Board Game Arena

Please tell me what's wrong with giving players with large different ratings a red thumb and preventing them from matching. Before changing that, Arena should introduce a system that only matches people with similar ratings. Because the management does not introduce such an obvious mechanism, players are forced to use low ratings. In Arena mode, it is not possible to avoid matchmaking with large differences in ratings. Rating systems are meaningless in this situation.

lordalx wrote: ↑02 January 2024, 11:39 I would like to thank you all for your feedback on this subject.

I continue to regularly read your messages.

Thank you for responding.

However, you didn't mention Invisible ELO for cooperative games like Hanabi.

Right now, low level players who don't get a perfect game don't know if they are improving in skill. The system might think 28 was pretty good considering the average ELO at the table. This is discouraging, and causes people to be even more upset during imperfect games.

Also, there is a massive difference in skill level within each rank. A player at the bottom end of any rank generally knows significantly less about common conventions than a player at the top end of the same rank. Players change the complexity of their clues based on the ELO of each player at the table. A lower ELO player will be given coaching and latitude when making mistakes or after misunderstanding the conventions used in the mid to upper range of their bracket. With invisible ELO, players in the lower end of each bracket no longer have that protection or buffer around them. It is simply assumed that they are poor players, rather than new to that rank.

Hanabi players spend the first 50-75 ELO in each rank learning new conventions common in each bracket. The Master rank is particularly challenging upon entry, as you are immediately at tables with players who have been playing at the Master level for years. YEARS.

Most of us don't mind teaching the basics to new Masters, but right now we don't have a heads up that a player is in need of tutelage. It is incredibly frustrating to give a 5 card layered clue (or any form of double bluff) at the start of the game only to have the new Master immediately bomb. Had we known their ELO heading into the game, we would have lowered our expectations and the complexity of our clues.

It would also be helpful to know if a player earned their ELO through 2 player or multiplayer games where early saves mean the exact opposite thing -- one warns that another card needs to be saved and the other means a card needs to be played. Separate ELO tracking for 2p games would be incredibly helpful.

Are there aggressive players? Yes, but invisible ELO isn't solving that. In fact, it's making it worse. All cooperative players get frustrated when their expectations of skill level aren't met by other players at the table. Hanabi is particularly challenging due to the conventions used at each rank (I'm not sure any other game has as complex unwritten rules). This incongruency between expectations and reality is exasperated by the fact that we don't have a good way of communicating ALL the conventions expected at each table. The existing "convention" list is woefully inadequate, especially since there is a massive difference between 2player and multiplayer conventions, as mentioned.

Fixes for Hanabi:
1. Make ELO visible again
2 Add a new rank at 900 ELO
3. Separate ELO tracking for 2p vs multiplayer
4. More convention checkboxes and/or more space to outline conventions used
5. Actually talk with Hanabi players at each rank to figure out common conventions.
6. Allow tables to choose ELO range instead of just rank, so Masters can more easily help train experienced experts (while avoiding new experts who need more guidance).

estroncio wrote: ↑19 December 2023, 09:37

anykidrated wrote: ↑19 December 2023, 09:05

estroncio wrote: ↑19 December 2023, 08:55 Matchmaking is broken and this is a mitigation.
The Arena system thinks a 200 ELO player with 30% win rates (in a 1vs1 game) is an "Elite" player. The outcome cannot be a surprise to anyone, any half good player will wipe out this "Elite" player in a totally pointless game. Twenty minutes of life wasted.

At least you could reduce this issue my red thumbing weak players. Not anymore apparently, FML.

What game does this happen in?

This happens a lot in Carcassonne. Just a few examples of games I had in this month only:

Code: Select all

+---------------------+-----------+--------+-------------+
| Date                | Table Id  | O. ELO | O. Win Rate |
+---------------------+-----------+--------+-------------+
| 2023-12-15 at 09:08 | 450316142 |    279 |         31% |
| 2023-12-15 at 12:39 | 450316142 |    250 |         34% |
| 2023-12-13 at 16:11 | 449700951 |    126 |         24% |
| 2023-12-13 at 13:31 | 449653533 |    166 |         38% |
| 2023-12-11 at 08:40 | 448852721 |    231 |         36% |
| 2023-12-07 at 11:53 | 447436429 |    219 |         34% |
| 2023-12-04 at 23:18 | 446578965 |    259 |         54% |
| 2023-12-01 at 08:50 | 445267753 |    137 |         21% |
+---------------------+-----------+--------+-------------+

I'm myself around ~630 with 71% win rate. As you can see there pairings don't make any sense.
(I would have 5 times more games like this had I not red thumb a lot of players)

I already have my settings like:

Code: Select all

+---------------------------+-------------------------+
| I'm okay playing with     | My level                |
| I never want to play with | Near my level (+/- 1)   |
| I never want to play with | Around my level (+/- 2) |
| I never want to play with | Far from my level       |
+---------------------------+-------------------------+

But those players are considered somehow "Elite" and belong to my level.

On top of having bad pairing due to everybody being "Elite" now I'm paired against "Diamond" people even though my settings say I only want to play people in my level

estroncio wrote: ↑05 January 2024, 09:50 On top of having bad pairing due to everybody being "Elite" now I'm paired against "Diamond" people even though my settings say I only want to play people in my level

That may be related to another bug. In certain games, extra levels (e.g. Platinum, Diamond) were introduced mid-season. E.g. in Century: Spice Road, at the start of the season, it was Bronze, Silver, Gold, Elite, but then halfway through Arena Season 15, Platinum was added in between Gold and Elite. (I have no idea how this happened.) Anyway, we now have a bunch of players stuck in Platinum league, while others before them went from Gold straight to Elite.

