• Mar-plij, eilit/pegit ar gemennadenn fazi a zo war ho skramm, ma zo unan.

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".

• Displegit deomp, mar-plij, ar pezh ho poa c'hoant d'ober, ar pezh ho peus graet hag ar pezh a zo c'hoarvezet 'benn ar fin

-

• Peseurt merdeer eo hoc'h hini ?

• Mar-plij, eilit/pegit an destenn e Saozneg ha n'eo ket en ho yezh. M'ho peus un dapadenn skramm eus ar gudenn (ho pezit soñj d'eus se !), gellout a rit implij Imgur.com evit e bellgargañ hag eilañ/pegañ al liamm amañ.

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".

• Ha dibres eo an destenn-mañ er sistem treiñ? Ma ya, daoust ha troet eo bet ouzhpenn 24 eur 'zo ?

-

• Peseurt merdeer eo hoc'h hini ?

• Displegit ho kinnig mar-plij, e berrgomzoù met en un doare resis, evit ma vefe an aesañ posupl kompren mat ar pezh ho peus c'hoant lâret.

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".

• Peseurt merdeer eo hoc'h hini ?

• Petra oa diskouezet war ar skramm pa 'z oc'h chomet stanket (Skramm goullo ? Ul lodenn eus etrefas ar c'hoari ? Kemennadenn fazi ?)

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".

• Peseurt merdeer eo hoc'h hini ?

• Pesseurt reolenn n'eo ket doujet gant azasadenn ar c'hoari-mañ ?

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".

• Ha posupl eo gwelet torridigezh ar reolenn e replay ar bartienn ? Ma 'z eo ya, da be niverenn taol ?

-

• Peseurt merdeer eo hoc'h hini ?

• Peseurt taol ho peus c'hoant c'hoari ?

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".

• Petra emaoc'h o klask ober evit delankañ an ober c'hoari-mañ ?

-

• What happened when you try to do this (error message, game status bar message, ...)?

• Peseurt merdeer eo hoc'h hini ?

• Da be bazenn ar bartienn eo en em gavet ar gudenn (petra oa testenn kemenn ar c'hoari) ?

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".

• What happened when you try to do a game action (error message, game status bar message, ...)?

-

• Peseurt merdeer eo hoc'h hini ?

• Mar-plij, diskrivit kudenn an diskwel. M'ho peus un dapadenn skramm eus ar gudenn (ho pezit soñj d'eus se !), gellout a rit implij Imgur.com evit e bellgargañ hag eilañ/pegañ al liamm amañ.

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".

• Peseurt merdeer eo hoc'h hini ?

• Mar-plij, eilit/pegit an destenn e Saozneg ha n'eo ket en ho yezh. M'ho peus un dapadenn skramm eus ar gudenn (ho pezit soñj d'eus se !), gellout a rit implij Imgur.com evit e bellgargañ hag eilañ/pegañ al liamm amañ.

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".

• Ha dibres eo an destenn-mañ er sistem treiñ? Ma ya, daoust ha troet eo bet ouzhpenn 24 eur 'zo ?

-

• Peseurt merdeer eo hoc'h hini ?

• Displegit ho kinnig mar-plij, e berrgomzoù met en un doare resis, evit ma vefe an aesañ posupl kompren mat ar pezh ho peus c'hoant lâret.

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".

• Peseurt merdeer eo hoc'h hini ?