• Por favor, copia/pega el mensaje de error que ves en tu pantalla, si hay alguno.

This setting does not have the intended effect with regards to Elo calculation.
en.doc.boardgamearena.com/Main_game_logic:_yourgamename.game.php#Only_%22winners%22_and_%22losers%22
en.doc.boardgamearena.com/Game_meta-information:_gameinfos.inc.php#Losers_not_ranked_between_themselves

Coup is used as the example in the docs, so let's use that. Here is a random, recent Coup table: boardgamearena.com/table?table=478182531

I realized that the detailed Elo caluclations are unavailable from Game result pages eventually so here are images saved: imgur.com/a/5WPXjTR

When summing up all Elo exchanges that would otherwise have happened, Victor Araujo should end up with a net positive, since they were the lowest Elo at the table and they tied with several other players with higher Elo. However, the losers_not_ranked setting sets his Elo change to +0, with the (very misleading) message "You cannot win ELO from teammates on a loss" (the other losers are not his teammates).

OK, so far you might think this is the exact intent of the losers_not_ranked setting, as the docs say, "When calculating ELO points, if there is at least one "Loser", no "victorious" player can lose ELO points, and no "losing" player can win ELO point."

But, now look at the Elo breakdown for Cheddar C. **Cheddar C loses 2.41 Elo for tying with Victor Araujo.** And yet, Victor Araujo was not able to gain any Elo on the other side of that exchange.

This is what does not make any sense. The way it is implemented, the losers lose "too much" Elo in total, they lose points that are not transferred to anyone else. Every time you play a game of Coup and is not the winner, you lose Elo to the other losers with lower Elo than you, but some of that Elo "disappears" and is not awarded to them. Games with this setting enabled will be intrinsically lower on Elo among the player pool than regular ranked games, which surely is not the intention?

Proposed fix:
If losers_not_ranked = true, each Winner should exchange Elo only with each Loser. No other player pairs should exchange Elo - Winners should not exchange Elo with other winners and losers should not exchange Elo with other losers. These should not be summed up and then capped, they should not be part of the sum to begin with.
This would preserve the intention of the setting - winners cannot net lose Elo and losers gannot net gain Elo. But it would do so in a more intuitive and expected way, that does not make extra Elo "disappear".

• Por favor, explica lo que querías hacer, lo que hiciste y lo que pasó

-

• ¿Qué navegador estás usando?

• Por favor, copia/pega el texto mostrado en inglés en lugar de en tu idioma. Si tienes una captura de este error (buena práctica), puedes usar Imgur.com para subirla y copiar/pegar el enlace aquí.

This setting does not have the intended effect with regards to Elo calculation.
en.doc.boardgamearena.com/Main_game_logic:_yourgamename.game.php#Only_%22winners%22_and_%22losers%22
en.doc.boardgamearena.com/Game_meta-information:_gameinfos.inc.php#Losers_not_ranked_between_themselves

Coup is used as the example in the docs, so let's use that. Here is a random, recent Coup table: boardgamearena.com/table?table=478182531

I realized that the detailed Elo caluclations are unavailable from Game result pages eventually so here are images saved: imgur.com/a/5WPXjTR

When summing up all Elo exchanges that would otherwise have happened, Victor Araujo should end up with a net positive, since they were the lowest Elo at the table and they tied with several other players with higher Elo. However, the losers_not_ranked setting sets his Elo change to +0, with the (very misleading) message "You cannot win ELO from teammates on a loss" (the other losers are not his teammates).

OK, so far you might think this is the exact intent of the losers_not_ranked setting, as the docs say, "When calculating ELO points, if there is at least one "Loser", no "victorious" player can lose ELO points, and no "losing" player can win ELO point."

But, now look at the Elo breakdown for Cheddar C. **Cheddar C loses 2.41 Elo for tying with Victor Araujo.** And yet, Victor Araujo was not able to gain any Elo on the other side of that exchange.

