Alle rapporter
Hanabi rapporter
#11910: "Limit the rating of "picky" players at Hanabi"
rejected: Utviklerne syns ikke dette er en god ide eller at kostnaden blir for høy i forhold til nytten
49
Hva handler denne rapporten om?
Hva har skjedd, eller hva gjelder det? Vennligst velg
Forslag: Etter min mening ville følgende forbedre spillimplementasjonen betydelig
Detaljert beskrivelse
-
• Vennligst forklar ditt forslag nøyaktig og konsistent slik at det er så enkelt som mulig å forstå hva du mener.
In this cooperative game, many players, mainly the "higher" rank players are acting too picky! That means after they made some unwilling mistake in the gameplay - like for example the yield of the mistake are 2 discarded numbers of 3 - they just vote to abbandon the game! I think the rating system should be changed! Such players do not play in the spirit of the game - and if there is some "unpleasant" event - I just call it a challenge - they just cowardly vote to run away from the game. So basicly they can never get a negative ELO. I think such behaviour in a cooperative gameplay should not be accepted. First of all, it is only a game, You do not have to always win.
I was the one who wanted to struggle and continue the game - they just ruined it on purpose! Like why should I just stop playing if the second 3 is discarded??? Come on...
Of course it is not possible to delete the option to quit the game - sometimes the real life duties are calling - so if the players agree to quit the game, so be it. But I think - in this cooperative game, after the finnish, there should be implemented also some sort of self-evaluating of your co-players - to lower their ELO rating after they just wanted to cowardly run away!!! • Hvilken nettleser bruker du?
Google Chrome v71
Rapporthistorikk
Feb 6 th 2019 12:20 • dadojin • Feilen har ikke blitt reprodusert av utviklerne enda:
yeah, not just these guys, but it happens sometimes with the players that they just want to run away easily - not facing the challenge of the cooperative gameplay.
Nov 7 th 2020 21:18 • schoolio • Dette forslaget har ikke blitt analysert av utviklerne ennå:
I don't really care about the ELO ranking, but is it fair for everyone to get negative points when they weren't the ones to make the mistake? If you can't back out of a game, then many get an unfair negative ranking. There are two ways to look at it.
Dec 31 st 2020 05:39 • ComplixVandh • Dette forslaget har ikke blitt analysert av utviklerne ennå:
Totally agreed! Collectively abandoning should be like collectively conceding. Players who do this should lose Elo.
Jan 17 th 2021 11:05 • Didou13 • Dette forslaget har ikke blitt analysert av utviklerne ennå:
Totally disagree with your purpose. You just make a subjective point. See...
Jan 19 th 2021 02:18 • pinkyandthebrain • Dette forslaget har ikke blitt analysert av utviklerne ennå:
It is a suggestion. By the very nature of suggestions they are subjective opinion pieces.
I too am in total agreement. Abandoning is frustrating, especially when the move is pulled right at the end of the game. It seems to all boil down to this fear of negative ELO. It's a shame BGA got rid of the message about a commitment to see a game through to the end on the accept page.
If people actually read the text in the log and at the end of the game they will see that as long as there are not three bombs then the game is a victory. Serial abandoners might find it cathartic to realise how unimportant a very minor deduction in ELO actually is.
I too am in total agreement. Abandoning is frustrating, especially when the move is pulled right at the end of the game. It seems to all boil down to this fear of negative ELO. It's a shame BGA got rid of the message about a commitment to see a game through to the end on the accept page.
If people actually read the text in the log and at the end of the game they will see that as long as there are not three bombs then the game is a victory. Serial abandoners might find it cathartic to realise how unimportant a very minor deduction in ELO actually is.
Feb 6 th 2021 10:31 • LustreOne • Dette forslaget har ikke blitt analysert av utviklerne ennå:
I had the same happen to me the very first "public" Hanabi game that I played on BGA. I've played Hanabi a lot in real life with friends, but there is definitely a 'style' of play to this game that needs some familiarity with the other players. A bit of strange luck in the deal and a few rounds in, the high-ELO players were basically forcing the abandonment of the game, rather than trying to play it to completion, essentially ruining the interest/challenge. This "game abandonment to preserve ELO" has totally turned me off playing Hanabi on BGA with players that are not my immediate friends.
