There's a new category in your "stats" area: "absolute" wins and losses.
The rules for a game counting as an "absolute" win or loss are as follows:
- There is only 1 winner per game.
- If you leave a game before it ends, you forfeit that game, and it counts as a loss for you.
- Exception: If you are seated at a table for less than 30 seconds, it will not be counted as a forfeit if you leave. This is done to be fair to someone who takes a losing seat directly at the end of a game.
- Only human players are counted as winning or losing; if a bot wins or loses, it does not show up in the global statistics for absolute wins and losses.
 |
| new "absolute" statistics |
These new statistics are being recorded for a couple of different reasons.
First - the original way that statistics were recorded at World of Card Games was confusing to many. These statistics are now shown as the "Relative Win Ratio". An example will explain the counting used: If you came in 1st place in Hearts, you were counted as winning against 3 other players. If you came in 2nd place, you were counted as winning against 2 other players and losing against 1 player. This counting method is relatively expressive - a person who comes in 2nd place a lot is probably a better player than someone who comes in 3rd place a lot, but if you count both placings as "losses" then you'll never see this distinction. However, most people expect a single winner for a game! This new statistic provides that clarity.
As an aside, the above counting method would not lead to confusion in team games like Spades, because there are exactly two winners and two losers (the winning and losing teams) in that type of game. It was really only a problem in Hearts, 3-5-8, and Go Fish.
Second - it has been proposed that some players are leaving a losing position shortly before a game ends so as to avoid having a loss counted against them. With the new forfeit rule, there will be no encouragement to leave a game early. I am a little skeptical that this will help with the "quitting players" problem, but we shall see.
These new statistics are experimental, so don't get too attached to them yet. In the next few weeks or months, I may make modifications based upon feedback; in that case I'll probably wipe the new stats and start fresh. Stay tuned.
24 comments:
Excellent!!! Thank you for obviously some great thought going into this. I think that everyone will notice a huge difference. I know that there are still some that will go on being sore losers but I think this will help a lot.
Thanks! I hope you are right... I must be more pessimistic about human nature than you ;)
I can see this working for hearts, but what about 3-5-8? A game could go on all day without a winner, and although I like to play, I can't spend the time it would take to stay until there is a winner. So if I'm playing for a half hour and have to leave and there's no winner, is it a loss for me then? That doesn't seem right.
I never bother with stats anymore. I just play & enjoy....
Hi Anon @ Mar 7 7:28 AM,
This is a good point. With Spades and Hearts, you do sometimes find a game can go for an hour. But you generally have an idea when the game is approaching its end. In contrast, 3-5-8 may end 5 minutes after you start, or an hour later, and you're never sure when that will happen.
It's even worse with the card game 29, where games frequently run for 2 or more hours. Most people do not stay till the end, and if you "win" it's very likely that you did not play the whole game.
I agree that the absolute win/loss statistics are not very helpful for these types of games. I don't necessarily think that it's a good idea to remove them, since they do give you *some* information. But it might be best not to keep track of the average of your win/loss stats for all games. In particular, the average doesn't seem helpful.
Any way to post a I concede stat for when people leave a game and no on shows up for a long period of time? If all parties agree.
doesn't matter one way or the other people quit for different reasons. phone, work, wife, kids, company, just being an ask hold, etc. so there is no true way to count.
Anon @ Mar 9 2015 12:36 PM - you are absolutely correct, in the end, there's no way for the site or anyone but you to know why you quit. Sometimes there are legit reasons and sometimes people are "ask holds". It's possible to use the "dislike" icon to pick off people that are recognizable quitters, one by one. But if there's any way to encourage people to stick with the game, I'd like to do so.
Anon @ March 9, 2015 at 11:33 AM - do you mean a "stat" or do you mean a button that allows people to finish up the game by conceding a loss? If you mean the button - then yes, I can certainly do this. Haven't had anyone request this, yet; you are the 1st.
Yes a button for private games or when bots are not allowed and someone has to leave before the game is completed and the rest cannot get enough players.
If you dislike a guest will they still show up as a guest later on?
Maybe we need a concede or draw button for when people leave and others cannot finish the game. A draw button would be nice
I'll add a "concede" button to my to-do list! This will allow a player (or team) to be credited with a win if their opponents wish to concede defeat.
Thanks that would be great, what's your opinion of a draw button so no one takes a loss if people leave and you can't get more players?
Anonymous @ March 10, 2015 at 11:52 AM - I guess it would either have to be a "concede" button, where a player or team concedes a loss, or a "draw" button where all players agree to not count the game at all. I would think most players would prefer to be credited with a win, rather than a draw. As usual, I welcome feedback on this.
Only problem I see with a concede button is who wins and who takes the loss if there is only 3 people left at a table, or do they all take a win?
A concede button would mean "I concede that I lost". For a game likes Hearts, where 1 player wins, all but 1 player would have to hit the "concede" button to concede a loss. This would probably only work at a table of good sports!
For Spades, it would require that both players on a team concede the loss. For a case where 1 player on the team has left, it would just require that the remaining player concede the loss for the opponent(s) to take a win.
Excellent work.
why have stats any way!!,people wont bother to leave only for a proper reason. How many people look at their stats,I only play for fun.
I do look at my stats. I don't mind losing but I try my hardest to win. I my mind why play if you don't try to win? I don't play card games where it is all random luck. Maybe a casual & a Rated Hearts site would help? If you may have to leave or don't try to win play a casual site. If you care to try to win play the rated site.
I still believe a short 2 minute delay before a quitter returns would be good. We all have legit times when we need to quit but I can't imagine many legitimate reasons for quitting that don't take a couple minutes anyway.
I have chatted with players who almost never check their stats. I myself do not check my stats, except for debugging purposes! I think many good players don't check their stats, and they also rarely leave the table before the game is over.
There are a variety of reasons to play. Some people are just socializing and passing time over cards. I've noticed that not everyone tries very hard to win, and they don't seem to care at all if they lose. Others appear to be quite focussed and serious.
I don't have the resources to split the site up into one for casual players and one for more serious people - however, you can weed out the more casual players yourself by using the dislike button. If you want to play in a more competitive way, it may be worth joining a league? The Spades league has been reasonably healthy, so far, but I don't have time to manage more than a few tournaments every week.
I am not considering a delay before allowing a quitter to return. I've been at too many tables where a player accidentally leaves and immediately hops back in, often frantic that they lost their seat because they hit the back button or some other legitimate reason. Why should I deny them their seat? In such cases, most players sitting at the table would like them to return.
One thing I could do is force a player who is leaving to only return to their seat. But people who leave a seat sometimes do so because they found someone unpleasant at the table. There is no point in forcing them to return to such a table.
If the site gets more users, it will be easier to group players into "quitters" and "non-quitters" and try to seat the non-quitters together in a preferential way. There just aren't enough players to do this, currently.
I've played at tournament type sites where everyone tries tensely to win and improve their rating. You're matched with players with similar ratings. It's actually more pleasant here, where you may be with a good player and/or a beginner. Just relax and play your best.
I know that some people have more fun when they are competing. I don't want to make World of Card Games all about that... but I do want everyone to be able to enjoy it, in their own, different ways. Eventually, I think I will allow people to play with others who have similar "rankings". However, I will try to make sure that casual game players do not get crowded out.
Post a Comment