All reports
taluva_displayed reports
#22930: " having all but 1 player be Losers keeps the ELO quite low for all but 1 player..."
implemented: This suggestion has been implemented
4
What is this report about?
What happened ? Please select from below
Suggestion: in my opinion, the following would greatly improve the game implementation
Detailed description
• Please explain your suggestion precisely and concisely so that it's as easy as possible to understand what you mean.
Finding a solution for scoring 2nd, 3rd, etc. would be more in line with all the other games on the site• What is your browser?
Mozilla v5
Report history
21. Aug 2020 1:06 • SteveV • This suggestion has not been analyzed by delopers yet:
I understand that this may be the intent of the original game, but since (nearly?) all of the games on BGA have 1st-nth scoring and ELO scaled as you move down the list ...
also, I understand that the ELO system may not be ideal (here or elsewhere), but since it's the system of use at the moment...
also, I understand that the ELO system may not be ideal (here or elsewhere), but since it's the system of use at the moment...
21. Aug 2020 5:12 • quietmint • This suggestion has not been analyzed by delopers yet:
See the discussion at forum.boardgamearena.com/viewtopic.php?t=13193
I'm fine with ranking first, second, third, etc. in cases where the game finishes "normally" (e.g., the rare case where you run out of tiles). But as I said in that post, I still do not believe it's correct or fair to apply the same ranking method when the game finishes "early" (e.g., the most common case where someone places enough buildings). You can't determine who is second-closest, third-closest to an "early" ending.
I'm fine with ranking first, second, third, etc. in cases where the game finishes "normally" (e.g., the rare case where you run out of tiles). But as I said in that post, I still do not believe it's correct or fair to apply the same ranking method when the game finishes "early" (e.g., the most common case where someone places enough buildings). You can't determine who is second-closest, third-closest to an "early" ending.
22. Aug 2020 23:19 • quietmint • This suggestion has been implemented:
Version 200822-2312: A partial tie breaker has been implemented. If the game ends "normally" (out of volcano tiles), non-eliminated players are ranked based on buildings. If the game ends "early" (someone builds all of two types), non-eliminated players all tie.
In both cases, however, elimination order is always used as a tie breaker -- the first player eliminated always ranks last, the second eliminated always ranks second-to-last, etc.
In both cases, however, elimination order is always used as a tie breaker -- the first player eliminated always ranks last, the second eliminated always ranks second-to-last, etc.
23. Aug 2020 17:40 • quietmint • This suggestion has been implemented:
Version 200823-1736: The scoring is now displayed in real-time.
26. Nov 2023 20:25 • Joe Hotson • This suggestion has been implemented:
This hasn't been fully resolved. Now, if a game ends "early", all players tie 2nd. However, the ELO calculation penalises players for not "winning" against those with a lower rank, even if they only actually lost to one player with a much higher rank.
26. Nov 2023 21:07 • quietmint • This suggestion has been implemented:
No bug here. There's no way to determine a rank order when the game ends "early", so the current behavior of making all losers tie is correct. (There's no way to tell who is "closer" to triggering an early ending.)
ELO calculation is done by BGA and not specific to the Taluva game. Yes, you will lose ELO points if you don't win against a weaker player you were expected to beat.
ELO calculation is done by BGA and not specific to the Taluva game. Yes, you will lose ELO points if you don't win against a weaker player you were expected to beat.
Add something to this report
Please add here anything that seems relevant to reproduce this bug or understand your suggestion:
- Another table ID / move ID
- Did F5 solve the problem?
- Did the problem appears several time? Everytime? Randomly?
- If you have a screenshot of this bug (good practice), you can use Imgur.com to upload it and copy/paste the link here.
