High/Low Score Statistics and Evolution

[dansimon44]

Hi, I recently purchased Premium and since I am a statistics junkie I love all the new data that is now available to me. One simple number that I think would make sense for many of the games that rely on scoring is High Score. I frequently wonder when having a particularly great (or particularly awful) result is how that rates with my historical performance. Also great would be a score trend chart (similar to the current Rank Evolution chart) to see if I am actually getting better over time or am doomed to permanent mediocrity in any particular game. Thanks for considering.

[BootyMFG]

I'd like to second this. Was that 56 I just scored in Agricola my best game ever? It seems the only way to figure that out would be to scroll through my game history (clicking "see more" a bunch of times) and eyeball it.

If there isn't an easy way to add a High Score option to the game history and/or statistics panels, is there at least an option to get a spreadsheet of the game history for easier searching?

[Silene]

Sounds nice. But it would lead to more complaints about people rightfully conceding the game before the end (in 2p games).

[qwertasdfg]

Sounds nice. But it would lead to more complaints about people rightfully conceding the game before the end (in 2p games).

That's already a terrible thing for everybody who pays for the statistics. Conceding already ruins them, so wouldn't be a change at all

[Een]

Conceding already ruins them, so wouldn't be a change at all

Sorry, no. I mean if I'm understanding correctly and you are talking about averages (your statement is not very clear except that it leans meaningfully towards negativity).
For computing averages, only games that ended normally are taken into account (so games conceded or broken for any reason are excluded).

[Meeplelowda]

Conceding already ruins them, so wouldn't be a change at all

Sorry, no. I mean if I'm understanding correctly and you are talking about averages (your statement is not very clear except that it leans meaningfully towards negativity).
For computing averages, only games that ended normally are taken into account (so games conceded or broken for any reason are excluded).

There you go again responding to complaints with facts.

[Silene]

Conceding already ruins them, so wouldn't be a change at all

Sorry, no. I mean if I'm understanding correctly and you are talking about averages (your statement is not very clear except that it leans meaningfully towards negativity).
For computing averages, only games that ended normally are taken into account (so games conceded or broken for any reason are excluded).

I think the point is, that an overwhelming win WOULD give a push on your average score upwards. A conceded game denies this push upwards which means it IS meddling with your stats somehow. But I don't mind. I think it's a good thing to be able to concede a game where you're hopeless but the game would still go on for a long time.

Only thing that could be added would be a "games won by concession" and "games lost by concession" in the stats for you. As well as "games abandonnend" (very useful for Hanabi players ) and "game broken"/"someone quit".

[aketti]

Conceding already ruins them, so wouldn't be a change at all

Sorry, no. I mean if I'm understanding correctly and you are talking about averages (your statement is not very clear except that it leans meaningfully towards negativity).
For computing averages, only games that ended normally are taken into account (so games conceded or broken for any reason are excluded).

There you go again responding to complaints with facts.

This is clearly not true; I see my average score for a game go down noticeably every time someone leaves a game and it ends with a score of '1' for me and the other winners and a score of '0' for the quitter. It would be great to have this changed so that abandoned games are NOT included in one's average score, as one of my goals has been to bring my average score up to a certain threshold, and that is almost impossible if I regularly have scores of "1" averaged in whenever someone quits!

[Een]

This is clearly not true; I see my average score for a game go down noticeably every time someone leaves a game and it ends with a score of '1' for me and the other winners and a score of '0' for the quitter. It would be great to have this changed so that abandoned games are NOT included in one's average score, as one of my goals has been to bring my average score up to a certain threshold, and that is almost impossible if I regularly have scores of "1" averaged in whenever someone quits!

We are talking about statistics; average score for a game is not a statistic generally provided, except if the developer included it specifically for their game, and you don't mention a specific game.
So your claim is pretty much impossible to verify, and what seems the most likely to me is that you are misunderstanding Elo ranking to be a statistic. It's not.

[aketti]

This is clearly not true; I see my average score for a game go down noticeably every time someone leaves a game and it ends with a score of '1' for me and the other winners and a score of '0' for the quitter. It would be great to have this changed so that abandoned games are NOT included in one's average score, as one of my goals has been to bring my average score up to a certain threshold, and that is almost impossible if I regularly have scores of "1" averaged in whenever someone quits!

We are talking about statistics; average score for a game is not a statistic generally provided, except if the developer included it specifically for their game, and you don't mention a specific game.
So your claim is pretty much impossible to verify, and what seems the most likely to me is that you are misunderstanding Elo ranking to be a statistic. It's not.

It's possible that I missed something as I jumped into this thread, but I am referring simply to the "Average Score" statistic that BGA provides, which does change when games end due to a players' quitting, etc. and thus evidently includes games that were not played to completion, when it would make more sense not to count such games. (I can only provide anecdotal evidence for this, but I had two games end in such fashion this week, and in both cases incorporating a score of 1 or 0 into my average instead of the usual 180-200 brought that average score down noticeably.) I do not mean Elo.