Home »
LB_COMMUNITY »
Reports »
LB_REPORT n°30059
All reports
{THIS_GAME_BUGS}
#30059: "For ARENA rewards count the PEAK of the SCORE instead of the current score"
#30059: "For ARENA rewards count the PEAK of the SCORE instead of the current score"
What happened ? Please select from below
Suggestion: in my opinion, the following would greatly improve the website
What happened ? Please select from below
Suggestion: in my opinion, the following would greatly improve the website
Please check if there is already a report on the same subject
If yes, please VOTE for this report. Reports with the most votes are taken care of in PRIORITY!
| # | Status | Votes | Game | Type | Title | Last update |
|---|
Detailed description
• Please copy/paste the error message you see on your screen, if any.
Idea is instead of the ladder being filtered by current score. Filter it by highest score player had achieved during that season.
Why this would be better?
1. It will prevent "parking" the score.
2. It will incetivize people to play more as they are never afraid of loosing ranking, they just have a chance to improve.
3. By providing greater number of players to be in the pool it's also easier to climb and it's more rewarding to play.
How it should be done?
In the profile present the peak score and sort the ladder by highest score achieved with a current score in the brackest.
Something like:
Player A 1998 (1998)
Player B 1997 (1900)
Player C 1950 (1930)• Please explains what you wanted to do, what you do and what happened
• What is your browser?
Google Chrome v87
• Please copy/paste the text displayed in English instead of your language. If you have a screenshot of this bug (good practice), you can use Imgur.com to upload it and copy/paste the link here.
Idea is instead of the ladder being filtered by current score. Filter it by highest score player had achieved during that season.
Why this would be better?
1. It will prevent "parking" the score.
2. It will incetivize people to play more as they are never afraid of loosing ranking, they just have a chance to improve.
3. By providing greater number of players to be in the pool it's also easier to climb and it's more rewarding to play.
How it should be done?
In the profile present the peak score and sort the ladder by highest score achieved with a current score in the brackest.
Something like:
Player A 1998 (1998)
Player B 1997 (1900)
Player C 1950 (1930)• Is this text available in the translation system? If yes, has it been translated for more than 24 hours?
• What is your browser?
Google Chrome v87
• Please explain your suggestion precisely and concisely so that it's as easy as possible to understand what you mean.
Idea is instead of the ladder being filtered by current score. Filter it by highest score player had achieved during that season.
Why this would be better?
1. It will prevent "parking" the score.
2. It will incetivize people to play more as they are never afraid of loosing ranking, they just have a chance to improve.
3. By providing greater number of players to be in the pool it's also easier to climb and it's more rewarding to play.
How it should be done?
In the profile present the peak score and sort the ladder by highest score achieved with a current score in the brackest.
Something like:
Player A 1998 (1998)
Player B 1997 (1900)
Player C 1950 (1930)• What is your browser?
Google Chrome v87
• What was displayed on the screen when you were blocked (Blank screen? Part of the game interface? Error message?)
Idea is instead of the ladder being filtered by current score. Filter it by highest score player had achieved during that season.
Why this would be better?
1. It will prevent "parking" the score.
2. It will incetivize people to play more as they are never afraid of loosing ranking, they just have a chance to improve.
3. By providing greater number of players to be in the pool it's also easier to climb and it's more rewarding to play.
How it should be done?
In the profile present the peak score and sort the ladder by highest score achieved with a current score in the brackest.
Something like:
Player A 1998 (1998)
Player B 1997 (1900)
Player C 1950 (1930)• What is your browser?
Google Chrome v87
• Which part of the rules was not respected by the BGA adaptation
Idea is instead of the ladder being filtered by current score. Filter it by highest score player had achieved during that season.
Why this would be better?
1. It will prevent "parking" the score.
2. It will incetivize people to play more as they are never afraid of loosing ranking, they just have a chance to improve.
3. By providing greater number of players to be in the pool it's also easier to climb and it's more rewarding to play.
How it should be done?
In the profile present the peak score and sort the ladder by highest score achieved with a current score in the brackest.
