Page 3 of 3
Re: i only got +2 ELO
Posted: 02 February 2025, 13:02
by Meeplelowda
yodamus wrote: ↑02 February 2025, 12:59
Just curious. Jellby. How do you see the elo in hundredths? And glad to know now about this consecutive win penalty for playing same opponent and how it works. Thanks
You mouseover the ELO laurel (or long press on a mobile device).
Re: i only got +2 ELO
Posted: 02 February 2025, 22:08
by BananaHarambe
nik592 wrote: ↑02 February 2025, 09:43
I'm not sure the period is 7 days, I think the suggestion was something like 30? This is discussed over on the 100 page thread, but I believe it was never officially confirmed, so everyone was guessing. But I think testing people did definitely suggested more than 7 days.
Check the response after yours. They took the time to lay out my 7 consecutive wins against the player and show how many consecutive wins the system considers. My only explanation for why it worked like that is the “7 day” theory.
Re: i only got +2 ELO
Posted: 02 February 2025, 22:18
by BananaHarambe
Jellby wrote: ↑02 February 2025, 11:00
There are 7 games, you won all of them:
The dates are of creation, but even the turn-based games didn't last more than one day. The run from #2 to #6 seems to support the 7-days theory, it looks like by the time of #6, #2 and #3 had been "forgotten".
Thanks for the breakdown Jellby! That summary was my point. The December 22/23 game (game #6) considered games 4 and 5 for the consecutive wins (about 6 days prior), but had “forgotten” games 2 and 3 which happened only a few days prior to games 4 and 5.
The reset range was longer than 6 days and shorter than 10 days. Pretty sure it’s based on 7 days as 168 hours or something similar based on calendar date. We would need a more precise example to further refine, but this clearly shows about a 7 day floating period for consecutive wins.
Re: i only got +2 ELO
Posted: 02 February 2025, 23:29
by nik592
BananaHarambe wrote: ↑02 February 2025, 22:08
nik592 wrote: ↑02 February 2025, 09:43
I'm not sure the period is 7 days, I think the suggestion was something like 30? This is discussed over on the 100 page thread, but I believe it was never officially confirmed, so everyone was guessing. But I think testing people did definitely suggested more than 7 days.
Check the response after yours. They took the time to lay out my 7 consecutive wins against the player and show how many consecutive wins the system considers. My only explanation for why it worked like that is the “7 day” theory.
Yeah I saw that. I don't know either (and to be honest, the ELO penalty doesn't bother me about my actual ELO that much, though I find it horribly frustrating to be applied to Arena where you can't choose your opponents), was just reporting what I recalled from the 100 page thread. Perhaps they adjusted it, without telling anyone again.
Re: i only got +2 ELO
Posted: 04 February 2025, 03:00
by RazorOz
It's definitely more like 30 days rather than 7. Either that or it's different for different games. See this:
https://boardgamearena.com/gamestats?pl ... ateStats=1
https://boardgamearena.com/table?table=601093557
https://boardgamearena.com/table?table=621042791
I am still reduced on player vasetoo from a game exactly 30 days prior.
7 would actually be more tolerable, 30 is just silly, actively encourages you to not play games. As is, I wish they'd just abolish it, it's universally unpopular, doesn't really achieve do what it intended to do, and actually does the opposite of the some of the intentions, because now you are incentivised to not play games, and high volume players get completely whacked (which I guess is another way if this has to exist it should be linked to # of games rather than time).
Re: i only got +2 ELO
Posted: 07 February 2025, 00:08
by BananaHarambe
RazorOz wrote: ↑04 February 2025, 03:00
It's definitely more like 30 days rather than 7. Either that or it's different for different games. See this:
https://boardgamearena.com/gamestats?pl ... ateStats=1
https://boardgamearena.com/table?table=601093557
https://boardgamearena.com/table?table=621042791
I am still reduced on player vasetoo from a game exactly 30 days prior.
7 would actually be more tolerable, 30 is just silly, actively encourages you to not play games. As is, I wish they'd just abolish it, it's universally unpopular, doesn't really achieve do what it intended to do, and actually does the opposite of the some of the intentions, because now you are incentivised to not play games, and high volume players get completely whacked (which I guess is another way if this has to exist it should be linked to # of games rather than time).
Thanks for sharing your "30 day theory" with good evidence to support it. I am starting to think it's game specific. Here's another example of it in Vale of Eternity:
https://boardgamearena.com/gamestats?pl ... ateStats=1
This shows the consecutive win bonus only applying over 7 days.