Board Game Arena

I really wish Arena Mode was Best of 3. Think it would stop the wild fluctuations in rankings as the better player would end up winning more often on average. What do others think?

(Same for Lost Cities. Those really short games benefit from playing to 2).

It triples the length of the game though and I like can’t stop because it’s short

On average, it would increase the length by about 3 or 4 minutes...

I find my ranking goes to the top 100, then in half an hour I'm outside the top 1000 then back up again in another half an hour. I think it would produce much more interesting and valid rankings.

MarkWard82 wrote: ↑14 August 2020, 14:31 On average, it would increase the length by about 3 or 4 minutes...

Not in turn-based games.

And, there's nothing stopping anyone from simply playing 3 games. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. (Can't stop isn't broken. Arena mode fluctuations are, and working on one game isn't going to fix the larger issue which will still remain.)

Jest Phulin wrote: ↑14 August 2020, 15:38 And, there's nothing stopping anyone from simply playing 3 games. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. (Can't stop isn't broken. Arena mode fluctuations are, and working on one game isn't going to fix the larger issue which will still remain.)

I think you know that arguing like this is really bad. "Because it doesn't solve the whole problem, it is not worth it to implement a viable improvement." Not cool.

I think that having a "Best of 3" variant of Can't Stop would be much appreciated even outside of Arena mode. And playing five "Best of 3" matches IS indeed different than playing 15 single games. And would indeed stabilize Arena ratings a little bit.

But you are right in that the bigger issue could be better solved in reducing EAS fluctuation in general, that is allowing different K factors for different types of games. For Can't Stop, the K factor could be even as small as K=5 (as opposed to K=40 like it is implemented currently).

If it is acceptable for Lost cities to have a 3-round variant, why it is not acceptable for can't stop? These two games should take up the same amount of time regardless.

nmego wrote: ↑14 August 2020, 17:07 If it is acceptable for Lost cities to have a 3-round variant, why it is not acceptable for can't stop?

Well, the 3-round variant in Lost Cities is an official rule from the publisher. (Actually, 1-round is the variant. 3 rounds is the standard in the rules.) Can't Stop has no such stipulation in its rulebook. Remember that BGA has to have licenses for its games, and generally those licenses require following the rulebook and official statements from the publisher/designer exactly.


Also, out of curiosity, who wins the match in a 3-player game where each player wins once? Or a 4-player match when 3 players win one game each, but claim no columns in the other two games, while the player that didn't win claims two columns in each game (so the total columns are 3 players with 3 total columns, and one player with 6 columns)?

You could make it "2 wins needed for victory". But apart from that, there are other games on BGA with specific settings possible only for 2p games.

The license question is a very good point.

dschingis27 wrote: ↑14 August 2020, 19:04 there are other games on BGA with specific settings possible only for 2p games.

I am unfamiliar with these settings, and therefore the precedence. Could you provide some examples, please? Thanks.

Jest Phulin wrote: ↑14 August 2020, 22:53 am unfamiliar with these settings, and therefore the precedence. Could you provide some examples, please? Thanks.

Kingdomino: 7x7
Peurto Rico: Craftsman Angst
Sushi Go: 2-player variant