• 如果可以的話，請轉貼螢幕顯示的錯誤訊息。

The existing ELO calculation after a win (or loss) treats the result as a win (loss) against each of the opponents, **and a tie with the player's partner**. That means that if you are paired with a weak player, ot only is winning more challenging (which is fine, luck of the draw) but also your ELO is docked because of partner's weakness.
As an extreme example, say a 600 is paired with a 20 ELO, playing against a couple of 310 ELO opponents, and everybody has K=20. If the 600/20 team wins, the 600 gains about 4 points against each opponent, and ties his partner, which is about (-18+2)/2 = -9 ELO points. The sum is -1, so the expert player, having beaten a couple of strong players despite being paired with a beginner, would *lose* about half an ELO point. Since the odds of winning, based on linear approximation using the combined ELO's, were about 50%, that expert (and his partner) should have gained 10 points.
The best solution is to treat the game as a two-player game, using the pair-averaged ELO rating for each pair to determine the effective ELO. If that is awkward within the overall BGA framework, then at least the system should not be indicating a tie against your partner.

• 請說明你當時想做什麼，你做了什麼，然後發生了什麼事

• 你的瀏覽器是什麼？

• 請轉貼未翻譯的英文字句。 建議將此錯誤的螢幕截圖上傳到 Imgur.com 並轉貼連結。

The existing ELO calculation after a win (or loss) treats the result as a win (loss) against each of the opponents, **and a tie with the player's partner**. That means that if you are paired with a weak player, ot only is winning more challenging (which is fine, luck of the draw) but also your ELO is docked because of partner's weakness.
As an extreme example, say a 600 is paired with a 20 ELO, playing against a couple of 310 ELO opponents, and everybody has K=20. If the 600/20 team wins, the 600 gains about 4 points against each opponent, and ties his partner, which is about (-18+2)/2 = -9 ELO points. The sum is -1, so the expert player, having beaten a couple of strong players despite being paired with a beginner, would *lose* about half an ELO point. Since the odds of winning, based on linear approximation using the combined ELO's, were about 50%, that expert (and his partner) should have gained 10 points.
The best solution is to treat the game as a two-player game, using the pair-averaged ELO rating for each pair to determine the effective ELO. If that is awkward within the overall BGA framework, then at least the system should not be indicating a tie against your partner.

• 這些文字存在於 翻譯系統 中嗎？若為真，其是否已被翻譯超過 24 小時？

• 你的瀏覽器是什麼？

• 請簡明精確地解釋你的建議，以便讓人一目了然。

The existing ELO calculation after a win (or loss) treats the result as a win (loss) against each of the opponents, **and a tie with the player's partner**. That means that if you are paired with a weak player, ot only is winning more challenging (which is fine, luck of the draw) but also your ELO is docked because of partner's weakness.
As an extreme example, say a 600 is paired with a 20 ELO, playing against a couple of 310 ELO opponents, and everybody has K=20. If the 600/20 team wins, the 600 gains about 4 points against each opponent, and ties his partner, which is about (-18+2)/2 = -9 ELO points. The sum is -1, so the expert player, having beaten a couple of strong players despite being paired with a beginner, would *lose* about half an ELO point. Since the odds of winning, based on linear approximation using the combined ELO's, were about 50%, that expert (and his partner) should have gained 10 points.
The best solution is to treat the game as a two-player game, using the pair-averaged ELO rating for each pair to determine the effective ELO. If that is awkward within the overall BGA framework, then at least the system should not be indicating a tie against your partner.