Maybe the system was not prepared to handle the extra league(s) introduced mid-season, and thinks that e.g. Diamond is equivalent to Elite in Carcassone.

In carcassonne i got to the point of beating an expert player in arena and getting 0 elo, it was my 7th consecutive win against him. Again, arena!
yesterday, playing games against a master, I won twice and get a penalty on the 2nd win even though he had more 150 elo than me... it was not arena, but still...

we are preventing an amount of powerlevellers of going through with their "tactics" at what cost? not rewarding those who play fair? should we really penalize a huge amount of players to prevent a few from power levelling (which will later on be identified if they reach weird high levels)?. what monitoring does this require to come to a conclusion that it hurts more the system than it helps?

I have canceled my subscription renewal, could not find a place to indicate my motive but it was due to bad management/implementation of BGA. decisions made in 2 minutes without further consideration or... imagine this, asking feedback before implementation rather than implement to be bombed and come to the conclusion of how poor were those ideas.

lordalx wrote: ↑13 December 2023, 10:41
→ Cooperative play and non competitive game
For cooperative games such as Hanabi, The Crew, or Just One, competition is already disabled. However, some players were too focused on the ELO, which led to unnecessary competitiveness in an environment which should instead incentivize cooperation.
For such games, we decided to hide the ELO value of each player and only display their current rank, from Beginner to Master.
This rank is based on existing win / loss games from the underlying ELO system. This way, you will not lose your rank with this change. For some games where chapters or scenarios are played, the more successful chapter will get you to the next rank faster, but you will not know how far from the next rank you could be at a given time.

Hello, I would like to understand this change in the ELO system in cooperative games what sense it can have, because in my opinion no one.

I would have understood if the ELO scoring system had been completely disabled in cooperative games then it would have made sense and logic.
or if a new ELO scoring mechanism had been introduced
or leave it as it was before because now with the new change it is the same thing than before
but the way it’s been modified now is just meaningless and only annoying.

Because the ELO ranking is still visible on the screen when the game starts and at the end of the game it changes depending on the result but without knowing how much, and to know it you have to go to your home and see how much has changed. (Why do this extra step?)

I do not understand why change something in this way, just to make it more complicated without apparent benefit.

It would make more sense to remove it completely because right now it is like before only with the boredom of having to check every time after a game going into the lobby.

Maybe it’s me that do not understand the potential of this system, but in this way the players stay too focused on ELO anyway. The problem is still here.

I propose as I wrote before thinking about introducing some new ELO scoring mechanism to overcome this problem. Half hiding things never solves anything, deal with the problem and look for a way to solve it in the best way.

No sarcasm I just want to understand and try to help to improve the site!
thanks for your work

I can see my win ELO being reduced when playing people I've played before but the loss ELO is not being reduced accordingly. Surely if I can't gain as much for a win then I shouldn't lose as much for a loss with this new change?

Or have I misunderstood something?

Nuzzer71 wrote: ↑05 January 2024, 21:38 I can see my win ELO being reduced when playing people I've played before but the loss ELO is not being reduced accordingly. Surely if I can't gain as much for a win then I shouldn't lose as much for a loss with this new change?

Or have I misunderstood somethingt?

Right now, winner gets less than full points, but loser gets the full deduction. So ELO is negative sum now. You find that strange? Welcome to the club! There are already 300+ comments in this thread, many with exactly the same issue.

I'd like to take back the ELO in Hannabi. I think there is important, because I don't want to play with people who have low ELO - they don"t know some rules which are important for good game.

carnepazza wrote: ↑05 January 2024, 13:02

lordalx wrote: ↑13 December 2023, 10:41
→ Cooperative play and non competitive game
For cooperative games such as Hanabi, The Crew, or Just One, competition is already disabled. However, some players were too focused on the ELO, which led to unnecessary competitiveness in an environment which should instead incentivize cooperation.
For such games, we decided to hide the ELO value of each player and only display their current rank, from Beginner to Master.
This rank is based on existing win / loss games from the underlying ELO system. This way, you will not lose your rank with this change. For some games where chapters or scenarios are played, the more successful chapter will get you to the next rank faster, but you will not know how far from the next rank you could be at a given time.

Hello, I would like to understand this change in the ELO system in cooperative games what sense it can have, because in my opinion no one.

I would have understood if the ELO scoring system had been completely disabled in cooperative games then it would have made sense and logic.
or if a new ELO scoring mechanism had been introduced.

But the way it’s been modified now is just meaningless and only annoying.
The ELO ranking is still visible on the screen when the game starts and at the end of the game it changes depending on the result but without knowing how much, and to know it you have to go to your home and see how much has changed. (Why do this extra step?)

I do not understand why change something in this way, just to make it more complicated without apparent benefit.

It would make more sense to remove it completely because right now it is like before only with the boredom of having to check every time after a game going into the lobby.

Maybe it’s me that do not understand the potential of this system, but in this way the players stay too focused on ELO anyway. The problem is still here.

I propose as I wrote before thinking about introducing some new ELO scoring mechanism to overcome this problem. Half hiding things never solves anything, deal with the problem and look for a way to solve it in the best way.

No sarcasm I just want to understand and try to help to improve the site!
thanks for your work

I think ELO in coop games is still useful in that it gives a feel for how much someone has played. Players play different clues in Just One if someone is well experienced vs a beginner. Same in Hanabi (which I've not played) going from recent comments here. So what if someone has a lot of ELO amassed in coop games? Who cares? Who exactly does it affect? It just means the player has spent a lot of time playing that particular game. Good for them. Who is so upset about it that they feel the need to prevent this? What is the point?