This is what does not make any sense. The way it is implemented, the losers lose "too much" Elo in total, they lose points that are not transferred to anyone else. Every time you play a game of Coup and is not the winner, you lose Elo to the other losers with lower Elo than you, but some of that Elo "disappears" and is not awarded to them. Games with this setting enabled will be intrinsically lower on Elo among the player pool than regular ranked games, which surely is not the intention?

Proposed fix:
If losers_not_ranked = true, each Winner should exchange Elo only with each Loser. No other player pairs should exchange Elo - Winners should not exchange Elo with other winners and losers should not exchange Elo with other losers. These should not be summed up and then capped, they should not be part of the sum to begin with.
This would preserve the intention of the setting - winners cannot net lose Elo and losers gannot net gain Elo. But it would do so in a more intuitive and expected way, that does not make extra Elo "disappear".

• ¿Está este texto disponible en el sistema de traducción? Si es así, ¿ha sido traducido hace más de 24 horas?

-

• ¿Qué navegador estás usando?

• Por favor explica tu sugerencia de manera precisa y concisa para que sea lo más fácil posible entender lo que quieres decir.

This setting does not have the intended effect with regards to Elo calculation.
en.doc.boardgamearena.com/Main_game_logic:_yourgamename.game.php#Only_%22winners%22_and_%22losers%22
en.doc.boardgamearena.com/Game_meta-information:_gameinfos.inc.php#Losers_not_ranked_between_themselves

Coup is used as the example in the docs, so let's use that. Here is a random, recent Coup table: boardgamearena.com/table?table=478182531

I realized that the detailed Elo caluclations are unavailable from Game result pages eventually so here are images saved: imgur.com/a/5WPXjTR

When summing up all Elo exchanges that would otherwise have happened, Victor Araujo should end up with a net positive, since they were the lowest Elo at the table and they tied with several other players with higher Elo. However, the losers_not_ranked setting sets his Elo change to +0, with the (very misleading) message "You cannot win ELO from teammates on a loss" (the other losers are not his teammates).

OK, so far you might think this is the exact intent of the losers_not_ranked setting, as the docs say, "When calculating ELO points, if there is at least one "Loser", no "victorious" player can lose ELO points, and no "losing" player can win ELO point."

But, now look at the Elo breakdown for Cheddar C. **Cheddar C loses 2.41 Elo for tying with Victor Araujo.** And yet, Victor Araujo was not able to gain any Elo on the other side of that exchange.

This is what does not make any sense. The way it is implemented, the losers lose "too much" Elo in total, they lose points that are not transferred to anyone else. Every time you play a game of Coup and is not the winner, you lose Elo to the other losers with lower Elo than you, but some of that Elo "disappears" and is not awarded to them. Games with this setting enabled will be intrinsically lower on Elo among the player pool than regular ranked games, which surely is not the intention?

Proposed fix:
If losers_not_ranked = true, each Winner should exchange Elo only with each Loser. No other player pairs should exchange Elo - Winners should not exchange Elo with other winners and losers should not exchange Elo with other losers. These should not be summed up and then capped, they should not be part of the sum to begin with.
This would preserve the intention of the setting - winners cannot net lose Elo and losers gannot net gain Elo. But it would do so in a more intuitive and expected way, that does not make extra Elo "disappear".

• ¿Qué navegador estás usando?

• ¿Qué había en la pantalla cuando se quedó bloqueado? (¿mensaje de error?, ¿pantalla en blanco?, ¿una parte de la interfaz del juego?)

This setting does not have the intended effect with regards to Elo calculation.
en.doc.boardgamearena.com/Main_game_logic:_yourgamename.game.php#Only_%22winners%22_and_%22losers%22
en.doc.boardgamearena.com/Game_meta-information:_gameinfos.inc.php#Losers_not_ranked_between_themselves

Coup is used as the example in the docs, so let's use that. Here is a random, recent Coup table: boardgamearena.com/table?table=478182531

I realized that the detailed Elo caluclations are unavailable from Game result pages eventually so here are images saved: imgur.com/a/5WPXjTR

When summing up all Elo exchanges that would otherwise have happened, Victor Araujo should end up with a net positive, since they were the lowest Elo at the table and they tied with several other players with higher Elo. However, the losers_not_ranked setting sets his Elo change to +0, with the (very misleading) message "You cannot win ELO from teammates on a loss" (the other losers are not his teammates).

