Board Game Arena

nik592 wrote: ↑07 March 2023, 04:29

Fletcheese wrote: ↑06 March 2023, 20:48 Can someone explain succinctly why using training mode is not an acceptable alternative? Is it just the fact that ELO is missing or is there more to it?

That's it for me. I play about half my games with RL friends, and don't like the idea of missing out on ELO on all of those games. We now play with the 1 move per 2 days setting, but occasionally friends get caught up and don't get on the site for a few days, and are now racking up time penalties (yes, I'm aware that's not a karma penalty). So we're essentially still playing with no time limit, as none of us will boot the others, but just that anyone who has RL get in the way of getting on to BGA now gets time penalties.

There's also the confusingness of real-time training mode, where games die after 4 hours. Which could just be alleviated by removing the training mode in the real-time setting (why have training mode die after less than 40 days, when people can just kill it whenever they want anyway?).

So unless someone else has another reason we've missed, this issue boils down to whether friendly games should affect ELO. To me the answer is obviously no. It's a bit tricky because Arena was added later and Arena points is kind of the "true ELO" of BGA, but it seems a bit silly to me that someone could be at the top of any leaderboard playing nothing but friendly games. My understanding is that this is a major reason for why this mode was disabled.

Fletcheese wrote: ↑07 March 2023, 17:06 So unless someone else has another reason we've missed, this issue boils down to whether friendly games should affect ELO. To me the answer is obviously no. It's a bit tricky because Arena was added later and Arena points is kind of the "true ELO" of BGA, but it seems a bit silly to me that someone could be at the top of any leaderboard playing nothing but friendly games. My understanding is that this is a major reason for why this mode was disabled.

So, if I understand your comment correctly, playing games with your friends somehow negates the competitiveness of the games you play with them?

Umm... my friends tend to be very competitive, and I find that the ELO score does accurately reflect general prowess at a specific game, even if you only ever play with friends.

Friendly Game - does that mean you aren't going to try and compete with the other players?

In any case, the reason people want to play With Friends Only, Normal, Turn Based Games with No Time Limits is because that is how most of us posting into these 22 pages in this discussion, and the 17 or 18 in the previous, prefer to play. I have two different friends who work in the medical field who have been unable to take their turns within two days, so have started flagging as late. It might not make a difference to those people, but 22 pages of comments - which I've avidly followed - suggest that many of us feel different.

If you've been following along, you've seen the site admins make some rather odd explanations for this change, which the people actively engaged in this discussion have wanted to discuss with the site admins. Who thus far have refused to do more than copy and paste their same comments repeatedly.

Your assumption about their reasons, as well as your conclusion about Friends with Games Only can not be competitive because of something-something ELO, makes no sense to me.

So, no, the issue does not boil down to ELO. It boils down to the way the premium subscribers in this discussion have repeatedly asked to have a feature returned that we all clearly care about. Sure, ELO is nice, but for those of us who keep asking, telling us to just go play training games when that is clearly not what we've been asking for - for months at this point.

We are simply asking them to put back things the way they were, before they made this poor business decision that is having a negative impact on our happiness and satisfaction with the site.

There are 22 pages of this discussion to peruse at your leisure, and I think you'll find that we are here and upset for different reasons than the one that you've come up with.

But thanks for sharing your thoughts!

Fletcheese wrote: ↑07 March 2023, 17:06My understanding is that this is a major reason for why this mode was disabled.

What is the basis for that understanding? By that I mean can you point to a specific post by an admin that says this or even hints at this being a major reason?

Meeplelowda wrote: ↑08 March 2023, 00:02

Fletcheese wrote: ↑07 March 2023, 17:06My understanding is that this is a major reason for why this mode was disabled.

What is the basis for that understanding? By that I mean can you point to a specific post by an admin that says this or even hints at this being a major reason?

I thought I recalled reading something about removing the option due to collusion among players to boost ELO. But that would be just as possible with a current timed friendly game so that's out the window.

This is not my hill to die on and the way I use BGA is not affected at all by this change. I was just surprised about how much of an uproar such a seemingly minor change has made. sourisdessert's responses in https://boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=28186 are completely satisfying to me, but again, not my hill.

Ignore me

Fletcheese wrote: ↑08 March 2023, 00:42 This is not my hill to die on and the way I use BGA is not affected at all by this change. I was just surprised about how much of an uproar such a seemingly minor change has made. sourisdessert's responses in https://boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=28186 are completely satisfying to me, but again, not my hill.

You are referring back to a quote from Jan 23, as if to refute what 22 pages of comments (as well as a moderator locked previous discussion) have disagreed with?

And even that, IIRC, was a cut and paste from a previous quote?

I'm glad that makes you satisfied. Clearly, there are a few of us who feel differently.