Something like:
Player A 1998 (1998)
Player B 1997 (1900)
Player C 1950 (1930)• Is the rules violation visible on game replay? If yes, at which move number?
• What is your browser?
Google Chrome v87
• Which was the game action you wanted to do?
Idea is instead of the ladder being filtered by current score. Filter it by highest score player had achieved during that season.
Why this would be better?
1. It will prevent "parking" the score.
2. It will incetivize people to play more as they are never afraid of loosing ranking, they just have a chance to improve.
3. By providing greater number of players to be in the pool it's also easier to climb and it's more rewarding to play.
How it should be done?
In the profile present the peak score and sort the ladder by highest score achieved with a current score in the brackest.
Something like:
Player A 1998 (1998)
Player B 1997 (1900)
Player C 1950 (1930)• What do you try to do to trigger this game action?
• What happened when you try to do this (error message, game status bar message, ...)?
• What is your browser?
Google Chrome v87
• At which step of the game did the problem occurs (what was the current game instruction)?
Idea is instead of the ladder being filtered by current score. Filter it by highest score player had achieved during that season.
Why this would be better?
1. It will prevent "parking" the score.
2. It will incetivize people to play more as they are never afraid of loosing ranking, they just have a chance to improve.
3. By providing greater number of players to be in the pool it's also easier to climb and it's more rewarding to play.
How it should be done?
In the profile present the peak score and sort the ladder by highest score achieved with a current score in the brackest.
Something like:
Player A 1998 (1998)
Player B 1997 (1900)
Player C 1950 (1930)• What happened when you try to do a game action (error message, game status bar message, ...)?
• What is your browser?
Google Chrome v87
• Please describe the display issue. If you have a screenshot of this bug (good practice), you can use Imgur.com to upload it and copy/paste the link here.
Idea is instead of the ladder being filtered by current score. Filter it by highest score player had achieved during that season.
Why this would be better?
1. It will prevent "parking" the score.
2. It will incetivize people to play more as they are never afraid of loosing ranking, they just have a chance to improve.
3. By providing greater number of players to be in the pool it's also easier to climb and it's more rewarding to play.
How it should be done?
In the profile present the peak score and sort the ladder by highest score achieved with a current score in the brackest.
Something like:
Player A 1998 (1998)
Player B 1997 (1900)
Player C 1950 (1930)• What is your browser?
Google Chrome v87
• Please copy/paste the text displayed in English instead of your language. If you have a screenshot of this bug (good practice), you can use Imgur.com to upload it and copy/paste the link here.
Idea is instead of the ladder being filtered by current score. Filter it by highest score player had achieved during that season.
Why this would be better?
1. It will prevent "parking" the score.
2. It will incetivize people to play more as they are never afraid of loosing ranking, they just have a chance to improve.
3. By providing greater number of players to be in the pool it's also easier to climb and it's more rewarding to play.
How it should be done?
In the profile present the peak score and sort the ladder by highest score achieved with a current score in the brackest.
Something like:
Player A 1998 (1998)
Player B 1997 (1900)
Player C 1950 (1930)• Is this text available in the translation system? If yes, has it been translated for more than 24 hours?
• What is your browser?
Google Chrome v87
• Please explain your suggestion precisely and concisely so that it's as easy as possible to understand what you mean.
Idea is instead of the ladder being filtered by current score. Filter it by highest score player had achieved during that season.
Why this would be better?
1. It will prevent "parking" the score.
2. It will incetivize people to play more as they are never afraid of loosing ranking, they just have a chance to improve.
3. By providing greater number of players to be in the pool it's also easier to climb and it's more rewarding to play.
How it should be done?
In the profile present the peak score and sort the ladder by highest score achieved with a current score in the brackest.
Something like:
Player A 1998 (1998)
Player B 1997 (1900)
Player C 1950 (1930)• What is your browser?
