Blocking strong opponents... Fair?

[Meeplelowda]

If a player's reason for blocking is DEFEAT, even if it might look juvenile... That decision needs respect. You are not to decide that is legitimate or not, because maybe for him/her, it is; maybe he/she is superstitious, and thinks he/she will always lose to the same player to which (s)he lost once, or who knows...

I disagree. People are deserving of respect. Not all of their decisions are. I can criticize a decision or the motivation for a decision without disrespecting the person. In this case, hiding from strong competition undermines the integrity of Arena. I do not support decisions that undermine the integrity of arena.

You are not to decide that I must respect a decision I believe is harmful.

[Ze Monstah]

If a player's reason for blocking is DEFEAT, even if it might look juvenile... That decision needs respect. You are not to decide that is legitimate or not, because maybe for him/her, it is; maybe he/she is superstitious, and thinks he/she will always lose to the same player to which (s)he lost once, or who knows...

I disagree. People are deserving of respect. Not all of their decisions are. I can criticize a decision or the motivation for a decision without disrespecting the person. In this case, hiding from strong competition undermines the integrity of Arena. I do not support decisions that undermine the integrity of arena.

You are not to decide that I must respect a decision I believe is harmful.

OK... if i gave you the impression that i want to fight or whatever, I would like to rectify that or to say sorry if i upset you, because I sense you are a bit aggressive and I think you should chill a tad.
I have no intention to get into a conflict, or into too many arguments with you, at this moment.

In this particular second... the site RULES say that any player can give RED THUMBS (after Arena or non-Arena games), for any reason.
I didn't say that RT-ing players who defeat you in Arena is Ethical, but it is not disrespecting any of the rules of the site...

And I also said that I agree with (and voted for) the INCOGNITO idea of Arena, and also, the Red Thumb Ignorance in arena games.

But with the current BGA rules and system, if a player RTs... whoever, in whatever game (Arena or not)... What is the purpose to criticise that, if the site allows it? :s
And you are not in the person's head to know EXACTLY why he or she red-thumbed - maybe (s)he is superstitious, maybe the person said something, maybe mental issues, maybe wanting to avoid ARENA plays with that person again, who knows... If it was a case of kingmaking, that would be easier to counter; but RTs are... subjective.

We (for instance) have ourselves red thumbed because of forum discussions, and we never ever played any game together...
So I think you disrespecting someone else's red thumb... :s even if it is after an Arena game... seems a bit... I don't know, weird, given the fact you Red Thumb a player on Forums, who disagrees with you.

Same situation with the people with multiple accounts in top 10 of a game... Immoral (even more immoral than RTing people after games in Arena, IMO), but... not against the rules.
If a person does like the Original Poster said, to immorally RT strong players after Arena games... that person will soon have a hard time finding Arena Players (considering (s)he Red Thumbs not only 1 Arena player) - this is of course, if the RTs are not with the purpose of joining Arena tables with a friend who could help him/her gain Points (like... 200 elite players, 2 friends who RT all the other 198 in order to play only them 2 - I think this is closer to cheating).

Again, I am pro Incognito and Red Thumb Ignorance (RT Ignorance only if Incognito is available as well !) in Arena Games, but I also respect someone's Red Thumb, because it is a person's right, accepted by the current Rule System...

*the Incognito with the downside already mentioned - that some people are accustomed to other players from previous plays, and might play a certain way if they knew they are playing with that particular player.

[AndyChance]

My concern is that players are using RTs to their advantage. At the beginning of a season they'll play a lot of games to establish a high rank. They then block all strong opponents to defend their rank.

If they then only play "weak" players they're unlikely to lose AND their stronger opponents can't get big point wins because the stronger players have blocked them.

This is use of RTs in a way that wasn't intended when they were first added to BGA.

The ultimate result could be that all ranked players adopt this strategy so that they're not disadvantaged, leading to strong players only playing against low ranked, new and weaker players. While that would cement their positions in the rankings, it really defeats the purpose of Arena.

Plus... it just sucks, lol! I'm pleased to say the majority of high ranked players don't use this strategy and I'm very impressed by the quality of games available. It would sadden me to see that eroded by the actions of those that don't compete in the spirit of the game. It's what happens on the board that counts.

[nmego]

I hear there's a dominant strategy in connect4 where p1 always wins, so a good way to rank up would be to private redthumb (unlimited) everyone you encounter who knows that strategy. So, I think that's the reasoning behind that, I think that's quite clever. And even if you allow players to play against red-thumbed opponents in arena, that still doesn't fix the issue of Connect4 being a 50/50 game when both players know the dominant strategy.

[AndyChance]

Connect 6 is a very different game to Connect 4. There's definitely no certain way to win. It's unfortunate that the 2 games share a name!

Maybe try it sometime. You might be surprised by the depth and visualisation skills required to win. I find chess easier

Either way, I'd maintain that your ranking should reflect what you do in the game. Not how devious you are in manipulating the platform.

[Ze Monstah]

Connect 6 is a very different game to Connect 4. There's definitely no certain way to win. It's unfortunate that the 2 games share a name!