• 你的瀏覽器是什麼？

• 當你不能動作時，螢幕上顯示什麼？（螢幕全黑？部份遊戲介面？錯誤訊息？）

The existing ELO calculation after a win (or loss) treats the result as a win (loss) against each of the opponents, **and a tie with the player's partner**. That means that if you are paired with a weak player, ot only is winning more challenging (which is fine, luck of the draw) but also your ELO is docked because of partner's weakness.
As an extreme example, say a 600 is paired with a 20 ELO, playing against a couple of 310 ELO opponents, and everybody has K=20. If the 600/20 team wins, the 600 gains about 4 points against each opponent, and ties his partner, which is about (-18+2)/2 = -9 ELO points. The sum is -1, so the expert player, having beaten a couple of strong players despite being paired with a beginner, would *lose* about half an ELO point. Since the odds of winning, based on linear approximation using the combined ELO's, were about 50%, that expert (and his partner) should have gained 10 points.
The best solution is to treat the game as a two-player game, using the pair-averaged ELO rating for each pair to determine the effective ELO. If that is awkward within the overall BGA framework, then at least the system should not be indicating a tie against your partner.

• 你的瀏覽器是什麼？

• 遊戲規則的哪部分在 BGA 版本有所錯漏？

The existing ELO calculation after a win (or loss) treats the result as a win (loss) against each of the opponents, **and a tie with the player's partner**. That means that if you are paired with a weak player, ot only is winning more challenging (which is fine, luck of the draw) but also your ELO is docked because of partner's weakness.
As an extreme example, say a 600 is paired with a 20 ELO, playing against a couple of 310 ELO opponents, and everybody has K=20. If the 600/20 team wins, the 600 gains about 4 points against each opponent, and ties his partner, which is about (-18+2)/2 = -9 ELO points. The sum is -1, so the expert player, having beaten a couple of strong players despite being paired with a beginner, would *lose* about half an ELO point. Since the odds of winning, based on linear approximation using the combined ELO's, were about 50%, that expert (and his partner) should have gained 10 points.
The best solution is to treat the game as a two-player game, using the pair-averaged ELO rating for each pair to determine the effective ELO. If that is awkward within the overall BGA framework, then at least the system should not be indicating a tie against your partner.

• 這項違反規則之處可否在遊戲重播中看到？若可以是在哪步？（重播時左上角資訊）

• 你的瀏覽器是什麼？

• 你當時想採取哪個遊戲行動？

The existing ELO calculation after a win (or loss) treats the result as a win (loss) against each of the opponents, **and a tie with the player's partner**. That means that if you are paired with a weak player, ot only is winning more challenging (which is fine, luck of the draw) but also your ELO is docked because of partner's weakness.
As an extreme example, say a 600 is paired with a 20 ELO, playing against a couple of 310 ELO opponents, and everybody has K=20. If the 600/20 team wins, the 600 gains about 4 points against each opponent, and ties his partner, which is about (-18+2)/2 = -9 ELO points. The sum is -1, so the expert player, having beaten a couple of strong players despite being paired with a beginner, would *lose* about half an ELO point. Since the odds of winning, based on linear approximation using the combined ELO's, were about 50%, that expert (and his partner) should have gained 10 points.
The best solution is to treat the game as a two-player game, using the pair-averaged ELO rating for each pair to determine the effective ELO. If that is awkward within the overall BGA framework, then at least the system should not be indicating a tie against your partner.

• 你想觸發這個遊戲行動時做了什麼？

• 當你試著這麼做時發生了什麼（錯誤訊息、遊戲狀態條訊息...）？

• 你的瀏覽器是什麼？

• 問題發生在遊戲的哪一步？（目前遊戲指示是什麼）

The existing ELO calculation after a win (or loss) treats the result as a win (loss) against each of the opponents, **and a tie with the player's partner**. That means that if you are paired with a weak player, ot only is winning more challenging (which is fine, luck of the draw) but also your ELO is docked because of partner's weakness.
As an extreme example, say a 600 is paired with a 20 ELO, playing against a couple of 310 ELO opponents, and everybody has K=20. If the 600/20 team wins, the 600 gains about 4 points against each opponent, and ties his partner, which is about (-18+2)/2 = -9 ELO points. The sum is -1, so the expert player, having beaten a couple of strong players despite being paired with a beginner, would *lose* about half an ELO point. Since the odds of winning, based on linear approximation using the combined ELO's, were about 50%, that expert (and his partner) should have gained 10 points.
The best solution is to treat the game as a two-player game, using the pair-averaged ELO rating for each pair to determine the effective ELO. If that is awkward within the overall BGA framework, then at least the system should not be indicating a tie against your partner.