OK, so far you might think this is the exact intent of the losers_not_ranked setting, as the docs say, "When calculating ELO points, if there is at least one "Loser", no "victorious" player can lose ELO points, and no "losing" player can win ELO point."

But, now look at the Elo breakdown for Cheddar C. **Cheddar C loses 2.41 Elo for tying with Victor Araujo.** And yet, Victor Araujo was not able to gain any Elo on the other side of that exchange.

This is what does not make any sense. The way it is implemented, the losers lose "too much" Elo in total, they lose points that are not transferred to anyone else. Every time you play a game of Coup and is not the winner, you lose Elo to the other losers with lower Elo than you, but some of that Elo "disappears" and is not awarded to them. Games with this setting enabled will be intrinsically lower on Elo among the player pool than regular ranked games, which surely is not the intention?

Proposed fix:
If losers_not_ranked = true, each Winner should exchange Elo only with each Loser. No other player pairs should exchange Elo - Winners should not exchange Elo with other winners and losers should not exchange Elo with other losers. These should not be summed up and then capped, they should not be part of the sum to begin with.
This would preserve the intention of the setting - winners cannot net lose Elo and losers gannot net gain Elo. But it would do so in a more intuitive and expected way, that does not make extra Elo "disappear".

• ¿Qué navegador estás usando?

• ¿Qué parte de las reglas no se ha respetado en la adaptación de BGA?

This setting does not have the intended effect with regards to Elo calculation.
en.doc.boardgamearena.com/Main_game_logic:_yourgamename.game.php#Only_%22winners%22_and_%22losers%22
en.doc.boardgamearena.com/Game_meta-information:_gameinfos.inc.php#Losers_not_ranked_between_themselves

Coup is used as the example in the docs, so let's use that. Here is a random, recent Coup table: boardgamearena.com/table?table=478182531

I realized that the detailed Elo caluclations are unavailable from Game result pages eventually so here are images saved: imgur.com/a/5WPXjTR

When summing up all Elo exchanges that would otherwise have happened, Victor Araujo should end up with a net positive, since they were the lowest Elo at the table and they tied with several other players with higher Elo. However, the losers_not_ranked setting sets his Elo change to +0, with the (very misleading) message "You cannot win ELO from teammates on a loss" (the other losers are not his teammates).

OK, so far you might think this is the exact intent of the losers_not_ranked setting, as the docs say, "When calculating ELO points, if there is at least one "Loser", no "victorious" player can lose ELO points, and no "losing" player can win ELO point."

But, now look at the Elo breakdown for Cheddar C. **Cheddar C loses 2.41 Elo for tying with Victor Araujo.** And yet, Victor Araujo was not able to gain any Elo on the other side of that exchange.

This is what does not make any sense. The way it is implemented, the losers lose "too much" Elo in total, they lose points that are not transferred to anyone else. Every time you play a game of Coup and is not the winner, you lose Elo to the other losers with lower Elo than you, but some of that Elo "disappears" and is not awarded to them. Games with this setting enabled will be intrinsically lower on Elo among the player pool than regular ranked games, which surely is not the intention?

Proposed fix:
If losers_not_ranked = true, each Winner should exchange Elo only with each Loser. No other player pairs should exchange Elo - Winners should not exchange Elo with other winners and losers should not exchange Elo with other losers. These should not be summed up and then capped, they should not be part of the sum to begin with.
This would preserve the intention of the setting - winners cannot net lose Elo and losers gannot net gain Elo. But it would do so in a more intuitive and expected way, that does not make extra Elo "disappear".

• ¿La infracción de las reglas es visible en la repetición de la partida? Si es así, ¿en qué jugada?

-

• ¿Qué navegador estás usando?

• ¿Qué acción de juego querías realizar?

