Board Game Arena

Yeah Matthew, good point about having the auto block be opt in, not automatic.

We dont need auto block we need a notification that you will get reduced elo. That's all is needed. And it shouldn't be that hard to implement.
Using red thumbs and a list is ridiculous.

AKuras wrote: ↑18 February 2025, 09:35 We dont need auto block we need a notification that you will get reduced elo. That's all is needed. And it shouldn't be that hard to implement.
Using red thumbs and a list is ridiculous.

I assume the issue is that you don't want matched against players where you will gain reduced elo, since you WANT to avoid repeatedly playing that person.

GTSchemer wrote: ↑19 February 2025, 17:37

AKuras wrote: ↑18 February 2025, 09:35 We dont need auto block we need a notification that you will get reduced elo. That's all is needed. And it shouldn't be that hard to implement.
Using red thumbs and a list is ridiculous.

I assume the issue is that you don't want matched against players where you will gain reduced elo, since you WANT to avoid repeatedly playing that person.

Yes. Especially when that reduction goes away after certain amount of time. I want to know before game if it's going to be reduced or appropriate time has paced and no reduction will be applied

The ELO decay in its current form punishes honest players, too. Consider this matchup:
https://boardgamearena.com/gamestats?pl ... me_id=1480

I got 0 ELO for my last win due to a win streak (and even in the games leading up to it, my ELO gain was heavily reduced). Yet if he wins against me, I get the full deduction. I am an honest player, why am I being punished? We play exclusively in Arena, where I have no control of the opponent (so I didn't even pick him intentionally). My opponent is a pro, top 20 in Arena, and had his fair share of wins against me in the past. He will win against me eventually.

Please revise this whole ELO reduction approach, for the sake of honest players, who were supposed to benefit from the ELO reduction system in the first place, yet the current system backfires badly. Better solutions were proposed in this very thread, including reducing the K factor instead for frequent matchups.

Wow, 100 pages of comments. When was the last input from BGA?

Mr_Magic wrote: ↑18 March 2025, 10:20 Wow, 100 pages of comments. When was the last input from BGA?

March 15, 2024 on page 70 by lordalx. We're just barely past the one year anniversary of the last admin post, and it completely missed the point of all the criticism.

This elo system is a bit ridiculous... and despite the outpouring of negative opinions on these changes, nearly a *1000^posts, and over a year later... no changes and barely any feedback/updates/acknowledgements from admins.

https://boardgamearena.com/table?table=657077749 ... received no elo from beating the player who was in 3rd place, due to an honest win streak. So should I just block the player that finished in 3rd place, or just purposely lose to them, just so that I can gain elo again against them again?

@lordalx ... any thoughts here?

This is their plan just ignore everything and maybe they will stop complaining

GeoPaladin wrote: ↑18 March 2025, 20:58

Mr_Magic wrote: ↑18 March 2025, 10:20 Wow, 100 pages of comments. When was the last input from BGA?

March 15, 2024 on page 70 by lordalx. We're just barely past the one year anniversary of the last admin post, and it completely missed the point of all the criticism.

As soon as BGA rolls any of this back me and 300 other people will come here to post comments about why we don't like it and why ELO decay was better. Me and an army of rollback-the-rollback stalwarts will post until our fingers bleed. If we generate 105 pages of scattered reasoning on why BGA should rollback-the-rollback perhaps the rollback will be rolled back. This of course will trigger the rollback-the-rolled-back-rollback initiative in hopes of 110 pages of scattered reasonings and a subsequent rollback of the rolled back rollback.