所有案件
Isaac 的案件
#25852: "ELO can be manipulated"
這是關於哪方面的案件?
發生什麼事? 請從下方選擇
建議:依我所見,有些調整將大幅增進遊戲完成度
細節描述
• 請簡明精確地解釋你的建議,以便讓人一目了然。
At the end of the 1st phase of a game of Isaac, the progression is only at 10%. If a player quits a game, they would only lose 10% of the normal points, and a 10 point penalty. Against my opponent in this particular game, that would be 11 points, and instead of my opponent winning 11 points, they would only have won 1 point. Loss of Karma does not tend to matter to anyone who plays frequently.
In a busier game with many active players, it probably would not be a big deal, but in a game like Isaac where there are only a handful of active players. And at the very top, where there is only 1 competitor within range of the top position, denying that opponent 90% of their points would be very helpful for the top player to maintain their position.
This oversight can be exploited by the top player to limit their opponent's gain, and potentially their own losses. In a game with a player who had a much lower ELO, it might just be better to cut one's losses at 10% before removing any pieces. After all, losing 15 points would be much more preferable than losing 50. And denying my opponent 45 of the 50 points which they deserved to win would be horrible. That should not be an option, but currently the game incentivizes this possibility.• 你的瀏覽器是什麼?
Google Chrome v85
案件沿革
R o d n e y • 此建議尚未被開發者分析過:
2020年10月 6日 17:04 • imgur.com/a/mkendcZ
On move 44 at 41% progression, I no longer had a possibility of winning the game and tried to concede to my opponent. It was not allowed, because the game progression was less than 50%. It was at that moment that I noticed that by quitting the game, one could limit losses and prevent opponents from gaining their much deserved points. Had I done so in this game, I would have lost 14 points instead of 11, but my opponent would have only gained 4 points, instead of 11. A net 18 point change instead of 22 which would have given my opponent a 6 point smaller margin of victory. Which definitely would have been a better outcome for me, despite being at a point where I could clearly see that I had already lost the game.
I did not exploit this oversight in the game, but it is allowed, and that is a problem.
On move 44 at 41% progression, I no longer had a possibility of winning the game and tried to concede to my opponent. It was not allowed, because the game progression was less than 50%. It was at that moment that I noticed that by quitting the game, one could limit losses and prevent opponents from gaining their much deserved points. Had I done so in this game, I would have lost 14 points instead of 11, but my opponent would have only gained 4 points, instead of 11. A net 18 point change instead of 22 which would have given my opponent a 6 point smaller margin of victory. Which definitely would have been a better outcome for me, despite being at a point where I could clearly see that I had already lost the game.
I did not exploit this oversight in the game, but it is allowed, and that is a problem.
為本案件添加內容
任何可能重現這項錯誤或了解你的建議之相關資訊,都請在此填寫:
- 其他同樣狀況的桌號/步數
- 按 F5 是否解決了這個問題?
- 問題是否發生了好幾次?每次都發生?時好時壞?
- 建議將此錯誤的螢幕截圖上傳到 Imgur.com 並轉貼連結。