This setting does not have the intended effect with regards to Elo calculation.
en.doc.boardgamearena.com/Main_game_logic:_yourgamename.game.php#Only_%22winners%22_and_%22losers%22
en.doc.boardgamearena.com/Game_meta-information:_gameinfos.inc.php#Losers_not_ranked_between_themselves

Coup is used as the example in the docs, so let's use that. Here is a random, recent Coup table: boardgamearena.com/table?table=478182531

I realized that the detailed Elo caluclations are unavailable from Game result pages eventually so here are images saved: imgur.com/a/5WPXjTR

When summing up all Elo exchanges that would otherwise have happened, Victor Araujo should end up with a net positive, since they were the lowest Elo at the table and they tied with several other players with higher Elo. However, the losers_not_ranked setting sets his Elo change to +0, with the (very misleading) message "You cannot win ELO from teammates on a loss" (the other losers are not his teammates).

OK, so far you might think this is the exact intent of the losers_not_ranked setting, as the docs say, "When calculating ELO points, if there is at least one "Loser", no "victorious" player can lose ELO points, and no "losing" player can win ELO point."

But, now look at the Elo breakdown for Cheddar C. **Cheddar C loses 2.41 Elo for tying with Victor Araujo.** And yet, Victor Araujo was not able to gain any Elo on the other side of that exchange.

This is what does not make any sense. The way it is implemented, the losers lose "too much" Elo in total, they lose points that are not transferred to anyone else. Every time you play a game of Coup and is not the winner, you lose Elo to the other losers with lower Elo than you, but some of that Elo "disappears" and is not awarded to them. Games with this setting enabled will be intrinsically lower on Elo among the player pool than regular ranked games, which surely is not the intention?

Proposed fix:
If losers_not_ranked = true, each Winner should exchange Elo only with each Loser. No other player pairs should exchange Elo - Winners should not exchange Elo with other winners and losers should not exchange Elo with other losers. These should not be summed up and then capped, they should not be part of the sum to begin with.
This would preserve the intention of the setting - winners cannot net lose Elo and losers gannot net gain Elo. But it would do so in a more intuitive and expected way, that does not make extra Elo "disappear".

• ¿Qué es lo que trataste de hacer para activar esta acción del juego?

-

• ¿Qué sucedió cuando lo hiciste (el mensaje de error, mensaje en la barra de estado del juego, ...)?

• ¿Qué navegador estás usando?

• ¿En qué etapa de la partida ocurrió el problema? ¿Cuál era la instrucción actual del juego?

This setting does not have the intended effect with regards to Elo calculation.
en.doc.boardgamearena.com/Main_game_logic:_yourgamename.game.php#Only_%22winners%22_and_%22losers%22
en.doc.boardgamearena.com/Game_meta-information:_gameinfos.inc.php#Losers_not_ranked_between_themselves

Coup is used as the example in the docs, so let's use that. Here is a random, recent Coup table: boardgamearena.com/table?table=478182531

I realized that the detailed Elo caluclations are unavailable from Game result pages eventually so here are images saved: imgur.com/a/5WPXjTR

When summing up all Elo exchanges that would otherwise have happened, Victor Araujo should end up with a net positive, since they were the lowest Elo at the table and they tied with several other players with higher Elo. However, the losers_not_ranked setting sets his Elo change to +0, with the (very misleading) message "You cannot win ELO from teammates on a loss" (the other losers are not his teammates).

OK, so far you might think this is the exact intent of the losers_not_ranked setting, as the docs say, "When calculating ELO points, if there is at least one "Loser", no "victorious" player can lose ELO points, and no "losing" player can win ELO point."

But, now look at the Elo breakdown for Cheddar C. **Cheddar C loses 2.41 Elo for tying with Victor Araujo.** And yet, Victor Araujo was not able to gain any Elo on the other side of that exchange.

This is what does not make any sense. The way it is implemented, the losers lose "too much" Elo in total, they lose points that are not transferred to anyone else. Every time you play a game of Coup and is not the winner, you lose Elo to the other losers with lower Elo than you, but some of that Elo "disappears" and is not awarded to them. Games with this setting enabled will be intrinsically lower on Elo among the player pool than regular ranked games, which surely is not the intention?

