Arena RNG

[Jellby]

It seems people see "Arena" and they have their own preconceptions about what it should be, mostly something like "it should be what I want it to be".

In my opinion, the best approach would be to accept Arena is what it is, and if you don't like it, don't play Arena (and, if you wish, suggest changes).

[tbhp]

I tend to have a different opinion than what has been said here. I can see how being paired with lower ranked players can be annoying (especially since there is a risk of losing many points against them), but how is being matched with higher ranked players a problem? How do you get better if you only play people your level?

In my opinion, if we were all matched against people of similar level, it would take forever to climb (not many points gained), and we would also tend to play worse overall. When you don't have a strong opposition in front of you, you have less incentive to give it your best and reinvent yourself. Under those circumstances, I think people would tend to stagnate rather than improve.

[Cile]

I recently played Beyond the Sun in arena and realized after the game was over that I had beaten the top ranked player. I matched with them again later and got trounced (I made a misplay and paid for it). I felt kind of bad about it because I don't play frequently enough to reach higher tiers so the other player lost more rank than they should have due to my rank not matching my ability.

For me this is what I'm looking for from arena: more competitive opponents. If I face a much higher ranked opponent than me I am going to pay attention to what they are doing to learn from them. I'll learn more from them than from someone making the same noob mistakes I am.

If you're not trying to rank up (which I would guess you aren't if you don't want to face high rank opponents), and you aren't looking for more challenging matches, I'm not sure what you're expecting Arena to be that you can't get from a regular table (which as others have said, you can limit the Elo range).

[tbhp]

It seems people see "Arena" and they have their own preconceptions about what it should be, mostly something like "it should be what I want it to be".

In my opinion, the best approach would be to accept Arena is what it is, and if you don't like it, don't play Arena (and, if you wish, suggest changes).

From some of the comments above it seems people are confused about the concept of leagues. Or they want them to be something they are not. Like was said in another recent thread, the inferior leagues are just a gateway or prelude to Elite league. It's not like there are different leagues and each rank of player has their own competition within that league. The only competition in Arena is the global ranking and how high people can climb there.

If you're not trying to rank up (which I would guess you aren't if you don't want to face high rank opponents), and you aren't looking for more challenging matches, I'm not sure what you're expecting Arena to be that you can't get from a regular table (which as others have said, you can limit the Elo range).

Pretty much. If people want to be rewarded for doing well against people of their own level, Arena doesn't really cater to that. The lower leagues are just there for aesthetics. What you are really playing for is your global ranking, which just happens to be hidden before you reach Elite league.

[Suoivax]

I tend to have a different opinion than what has been said here. I can see how being paired with lower ranked players can be annoying (especially since there is a risk of losing many points against them), but how is being matched with higher ranked players a problem? How do you get better if you only play people your level?

That's only true to a point. A genuine chess newbie sitting down to play a real GrandMaster will learn nothing (unless the GM is actually tutoring them, which isnt arena)

[Meeplelowda]

I tend to have a different opinion than what has been said here. I can see how being paired with lower ranked players can be annoying (especially since there is a risk of losing many points against them), but how is being matched with higher ranked players a problem? How do you get better if you only play people your level?

That's only true to a point. A genuine chess newbie sitting down to play a real GrandMaster will learn nothing (unless the GM is actually tutoring them, which isnt arena)

In other words, only seeing what someone did without knowing why they did it is of non-zero, but limited, usefulness.

You may just witness an exchange of pieces and think the rule is "trade a knight for a bishop," whereas the grand master is thinking "with this pawn structure, it is advantageous in the middlegame to have an active light square bishop and I want to deny my opponent that long term asset now" or something like that.

[tbhp]

I tend to have a different opinion than what has been said here. I can see how being paired with lower ranked players can be annoying (especially since there is a risk of losing many points against them), but how is being matched with higher ranked players a problem? How do you get better if you only play people your level?

That's only true to a point. A genuine chess newbie sitting down to play a real GrandMaster will learn nothing (unless the GM is actually tutoring them, which isnt arena)

Just because they would always lose doesn't mean they wouldn't learn from observing that player. Sure, they'd lack the experience that comes with actually being in the winning position yourself. But the experience of trying to hold your ground against a much better opponent would be very valuable, and once you've gone through that, playing against lower level players will seem easy in comparison.

Also, most games on this website don't have the skill gap that exists in Chess. Generally when playing a top player here, you have some minor chance of winning if you know the rules and think well.

You may just witness an exchange of pieces and think the rule is "trade a knight for a bishop," whereas the grand master is thinking "with this pawn structure, it is advantageous in the middlegame to have an active light square bishop and I want to deny my opponent that long term asset now" or something like that.

Just because someone is new at Chess doesn't mean they can't think for themselves and won't try to figure out as best as they can the complex reasons behind a move. Or that they won't themselves come up with those sorts of strategies in order to hold their own better in such a tough game.

If a person won't do that work, that's not a feature of playing against someone much better than them, that's because they aren't interested in thinking too deeply about the game. It would be the same if they were playing against a lower level opponent.

[katmk]

Looking back on your game history, OP, you would definitely benefit from limiting your opponents to "My level only" (use the cog), although as lots of people have already pointed out this is based on Arena Level not Elo.

However at this point in the season, it's a pretty good chance that anyone with a very high Elo will be in Elites by now.

As someone who plays a lot of games in Arena, I honestly don't think it's that bad as long as you use the level filters when you're new. Yes, it's prone to manipulation but if you measure progress by Elo, so is that.

Personally, I would leave people in the league they finish the season in (maybe relegate the bottom 25%), so you'd keep the really high level regular players in Elite to scrap it out right from the beginning but that's just faffing about at the edges.

It's got the highest level of competition on BGA, so that's what you should expect. I know that if I think I'm good at a game before I go into Arena, I will rapidly discover that I'm not

[Mykola]

It seems people see "Arena" and they have their own preconceptions about what it should be, mostly something like "it should be what I want it to be".

In my opinion, the best approach would be to accept Arena is what it is, and if you don't like it, don't play Arena (and, if you wish, suggest changes).

Yes, Arena is what it is, but I don't want to engage it anymore.
Why? Because it does not follow even those rules that there are awailable.
Like why shoud it bother with my STRICTLY EXPLICITED intention not to play against players of different level while there is a TOP-hanging star that is willing to wipe some noob arses.

[Jellby]

If the filters don't work as advertised, it's a bug with the filters (or with their description), but it has nothing to do with "Arena RNG".

I almost never do Arena or auto match-making, but I have the feeling sometimes the filters (or the table settings, for that matter) reset on their own. That means that if you have some filter/preferences set and you get some match that should not have been allowed, it could be that the filter didn't work, or it could mean that the filter had been silently reset before that match. If you check your filters *after* the problem match and they're still what they should be (such that the match should not have happened), then I would more inclined to suspect a bug, and anyone affected should immediately file a report.

Then there's the added confusion that the filters are different for Arena or casual play, and I wouldn't be surprised if they were even different for real-time or turn-based play. There are so many possible points of failure that is difficult to prove there's a bug, but it's definitely a sub-optimal interface.