Google Chrome v87
Report history
14. Dec 2020 19:30 • Wonderful Plays • This suggestion has not been analyzed by delopers yet:
Mandatory field
15. Dec 2020 8:33 • Wonderful Plays • This suggestion has not been analyzed by delopers yet:
Relevant discussion topic on the forum:
boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=18661
boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=18661
31. Dec 2020 8:04 • compte obelète • This suggestion has not been analyzed by delopers yet:
So if i understand, if a tie happens, we gonna use their actual ones to break it, but if is the same again whit their actual, use the average amount of score win, if still a tie, then, simply make the earlier one the winner.
31. Dec 2020 13:29 • Wonderful Plays • This suggestion has not been analyzed by delopers yet:
In case of a tie I would propose to actually use the current score.
I also believe the ELO has a hidden component. So it's actually like 1684.48 instead of 1684 that is showed, so ties are much less likely than we think.
I also believe the ELO has a hidden component. So it's actually like 1684.48 instead of 1684 that is showed, so ties are much less likely than we think.
31. Dec 2020 15:26 • Wonderful Plays • This suggestion has not been analyzed by delopers yet:
I made a video talking about this and another suggestion:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRQ_rRukeeM
www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRQ_rRukeeM
5. Jan 2021 9:50 • mumpsimus • This suggestion has not been analyzed by delopers yet:
I don't see that there is a huge problem with parking? If the top player stops playing, they will be overtaken by others, because it's relatively easy to gain points as it is. I think scoring in arena is fine as it is.
6. Jan 2021 6:40 • ucarts • This suggestion has not been analyzed by delopers yet:
Parking is certainly a valid problem, which is why a lot of systems will decay ratings of players who have not played very many games recently, or hide those players from the list. Using a peak score would work too. I'm not certain which of these solutions is the better approach, but I think either would be an improvement.
For me, I've found that the high volatility (K factor is too large given the low spread of ratings among the playerbase - I can elaborate but do not want to go off topic too much) can cause my rating to be higher than my true skill - at which point playing any further games would likely decrease my rating. I personally switched over to casual games when I made it to the top 20 and will plan do so again this season (well, maybe I'll wait until I'm 1st or 2nd before I park). There definitely wouldn't be a point where I stop playing arena in order to preserve rating if the system used peak rating instead of current rating, since then I'd have nothing to lose by playing more.
As for those who think that a high-skilled player who stops playing will simply be overtaken by people who play more, I would encourage them to look at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system
For me, I've found that the high volatility (K factor is too large given the low spread of ratings among the playerbase - I can elaborate but do not want to go off topic too much) can cause my rating to be higher than my true skill - at which point playing any further games would likely decrease my rating. I personally switched over to casual games when I made it to the top 20 and will plan do so again this season (well, maybe I'll wait until I'm 1st or 2nd before I park). There definitely wouldn't be a point where I stop playing arena in order to preserve rating if the system used peak rating instead of current rating, since then I'd have nothing to lose by playing more.
As for those who think that a high-skilled player who stops playing will simply be overtaken by people who play more, I would encourage them to look at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system
3. Sep 2021 23:23 • dschingis27 • This suggestion has not been analyzed by delopers yet:
"2. It will incetivize people to play more as they are never afraid of loosing ranking, they just have a chance to improve."
Not really sure if it would overall incentivize to play more. Yes, you are not afraid of loosing but this part, "they just have a chance to improve" is not entirely true. Very often your peak score will not change at all after a play session, increasing the peak score can get really hard and people might quickly get stuck at a certain ranking and lose interest.
However, it really just needs to be tested out!
Not really sure if it would overall incentivize to play more. Yes, you are not afraid of loosing but this part, "they just have a chance to improve" is not entirely true. Very often your peak score will not change at all after a play session, increasing the peak score can get really hard and people might quickly get stuck at a certain ranking and lose interest.
However, it really just needs to be tested out!
17. Jan 2022 3:26 • Respublik • This suggestion has not been analyzed by delopers yet:
It would increase play anyways if active players aren't parking to protect their score.
11. Jul 2023 16:31 • Wonderful Plays • This suggestion has not been analyzed by delopers yet:
This is still very much needed, BGA when this is getting implemented?
18. Feb 2024 10:39 • KongKing123 • This suggestion has not been analyzed by delopers yet:
Bump to avoid automatic closure.
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.
Change report status to:
bug?id=30059
