Arena Season 2: let's go!

[Mercury79]

Disappointed and confused. I was rank 1000+ in elite for yahtzee and was demoted to gold league. But was top 50 for sushi go and top 100 for solo in elite, yet demoted to silver. Got to grind my way to the top again. But boring. Why the unbalanced demotions?

[frogstar_A]

Disappointed and confused. I was rank 1000+ in elite for yahtzee and was demoted to gold league. But was top 50 for sushi go and top 100 for solo in elite, yet demoted to silver. Got to grind my way to the top again. But boring. Why the unbalanced demotions?

For both Yahtzee and Sushi Go everyone in Elite was put down 3 leagues. That’s down to Gold for Yahtzee but down to Silver for Sushi Go, since that has no Diamond league.

I was Top 20 at both games and the same thing happened

[sprockitz]

I agree that the one size fits all approach really doesn't work. Games like 7 Wonders are very quick and a little lucky streak and you are up a level (lost cities and can't stop are even worse). Other games (like Terra Mystica) you need 20-40 hours of near perfect play to reach Elite, or 50-100 hours of pretty good play.

-K value should differ by length of games
-The 10 stars to advance a level should differ by length of the game
-The 3/3 4/2 5/1 system for gaining stars based on different levels should really be rethought as it isn't based on good math. If this 'simple math' has to stay, then you should really force people to play against their level as much as possible. (like force the +/- 1 level to 2nd priority and +/- 2 to 3rd and anything more to never so cross level games aren't started immediately as is the case now).

and not directly related, but please fix it so people aren't losing EAS points when someone else quits!!!!

[Otava]

-The 3/3 4/2 5/1 system for gaining stars based on different levels should really be rethought as it isn't based on good math.

I think that is one of the main issue especially games with platinum and diamond league. Later in the season to get up in the leagues as a lower league member becomes so much easier as more and more people reach the elite level.

I think this breaks the spirit of the game a bit when you can play a game where you don't have a risk of losing any medals. That happens when you are in a gold league or lower and you play against elite league players.

[sprockitz]

-The 3/3 4/2 5/1 system for gaining stars based on different levels should really be rethought as it isn't based on good math.

I think that is one of the main issue especially games with platinum and diamond league. Later in the season to get up in the leagues as a lower league member becomes so much easier as more and more people reach the elite level.

I think this breaks the spirit of the game a bit when you can play a game where you don't have a risk of losing any medals. That happens when you are in a gold league or lower and you play against elite league players.

it basically says the odds of beating someone at your level is 50%, that is fine. But 1 level up is 67%, 2 levels is 83% and 3+ levels is 100%. This math is obviously flawed, using arithmetic methods on something that is much closer to geometric makes no sense. In a geometric method say 1 level should equate to 64% win rate. (of course in theory if you play enough you only need to be over 50% win rate against your own level to eventually move up a level)

So if you keep the total gain at 6 you would use these percentages (2nd column) to determine the gain/loss (3rd column) for a winner's level relative to the loser's level (1st column).

-4 9.1 5.5
-3 15.1 5.1
-2 24.0 4.6
-1 36.0 3.8
0 50.0 3.0
1 64.0 2.2
2 76.0 1.4
3 84.9 0.9
4 90.9 0.5

[dschingis27]

Interesting numbers. Another solution with simple numbers is to keep the current system but allow at most 4 Arena points gained or lost and do not allow matches with one player not being able to gain any points. Not ideal but better than now.
https://boardgamearena.com/bug?id=15701

[admitted]

I share the same sentiment of many posted above saying arena is not selective enough.

I had some quite quality games a month into Season 1 at Stone Age but my enjoyment quickly faded as 100 elo players managed their way into the elite league. As an 800 elo player with 2000 arena elo myself, I was reluctant to play an easy game against a 100 elo/1300 arena elo player. That's why I only searched arena if there were quality players online, but I couldn't seem to avoid low elo players that I had to red thumb some to avoid them.

However, I don't think x+ arena elo filter is realistic arena leaderboard varies a lot depending on the game. I recommend having a top x% arena elo filter.

[Foppeke]

A top x% arena filter would do the same trick.
I hope the admins pick up on this topic.

If any of the admins are reading this: do we need to start a specific topic to have more selective filters in arena(just 'elite' is not enough for popular games) or is this enough to take the question in consideration?
Or tell us why this will not be taken in consideration....

[Pistolero]

I'm pretty sure they don't give a damn about what top players are saying.

They keep repeating : "Arena is awesome. Statistics say we see more tables for the Arena than for regular games". Probably they saw more new Premium accounts since the Arena was created, and they are just happy with that. With thousands of players here, they swear only by their statistics and they don't care about what top players are saying. We are just a small drop in the ocean of all players.

The Arena is fun until there are ~20 Elite players. Then the whole systems crashes down and becomes a new lame ELO implementation where you are forced to play with bad players.

BGA is a great website to PLAY games. But BGA should not try to determine the "best" players in some games, as it completely lacks the understanding of what competition should be.

[firexed]

Would it be better to allow players to be demoted to lower leagues - solves the problem of elite leagues becoming overinflated with weak players at the end of the season, many of whom get there by a lucky streak ?