...

[CaractacusPots]

Some people are just drawn to conspiracy theories. Really why would a board games website where no money is wagered and membership is free bother to rig games?

It was explained upthread.

Talking purely hypothetically. Any games site or any online gambling site has a business model that is founded on memberships and or money wagered on games. Maintaining a healthy membership is thus the foundational and most important aspect of the business. Here, no money is wagered but the business model is founded on Premum subscriptions. People are not going to pay for subscriptions if their experience is a constantly bad one as a result of losing most games they play because their skill level is low. Therefore it is in all such site's interests to have ways of "leveling the playing field" so that good players simply can not constantly dominate. I'm not saying this happens. Just saying that it makes perfect financial sense to do so.

[Jest Phulin]

Any games site or any online gambling site has a business model that is founded on memberships ...

This site has over 4.2 million users, from the login screen. It has less than 70 000 people who have played backgammon. (Playing one game of any game automatically joins you into the "<game> players" group.) What you have described is quite a bit of effort to attract less than 5% of the population.

Additionally, it assumes that a "good experience" is only achieved by winning. Many game players (myself included) enjoy playing regardless of our wins.
But even if this were true, rigging the game for inexperienced players will drive away members. Because the longer you are on the site, the more chance you have of the game being rigged against you.

Then, if this is something that BGA staff told all the volunteer developers (to rig games in favor of the player with less ELO), how should developers accomplish this in games with no randomness? Chess, Reversi, Quarto, Quoridor, Pylos, Hive, Connect 4, Battle Sheep, Go, Gomoku, Niagara, Kalah, Checkers.... (There are plenty more, I just got tired of listing them.)



Sigh. As a side note, I wonder why I see this same conversation of "the dice are rigged" in Backgammon, Yahtzee, and Can't Stop, but never in Stone Age, Perudo or Senet.

[CaractacusPots]

This site has over 4.2 million users, from the login screen. It has less than 70 000 people who have played backgammon. What you have described is quite a bit of effort to attract less than 5% of the population.

It's no effort at all. Just about all gaming sites have the same type of problems with randomness or game leveling. It's just par for the course imo.
I have yet to see a single gaming site that doesn't incorporate some level of "tweaking"

Additionally, it assumes that a "good experience" is only achieved by winning. Many game players (myself included) enjoy playing regardless of our wins.

Don't get me wrong. I too enjoy playing games whether I win or lose, but the enjoyment only exists when I win or lose genuinely and not because it's just my turn to lose in order to maintain a balance. I don't ever put money into slot machines because I know that they are programmed to take money off me. Nothing I can do as a player will change that. Therefore there is for me, absolutely no enjoyment in playing slot machines.
Same with online games that are not purely random and left to the genuine skill of players.

.

But even if this were true, rigging the game for inexperienced players will drive away members. Because the longer you are on the site, the more chance you have of the game being rigged against you.

I agree and yes it does drive people away. There are a lot of sites and phone/tablet apps that I just don't play because the games are rigged in one way or another. I find the exercise totally pointless. Yet whilst they lose customers like myself, there must be 50 more naive people out there who will play the games and that is the target audience. After all there do exist millions of fools who will happily sit and play slot machines and watch reels spin truly believing that they may just win. They don't understand odds, or how machines and systems are coded. They are the best audience a gaming site can hope for. Therefore I feel sure they will happily trade a player like myself for lots of other players who are let's just say more easily pacified.

Then, if this is something that BGA staff told all the volunteer developers (to rig games in favor of the player with less ELO), how should developers accomplish this in games with no randomness? Chess, Reversi, Quarto

No need to for games that are pure skill. However what you COULD do is doctor the view of which opponents are available to play such that you mostly give a player someone with similar skill. Just one way you could affect outcomes.

Sigh. As a side note, I wonder why I see this same conversation of "the dice are rigged" in Backgammon, Yahtzee, and Can't Stop, but never in Stone Age, Perudo or Senet.

Only know Perudo of those games. It being a game of bluff it largely doesn't matter what you are dealt as the skill comes from assessing what everyone else might hold and then making bids that lean towards their holding.

