• Per favore copia/incolla il messaggio di errore visualizzato sullo schermo, se possibile.

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".

• Per favore spiega cosa avresti voluto fare, cosa hai fatto e cosa è successo

-

• Qual è il tuo browser?

• Per favore copia/incolla il testo visualizzato in inglese invece che nella tua lingua. Se hai una schermata di questo errore (cosa buona e giusta), puoi usare Imgur.com per caricarla e fare copia/incolla del link qui.

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".

• Questo testo è disponibile nel sistema di traduzione? Se sì, è stato tradotto nell'arco di più di 24 ore?

-

• Qual è il tuo browser?

• Spiega il tuo suggerimento in modo preciso e conciso in modo che sia il più semplice possibile per capire cosa intendi.

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".

• Qual è il tuo browser?

• Cosa era mostrato sullo schermo quando sei rimasto bloccato (schermo bianco? interfaccia di gioco parziale? messaggio di errore?)

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".

• Qual è il tuo browser?

• Quale parte delle regole non è stata rispettata dall'adattamento 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 violazione delle regole è visibile nel replay della partita? Se sì, a che numero di mossa?

-

• Qual è il tuo browser?

• Qual era l'azione di gioco che volevi fare?

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".

• Cosa stai provando a fare per attivare questa azione di gioco?

-

• Cosa è successo quando hai provato a fare questo (messaggio di errore, messaggio nella barra di stato del gioco...)?

• Qual è il tuo browser?

• In quale fase del gioco si è verificato il problema (qual era l'istruzione della partita in corso)?

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".

• Cosa è successo quando hai provato a fare questa azione di gioco (messaggio di errore, messaggio nella barra di stato del gioco...)?

-

• Qual è il tuo browser?

• Per favore descrivi il problema rilevato. Se hai una schermata di questo errore (cosa buona e giusta), puoi usare Imgur.com per caricarla e fare copia/incolla del link qui.

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".

• Qual è il tuo browser?

• Per favore copia/incolla il testo visualizzato in inglese invece che nella tua lingua. Se hai una schermata di questo errore (cosa buona e giusta), puoi usare Imgur.com per caricarla e fare copia/incolla del link qui.

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".

• Questo testo è disponibile nel sistema di traduzione? Se sì, è stato tradotto nell'arco di più di 24 ore?

-

• Qual è il tuo browser?

• Spiega il tuo suggerimento in modo preciso e conciso in modo che sia il più semplice possibile per capire cosa intendi.

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".

• Qual è il tuo browser?