Re: BGA - please stop the Arena madness
Posted: 04 July 2024, 14:13
BGA clearly doesnt care whether players participate in Arena, or it would have a more sensible and inclusive Arena system.
You are just making things up. The K factor never changes, it stays at 40 the whole time. Actually a decreasing K factor the more you play could even be reasonable idea. But reality is far from it.
https://boardgamearena.com/faqdschingis27 wrote: ↑04 July 2024, 16:08You are just making things up. The K factor never changes, it stays at 40 the whole time. Actually a decreasing K factor the more you play could even be reasonable idea. But reality is far from it.
Okay, so K doesn't approach 1 because that would result in 0.5 ELO for beating someone with the same ELO as you, but it does go down the more games you play.The easiest situation is a 2 player game. You will gain a number of ELO points equal to K x (W - p(D)) where:
W is the result of the game: 1 for a victory, 0 for a defeat, 0.5 for a tie.
D is the difference of ELO between you and your opponent.
p(D) is the probability of victory considering the previous difference (see Wikipedia for details).
K, the 'elasticity factor,' has a value that depends on the number of games you have played: 60 for your first 10 games, 40 between your 11th and 20th games, 20 for your 21st onwards.
How many games on BGA? It's not feasible for BGA to define different 'luck' and 'interaction' ratings for every single one of them, and then continuously tweak them as users complain that they are too high or too low. You know how much luck and interaction is in the game you are playing, you can take that into account yourself.Romain672 wrote: ↑04 July 2024, 12:08 I proposed a while ago to use the 'Luck' rating in the k-factor formula. I just checked for Can't stop and Lucky number and it's at 4, so it would work.
And then I proposed to use the 'Interaction' part with 3+ players games to reduces the '% to win' of the highest elo (ie make it so that the highest elo lose less, and lowest win less ; but not less than if they got identical elo). This is because targetting a player is easier on those games (I believe).
Now the problem is how to find the right number? Do you apply it to all ranking?
I think you could.
There is not much documentation on BGA thus it is understandable that you mix ELO with EAS. ELO has a decreasing K factor since you start with 0 ELO and you need a high K factor to more quickly reach the true ELO value. High fluctuation of ELO for a beginner is a feature - not a bug.Cile wrote: ↑04 July 2024, 16:29https://boardgamearena.com/faqdschingis27 wrote: ↑04 July 2024, 16:08You are just making things up. The K factor never changes, it stays at 40 the whole time. Actually a decreasing K factor the more you play could even be reasonable idea. But reality is far from it.
Okay, so K doesn't approach 1 because that would result in 0.5 ELO for beating someone with the same ELO as you, but it does go down the more games you play.The easiest situation is a 2 player game. You will gain a number of ELO points equal to K x (W - p(D)) where:
W is the result of the game: 1 for a victory, 0 for a defeat, 0.5 for a tie.
D is the difference of ELO between you and your opponent.
p(D) is the probability of victory considering the previous difference (see Wikipedia for details).
K, the 'elasticity factor,' has a value that depends on the number of games you have played: 60 for your first 10 games, 40 between your 11th and 20th games, 20 for your 21st onwards.
https://boardgamearena.com/gamepanel?game=cantstopCile wrote: ↑04 July 2024, 16:34How many games on BGA? It's not feasible for BGA to define different 'luck' and 'interaction' ratings for every single one of them, and then continuously tweak them as users complain that they are too high or too low. You know how much luck and interaction is in the game you are playing, you can take that into account yourself.Romain672 wrote: ↑04 July 2024, 12:08 I proposed a while ago to use the 'Luck' rating in the k-factor formula. I just checked for Can't stop and Lucky number and it's at 4, so it would work.
And then I proposed to use the 'Interaction' part with 3+ players games to reduces the '% to win' of the highest elo (ie make it so that the highest elo lose less, and lowest win less ; but not less than if they got identical elo). This is because targetting a player is easier on those games (I believe).