In the end this whole thing is no big deal. It is what it is and it's prevalent on most gaming sites imo.

[Giordano Bruno 1974]

Some people are just drawn to conspiracy theories. Really why would a board games website where no money is wagered and membership is free bother to rig games?

It was explained upthread.

Talking purely hypothetically. Any games site or any online gambling site has a business model that is founded on memberships and or money wagered on games. Maintaining a healthy membership is thus the foundational and most important aspect of the business. Here, no money is wagered but the business model is founded on Premum subscriptions. People are not going to pay for subscriptions if their experience is a constantly bad one as a result of losing most games they play because their skill level is low. Therefore it is in all such site's interests to have ways of "leveling the playing field" so that good players simply can not constantly dominate. I'm not saying this happens. Just saying that it makes perfect financial sense to do so.

Yes, but you think all games sites are rigged. The common denominator between all those sites is you.

I really don't think the business model here is based on premium subscriptions. Not that many people have them.

[N_Faker]

People are not going to pay for subscriptions if their experience is a constantly bad one as a result of losing most games they play because their skill level is low. Therefore it is in all such site's interests to have ways of "leveling the playing field" so that good players simply can not constantly dominate. I'm not saying this happens. Just saying that it makes perfect financial sense to do so.

Isn't the playing field already leveled by luck being a very significant factor?

[CaractacusPots]

I really don't think the business model here is based on premium subscriptions. Not that many people have them.

Well there are no adverts so income isn't being generated that way. If premium subs are not the core model then why do I get constantly bombarded with a 30 sec countdown advert encouraging me to go premium before a huge percentage of the games which just annoys everyone and keeps them waiting?

[Jest Phulin]

I really don't think the business model here is based on premium subscriptions. Not that many people have them.

Well there are no adverts so income isn't being generated that way. If premium subs are not the core model then why do I get constantly bombarded with a 30 sec countdown advert encouraging me to go premium before a huge percentage of the games which just annoys everyone and keeps them waiting?

Oh, so you're saying there's an obvious mechanism in place to encourage going premium? Then why would they try to resort to a dice manipulation method?

[CaractacusPots]

Oh, so you're saying there's an obvious mechanism in place to encourage going premium? Then why would they try to resort to a dice manipulation method?

Just being hypothetical. As posted upthread. Leveling the playing field to keep strong players at bay keeps more people at the tables simple as.
More people at the tables = more chance that people will go premium. Seems pretty straightforward to me. There are always more poor/bad players than strong ones so from a business perspective better to lose a few strong players (who get sick of the system keeping them back) in order to keep lots of poorer players.

[CaractacusPots]

Sigh. And another game gets totally turned around because of the system.

I make my points early, get a blot knocked off. Opponent only has 6 pt covered. Sure enough system gives me 6-6. A 1 in 36 disaster roll.
Opp then makes her 1pt.
System now gives me 6-1. a 3 in 36 (1 in 12) disaster roll.

Opponent has 2 pieces trapped behind my wall and is playing absolutely terribly. Has no idea of the real strategy of the game and like most beginners just stacks pieces on existing points so as never to leave a blot. I am absolutely pawning the game. Then in just 3 more dice rolls the system turns it all around. I get the expected throw that forces me to move my wall forward 5-5 thereby allowing her pieces to escape with 6s.
System then gives her 6-6 and out she pops like a whippet out of a race trap.

I have a remaining piece coming around the board which gets knocked off. She only has 3 pts blocked in the home quad. Sure enough I can't get back on. Sure enough the 2nd attempt I can't get back on. Sure enough the third attempt I can't get back on.

Really is there any point? With real dice I would be pawning players like this 8-9 times out of 10. The miracle throws are just so common it's kinda embarrassing. Why do I put myself through this nonsense when I know that there does not exist one single BG site with totally uncontrolled outcomes???

I must have masochistic tendencies I guess.

[Giordano Bruno 1974]

Or alternatively backgammon is a game with a large element of luck.

If you want to pwn newbies everytime I suggest chess.