Someone who played 250 games without rating, so that he is not restricted to rank.
)
Wth his 13K / 1500 ELO starting points he beats even 1Ks, and nothing happen.
Since the new rating system and within the disaperence of the rated/unrated -
games value, it makes guys like this just as easy as possible to sandbag.
It is a proper invitation for sandbaggers.
(@anoek: why is this concern not even worth a comment? )
In this case it is very obvious, 'cause he didnāt played a single ranked game, with some rated games from time to time in between it would be hard to detect.
(Could it be that the offering of unranked games increased since a couple of weeks? (just a daily feeling when I look on the game graph)
No disappearance. It is still possible to play either rated or unrated. This player chooses to play unrated games, thus he has no rating. What is the problem here?
Your logic is hard to follow, Iām not entirely sure what your words mean? But I think youāre complaining that you canāt see the total games played of a player who plays unranked gamesā¦ I believe you are also accusing anoek of ānot even worth a commentā when in fact he went out of his way to create an issue tracker ticket for this.
First: I know this guy is playing only unranked games, and it is his choice, and I dont have to accept his challenges.
I just pointed out, that this kind of behavior is undermeing the ranking system. A system where player get an idea what their opponent strength is (aprox.) and decide that they will play with them or not, to get a good balance between joy and learning effect.
Besides from getting an idea for the own strenght.
If you see only the last part, then okay it wont matter if someone else have a false (or in this case no) rank.
Second:
you are rtight I am complaining about disaperence of an old feature thats just display the ranked/unranked games. (to identify such sandbaggers more easily). And the silently leaveing of the person who could help from the conversation (again) no furhter statment of a posiible implementation or not implementation. just posts from others why this matter not matters in their opinonsā¦
Third:
I dont know what on github is happening, I dont have an account there. My loss, i know, but I refuse to make an third account just to play here on OGS.
Forth:
(and this is a not small subonscios part )
I got the feeling over the last 2 years, that user voices about some small improvments (especialy in the UI) dont get heard (or at least not implemented) despite some announcments [after the big server changes] , of course there was some change since then, like the big server update and the the rating system. But I miss the small things that user suggested.
If someone post here in the forum an possilbe improvment, the only thing that will happen is: some other users says post in github or there is already an ticket on github ā¦and thats it.
I stoped to have hope the small things will implemented 'cause they wont (just subjective feeling) . But something like the disaperence of some good features makes me a bit angry ā¦ .and then sad, 'cause I realize i still had hope again.
And then i dont know, should I wait longer (how long?) or change the server (but i like the base of the UI on OGS) and then I look to the numbers of daily players and realize there was a time with a bigger pool of players here and I wonder is there a connection? and then I get sad again.
Then I realize if have to apriciate what i have and not mourn what I maybe could have.
AND then something like this above is happening (a player undermines the ranksystem) and i get angry about it and everything else I wrote aboveā¦ and I post here, in hope to gat a change. But nothing will happenā¦like everytime. ā¦ And I start to wonder maybe its me, and why I cant care less about OGS.
And then I doā¦ I let go and care less. bit by bit by bit.
Sometimes I will post here on my way away from OGS in hope there will be some change in this matter and I dont have to leave, but more and more I dont. And I finaly can care less. This time it was to much emtoions again and I get inviolved again. Sorry for that. I will try harder to care less about. Thanks for your opinon and a reminder why my feelings should matter less.
I disagree that it undermines the ranking system that is just my opinion though as someone who mostly plays unrank, although I can see where you are coming from.
Yes that feature got removed during the big update, although they arenāt āsandbaggersā because they play unrank. Anoek will still comment on the forums about possible features, this ties in with the third post but github is where we ask for features and where people can add features themselves which Anoek/Matburt will approve.
The only thing you need to play on OGS is an ogs account. so saying you have to make a third account is technically wrong that is also why you have issues with number 2. All of OGS feature implementations have been move over to github so people can request features or if they have the knowledge add their own features.(we are open source now for the most part.)
The majority of 4 is about how you feel so I canāt change it but you are wrong about two things āI got the feeling over the last 2 years, that user voices about some small improvments (especialy in the UI) dont get heard (or at least not implemented)ā and " then I look to the numbers of daily players and realize there was a time with a bigger pool of players "
For the first part I can assure you they are still listening and implementing user requests they have a list from top priority to lower priority. The number of daily players has not been dropping we have constantly been getting more and more players online all the time. So that is just factually wrong I remember when it was a big deal to break 850 players online, we always have over 1000 now at any given time. I donāt know about you but are player count isnāt dropping at all.
Thatās why hĆ«/she has the question mark instead of rank, right? So you know he/she might be whatever rank, and is not hurting anyone else since all the games are unrankedā¦ Does not ruin your rank in any wayā¦ I too donāt see an issue with it
I can assure you that lots of ui changes are constantly being implemented. It can never be all of them done quickly because the core dev team is still only 2 people.
