cosmosis wrote:
I do understand this point. And I should be on your side (maybe?) because I would potentially not be getting ELO decay. But it does feel wrong to have some cutoff above which players are penalized. Firstly, it sucks for those players. Secondly, it just feels really arbitrary. I think removing the trophies from the top ELO spots seems like a cleaner solution.
I agree it feels a little weird to have a cutoff above which some people feel it and others do not. Considering how many games there are (98? now I believe), it seems really rare to see a top 20 player playing any of them. Obviously there is overlap between who is a top player in different games, but that is still a large number of players in that group. The idea is just to encourage play. Maybe it would be more fair to universally apply a decay system if it is every implemented (though I doubt it) since lower ranked people wouldn't really lose any points anyway.
This is a great point (as already noted by other people). And it is something that is already happening with tournaments on the site. But I don't think it's a hard problem to solve.
You could, for example, have it so that trophies from previous years don't count for the current leaderboard. This would encourage new waves of participation each year.
I think that's a great idea and basically solves the issue. Like an annual (or however long a season is) champion. Past winners would lose the ELO boost, but still have the trophy in their profile to show it. I think that would be a great addition to the tournament system if that gets implemented.
My big question at this point is are we all just beating a dead horse in that has BGA already decided exactly what it is going to try first, or is there actually potential some of these ideas get put into action?
).
