Tie-breaker please

[Pedros]

Thanks for this enjoyable(if confusing!) game, but one reeservation.

It's very unusual for games here simply to register one winner and everybody else as losers (particularly in games which might have 4/5 losers). The effect of this is to skew the Elo ratings and also to limit the enjoyment of the game as a regular activity. Please could this be corrected?

[Een]

It's very unusual for games here simply to register one winner and everybody else as losers (particularly in games which might have 4/5 losers). The effect of this is to skew the Elo ratings and also to limit the enjoyment of the game as a regular activity. Please could this be corrected?

Actually, this is not especially rare. We respect the original game rules for this: in cases when there is only one winner in the rules, all other players are indeed losers (equal rank). That's the case for example in Coup and Quantum, and other games too.

[Pedros]

Thanks Een. I understand and accept your reason, but I have to say it will be very demotivating - after a while I'm likely to feel there's little incentive to keep playing. Especially in a game with a big random factor (like this one) the more chance to measure relative skill levels, the better

[Cheery Dog]

I think this can be fixed and respect the original rules by doing a multiple pyramids set up. Like the many other games that vary the amount of hands that are played.

[Een]

I think this can be fixed and respect the original rules by doing a multiple pyramids set up. Like the many other games that vary the amount of hands that are played.

You could indeed add this as a suggestion for the developer (who is also the game designer) in https://boardgamearena.com/bugs

[57erniepyle]

You can never please everyone. Some people say that in Hearts, only the winner should score. Like the movie HIghlander, "There can be only one!"

In my opinion, either way is fine. Play the games for the games, and don't sweat the ELOs.

[57erniepyle]

I just played a three person game. The game stopped when someone won, but I got a boost to my ELO for coming in second. So I'm not sure the original complaint stands up at all in light of this millstone of a factoid.

[Cheery Dog]

A way of sorting the losers was introduced sometime after this thread was made. It was relevant before that happened.