FAQ: new achievements & XP system

[cosmosis]

I think that the purpose of putting the 300+ ELO minimum on the Top ELO Achievements was to make it so that the awards would not go to all of the players who played a game just after it was created, but it does nothing to prevent the achievements from going to players who got lucky in their first 10 or so games without really getting good at the game. Because your K Factor is so large before you have played 20 games, it is possible to get the Top ELO achievements very early on simply by getting a lucky winning streak in your first games. Since in your first 20 games your ELO can change by over 50 points in a single game, this makes it so the Top ELO achievements can go to new players who haven't really earned them, especially in games with a larger element of luck. For example, I have played games of For Sale with people who have less than 20 games played, yet still had gotten the Top 10 ELO achievement by getting lucky in their first few games, and at the point I played them had lost rating points down to a rating of less than 200 when they have about 10 or 15 games played because their rating was changing by over 50 points a game. I would suggest making a minimum games played requirement for the Top ELO achievements to prevent awards going to new players who just got lucky, rather than from skill at the game. If a new player was good at the game, then they would still be in the top section of players after the minimum games had been achieved. It wouldn't have to be a very large number, just 20 games because that is when the K Factor is down to 20, where it will stay. This way the Top ELO achievements won't go to new players just because of the massive ELO fluctuations early on. Thus, I suggest adding a minimum games played requirement of at least 20 games for all of the Top ELO achievements. You could also consider not ranking players at all until they have played at least 20 games, because that early on the ranking is rather meaningless due to the massive ELO fluctuations.

I think a better proposal might be that when a game comes out, you wait a certain period of time (like 2 weeks?) before ranking anyone. After that, and from then on, you rank the top 20. That makes it so that people don't rush to become the first to 300, or to play 20 games. It seems like there's less chance of gaming the system that way, and it gives a nice period of time where leaders can be established.

[ElerCant]

Thank you for my Nobel prize. Does no one really got such yet?

Pity there's no similar one for the victories though... Of course, there are at least 3 games which don't allow a person to win, but still...

[T72on1]

Is there a page where I can see what achievements are available?

We will introduce soon a way to see what are the next achievements you can get.

However, some achievements won't be visible until you get them

Any idea when we will get to see this?

[TheDiamondRuff]

I've met conditions for several games but didn't get awarded the VP badge. I'm currently 18th overall in Battleships but wasn't awarded the Top 20 VP badge after my victory that landed me there. The same issue previously happened with Veggie Garden when a win put me in the Top 20. As far as I can tell those are the only errors so far. Why is this happening and can it be fixed?

[cosmosis]

I've met conditions for several games but didn't get awarded the VP badge. I'm currently 18th overall in Battleships but wasn't awarded the Top 20 VP badge after my victory that landed me there. The same issue previously happened with Veggie Garden when a win put me in the Top 20. As far as I can tell those are the only errors so far. Why is this happening and can it be fixed?

It's another example of the issues mentioned earlier in this thread. Currently, to get those awards you have to also pass 300 ELO. There are a decent number of games where you can be in the top 20 without >300 ELO though, so in that case you currently get no awards.

There hasn't been any official response to it in this thread though besides a post mentioning the 300 ELO limit, so not sure if this is the best way to get a response.

[TheDiamondRuff]

I've met conditions for several games but didn't get awarded the VP badge. I'm currently 18th overall in Battleships but wasn't awarded the Top 20 VP badge after my victory that landed me there. The same issue previously happened with Veggie Garden when a win put me in the Top 20. As far as I can tell those are the only errors so far. Why is this happening and can it be fixed?

It's another example of the issues mentioned earlier in this thread. Currently, to get those awards you have to also pass 300 ELO. There are a decent number of games where you can be in the top 20 without >300 ELO though, so in that case you currently get no awards.

There hasn't been any official response to it in this thread though besides a post mentioning the 300 ELO limit, so not sure if this is the best way to get a response.

cosmosis thank you for that info. Getting to 300 with the current ELO system is virtually impossible for most games. I never get a response for any of my inquiries. Like why was ELO capped at 8700 for every game? I was on a years long mission to become the #1 ranked player in Thermopyles and then they capped everyone at 8700 which was infuriating - that happened shortly after I caught another "top" player cheating at the game. It doesn't even show Top Player VP achievements for that game either. I feel like years of effort were thrown away with literally no explanation. Then they deleted all records of Injawara when I was the topped ranked player for that as well. No mention of the game being removed.

[TorbenNL]

Is there a way to turn off the achievement notifications?
I am here to enjoy a game, I don't care about all the pop-ups that tell me that I won a game for the ... time.
Call me old fashioned, but I don't like that all the computer games and websites seem to move towards an achievement-focussed atmosphere.
I'd like to be able to look up statistics, I'd like to see ELO-ratings (or whatever you call them), but that's about it.

[CaKtus]

I fully agree with the fact that achievements have to be kept despite you lose points.

But I think you should also clean up the achievement wall. Major achievements are lost among minor ones. It makes it difficult to see at a glance the value of players (also but that's a bug, the Elo ranking is not always displayed beside the name)

Indeed you end up looking like these old russian generals who have not enough room on their chest to pin onto all the medals they won.

Who cares that you have a +100 Elo, and a +200 Elo if you have achieved a +300 Elo ?
Same for number of games played, number of victories…

Also I think some achievements are missing : +400 Elo, Top 100, Top 50... for exemple

[infacc00]

Maybe it has been already raised. I have played some games to Tallyman GT on solo mode and when I concede the game (because I am trying to beat the best times and made a big mistake or was unlucky) it counts as a victory. I think it should not be the case.

[Lenissart]

Any news ?