Board Game Arena

One of the other oddities in my opinion is that BGA itself has St Petersburg simple games set to say the recommended best player count is 4. Seems incongruous to then put the competitive mode at 2p if the game is best at 4p. (Which I do think the game is best at 4p)

Still hoping we could see a change for season 4 yet.

I agree ; OP, you should add a poll to this topic, maybe something like :

2 players, no info
3 players, no info
4 players, no info
2 players, open info
3 players, open info
4 players, open info

We usually go with the recommended players number, unless the game doesn't have enough players to get arena matches quickly enough (which is not the case here). So this was probably a mistake. Changed to 4 players / no info for this season.

Awesome, glad to see this change.

However, I just realized that since the game just finally got officially released and had an arena mode in December, it meant the system has just carried over all the results from those games in to this current season, such that there are already many elite players that got their ranking from playing 2 player games.

It's not a huge issue, but it does seem a bit weird to have 1 month of games count at 2 player settings and now the rest of the season and competitors will be playing 4 player. I'm not sure there is an easy solution as switching to keeping this season as 2 players isn't ideal, but maybe does make sense, whereas switching to 4 player but keeping all the 2 player results also seems wrong....

Ah, yes... a bit weird indeed. But since conditions have been the same for everyone and changed at the same time for everyone, I suppose it's still ok.

Een wrote: ↑06 January 2021, 16:36 Ah, yes... a bit weird indeed. But since conditions have been the same for everyone and changed at the same time for everyone, I suppose it's still ok.

No, it’s totally not okay. You’ve completely shifted the goalposts mid-season, and the players who’ve only had defeat a single opponent at a time have a massive advantage in retaining their standing over those who now have to fend off three opponents at once to advance.

Switching to the inherently problematic format of 3+-player games is bad enough, but doing so mid-season?! And you weren’t even aware of this until someone pointed it out after the fact?

Just more fodder for the list of decisions that demonstrate that BGA has no clue how to set up and manage a competitive format, I guess.

I am a bit surprised by the overwhelming preference for 3/4 players. Personally, I actually prefer 2-player for competitive play, because it is much more determined by skill. For 3 and four players, the starting positions have a large influence on your chances, and mistakes of player A can make it almost impossible for you to win the game against player B and/or C.

Late to the discussion, but I much prefer non-4 player games. It is my belief that the 1st and 2nd seat Aristocrat players (in 4 players) have a big advantage. Is there a way that this statistic can be mined from all the 4 player games (or maybe just the arena games from last season)?

Currently no. I can make it possible by adding statistics on the starting position of winner and looser per number of players. This will concern only new games, I can not build back the stats for past games.

I prefer 2-player, no public information.

Since observatory cards are hidden in real life play, there is no reason that information should be public here. And tracking your opponent's approximate level of funds is not something all lower-skilled players do, so it shouldn't be handed to them on a plate.