Board Game Arena

And by multiplayer I mean games whose arena's configuration is at least 4players. one could make a case for 3p, but I find it much more tolerable.

The classic example here is Sushi Go, most of the time getting 2nd place rewards nothing, even having '1' lower-ranking player in the game is enough for that to happen. (e.g. 3 Plat and 1 Gold)

So, the only real way to climb is to get first place, every single time. The game turns into whoever gets luckier with a winstreak. It is impractical, because in a game with 4 players of equal skill, getting first place is about 25%. You should at least be guaranteed some points for 2nd place in a 4p game, since at least you've defeated 2 players (but lost to 1).

And especially in Sushi Go, which has a fair amount of luck in it, but also depends on blocking other players, it is common to manage to block 1 or 2 and get second place while the first place is someone who wasn't contested that much.

+1 with many 4p games.
Winner should get the "number of players" points. He/she wins against all the others (4 points in 4 players). The second wins over the 2 last (2 points).
The third wins over the last (1 point). Nothing for being last !

Well I think that it should still be symmetric somehow. Maybe +3 for 1st, +1 for 2nd, -1 3rd, -3 4th? That is the simple way... however I still feel there is something better than just this.

Brisbane Roar wrote: ↑29 April 2020, 15:44 Well I think that it should still be symmetric somehow. Maybe +3 for 1st, +1 for 2nd, -1 3rd, -3 4th? That is the simple way... however I still feel there is something better than just this.

I believe it is exactly that if all players are on same level. Basically you get +3 from all players you beat and -3 from all players you lose, but the total is divided by the number of opponents.