• Sila salin/tampal mesej masalah yang anda dapat lihat di skrin, jika ada.

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".

• Tolong jelaskan apa yang anda ingin buat, apa yang telah anda buat dan apa yang telah terjadi

-

• Apakah browser anda?

• Tolong salin/lekat teks yang dipaparkan dalam bahasa inggeris dan bukannya bahasa anda. Sekiranya anda ada screenshot bug ini (amalan yang baik), anda boleh gunakan Imgur.com untuk muatnaik dan copy/paste pautan itu di sini.

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".

• Adakah teks ini tersedia dalam sistem terjemahan ? Jika ya, adakah ia diterjemahkan selama lebih daripada 24 jam?

-

• Apakah browser anda?

• Tolong jelaskan cadangan anda dengan tepat dan ringkas supaya semudah mungkin untuk memahami apa yang anda maksudkan.

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".

• Apakah browser anda?

• Apa yang dipaparkan pada skrin apabila anda disekat (Skrin kosong? Antara muka permainan? Mesej ralat?)

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".

• Apakah browser anda?

• Bahagian peraturan yang mana tidak dihormati oleh penyesuaian 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".

• Adakah kelanggaran peraturan boleh dilihat di ulangan permainan? Jikanya ya, pada langkah berapa?

-

• Apakah browser anda?

• Apakan tindakan yang anda mahu lakukan?

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".

• Apa yang anda cuba lakukan untuk mencetuskan tindakan permainan ini?

-

• Apa yang berlaku apabila anda cuba melakukan ini (mesej ralat, mesej bar status permainan, ...)?

• Apakah browser anda?

• Pada peringkat mana semasa permainan , masalah itu berlaku (apakah arahan semasa permainan tersebut)?

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".

• Apa yang berlaku apabila anda cuba melakukan tindakan permainan (mesej ralat, mesej bar status permainan, ...)?

-

• Apakah browser anda?

• Tolong jelaskan masalah pemaparan. Sekiranya anda ada screenshot bug ini (amalan yang baik), anda boleh gunakan Imgur.com untuk muatnaik dan copy/paste pautan itu di sini.

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".

• Apakah browser anda?

• Tolong salin/lekat teks yang dipaparkan dalam bahasa inggeris dan bukannya bahasa anda. Sekiranya anda ada screenshot bug ini (amalan yang baik), anda boleh gunakan Imgur.com untuk muatnaik dan copy/paste pautan itu di sini.

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".

• Adakah teks ini tersedia dalam sistem terjemahan ? Jika ya, adakah ia diterjemahkan selama lebih daripada 24 jam?

-

• Apakah browser anda?

• Tolong jelaskan cadangan anda dengan tepat dan ringkas supaya semudah mungkin untuk memahami apa yang anda maksudkan.

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".

• Apakah browser anda?