But Iāve seen @GreenAsJade doing a lot of work with anoek recently and one of his projects will bring back the total number of games played to the profile page along with some better graphing. My understanding is that this should be merged shortly.
Nobody wants you to care less @sTan this community is what it is because we all care so much! If something is important to you, keep making rational arguments for it! Sure some people may disagree, but one day with persistence they may come around to your side
One minor point here: there are still occasional times when a person who is basically still unranked, and is usually displayed at [?] gets displayed at 13k (or whatever it is).
Iāve noticed it in passing before, but havenāt raised it as an issue yet.
That seems like abug, and it might contribute to confusion some times.
However, in respect of the original complaint, the situation is precisely the same as it was before.
Before, you used to be āunrankedā. This meant that we didnāt know what your rank is, and if you accept a challenge from a person like that then you donāt know what their rank is. If they never play ranked games, then this situation persisted.
If you played an unranked person, then you were by definition gambling what their ability might be.
This is not sandbagging, because the unranked person is not making any claim about their rank. Itās up to you to review their history, if you care.
Itās the same now: if someone is [?] then you donāt know what their rank is. And it will persist till they play ranked games.
Nothing has changed in that respect.
Weād all like small improvements to come faster, and we did lose some stuff in the ābig changeā but it is gradually coming back
The referenced player certainly is a sandbagger. His (we recognize that it could be a her) strength is somewhere around 1k, as @sTan says, and he frequently plays people far below his level (DDKs). He also plays games at his level, unranked, which thereby preserves his cover. Since most players rated (?) are newbies, DDK opponents who get pasted could well be demoralized by the experience. His games are not teaching games, be it noted. Contrast this with the honorable approach of @thought, who plays unranked due to a philosophical objection to the amount of komi; in the past he played enough ranked games to establish his ranking, so his opponents have an accurate idea of his strength.
A sandbagger misrepresents their strength to get games against low ranked people.
This person does not misrepresent their rank. They also play people at their apparent skill level.
For all you know, the games you see against DDK are teaching or for-fun-playing-up for those DDK players. The DDK players involved had every opportunity to see what they were up against.
Yes, GreenAsJade it is like the minor period in the beginning where nobody knows the rank of the a new player, but in this case it is 250 games āminorā
An exaggerated(!) question to realize what I am trying to say:
If the rank of an opponent doesnāt matter, why dont hide it all the time?
ā¦ maybe I am the only one, whos using my opponents rank as an deciding factor to accept a challenge or not.
Then my apologies for bothering.
@BHydden: you pointed out, that some of the feature especially the one with total number of played games will come back (hopefully, the ranked/unranked numbers, too) then my apologies for being unpatient.
@adam: I dont care about the not-impact or impact to my rank. As I wrote, my issue is, I use the rank of my opponent as an deciding factor to accept a challange or not.
Not playing is always an option, you are absolutly right.
If someone with a higher rank trick a lower rank into playing by hiding his/her true strenght and beats the crap out of it without a choice:
If this is called diffrent then āsandbaggingā, cause he/her hides his true strength by not getting ranked at all, then sorry for choosing a wrong word. ā¦but this is the behavior what this post is about, however you would call it.
ok, then my mistake. I only looked from time to time on the āplayed livegamesā and had the feeling this number is lower then. Maybe it was just the summer or just the wrong times that i looked.
May I say that when I was young and still learning I was always on a lookout for strong players who are willing beat the crap out of me for learning purposes? If I was ~10k I would add the player in question as friend to abuse his willingness to play weaker players for learning purposes. I completely miss the point of the thread. I might be masochistic, but not necessarily.
Iāve skimmed through few games in question and the only thing that strikes me is the amazing courtesy and patience of the player. I donāt see any proof of malicious intent, quite opposite itās extremely rare to find players who find time to spell out āHelloā and āThank you for the gameā every time they play.
If you believe there is a problem with players behaviour, feel free to contact him individually, and point his wrongs to him directly.
Every unranked player āconceals their strengthā thatās why their rank is ā?ā because they could be 30 kyu or 9 dan nobody knows. If they choose to play unranked games then they shouldnāt have a rank. If you choose to play against a player with a ? for a rank, you need to accept that they could be 30k or 9d you canāt know.
If you want a reliable game against a certain strength, play a ranked game.
You canāt claim to know the intentions of this player.
Furthermore, are you proposing that every user is forced to play a certain number of ranked games? This user has no rank because s/he plays no ranked games. Itās that simple.
I really donāt see how this is a problem? If you are assuming that anyone without a rank is a new player, maybe you should reassess that assumption?
