Board Game Arena

Browsing the Elo ratings of the top players, I see a few games where 1000 has been exceeded. No one has crossed 1300 though, until I see Thermopyles. The top player at this moment is 11716, 2nd place 9380, 3rd spot 7900. The 10th spot is 1414, better than the top rating of any other game. Is Thermopyles truly such a deep game? Or are other factors involved? I'm not accusing anyone of anything, just very curious.

It is a solo game and ratings aren't Elo in any normal sense.

It is simply +10 for a win and -2 for a loss. So anyone who can win more than 17% are only limited in how much 'Elo' they can gain by how much time they have to play.

Thanks for the info. I looked at the rules. It seems to be vaguely like a solo (or cooperative) version of the card game War, except you get to choose which card in your hand to play, with dice and lots of other stuff added. Maybe a spreadsheet analysis could tell you optimal play for almost any situation. It might be interesting to play, but not 6000 times

It suggests the 'bot' you are rated against is misconceived. In Hannabi different set ups have different ELO ratings and players measure their result against that. If the same principle is applied in any solo game you get realistic Elos.

There is dice involved it's a bit random, you can't win ALL the time.

There is a strategic guide for this game, written by me