Elo count

[Travis Hall]

you make me say what I did not say.

in practice as soon as you know that you will not go to the end there is always a collective abandonment not to lose too many points.

Why? You’ve mentioned the (or a) goal of the site, but what is your goal that drives you to do this?

I didn't say that's what I do. But you who are a regular Hanabi player, you can't deny that it happens very often.

When I play with players with more than 600 ELO, more than one time out of two if we know that we are not going to finish someone proposes the abandonment .... do you find that normal? It means that there is a problem in the system...

Not in my games. I’ve red thumbed a lot of players who do this, at least the ones who are obnoxious about it, and the rest I just deny the request to abandon.

I still wind up with some abandonments in my history, and always will. There are legitimate reasons to abandon - things come up, and a player can’t continue, and I’d rather accept a communal abandon than force a quit, just to encourage people to be up-front about the problem, as long as the kindness doesn’t seem to get abused. Sometimes it’s me who needs the courtesy. Even more rarely I run short on time and can’t deny an abandon request. I’ve still been known to accept an abandonment if the chat becomes too toxic (generally toward others - I just ignore insults towards me these days) but that will be followed by red thumbs and reporting, and that’s very rare for me these days too.

And if you go way back in my history, I’ve got a couple of hundred abandoned games. That was before I realised why people were requesting abandons. I figured it was because I was screwing up games and didn’t know what I was doing (which is true) and I was annoyed even then because I was learning from the mistakes and what followed on from there. There’s more to learn from a mistake than a perfect play. But the thing about ELO systems, fortunately, is that the further back in history you go, the less impact on current score there is, so after 2000 more games, those early abandons are insignificant now.

So if you don’t abandon, there isn’t a problem, is there?

[Ravenhead]

Hi. Im New to hanabi and i get 22 elo Points in my first game. Now 10+ games later im at 22 with no numbers in- or decreased over that plays. What does the game me to do, to get more elo? I play at 55 cards. Which is pretty descent for me, getting 25-27 stars at the End. Done 30 too, but nothing changed.
May someone be so Kind to explain, what i need to do, to increase my tiny elo count?

[Silene]

Specifically the 55 cards version is completely outside of elo-calculation. Playing that setting will never let you gain/lose any elo points. I think because it was considered too luck-dependent?
Any other color-combination (5 colors / 6 colors / multicolor / with or without black) will have elo-adjustment. Only this one doesn't.

I don't know why there's no hint about that when creating a table. Anyway - now you know

[Jellby]

... and your ELO will never decrease below 100. While you're below 100, it can only increase (when deserved), and when you're above 100 it will only decrease down to 100.

[Vandaley]

you make me say what I did not say.

Why? You’ve mentioned the (or a) goal of the site, but what is your goal that drives you to do this?

I didn't say that's what I do. But you who are a regular Hanabi player, you can't deny that it happens very often.

When I play with players with more than 600 ELO, more than one time out of two if we know that we are not going to finish someone proposes the abandonment .... do you find that normal? It means that there is a problem in the system...

Not in my games. I’ve red thumbed a lot of players who do this, at least the ones who are obnoxious about it, and the rest I just deny the request to abandon.

I still wind up with some abandonments in my history, and always will. There are legitimate reasons to abandon - things come up, and a player can’t continue, and I’d rather accept a communal abandon than force a quit, just to encourage people to be up-front about the problem, as long as the kindness doesn’t seem to get abused. Sometimes it’s me who needs the courtesy. Even more rarely I run short on time and can’t deny an abandon request. I’ve still been known to accept an abandonment if the chat becomes too toxic (generally toward others - I just ignore insults towards me these days) but that will be followed by red thumbs and reporting, and that’s very rare for me these days too.

And if you go way back in my history, I’ve got a couple of hundred abandoned games. That was before I realised why people were requesting abandons. I figured it was because I was screwing up games and didn’t know what I was doing (which is true) and I was annoyed even then because I was learning from the mistakes and what followed on from there. There’s more to learn from a mistake than a perfect play. But the thing about ELO systems, fortunately, is that the further back in history you go, the less impact on current score there is, so after 2000 more games, those early abandons are insignificant now.

So if you don’t abandon, there isn’t a problem, is there?

Same here, I do not abandon and have a high rating. I did stop playing with people I do not know though, the anger for not abandoning was not worth it, so now I just play with the same couple of people. This helps ELO as we are very locked in on our conventions.

That said, if anyone wants to play turn based and is cool with chatter about plays and conventions after things are missed or misinterpreted feel free to invite me to a game.

