Board Game Arena

It's an issue that has cropped up lots of times in the past. No-one on the BGA team plays competitively. Not arena, not ELO, not even against strangers. If they play at all, then it's against their friends which are mainly other BGA team members. They really don't have an understanding, and therefore a proper grounded reasoning to know the difference between players that moan about stuff anyway, and real problems.
From a user experience the number of problems that come up when you're not just playing against your friends is staggering. And this is the reason why. BGA staff just don't experience it. Tournaments, Arena, ELO - no experience.

Personally I contribute from time-to-time (probably just interpreted as plain moaning to BGA staff). But after the farce of the joint placement ELO calculation, I've let the contributions slip. Ironically that particular old problem was fixed in this latest saga.

Now, added to the 'learning the ways of BGA' is added: Play less competitive games, probably with your friends instead. Ignore ELO, it's so bastardised and close to a useless statistic.

It's a real shame for players like h_illes, where they solely play on BGA for the competitive gaming. No alternative might mean bye-bye to great players, but also great contributors. BGA should be wary of the audience that they are (un)intentionally garnering.

GeoPaladin wrote: ↑08 March 2024, 11:24 While we're reduced to speculation, I expect the reason is a bit simpler than some are suggesting. When I see this behavior in similar cases, it's almost always because the person in charge doesn't want to deal with the problem and just hopes it goes away.

I expect the reasoning for leaving the change involves some combination of organizational inertia/laziness (probably the most likely culprit), pride, and possibly opinionated dev(s) who want the system to work, and potentially poor organization/lack of resources for use in fixing a self-inflicted problem.

I consider the poor organization part confirmed, whatever the reason is. It is very sad that the site is run this way. Truly, there is no excuse for the lack of communication.

ChiefPointThief wrote: ↑08 March 2024, 03:44
Was the issue ever corrected or did they just put a band aid on it? Sure not losing elo in a game you were on the final move of winning is great but actually getting elo for that game would be fixing that problem.

I mean, as much as I'm on board with haranguing the BGA staff for not correcting obvious issues like losing elo for someone else quitting a game, I think we also have to be fair to them. In a 4 player game like Agricola, yes it * when someone quits in the final round, and it it super dumb that high rated players can lose elo to someone else quitting, since the system treats it as a three way tied win among the other players. This was actually fixed in the past though by making it impossible for one to lose elo in these circumstances.

While I agree it'd be nice to actually award the real winner the appropriate elo, I accept this is not actually something that can be fixed. What would you have them do? In something like Agricola, if someone quits in the final round and there are still remaining actions in the game, you can't know who is actually winning. The game isn't over, remaining actions can change who is in the lead and who is going to win. There's no programmatic way to determine a winner.

So anyhow, yes I would claim this issue had been fixed in the past, as much as it ever was going to be. There's nothing further that could be done for those situations, no ability to award "deserved" elo.

*Moderator edit: please refrain from swearing on BGA, this is a family-friendly platform.

Maybe we should start a list of issues we would like bga to address I forgot about how elo calculation is now hidden for games more than a week old. Why was this change made? Seems odd

Ranior wrote: ↑08 March 2024, 14:58

ChiefPointThief wrote: ↑08 March 2024, 03:44
Was the issue ever corrected or did they just put a band aid on it? Sure not losing elo in a game you were on the final move of winning is great but actually getting elo for that game would be fixing that problem.

I mean, as much as I'm on board with haranguing the BGA staff for not correcting obvious issues like losing elo for someone else quitting a game, I think we also have to be fair to them. In a 4 player game like Agricola, yes it * when someone quits in the final round, and it it super dumb that high rated players can lose elo to someone else quitting, since the system treats it as a three way tied win among the other players. This was actually fixed in the past though by making it impossible for one to lose elo in these circumstances.

While I agree it'd be nice to actually award the real winner the appropriate elo, I accept this is not actually something that can be fixed. What would you have them do? In something like Agricola, if someone quits in the final round and there are still remaining actions in the game, you can't know who is actually winning. The game isn't over, remaining actions can change who is in the lead and who is going to win. There's no programmatic way to determine a winner.

So anyhow, yes I would claim this issue had been fixed in the past, as much as it ever was going to be. There's nothing further that could be done for those situations, no ability to award "deserved" elo.

There are a few options. One is that all non quitters tie and split elo from the losing player equally. Also note in this situation that the quitter is losing 10 elo for the karma hit that goes nowhere. Instead those points can go to the players. So in a 4p game each player is already guaranteed 3.33 elo in addition to there equal share of whatever elo is split evenly. To be clear if a player has increased k factor they should still get their equivalent.