Maybe try it sometime. You might be surprised by the depth and visualisation skills required to win. I find chess easier

Either way, I'd maintain that your ranking should reflect what you do in the game. Not how devious you are in manipulating the platform.

I just thought of something... If Red Thumbing Overruling (Ignorance) and Incognito Mode will be added in Arena, if for instance 2 players hate each other... for reasons that have nothing to do with any competition... and have themselves reciprocally RTed, and see they just played an Arena Game, this will surely backfire on BGA...

I think it is a sensitive issue, and no one can do anything, without upsetting the other part. Like "damned if you do and damned if you don't".

I agree that many people might do some immoral stuff (like the many accounts, and the ones who do like you said - blocking others in Arena, for competitive reasons), but these 2 examples of immoral stuff are... not against BGA rules.

While obvious kingmaking (in any way), is against BGA rules; but cases of reported Kingmaking took ages for the BGA team to take care of and punish the culprits (that in the happiest situation - all the pieces of proof, the moves, etc.), so imagine that if it is so hard to punish kingmaking... imagine how difficult will be to take care of a ruling "soft spot", which players might take advantage of.

And I think that whichever way the rules might go (on any site), there will always be people who will try to seek "soft spots" in the ruling system, to gain ELO or whatever, easier.

[Chocbach]

I'm playing a game in arena mode, and there are very few players. I keep getting matched with a player who is much better than me, so I can never progress, through playing people closer to my skill level. Plus, it's no fun to lose EVERY time! I'm considering blocking that player, just so I can have a chance to progress. Once I get better, I'll be playing more skilled players, because then I'll be at their level. I just don't get why I get matched with that person over and over again, instead of players at my level.

[NunuKar]

Outside of Arena:

While I believe blocking strong opponents is an extreme case of being a sore loser, I don't think there should be any limit on personal red thumb.
The goal of red thumbs is to make the platform safer and more pleasant for everyone, and you should not judge when someone says "I don't have fun when I play with them, so I don't want to play with them any more". Additionally, this systems reduces the number of "cancel at launch" (because if this person don't want to play with you, they can just reject any game with you, which will be even more annoying for you as you would lose a lot of time).

Inside of Arena:

I believe red thumbs should be ignored, and you should be matched to whoever the Arena algorithm think is the fairest, disregarding whether of not you end up playing against the person you hate the most. This is a competitive mode, as long as your opponent stay within the rules (and penalties need to be harsh if they don't), you should have not right to pick and choose who to play against.
[I also believe Arena should be fully anonymous, and without any game chat or communication method (unless the game really needs it to function), but that's another debate.]

You are missing the fact that often people with 0 or 1 bronze are matched against people with multiple gold or whatever, simply because no one else is available. Because of this, the bronze person will NEVER have a chance to get ahead, because they are forced to play against a very strong player from the outset. This has happened to me so many times I can never break out of bronze. I'm just basically helping silver and gold people advance. It's not fun. The algorithm clearly does not work! If it can't put me against another similarly ranked opponent, I should have the option to opt out. Currently, the only way to do that is with a RT, which I really don't want to do.

[LaChouetteOrtho]

You are missing the fact that often people with 0 or 1 bronze are matched against people with multiple gold or whatever, simply because no one else is available. Because of this, the bronze person will NEVER have a chance to get ahead, because they are forced to play against a very strong player from the outset. This has happened to me so many times I can never break out of bronze. I'm just basically helping silver and gold people advance. It's not fun. The algorithm clearly does not work! If it can't put me against another similarly ranked opponent, I should have the option to opt out. Currently, the only way to do that is with a RT, which I really don't want to do.

It's true that quite often, the lack of players will lead you to play against people with way higher ranks. However, if you're consistently losing against silver and gold people, you deserve your spot in bronze. If the algorithm was able to put you with other bronze-ranked people, maybe you'd win and get to silver. But then what happens? You go against the same silver people you're complaining about right now and get sent right back to bronze. If you were to tell me that the algorithm puts you against platinum or elite people, then sure, maybe you might be deserving of a spot between bronze and platinum. But if you're losing against silver, bronze is where you belong.

And as far as the option to opt out goes, what use would that be? It would just prevent most people from playing. If every single time you try to play you get matched against someone with a higher rank, would you always choose to opt out? Would people still play Arena if half the time their opponent chose to opt-out?

[Calmon70]

Inside of Arena:

I believe red thumbs should be ignored, and you should be matched to whoever the Arena algorithm think is the fairest, disregarding whether of not you end up playing against the person you hate the most. This is a competitive mode, as long as your opponent stay within the rules (and penalties need to be harsh if they don't), you should have not right to pick and choose who to play against.
[I also believe Arena should be fully anonymous, and without any game chat or communication method (unless the game really needs it to function), but that's another debate.]

Wait what, you can block people in Arena? That needs fixed asap otherwise you can basically manipulate super easy. A lot of games are basically 100% win when you exclude the other top players as a top player.