Current ELO system ruins the game. Only 1st should gain, all others lose equally.

[Romain672]

You don't 'lose' it, but you became unranked until you play again.

[Beorn]

Totally agree. Just played a game where a guy mooned for third place. When asked, "Moon for third?" Person responded, "Why not? I lost no points."

[TarkinsRevenge]

I would love to see this ELO system implemented for this game.
This game has the most frustrating ELO system for me on BGA. Because of this, players are encouraged to play for second or third place to protect their ELO, which changes the entire balance of the game. This system does NOT encourage you to play for the win, since being second place (first loser) often results in positive ELO and third place results in minor ELO loss.

PROPOSAL:
ELO for the win
Equal ELO loss for2-4

[Drizlin]

Hearts has been around for hundreds of years. Traditionally it had 1 winner and 3 losers (or a 3 way tie for 2nd if you prefer). That 'prize' structure encourages a 3v1 against the point leader, making the game a bit of a team game. With ELO being awarded differently for 1st, 2nd, 3rd & 4th the incentive is different. The result is that if you have learned traditional play strategy, you will be very upset playing Hearts on BGA!

I would very much support the idea of changing the ELO awarded to 1 winner and 3 equal non winners

OR change the name of the game to "Hearts, cut throat edition!"

[aesche]

I repeatedly wonder how all you guys play multiplayer games in real life. Be it hearts or wizard or any other game with trackable score, if 3rd can‘t make 1st anymore, he obviously targets 2nd. Noone crying around about it there, not sure why it should be different here.

[TarkinsRevenge]

I repeatedly wonder how all you guys play multiplayer games in real life. Be it hearts or wizard or any other game with trackable score, if 3rd can‘t make 1st anymore, he obviously targets 2nd. Noone crying around about it there, not sure why it should be different here.

A) Not "crying" about it, we are suggesting a change.
B) 3rd can ALWAYS make first. Hearts does not end until the last point is lost. Although the odds of victory decrease the closer to zero you get, the odds are never zero.

The issue is that the way ELO is rewarded in this game (something that does not happen IRL), causes strategies to be based around ELO and not around the game itself.

[RicardoRix]

So you'd be more happy, if everyone gunned for the 1st player, and in the end the 4th place positional player sneaks the win and gets all the points.
Is that more fair?

Or did the original guy in 1st place deserve their lead when everyone was playing against everyone else? Another rhetorical question. Yes, they did.

If you change 2-4 as equal placement, then you still run into the BGA ELO shared placement bug that has been around forever. Out of the frying pan...

If you like, then you can play without ELO in training mode.

[danno19]

Scusate è la prima volta che scrivo e approfitto di questo post perché trovo assurdo il modo in cui in questo gioco (Hearts) vengano assegnati/tolti gli scudi Elo per salire di livello nella versione arena
Vinco una partita e il gioco mi assegna due scudi, se non uno. Perdo una partita e mi toglie due tre a volte è capitato anche 4 scudi.
Tra l'altro non è un discorso di "forza dell'avversario" perché vinco con gente molto più forte di me e mi assegna +2 perdo con le stesse "forza valore" e mi dà un -3.
Mi pare davvero ridicolo. Così non arriverò mai a livello Elite.
Tra l'altro io ho un livello di 136 (molto basso).
Questa cosa però mi capita nelle ultime due settimane, perché non ricordo importanti disparità per assegnare/togliere scudi in questo gioco.
Assurdo.

[tim_is_awesome]

i do agree with this as well. players should play to win and taking some points to prevent the game from ending is the only play sometimes so that you gain a chance to win. i wonder if for some games a wrapper around the final elo distrribution could be created so that the points are evaluated and perhaps the ranking gets balanced so that the winner gets the points as they should. since i am not aware how this portion of the mechanics work in the background it seems that when that portion of the code gets called, right before it when the game ends it could call some code to allow for the changes before the elo code kicks in.

[Sheba-leila]

Es ist bei allen Spielen ab 3 Personen das fast immer 2 zusammenspielen. Ich hatte jetzt 1 Fall ich habe nur 1 Catan gewonnen wegen zeitüberschreitung. Es schrieb mich ein 3. Spieler an Warum ich gegen ihn und seinen Freund gewonnen habe. Der hat gar nicht mitgespielt. Für mich sind das Betrüger. Es macht halt keinen Spaß wenn so offensichtlich betrogen wird das man es merkt. Ich habe kein Problem zu verlieren aber nicht so. Deshalb zahle ich auch nicht für Premium. Und weil die Zeiten bei schneller Einstellung viel zu lange sind. Ich spiele solche spiele woanders und hier nur um die 5 geschenkpunkte.