to know what my ELO is, I don't want to know about other player's ELO, how much I gained/lost, nothing. Not only am I not interested in such things, it decreases my enjoyment of the BGA experience having that information available. Don't care, don't care, don't care, don't care.

You can already play without ELO in training mode.

[Daavids]

I'm happy to hear there will be a clear delineation between competitive and casual play. I would LOVE to see this taken a step further and remove ELO altogether. I don't want to know about it and I don't care to play with players who care about that. I have absolutely no interest in playing competitively or with people who care about such things.

Would it be possible to have a "care bear option" that pools people who are SUUUUUPPPEEERRR not into ELO crap just so we can have a more casual experience? Or, as an alternative, have a profile option that removes all reference of ELO from my experience. I don't want to know what my ELO is, I don't want to know about other player's ELO, how much I gained/lost, nothing. Not only am I not interested in such things, it decreases my enjoyment of the BGA experience having that information available. Don't care, don't care, don't care, don't care.

If you truly don't care, you would not post this. Just play!

[ST13]

I ask the Arena organizers to carefully read my analysis. We, like you, want the site to become even better.
He was so gorgeous!
But you decided to combine the incompatible. Among us there are players who like to play fast games. You cannot force them to play turn-based games because of their temperament or employment at work. Turn-based players are not inferior to them in skill and in-depth analysis of the game. But they are not able to quickly calculate complex combinations. Compare them with the cavalryman and tanker of the First World War. The first participant is a dashing cavalryman. He rode a horse. He cut down the other members of the saber. And quickly left pleased with himself. The second participant is a soldier. Half a day rode to the front in a tank at the speed of an infantryman. But he arrived and removed everyone in his path. A soldier cannot ride a horse. A cavalryman cannot be placed in a tank with a horse.

Nevertheless, I welcome your decision to make the site even brighter and sharpen the struggle in games.

Limiting games was a mistake. Turn-based players can compete with fast players, playing simultaneously in a large number of games. Thank you for returning to the old gaming application system.
Now about the main thing.
The elite league scale is too cruel and ineffective.

Any participant, sitting down at the game, always sets a goal. Different players have it differently. But every player wants to achieve a positive result. A positive result inspires him, gives strength for new games. Any single player game has a progressive score scale. An example of this is Thermopylae's game. The rating scale there is real for a strong player, but not for a master. But the masters did not stop there, but continued to play, raising their rating to 12,000 points. The stimulus for them was a progressive scale of points and the struggle between themselves. The game itself is also respectful.

But back to the Arena. Scoring is not on a progressive scale in the elite league, but regressive. What annoys the players and pushes them from continuing to participate in the Arena.
A striking example is my game in Takenoko. I am a turn-based player. I have participated in almost all tournaments for this game for more than a year. In every third tournament I was in the top three. My rating there ranged from 500 to 630 points. There, the accrual of points was justified. So the players are within reasonable limits of each other. And the incentive is different there. The cup does not depend on the player rating. Now about me. I play in the Arena no worse than in tournaments. But not a step forward. The rating in the Arena is only falling. And not only for me, but also for other participants in the championship.

Say that the champion must win. But take any Takenoko tournament. The winner suffers from 2 to 5 defeats from 20 games. Other strong players are bigger. The reason is the unpredictability of the game, dependence on luck and a large number of strong players. But in tournaments, equal rivals, at least in equal position. Here you can stumble upon a distribution of 1: 5 points with an equal opponent. The reason your opponent entered the game later. But he did not become weaker.
Result. Less stubborn players left the company to fight for the World Cup. And some players, having reached a certain height for themselves, stopped. Take a wait and see attitude. It’s easier to stay in a high place. That is, with what you started to fight, you came to that.

I think there is only one way out. Make the grading scale progressive. A participant who has played 50 games in the elite league must have an advantage in points over an equal opponent who has played 10 games. And now just the opposite. A progressive scale will make players play more, and not look at others as they swing on a swing on the scale. Sometimes in front, but more often behind him.
At the end of the season all points will be deducted. So for you there will be no difficulties with a lot of points for game champions.
My suggestion is pretty reasonable. Please listen to him.

Now specific offers for games.
1) volcanic eruption. In this game, you can determine the best only by playing 2 players. Each game is like a hockey game. On thin ice. If you are not lucky, the master loses to the average player by 35 percent.
Three or more players can only play in a friendly company. Two, if combined against a strong opponent, will win 90 of the 100 cases. It is not possible to hold a championship for three or more players. Therefore, experienced players ignored participation in the Arena in this game.
2) Signoria. A game for four players is the best option to determine the strongest. This gives two orders of magnitude more opportunities when playing than a game for two players. But the participants who submitted their applications for the game must be hidden from each other before the start of the game. Example. I am on the list first. The second participant submits an application, sees my name and, without waiting for two more participants, withdraws his participation. Result. Only three games per month. What kind of championship is this if the participants themselves choose their rivals?
I think this is true for other games with three or more players.
Thanks for listening to me. Thank you for what you are doing for us.

[Sushiyum]

If I'd known that the option for Toc was 2*2 I would never have played. When did this change? So annoying that the goalposts have been moved without any warning, or are we supposed to check the variants each time we want to start a game?

[pierpenguin]

It seems like the time limit on turns doesn't accurately count down? I have been waiting a long time for my opponents to take their turns..

[lolo91]

J'ai essayé mais je n'ai pas trouvé de joueurs je crois en sobek tour par tour. Comment suis je avertie si ça commence ? Comment être sûr qu'on est pas en temps réel je veux pas être éliminé parce que je n'ai pas joué