Mar 8 th 2021 08:04 • master of bluff • Dette forslaget har ikke blitt analysert av utviklerne ennå:
join a table that actully suits youre level in bga style and every thing is good . its not always about loosing uniq cards but its playing with weak players who dosent get youre hints its frustrating its like we are playing in two different planet so the best is to abondon
Mar 10 th 2021 22:01 • Metalfreak80 • Dette forslaget har ikke blitt analysert av utviklerne ennå:
I only experienced 1 game where the other player intentionally played wrong cards to end the game. I think it was because I refused to accept to end the game. I do however had multiple occasions of high ranked players immediately asking to end the game, once a perfect game (25points) was no longer possible, either by a fault or just bad luck with the cards. Just to avoid losing ELO points.
Another thing that surprised me in the beginning, when I had zero or low ELO, was that I got a massive amount of rejects from high ranked players, not willing to even start the game. Only 1 or 2 actually played and gave some advise on the extra strategy rules.
Now that I'm more experienced, I can understand it's sometimes a burden to play with low ELO players when they don't understand the usual strategy.
I think this all comes from the definition of how ELO points are given in this game. Higher ranked players have little to gain but much to lose. And playing with "newbies" only increases the chance of losing ELO points.
The calculation of ELO points on a cooperative game like this is up for improvement. It's too much based on calculation for competitive games.
I think higher ranked players should get higher ELO points for playing with lower ELO players and vice versa.
That would actually be more representative to the difficulty of success in the game.
It would also increase the willingness to play with and explain rules to lower ELO players.
This would improve community instead of divide players.
Another thing that surprised me in the beginning, when I had zero or low ELO, was that I got a massive amount of rejects from high ranked players, not willing to even start the game. Only 1 or 2 actually played and gave some advise on the extra strategy rules.
Now that I'm more experienced, I can understand it's sometimes a burden to play with low ELO players when they don't understand the usual strategy.
I think this all comes from the definition of how ELO points are given in this game. Higher ranked players have little to gain but much to lose. And playing with "newbies" only increases the chance of losing ELO points.
The calculation of ELO points on a cooperative game like this is up for improvement. It's too much based on calculation for competitive games.
I think higher ranked players should get higher ELO points for playing with lower ELO players and vice versa.
That would actually be more representative to the difficulty of success in the game.
It would also increase the willingness to play with and explain rules to lower ELO players.
This would improve community instead of divide players.
Apr 10 th 2021 01:49 • Zothi • Dette forslaget har ikke blitt analysert av utviklerne ennå:
Totally agree
Sep 2 nd 2022 10:42 • bidouilIe • Dette forslaget har ikke blitt analysert av utviklerne ennå:
Metalfreak80 made one great point. I have another here.
There should be two game mode. One for enjoy/train, another to "compete" (as some seems to think there may be competition in cooperative game…). What we have actually is just a "no score no chrono no abandon" mode (so called training), and "chrono + score + abandon" mode (so called normal). Something doesn't make sense here.
So, what I mean by enjoy/train is, playing for no point, freely. Hence, no ELO, talking allowed, no need of chrono, abandon allowed, etc. (and why not, an undo which have to be collectively agreed, and/or a replay same deck!?) Pleasure and self/mutual improvement.
Counterpart is that ELO mode should not allow talking nor abandon collectively. *That* is the real challenge: you start to engage your points, either win or loose (either by playing or quiting). Nothing else. And for emergency case (as real life happens, we all know that), still possible to go turn/turn! Will to earn? Assume risk.
Also, if you think about scoring, there may be a competitive mode inspired by "duplicate" tarot. It also exists in scrabble and probably lots of other game. Principle is being rate against deck, everyone playing same deals. For example 16 tables each with predefined deck, and round with players rotating on tables, in a way you meet every other. Hence the goal is to make better than others in (almost) same condition (the almost coming from not having same partner on each deal). Where this competition mode is used, it's a really good evaluation of rank, almost cancelling chance variable.