Another is depending on the game it can just carry on with the quitter coming in last and play resumes as normal.

Maybe you should chime in here: https://boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=35359

Like I told razor there are several threads on this issue. Maybe they should be combined in one to show how much people would like to see change. That may not help anything considering the size of this thread but having one big thread is better than tons of little ones because they each get a few comments and fade away.

h_illes wrote: ↑08 March 2024, 12:55

GeoPaladin wrote: ↑08 March 2024, 11:24 While we're reduced to speculation, I expect the reason is a bit simpler than some are suggesting. When I see this behavior in similar cases, it's almost always because the person in charge doesn't want to deal with the problem and just hopes it goes away.

I expect the reasoning for leaving the change involves some combination of organizational inertia/laziness (probably the most likely culprit), pride, and possibly opinionated dev(s) who want the system to work, and potentially poor organization/lack of resources for use in fixing a self-inflicted problem.

I consider the poor organization part confirmed, whatever the reason is. It is very sad that the site is run this way. Truly, there is no excuse for the lack of communication.

You're preaching to the choir, but I expect you know that. I couldn't agree more.

lordalx wrote: ↑13 December 2023, 10:41 As usual, feel free to post your feedback, we will continue to monitor the current situation and improve the system accordingly.

Just replying again to let you know this issue is not forgotten. I still don't understand how there was no official reply for over 2 months now, despite you explicitly asking for feedback and saying you will monitor the situation. Care to shed some light on this?

Did anyone notice that we no longer receive messages in our game history when we reach a new level (Good, strong, expert, master elo)? Was this done intentionally by bga as a we don’t won’t you to care about elo change?

Ranior wrote: ↑08 March 2024, 14:58

ChiefPointThief wrote: ↑08 March 2024, 03:44
Was the issue ever corrected or did they just put a band aid on it? Sure not losing elo in a game you were on the final move of winning is great but actually getting elo for that game would be fixing that problem.

I mean, as much as I'm on board with haranguing the BGA staff for not correcting obvious issues like losing elo for someone else quitting a game, I think we also have to be fair to them. In a 4 player game like Agricola, yes it * when someone quits in the final round, and it it super dumb that high rated players can lose elo to someone else quitting, since the system treats it as a three way tied win among the other players. This was actually fixed in the past though by making it impossible for one to lose elo in these circumstances.

While I agree it'd be nice to actually award the real winner the appropriate elo, I accept this is not actually something that can be fixed. What would you have them do? In something like Agricola, if someone quits in the final round and there are still remaining actions in the game, you can't know who is actually winning. The game isn't over, remaining actions can change who is in the lead and who is going to win. There's no programmatic way to determine a winner.

So anyhow, yes I would claim this issue had been fixed in the past, as much as it ever was going to be. There's nothing further that could be done for those situations, no ability to award "deserved" elo.

*Moderator edit: please refrain from swearing on BGA, this is a family-friendly platform.

I didn't know that the system previously followed the principle that you should never lose elo in a game somebody else quits. Why was that principle abandoned?? It is clearly correct.

alexwjb wrote: ↑11 March 2024, 11:05
I didn't know that the system previously followed the principle that you should never lose elo in a game somebody else quits. Why was that principle abandoned?? It is clearly correct.

Who knows, it's absolutely baffling.

It was corrected years ago. Then they introduced arena, and you could lose arena points in games others quit. This was pointed out and corrected. I'm pretty sure it also resurfaced as an issue on some other prior elo update/modification, and corrected.

So I have no clue why they've not been dealing with fixing it again for months here. I'm pretty sure it's a good indication they're not actually reading or paying any attention to this thread, although I've got to assume it's also listed in the bug reports somewhere. (To be fair, I suppose I should actually make sure it is, although I haven't had this happen to me so I couldn't provide a great report, it's just I'm in turn with the Terra Mystica and Agricola communities, both of which tend to be played 4 player, and both of which have high rated players, and long games that sometimes see quitters, which are the circumstances that give rise to anyone actually experiencing or noticing this problem)

I get that it is a somewhat niche issue that doesn't impact many players, and only really hurts a handful of high rated players....but it's still obviously something that should be fixed.


I really love this site overall, I love being able to play games on BGA, but it's sad that I fairly consistently am not a fan of the decisions the admins make.

ChiefPointThief wrote: ↑11 March 2024, 09:30 Did anyone notice that we no longer receive messages in our game history when we reach a new level (Good, strong, expert, master elo)? Was this done intentionally by bga as a we don’t won’t you to care about elo change?

yes, true. the achievement is no longer published. a friend form the carcassonne national team reached master for the 1st time and got... nothing.