[Ethereallz]

To your comments about abandoning to exploit the ELO system - you're totally right in that you can do that.

Anything over 5% abandon rate however will cause me and many of the other high skill players to avoid you. Personally I have about 1% abandon rate and it was exclusively from people rage quitting the game. I have found that most people with 20-30% abandon rates have only the loosest understanding of convention and will almost always make massive mistakes

In regards to how the elo system works: It essentially pegs you against what it expects your team average to score. As if you were playing against a bot team of that ranking. Harder difficulties cap at different elo points.

For example if you have a team average rating of 1,000 elo you will not gain points in any mode.

The elo system difficulty ranking is certainly not perfect. For example 5 player games have the highest ELO cap, and while 5 player is the easiest mode to 'go off the rails' because of divergent ideas, it's mathematically the EASIEST 30 since you have larger hand capacities, and a longer last turn which eliminates many of the 'impossible' orderings.

2 player with a 5 card deck variant is mathematically the most difficult, but is rewarded with a cap close to 4 player, and unfortunately despite 3 player having some of the same perspective issues as 2 player without many of the efficiency tricks of 4/5 player it has an incredibly low elo cap.

It's been a while but on the highest difficulty I think it's something like

2pl 930
3p 725
4p 930
5p 975

For the respective caps (Cap meaning that a perfect score gets you zero)

As to the reasoning behind why the points drop off is so severe: It is infinitely easier to get 28/29 points than it is to get 30 points.

If you're at a point where you get 1 point for 30, and -3 pts for 29 then in order to progress you need to get 30 in at least 75% of the games to break even. That's a pretty strong player. The best players on the site have an average 0 adjusted (Since the way it averages bomb outs make the stats silly) score of 29.5 or better.

[Sombracier]

I agree to the original post and i thing people don t really understand the question.

The first topic wasn t about the means to win/lose elo point at some point once a soecific level is reached.

The issue was that the player usually win or lose points at some whatever rate but rather than for a few days/weeks, points SEEMS harder to get / easier to lose than he used to remind, FOR SIMILAR GAMES, RESULTS, AND STARTING ELO RANK

in fact i came on the forum because i felt the same way the last few games (havent played much recently). Last one a 2 player game me 440 him 950, black powder, nonfireworks no multi, we ended full score (+1 mistake) we didn t even win a point.

Not that it is a serious matter, i just came by to know if the ranking allocation system got an update recently.

[Stroom]

ELO should not raise indefinitely. This is why you lose more points at higher elo and win less. If you are truly good, you can win more often than lose so that your elo actually increases. If it doesn't, you have reached your skill level. And even if they tweak the system, more experienced players would be much further away form you.

[Travis Hall]

in fact i came on the forum because i felt the same way the last few games (havent played much recently). Last one a 2 player game me 440 him 950, black powder, nonfireworks no multi, we ended full score (+1 mistake) we didn t even win a point.

There is something that I’ve long suspected is an issue. I suspect the ELO calculations may not have been adjusted to take Black Powder into account. Black Powder does not change the maximum score at all, due to how unplayed black cards subtract from the score rather than played black cards adding to it, so it could have slotted neatly into the existing algorithm when it was introduced. It definitely makes the game harder, though, so there really should be an adjustment to the algorithm to take Black Powder into account. I bet you did get an increase, but it would have been less than a point.

So that noted… you played with a team average rating of 695 on the easiest setting (not really the easiest, but counts as the easiest if the algorithm hasn’t been adjusted per above). You’re just shy of a master average. How much do you expect your ELO to increase there? Masters should really been scoring 25 something like 90% of the time in a basic game.

If you want to show that you are better, add in Avalanche of Colors, and start scoring 30 consistently. (I guess if you aren’t ready for both Avalanche of Colors and Black Powder together, take Black Powder out. I almost always play with both, though. When I don’t play with both, it usually means I misread the table settings.)

Not that it is a serious matter, i just came by to know if the ranking allocation system got an update recently.

I understand there was an adjustment to the ELO system for Hanabi at some point, but it wasn’t really recent.

[Travis Hall]

Another thing to note, for anyone who acknowledges that ELO is not supposed to rise indefinitely, but still think it should be rising for them… If the algorithm was adjusted to allow your ELO score to rise higher now, your ELO score would simply rise to that higher point and then stop rising again. In fact, ELO systems are intended to allow scores to rise fairly quickly to near to the player’s equilibrium point according to their skill. You’d only play a few dozen games and then be complaining again.