Advantage/disadvantage - changing how teams are chosen

[FrankJones]

When I create a game I do all my settings and invite my partner prior to making my table public. So there is no surprise. I've had this happen at other games not at spades because I usually set my own table. What would solve this is if settings couldnt be changed once a player joins. This is how it is done for turn based games. You click accept when a real time game launches so maybe that is the reasoning but most ppl probably don't check the settings and just click accept when the game is launched.

Agreed.

[ufm]

Everyone has the ability to find friends within the community and invite them to games.

Forcing friendly mode for custom team member order options does not remove that ability.

I find it way more unfair for higher ranked players to lose a bunch of elo for losing with a 100elo player and gain little for winning with that player.

I find constantly teaming with a regular partner to trample a bunch of randomly paired players across hundreds of games more unfair.
Besides, you are disregarding advantages of fixed partners (e.g. identifying play habits, conventions, collusions).
If you want high level games, try limiting participant Elo rating instead.

When I create a game I do all my settings and invite my partner prior to making my table public. So there is no surprise. I've had this happen at other games not at spades because I usually set my own table. What would solve this is if settings couldnt be changed once a player joins. This is how it is done for turn based games. You click accept when a real time game launches so maybe that is the reasoning but most ppl probably don't check the settings and just click accept when the game is launched.

There would be no surprise, in a perfect world. Unfortunately it doesn't work like that in many cases:
- Most players simply don't want to wait too long for tables of a perfect option match, or don't care about options at all.
- Lack of information: For example, Spades team option doesn't even have tmdisplay parameter for team options.
- Some games (e.g. Belote, Tichu) set a fixed team member order as the default option (facepalm). No red highlights for nondefault options.

Overall, keeping these options in normal mode results in teaming players being moderated and later asking why they have been moderated.
Currently Tichu is the worst offender, but all team games with this possibility fall into the same category.

[FrankJones]

Everyone has the ability to find friends within the community and invite them to games.

Forcing friendly mode for custom team member order options does not remove that ability.

I find it way more unfair for higher ranked players to lose a bunch of elo for losing with a 100elo player and gain little for winning with that player.

I find constantly teaming with a regular partner to trample a bunch of randomly paired players across hundreds of games more unfair.
Besides, you are disregarding advantages of fixed partners (e.g. identifying play habits, conventions, collusions).
If you want high level games, try limiting participant Elo rating instead.

When I create a game I do all my settings and invite my partner prior to making my table public. So there is no surprise. I've had this happen at other games not at spades because I usually set my own table. What would solve this is if settings couldnt be changed once a player joins. This is how it is done for turn based games. You click accept when a real time game launches so maybe that is the reasoning but most ppl probably don't check the settings and just click accept when the game is launched.

There would be no surprise, in a perfect world. Unfortunately it doesn't work like that in many cases:
- Most players simply don't want to wait too long for tables of a perfect option match, or don't care about options at all.
- Lack of information: For example, Spades team option doesn't even have tmdisplay parameter for team options.
- Some games (e.g. Belote, Tichu) set a fixed team member order as the default option (facepalm). No red highlights for nondefault options.

Overall, keeping these options in normal mode results in teaming players being moderated and later asking why they have been moderated.
Currently Tichu is the worst offender, but all team games with this possibility fall into the same category.

Yes. Well said, ufm.

[ChiefPointThief]

Everyone has the ability to find friends within the community and invite them to games.

Forcing friendly mode for custom team member order options does not remove that ability.

I find it way more unfair for higher ranked players to lose a bunch of elo for losing with a 100elo player and gain little for winning with that player.

I find constantly teaming with a regular partner to trample a bunch of randomly paired players across hundreds of games more unfair.

The only reason to force friendly matches is if the settings would give improper ratings which they wouldn't in this case. Partners playing together actually better reflect how elo works for non team games.

You can't trample anyone if you aren't good. If two good players are on a team then their win probabilities actually better reflect what it should be whereas if player a is 300elo and player b 100elo (on the same team) then player a can have a win probability of 75% and player a can have 20% (this makes absolutely no sense). Thus player a will most likely play for more superior than player b but yet the system awards player a less for victories and penalizes more for loses. There is more of an argument that random teams should be ranked friendly as long as the rating system stays the way it is.

If you want high level games, try limiting participant Elo rating instead.

I've done this. I went to the leaderboard and literally invited all top players to games for a challenge. I had fixed team games. Don't see why there would be a reason to not rank those.

If you try to have a high level game (which would be good & above in spades) randomly you will wait forever. As I have stated there are problems with the current rating system. Therefore it brings down good players skill rating and raises bad players rating. Making what you are suggesting really difficult.

[ufm]

The only reason to force friendly matches is if the settings would give improper ratings which they wouldn't in this case. Partners playing together actually better reflect how elo works for non team games.

Only when all players play so. Obviously not the case.

You can't trample anyone if you aren't good. If two good players are on a team then their win probabilities actually better reflect what it should be whereas if player a is 300elo and player b 100elo (on the same team) then player a can have a win probability of 75% and player a can have 20% (this makes absolutely no sense). Thus player a will most likely play for more superior than player b but yet the system awards player a less for victories and penalizes more for loses. There is more of an argument that random teams should be ranked friendly as long as the rating system stays the way it is.