Proposed fix:
If losers_not_ranked = true, each Winner should exchange Elo only with each Loser. No other player pairs should exchange Elo - Winners should not exchange Elo with other winners and losers should not exchange Elo with other losers. These should not be summed up and then capped, they should not be part of the sum to begin with.
This would preserve the intention of the setting - winners cannot net lose Elo and losers gannot net gain Elo. But it would do so in a more intuitive and expected way, that does not make extra Elo "disappear".

• ¿Qué sucedió cuando trataste de hacer una acción de juego (mensaje de error, mensaje en la barra de estado del juego, ...)?

-

• ¿Qué navegador estás usando?

• Por favor, describe el problema de visualización. Si tienes una captura de este error (buena práctica), puedes usar Imgur.com para subirla y copiar/pegar el enlace aquí.

This setting does not have the intended effect with regards to Elo calculation.
en.doc.boardgamearena.com/Main_game_logic:_yourgamename.game.php#Only_%22winners%22_and_%22losers%22
en.doc.boardgamearena.com/Game_meta-information:_gameinfos.inc.php#Losers_not_ranked_between_themselves

Coup is used as the example in the docs, so let's use that. Here is a random, recent Coup table: boardgamearena.com/table?table=478182531

I realized that the detailed Elo caluclations are unavailable from Game result pages eventually so here are images saved: imgur.com/a/5WPXjTR

When summing up all Elo exchanges that would otherwise have happened, Victor Araujo should end up with a net positive, since they were the lowest Elo at the table and they tied with several other players with higher Elo. However, the losers_not_ranked setting sets his Elo change to +0, with the (very misleading) message "You cannot win ELO from teammates on a loss" (the other losers are not his teammates).

OK, so far you might think this is the exact intent of the losers_not_ranked setting, as the docs say, "When calculating ELO points, if there is at least one "Loser", no "victorious" player can lose ELO points, and no "losing" player can win ELO point."

But, now look at the Elo breakdown for Cheddar C. **Cheddar C loses 2.41 Elo for tying with Victor Araujo.** And yet, Victor Araujo was not able to gain any Elo on the other side of that exchange.

This is what does not make any sense. The way it is implemented, the losers lose "too much" Elo in total, they lose points that are not transferred to anyone else. Every time you play a game of Coup and is not the winner, you lose Elo to the other losers with lower Elo than you, but some of that Elo "disappears" and is not awarded to them. Games with this setting enabled will be intrinsically lower on Elo among the player pool than regular ranked games, which surely is not the intention?

Proposed fix:
If losers_not_ranked = true, each Winner should exchange Elo only with each Loser. No other player pairs should exchange Elo - Winners should not exchange Elo with other winners and losers should not exchange Elo with other losers. These should not be summed up and then capped, they should not be part of the sum to begin with.
This would preserve the intention of the setting - winners cannot net lose Elo and losers gannot net gain Elo. But it would do so in a more intuitive and expected way, that does not make extra Elo "disappear".

• ¿Qué navegador estás usando?

• Por favor, copia/pega el texto mostrado en inglés en lugar de en tu idioma. Si tienes una captura de este error (buena práctica), puedes usar Imgur.com para subirla y copiar/pegar el enlace aquí.

This setting does not have the intended effect with regards to Elo calculation.
en.doc.boardgamearena.com/Main_game_logic:_yourgamename.game.php#Only_%22winners%22_and_%22losers%22
en.doc.boardgamearena.com/Game_meta-information:_gameinfos.inc.php#Losers_not_ranked_between_themselves

Coup is used as the example in the docs, so let's use that. Here is a random, recent Coup table: boardgamearena.com/table?table=478182531

I realized that the detailed Elo caluclations are unavailable from Game result pages eventually so here are images saved: imgur.com/a/5WPXjTR

When summing up all Elo exchanges that would otherwise have happened, Victor Araujo should end up with a net positive, since they were the lowest Elo at the table and they tied with several other players with higher Elo. However, the losers_not_ranked setting sets his Elo change to +0, with the (very misleading) message "You cannot win ELO from teammates on a loss" (the other losers are not his teammates).

