Alle rapporter
Hjerterfri rapporterer
#13918: "Person who comes in 2nd place SHOULD NOT receive a boost to ELO rating"
rejected: Udviklerne tænker ikke at det er en god ide eller at omkostningerne vil være for høje
6
Hvad handler denne rapport om?
Hvad skete der? Vær venlig og vælg nedenunder
Foreslag: efter min mening vil følgende forbedre spillets implementering betydeligt
Detaljeret beskrivelse
• Forklar venligst dit forslag præcist og sammenfattende, så det er så let som muligt at forstå, hvad du mener.
Hearts is supposed to be played with 1 winner and 3 losers. Currently 2nd place gets an ELO boost. The game does not function properly when there is an incentive to get 2nd place.
ElO should be winner take all, and all 3 losers lose points equally.• Hvilken browser bruger du?
Google Chrome v78
Rapporthistorik
19. nov 2019 18:00 • tiktak292 • Dette forslag er endnu ikke analyseret af udviklerne:
For Example:
If I have the opportunity to stick the queen of spades on 4th place when I am 2nd, I am currently incentivized to make this move so I can get 2nd place and conserve my ELO ranking.
If ELO was winner take all and all 3 losers lost points equally, then I would be incentivized to eat the queen of spades. This is how the game is supposed to be played
If I have the opportunity to stick the queen of spades on 4th place when I am 2nd, I am currently incentivized to make this move so I can get 2nd place and conserve my ELO ranking.
If ELO was winner take all and all 3 losers lost points equally, then I would be incentivized to eat the queen of spades. This is how the game is supposed to be played
10. maj 2021 6:18 • ursaminor1 • Dette forslag er endnu ikke analyseret af udviklerne:
I disagree. In the scenario described above. The decision would be based on context. If I think I have a chance to take 1st, I'll choose one way, whereas if I think there's no chance I'll choose the way that preserves my 2nd place status. The way ELO is awarded matches the way this game is played in person: everyone would prefer to take 2nd place over 3rd or 4th, so the incentive is the same.
7. jul 2021 2:28 • KingJakeoffsuit • Dette forslag er endnu ikke analyseret af udviklerne:
The person from may 9th clearly doesn't understand the concept of the game, or the strategy. This is a huge deal, having a second place ruins a normally perfect game
20. jan 2022 11:44 • pheon • Dette forslag er endnu ikke analyseret af udviklerne:
This should be implemented ASAP. There are either change the ELO award (only first will have +, all others -)
Or change the result of the game: winner is 1st and all others 2nd
Or change the result of the game: winner is 1st and all others 2nd
7. jul 2022 23:35 • Just Keep Climbing • Dette forslag er endnu ikke analyseret af udviklerne:
I disagree with this suggestion. In most 3+ player games, one person is a winner, yet while the other players are not considered winners, there is still a second place, such as in Azul, Can't Stop, CATAN, 6nimmt!, Tock, Yahtzee, etc. I believe that ELO for hearts should be treated the same way as any of these other games and I ask that the devs reject this suggestion.
13. jun 2023 3:56 • ufm • Udviklerne tænker ikke at det er en god ide eller at omkostningerne vil være for høje:
Rejected as plshavemercy's explanation.
31. jul 2023 3:52 • SleeperService • Udviklerne tænker ikke at det er en god ide eller at omkostningerne vil være for høje:
Too bad. I've played Hearts for over 65 years. There's never been a "second place". So what if these other new fangled "games" do.
31. jul 2023 14:37 • ufm • Udviklerne tænker ikke at det er en god ide eller at omkostningerne vil være for høje:
Tilføj noget til denne rapport
Vær sød at tilføje, det du finder relevant for at vi kan løse fejlen i spillet eller forstå dit forslag:
- Et andet bord-ID / træk ID
- Løste F5 problemet?
- Skete problemet flere gange? Hver gang? Tilfældigt?
- Hvis du har et skærmbillede af denne fejl (god øvelse), kan du bruge Imgur.com til at uploade den og kopiere/indsætte linket her.