• 當你試著進行遊戲動作時發生了什麼（錯誤訊息、遊戲狀態條訊息...）？

• 你的瀏覽器是什麼？

• 請描述顯示問題。 建議將此錯誤的螢幕截圖上傳到 Imgur.com 並轉貼連結。

The existing ELO calculation after a win (or loss) treats the result as a win (loss) against each of the opponents, **and a tie with the player's partner**. That means that if you are paired with a weak player, ot only is winning more challenging (which is fine, luck of the draw) but also your ELO is docked because of partner's weakness.
As an extreme example, say a 600 is paired with a 20 ELO, playing against a couple of 310 ELO opponents, and everybody has K=20. If the 600/20 team wins, the 600 gains about 4 points against each opponent, and ties his partner, which is about (-18+2)/2 = -9 ELO points. The sum is -1, so the expert player, having beaten a couple of strong players despite being paired with a beginner, would *lose* about half an ELO point. Since the odds of winning, based on linear approximation using the combined ELO's, were about 50%, that expert (and his partner) should have gained 10 points.
The best solution is to treat the game as a two-player game, using the pair-averaged ELO rating for each pair to determine the effective ELO. If that is awkward within the overall BGA framework, then at least the system should not be indicating a tie against your partner.

• 你的瀏覽器是什麼？

• 請轉貼未翻譯的英文字句。 建議將此錯誤的螢幕截圖上傳到 Imgur.com 並轉貼連結。

The existing ELO calculation after a win (or loss) treats the result as a win (loss) against each of the opponents, **and a tie with the player's partner**. That means that if you are paired with a weak player, ot only is winning more challenging (which is fine, luck of the draw) but also your ELO is docked because of partner's weakness.
As an extreme example, say a 600 is paired with a 20 ELO, playing against a couple of 310 ELO opponents, and everybody has K=20. If the 600/20 team wins, the 600 gains about 4 points against each opponent, and ties his partner, which is about (-18+2)/2 = -9 ELO points. The sum is -1, so the expert player, having beaten a couple of strong players despite being paired with a beginner, would *lose* about half an ELO point. Since the odds of winning, based on linear approximation using the combined ELO's, were about 50%, that expert (and his partner) should have gained 10 points.
The best solution is to treat the game as a two-player game, using the pair-averaged ELO rating for each pair to determine the effective ELO. If that is awkward within the overall BGA framework, then at least the system should not be indicating a tie against your partner.

• 這些文字存在於 翻譯系統 中嗎？若為真，其是否已被翻譯超過 24 小時？

• 你的瀏覽器是什麼？

• 請簡明精確地解釋你的建議，以便讓人一目了然。

The existing ELO calculation after a win (or loss) treats the result as a win (loss) against each of the opponents, **and a tie with the player's partner**. That means that if you are paired with a weak player, ot only is winning more challenging (which is fine, luck of the draw) but also your ELO is docked because of partner's weakness.
As an extreme example, say a 600 is paired with a 20 ELO, playing against a couple of 310 ELO opponents, and everybody has K=20. If the 600/20 team wins, the 600 gains about 4 points against each opponent, and ties his partner, which is about (-18+2)/2 = -9 ELO points. The sum is -1, so the expert player, having beaten a couple of strong players despite being paired with a beginner, would *lose* about half an ELO point. Since the odds of winning, based on linear approximation using the combined ELO's, were about 50%, that expert (and his partner) should have gained 10 points.
The best solution is to treat the game as a two-player game, using the pair-averaged ELO rating for each pair to determine the effective ELO. If that is awkward within the overall BGA framework, then at least the system should not be indicating a tie against your partner.

• 你的瀏覽器是什麼？