Page 1 of 2
Could this be considerated a cheat?
Posted: 18 February 2025, 22:51
by vitinho0Z
"Our service is having an issue right now.
Note: all reputation penalties received for leaving games will be cancelled."
In colaborative games when the team has a bad performance (and probably ELO loss), and someone that abandons on purpose evading a ELO loss, could this be considerated cheating?
Re: Could this be considerated a cheat?
Posted: 18 February 2025, 23:42
by nik592
If the site isn't working, can you distinguish between someone who quit because they were losing, or someone who quit because they weren't able to play a turn for several minutes?
In theory, site issues happen rarely (though I know lately it is a bit more than that), and most players aren't going to be able to take advantage of it because they're losing.
Re: Could this be considerated a cheat?
Posted: 19 February 2025, 04:31
by ufm
vitinho0Z wrote: ↑18 February 2025, 22:51
In colaborative games when the team has a bad performance (and probably ELO loss), and someone that abandons on purpose evading a ELO loss, could this be considerated cheating?
Abandoning cooperative games is now impossible, since December 2023.
Conceding cooperative games automatically results in 0 points, and in Hanabi getting 0 is worse than getting 1 or more points, obviously.
Re: Could this be considerated a cheat?
Posted: 19 February 2025, 13:49
by Ceaseless
ufm wrote: ↑19 February 2025, 04:31
vitinho0Z wrote: ↑18 February 2025, 22:51
In colaborative games when the team has a bad performance (and probably ELO loss), and someone that abandons on purpose evading a ELO loss, could this be considerated cheating?
Abandoning cooperative games is now impossible, since December 2023.
Conceding cooperative games automatically results in 0 points, and in Hanabi getting 0 is worse than getting 1 or more points, obviously.
Wait, what? How were you ever getting more than 1 point from conceding? Or any points at all upon ruling out going from 0 to 1? What sort of system did cooperative games have?
I'd have figure at best they'd have only been able to abandon for 0 points to avoid rating loss from conceding, which would be cut down by the update you describe. That they had a way to gain points from conceding seems wild.
Re: Could this be considerated a cheat?
Posted: 19 February 2025, 18:01
by richyfourtytwo
Afaik there is no such thing as an ELO-loss in coop games.
Re: Could this be considerated a cheat?
Posted: 19 February 2025, 23:07
by Ceaseless
richyfourtytwo wrote: ↑19 February 2025, 18:01
Afaik there is no such thing as an ELO-loss in coop games.
So coop rating is roughly how much you've played with better players getting a bit of a speed bump?
Re: Could this be considerated a cheat?
Posted: 20 February 2025, 00:12
by aesche
richyfourtytwo wrote: ↑19 February 2025, 18:01
Afaik there is no such thing as an ELO-loss in coop games.
That‘s wrong, example Hanabi. There is almost as many different ELO implementations as there are coop games…
Ceaseless wrote: ↑19 February 2025, 13:49
ufm wrote: ↑19 February 2025, 04:31
vitinho0Z wrote: ↑18 February 2025, 22:51
In colaborative games when the team has a bad performance (and probably ELO loss), and someone that abandons on purpose evading a ELO loss, could this be considerated cheating?
Abandoning cooperative games is now impossible, since December 2023.
Conceding cooperative games automatically results in 0 points, and in Hanabi getting 0 is worse than getting 1 or more points, obviously.
Wait, what? How were you ever getting more than 1 point from conceding? Or any points at all upon ruling out going from 0 to 1? What sort of system did cooperative games have?
I'd have figure at best they'd have only been able to abandon for 0 points to avoid rating loss from conceding, which would be cut down by the update you describe. That they had a way to gain points from conceding seems wild.
Not what he said, and probably also needs understanding of game-specific scoring and elo implementation. In Hanabi, a perfect score either is 25 or 30. For high ELO players, everything below perfect score likely results in ELO loss. Accordingly, in the old system, abandoning (assumed) imperfect games, that cancelled any scoring and ELO adjustment, was very common to avoid ELO loss. Now, an abandon is counted as a loss / game over, equaling a score of 0, and therewith the highest ELO loss possible. There still are plenty bad apples, but Hanabi is much more enjoyable since.
Re: Could this be considerated a cheat?
Posted: 20 February 2025, 04:32
by ufm
Ceaseless wrote: ↑19 February 2025, 23:07
richyfourtytwo wrote: ↑19 February 2025, 18:01
Afaik there is no such thing as an ELO-loss in coop games.
So coop rating is roughly how much you've played with better players getting a bit of a speed bump?
Now, only Hanabi and Pandemic use artificial ELO simulation.
Daybreak adopts flat subtraction for loss instead.
Others? Maybe what you said would apply, but better players usually don't play with beginners.
Even ratings never drop, when players are defeated they still lose TIME spent.
Re: Could this be considerated a cheat?
Posted: 20 February 2025, 09:04
by Jellby
ufm wrote: ↑20 February 2025, 04:32
Even ratings never drop, when players are defeated they still lose TIME spent.
Presumably they enjoyed playing the game while it lasted, so it's not really lost time
Re: Could this be considerated a cheat?
Posted: 20 February 2025, 12:37
by Ceaseless
aesche wrote: ↑20 February 2025, 00:12
richyfourtytwo wrote: ↑19 February 2025, 18:01
Afaik there is no such thing as an ELO-loss in coop games.
That‘s wrong, example Hanabi. There is almost as many different ELO implementations as there are coop games…
Ceaseless wrote: ↑19 February 2025, 13:49
ufm wrote: ↑19 February 2025, 04:31
Abandoning cooperative games is now impossible, since December 2023.
Conceding cooperative games automatically results in 0 points, and in Hanabi getting 0 is worse than getting 1 or more points, obviously.
Wait, what? How were you ever getting more than 1 point from conceding? Or any points at all upon ruling out going from 0 to 1? What sort of system did cooperative games have?
I'd have figure at best they'd have only been able to abandon for 0 points to avoid rating loss from conceding, which would be cut down by the update you describe. That they had a way to gain points from conceding seems wild.
Not what he said, and probably also needs understanding of game-specific scoring and elo implementation. In Hanabi, a perfect score either is 25 or 30. For high ELO players, everything below perfect score likely results in ELO loss. Accordingly, in the old system, abandoning (assumed) imperfect games, that cancelled any scoring and ELO adjustment, was very common to avoid ELO loss. Now, an abandon is counted as a loss / game over, equaling a score of 0, and therewith the highest ELO loss possible. There still are plenty bad apples, but Hanabi is much more enjoyable since.
When Ufm originally commented I read points in the context of the rating points originally being discussed. I take it you are saying the points in questions were actually the game scoring, not rating.