OK, so far you might think this is the exact intent of the losers_not_ranked setting, as the docs say, "When calculating ELO points, if there is at least one "Loser", no "victorious" player can lose ELO points, and no "losing" player can win ELO point."

But, now look at the Elo breakdown for Cheddar C. **Cheddar C loses 2.41 Elo for tying with Victor Araujo.** And yet, Victor Araujo was not able to gain any Elo on the other side of that exchange.

This is what does not make any sense. The way it is implemented, the losers lose "too much" Elo in total, they lose points that are not transferred to anyone else. Every time you play a game of Coup and is not the winner, you lose Elo to the other losers with lower Elo than you, but some of that Elo "disappears" and is not awarded to them. Games with this setting enabled will be intrinsically lower on Elo among the player pool than regular ranked games, which surely is not the intention?

Proposed fix:
If losers_not_ranked = true, each Winner should exchange Elo only with each Loser. No other player pairs should exchange Elo - Winners should not exchange Elo with other winners and losers should not exchange Elo with other losers. These should not be summed up and then capped, they should not be part of the sum to begin with.
This would preserve the intention of the setting - winners cannot net lose Elo and losers gannot net gain Elo. But it would do so in a more intuitive and expected way, that does not make extra Elo "disappear".

• ¿Está este texto disponible en el sistema de traducción? Si es así, ¿ha sido traducido hace más de 24 horas?

-

• ¿Qué navegador estás usando?

• Por favor explica tu sugerencia de manera precisa y concisa para que sea lo más fácil posible entender lo que quieres decir.

This setting does not have the intended effect with regards to Elo calculation.
en.doc.boardgamearena.com/Main_game_logic:_yourgamename.game.php#Only_%22winners%22_and_%22losers%22
en.doc.boardgamearena.com/Game_meta-information:_gameinfos.inc.php#Losers_not_ranked_between_themselves

Coup is used as the example in the docs, so let's use that. Here is a random, recent Coup table: boardgamearena.com/table?table=478182531

I realized that the detailed Elo caluclations are unavailable from Game result pages eventually so here are images saved: imgur.com/a/5WPXjTR

When summing up all Elo exchanges that would otherwise have happened, Victor Araujo should end up with a net positive, since they were the lowest Elo at the table and they tied with several other players with higher Elo. However, the losers_not_ranked setting sets his Elo change to +0, with the (very misleading) message "You cannot win ELO from teammates on a loss" (the other losers are not his teammates).

OK, so far you might think this is the exact intent of the losers_not_ranked setting, as the docs say, "When calculating ELO points, if there is at least one "Loser", no "victorious" player can lose ELO points, and no "losing" player can win ELO point."

But, now look at the Elo breakdown for Cheddar C. **Cheddar C loses 2.41 Elo for tying with Victor Araujo.** And yet, Victor Araujo was not able to gain any Elo on the other side of that exchange.

This is what does not make any sense. The way it is implemented, the losers lose "too much" Elo in total, they lose points that are not transferred to anyone else. Every time you play a game of Coup and is not the winner, you lose Elo to the other losers with lower Elo than you, but some of that Elo "disappears" and is not awarded to them. Games with this setting enabled will be intrinsically lower on Elo among the player pool than regular ranked games, which surely is not the intention?

Proposed fix:
If losers_not_ranked = true, each Winner should exchange Elo only with each Loser. No other player pairs should exchange Elo - Winners should not exchange Elo with other winners and losers should not exchange Elo with other losers. These should not be summed up and then capped, they should not be part of the sum to begin with.
This would preserve the intention of the setting - winners cannot net lose Elo and losers gannot net gain Elo. But it would do so in a more intuitive and expected way, that does not make extra Elo "disappear".

• ¿Qué navegador estás usando?