Last but not least, the actual scoring doesn't take difficulty in account. It's by far easier to end with unofficial variant and/or flambs. Still a no flamb + official deal is same reward. Kind of same problem than what Metal talked about above: not scoring because of risk taken. Same way, doing -3 when it was the best possible score and no error is same punishment than if playing an easy deck with big fingers or small focus.
What suprise me about hanabi way of ELO, is that it looks like a subtle and complex process missing its target, and having unwilling side effects. In Bandido, it's +1 if you win, 0 if you loose. 5 or 6 exit, number of player, etc. doesn't matter: ELO is just a victory counter. And gess what? No picky player in Bandido =)
There should be two game mode. One for enjoy/train, another to "compete" (as some seems to think there may be competition in cooperative game…). What we have actually is just a "no score no chrono no abandon" mode (so called training), and "chrono + score + abandon" mode (so called normal). Something doesn't make sense here.
So, what I mean by enjoy/train is, playing for no point, freely. Hence, no ELO, talking allowed, no need of chrono, abandon allowed, etc. (and why not, an undo which have to be collectively agreed, and/or a replay same deck!?) Pleasure and self/mutual improvement.
Counterpart is that ELO mode should not allow talking nor abandon collectively. *That* is the real challenge: you start to engage your points, either win or loose (either by playing or quiting). Nothing else. And for emergency case (as real life happens, we all know that), still possible to go turn/turn! Will to earn? Assume risk.
Also, if you think about scoring, there may be a competitive mode inspired by "duplicate" tarot. It also exists in scrabble and probably lots of other game. Principle is being rate against deck, everyone playing same deals. For example 16 tables each with predefined deck, and round with players rotating on tables, in a way you meet every other. Hence the goal is to make better than others in (almost) same condition (the almost coming from not having same partner on each deal). Where this competition mode is used, it's a really good evaluation of rank, almost cancelling chance variable.
Last but not least, the actual scoring doesn't take difficulty in account. It's by far easier to end with unofficial variant and/or flambs. Still a no flamb + official deal is same reward. Kind of same problem than what Metal talked about above: not scoring because of risk taken. Same way, doing -3 when it was the best possible score and no error is same punishment than if playing an easy deck with big fingers or small focus.
What suprise me about hanabi way of ELO, is that it looks like a subtle and complex process missing its target, and having unwilling side effects. In Bandido, it's +1 if you win, 0 if you loose. 5 or 6 exit, number of player, etc. doesn't matter: ELO is just a victory counter. And gess what? No picky player in Bandido =)
Dec 4 th 2022 16:15 • Malo77 • Dette forslaget har ikke blitt analysert av utviklerne ennå:
I agree something has to be done, to avoid picky players. Maybee a beginner friendly option / no beginnnger option in the game, and do not allow abandoning. And the ELO in Hanabi do not reward people going to the end enough. So playing with beginners can be complicated/not rewarding as you spend much time explaining, and loose or maybee win 1 or 2 points.
Feb 28 th 2024 01:08 • Travis Hall • Dette forslaget har ikke blitt analysert av utviklerne ennå:
With the change to disallow abandoning cooperative games (substituting conceding instead, with ELO loss for concession) this suggestion is no longer relevant, and should be closed.
Oct 13 th 2024 23:15 • Blacktango • Utviklerne syns ikke dette er en god ide eller at kostnaden blir for høy i forhold til nytten:
Closed since players can't choose to concede a game anymore.
If they leave they will all lose ELO.
If they leave they will all lose ELO.
Legg til noe i denne rapporten
Legg til her noe som synes relevant for å reprodusere denne feilen eller forstå forslaget ditt:
- En annen bord ID / flytt ID
- Løste F5 problemet?
- Oppstod problemet gjentatte ganger? Hver gang? Tilfeldig?
- Hvis du har et skjermbilde av denne feilen (alltid lurt) kan du bruke Imgur.com for å laste det opp og kopiere inn lenken til bildet her.