That totally sound like justifying constant Elo farming against beginners.
Is an Elo 400 player who only beats Elo ~100 better skilled than an Elo 300 who doesn't select their opponents?
Elo value is an expectation, not an absolute standard.

If you try to have a high level game (which would be good & above in spades) randomly you will wait forever. As I have stated there are problems with the current rating system. Therefore it brings down good players skill rating and raises bad players rating. Making what you are suggesting really difficult.

I just checked top 10 players' game records.
Unsurprisingly, more than half of them are teaming with a specific partner and beating beginners, contrary to lower ranked players.
A typical Elo farming doesn't sound like a behavior of GOOD players at all...
No wonder they are absent in Arena mode where random partners are forced.

[FrankJones]

I just checked top 10 players' game records.
Unsurprisingly, more than half of them are teaming with a specific partner and beating beginners, contrary to lower ranked players.
A typical Elo farming doesn't sound like a behavior of GOOD players at all...
No wonder they are absent in Arena mode where random partners are forced.

Maybe the algorithm should prevent this from occurring ???

[ufm]

I just checked top 10 players' game records.
Unsurprisingly, more than half of them are teaming with a specific partner and beating beginners, contrary to lower ranked players.
A typical Elo farming doesn't sound like a behavior of GOOD players at all...
No wonder they are absent in Arena mode where random partners are forced.

Maybe the algorithm should prevent this from occurring ???

How exactly? It's easier said than done. Literally all games are prone to opponent selection.
Arena mode doesn't allow cancelling after table filling, to prevent opponent selection. However, this method has its own flaws.
Imo the realistic option is limiting custom team order to friendly mode, significantly reducing the chance of predatory matchmaking in team games.

[FrankJones]

How exactly? It's easier said than done. Literally all games are prone to opponent selection.
Arena mode doesn't allow cancelling games, to prevent opponent selection. However, this method has its own flaws.
Imo the realistic option is limiting custom team order to friendly mode, significantly reducing the chance of predatory matchmaking in team games.

Good point.
( I didn't really think through my post very thoroughly before I posted.

Apologies.

[ChiefPointThief]

The only reason to force friendly matches is if the settings would give improper ratings which they wouldn't in this case. Partners playing together actually better reflect how elo works for non team games.

Only when all players play so. Obviously not the case.

You can't trample anyone if you aren't good. If two good players are on a team then their win probabilities actually better reflect what it should be whereas if player a is 300elo and player b 100elo (on the same team) then player a can have a win probability of 75% and player a can have 20% (this makes absolutely no sense). Thus player a will most likely play for more superior than player b but yet the system awards player a less for victories and penalizes more for loses. There is more of an argument that random teams should be ranked friendly as long as the rating system stays the way it is.

That totally sound like justifying constant Elo farming against beginners.
Is an Elo 400 player who only beats Elo ~100 better skilled than an Elo 300 who doesn't select their opponents?
Elo value is an expectation, not an absolute standard.

If you try to have a high level game (which would be good & above in spades) randomly you will wait forever. As I have stated there are problems with the current rating system. Therefore it brings down good players skill rating and raises bad players rating. Making what you are suggesting really difficult.

I just checked top 10 players' game records.
Unsurprisingly, more than half of them are teaming with a specific partner and beating beginners, contrary to lower ranked players.
A typical Elo farming doesn't sound like a behavior of GOOD players at all...
No wonder they are absent in Arena mode where random partners are forced.

It isn’t elo farming. You play who is available. Well, I will speak for what I do personally. There are only a few hundred “good” players in spades. & when you divide that amongst the 4 playing modes (real, tb, & 2 arenas) it is not possible to consistently get random games with “good” players. Furthermore some “average” players are actually “good” players who are victims of this terrible rating system.

Looking at my own history I had tons of fixed teams games with other “good” players and I won a majority of them.

If there is a complaint about improper ratings something needs to be done about how elo is calculated for rage quitters. 5 of my last 25 games (20%) I was rage quit on and the majority of the split elo went to the person on the losing team

A lot of the top players have been the same few ppl on different accounts fyi

If you think arena is the standard for high quality play you are highly mistaken

Lastly, in my case, I announce that player #2 will be my partner. Player #3 has the option to play against us or not. Player #4 has this same option and is choosing their partner by joining the table. So it is fair game.

If ppl are purposefully being manipulative and changing the settings after players join like op stated then that is wrong.

[ufm]

It isn’t elo farming. You play who is available. Well, I will speak for what I do personally.

With all due respect, when so many players can easily abuse the system, it's a big red flag although you and some others try to be fair.

If there is a complaint about improper ratings something needs to be done about how elo is calculated for rage quitters. 5 of my last 25 games (20%) I was rage quit on and the majority of the split elo went to the person on the losing team

This is irrelevant to custom team member order at all, since this happens in all games.

A lot of the top players have been the same few ppl on different accounts fyi

This is even worse in team games with custom team member order.
Custom team member order makes this manipulation much easier and subtler.

If you think arena is the standard for high quality play you are highly mistaken

I didn't say anything like 'the play level of Arena mode Spades is higher than normal mode'.
What I said are:
- Beating a bunch of beginners with a fixed partner doesn't mean the team is highly skilled
- Custom team member order is being actively used to farm Elo by many players
- Farming EAS with custom team member order is impossible in the current Arena mode setting
- A large portion of leaderboard players avoid Arena mode entirely and then play as a fixed team to beat beginners