Board Game Arena

I myself don't even play turn based games, but I am curious if that is how it works. I just checked 2 results from another person and it seems that turn based calculates score based on your rating when u ended the game, not when started.

1. Start as many 2p games as possible.
2. Drag the games you think you stand a chance at as long as possible.
3. Surrender at all the games you can't win as soon as possible.
4. Claim all wins at the end.

Because your rating get's lower first, you will end up with higher rating. Am I missing sth?

and with their minor inflated ELO, they'll give it all back on the next cycle of games.

A very long winded and practically difficult feat to accomplish for very little gain. More of a thought experiment rather than anything concrete.

I do not see this as a potential realistic abuse of the ELO system.

You'd play better if you didn't start all 10 games at once.

It's not all black and white to know whether you'll win or not. Conceding games is not generally a good idea, you always stand a chance. And you'll gain more and better experience in the games you lose.

OwnerOfTheIronThrone wrote: ↑15 March 2024, 11:30 Because your rating get's lower first, you will end up with higher rating. Am I missing sth?

No, you are quite right. This is well known amongst turn based players. it can be used to give you a slight boost, or to mitigate a little on a dramatic loss. But the effect is quite minor - it might let you edge over to one of the medals (300 and 500 Elo) but it won't long term have any effect on your play.

Note, that this is part of the reason that Arena turn based works differently to standard turn based. In Arena you have to play the games in order.

So, yeah known thing, but not a problem.

The reason they did it with Arena is because players were purposefully dragging their losing game on past the deadline so the result wouldn't count at all.
If it was partly the same reason to do it in normal turn-based games, then they could/should put this restriction in as-well.

RicardoRix wrote: ↑15 March 2024, 13:26 The reason they did it with Arena is because players were purposefully dragging their losing game on past the deadline so the result wouldn't count at all.
If it was partly the same reason to do it in normal turn-based games, then they could/should put this restriction in as-well.

In fact they did (sort of) by banning no time limit ELO match

RobertBr wrote: ↑15 March 2024, 12:42 But the effect is quite minor - it might let you edge over to one of the medals (300 and 500 Elo) but it won't long term have any effect on your play.

No, this has been used extensively by a few players to claim 1st ranking in multiple games.

N_Faker wrote: ↑15 March 2024, 14:57 No, this has been used extensively by a few players to claim 1st ranking in multiple games.

Nonsense. Congratulations on joining the conspiracy theory wing of the forum that believes the rand function is rigged, that AI bots have been secretly developed, that players extensively hack the interface, or that BGA awards wins to paying members.

For anyone who is not a conspiracy theorist and lives in reality, rest assured the overall effect is minor and while you can nudge yourself slightly by shifting the order games finish in no one is using this to substantially distort their ranking.

ufm wrote: ↑15 March 2024, 14:56

RicardoRix wrote: ↑15 March 2024, 13:26 The reason they did it with Arena is because players were purposefully dragging their losing game on past the deadline so the result wouldn't count at all.
If it was partly the same reason to do it in normal turn-based games, then they could/should put this restriction in as-well.

In fact they did (sort of) by banning no time limit ELO match

Yeah, this was part of the reason for that change. In no time limit games you could exploit by just never finishing lost games, and some people were doing that (one of the weirdness you get on the forums are incredibly narrow viewpoint positions; we've seen a conspiracy theorist here you can also find a huge thread maintained by a very small minority of players wanting Elo to be returned as an option for no time limit games despite the really obvious reason it was removed).

RobertBr wrote: ↑15 March 2024, 15:24

N_Faker wrote: ↑15 March 2024, 14:57 No, this has been used extensively by a few players to claim 1st ranking in multiple games.

Nonsense. Congratulations on joining the conspiracy theory wing of the forum that believes the rand function is rigged, that AI bots have been secretly developed, that players extensively hack the interface, or that BGA awards wins to paying members.

For anyone who is not a conspiracy theorist and lives in reality, rest assured the overall effect is minor and while you can nudge yourself slightly by shifting the order games finish in no one is using this to substantially distort their ranking.

You are ridiculous. Don't try to make claims when you have no knowledge about it, a few players have been extensively reported due to exploiting how ELO is attributed in this way.

N_Faker wrote: ↑15 March 2024, 14:57

RobertBr wrote: ↑15 March 2024, 12:42 But the effect is quite minor - it might let you edge over to one of the medals (300 and 500 Elo) but it won't long term have any effect on your play.

No, this has been used extensively by a few players to claim 1st ranking in multiple games.

Can you provide us with some evidence?