Board Game Arena

Jellby wrote: ↑06 August 2025, 16:09 Actually, it's not correct.

I meant that the difference between points lost/won by 3rd and 4th (not the absolute result) is the same as if they had played a 2-player game. But that's only correct if they have the same elo. If they have different elo, given that both have lost against 2 other players, the one with higher elo loses more than the one with lower elo. Still, the partial result of the 3rd-4th sub-match is the same regardless of other players, or how they're placed.

If the loss of 3rd is "negligible" and the loss of 4th is "demolishing", then, if they had been placed 1st and 2nd, the gain of 1st would be astonishing and the gain of 2nd would be negligible, and the difference between them would be the same, which was my point.

I think I agree?

For simplicity let's assume all 4 players in a game of hearts have the same Elo and the same K-factor.

Whoever finishes first will gain a lot of Elo. Second will gain a small amount. 3rd Will lose a small amount. 4th will get demolished and lose a lot.

This adversely affects the game as players trying to avoid 4th place start attacking each other with the Q and extra hearts, allowing 1st place to cruise to an easy win.

Generally speaking, I play to win. But, Once I realized how disastrous 4th place was, I started playing to avoid 4th place and take the wins whenever I could. My Elo started rapidly climbing, eventually surpassing 300, which isn't easy to do in Hearts.

I believe this was the complaint of the OP.

Correct. That was my point

Players also engage in Kingmaking to grind ELO, destroying the fun of the game!