It doesn't feel like a minor change to us.

And honestly, the only reason we keep checking back is to see if:
> A: The site admins *ever* respond again, -or -
>B: Out of some lost hope that eventually they will just roll back this change.

As for hills to die on, I don't suppose they will keep track of the premium memberships that are not renewed, which has (in theory) a negative impact on this entire community. It might not impact you, personally, and you may be complete satisfied, but there are a few of us who are impacted, and do care about it.

Thanks, again, for sharing your views.

The only real difference between the "No Time Limit" games, and "Training" games, as far as I can tell, is ELO. So I do find it a bit strange that so many proponents of bringing back "No Time Limit" are pretending it isn't all about ELO (nothing wrong with this - gaining elo is fun. But you should be honest about your motivations if you want to have a productive discussion).

Since it seems many people aren't aware of the ELO abuse that caused BGA to remove "No Time Limit" in the first place was that some people were simply not playing games that they were going to lose, preventing themselves from ever losing ELO (this is what the admins mean when they say people were "stuck"). Now obviously this aspect doesn't sound like an issue for friend-only games, but also BGA doesn't (currently) have any mechanism for filtering game types based on game access. There's also the fact that you can invite anyone to your "Friends only" game, a feature which BGA would have to remove in order to give us "No Time Limit" + ELO games, in order to prevent the abuse that happened before.

To me, it all seems like it would be way more trouble than it's worth, both from a development perspective and from a UX perspective. It's not like you get any ELO for playing physical board games with your friends, why is it such a big deal here?

Fletcheese wrote: ↑08 March 2023, 00:42This is not my hill to die on and the way I use BGA is not affected at all by this change. I was just surprised about how much of an uproar such a seemingly minor change has made.

I also am not affected by the change in the least. And there are some people complaining about it who actually don't use BGA in a way that it affects them (so I guess they are complaining just to jump on the bandwagon?).

But I do see evidence that many people are passionate about this and have reasons why the change affects them negatively regardless of whether I personally think it should be a concern. And BGA seemingly doesn't give....I'll say doesn't care, to avoid moderation-invoking expletives. That's what bothers me.

RedAlert39 wrote: ↑08 March 2023, 04:04 Since it seems many people aren't aware of the ELO abuse that caused BGA to remove "No Time Limit" in the first place was that some people were simply not playing games that they were going to lose, preventing themselves from ever losing ELO (this is what the admins mean when they say people were "stuck").

I can see the logic, but the admins never explained it like this. So how can you be sure?

RedAlert39 wrote: ↑08 March 2023, 04:04 Now obviously this aspect doesn't sound like an issue for friend-only games

I agree. And that's why no time-limit was reduced to friends-only games (mutual friends) about 6 months ago. Problem solved! But then BGA decided to put off no time-limit with Elo for everyone...

RedAlert39 wrote: ↑08 March 2023, 04:04 also BGA doesn't (currently) have any mechanism for filtering game types based on game access.

I am not sure what you are talking about here.

RedAlert39 wrote: ↑08 March 2023, 04:04 There's also the fact that you can invite anyone to your "Friends only" game, a feature which BGA would have to remove in order to give us "No Time Limit" + ELO games, in order to prevent the abuse that happened before.

What you are referring to as "Friends only game" here is probably training mode, which is now called friendly mode. That's not what we were originally discussing here. The option for no time-limit was different: you could only use it when you as a host restricted the table to people of your personal friends list. And as you said Elo abuse shouldn't be a problem with mutual friends. That's why we want back no time-limit + Elo for mutual friends.

Based on the communications from the admins, it sounds like the old "no time limit" mode was causing issues for new/casual players who started real-time games with their friends, someone wouldn't be able to finish, and they'd be forced boot their friend from the game to keep using the site. It was happening often enough that they decided having the option wasn't worth the hassle for more casual players.

RedAlert39 wrote: ↑09 March 2023, 03:33 Based on the communications from the admins, it sounds like the old "no time limit" mode was causing issues for new/casual players who started real-time games with their friends, someone wouldn't be able to finish, and they'd be forced boot their friend from the game to keep using the site. It was happening often enough that they decided having the option wasn't worth the hassle for more casual players.

Except that Turn based games were not affected by this, as you can participate in multiple turn based games at the same time. So this is in no way a reasonable argument for removing the Turn Based game option. Which is also why this thread focuses on the ask to bring back the Turn Based game mode, and NOT the real time game mode.

There was no way to get ”trapped” in turn based games. Tables would also automatically shut down after like 40 days of inactivity.

So this explanation, which has been posted by some admin, is total *, and when I on multiple occasions have asked for an explanation on HOW this applied to Turn Based games, the admin just ghosts the conversation.

*moderator edit: please remember to use family-friendly language on BGA