There was a bug in the update to the Hearts ratings last week which caused the losing players to get more points deducted from their Elo ratings than they should have. My apologies, I know some of you take the ratings very seriously!
I've applied a fix to the problem this morning. Anyone who would like to get their Elo ratings set back to where they were last Wednesday need only write to me and ask (marya@worldofcardgames.com). To do this, just make sure that you send me the email from the address that you registered with, so I know it's you. I will do this for people up until the end of November.
[Edit on Nov 24 2015: Only a small number of requests to reset Elo ratings have come in. After receiving negative feedback on the way this was being done, I decided to just go ahead and do the work to perform a bulk update of Elo ratings. Anyone who played at a ranked table prior to Nov 17 has had their Elo rating reset to the value from Nov 11, before the bug was introduced. To be clear, this was only done if it led to an increase in their ratings - I did not reset values that were lower.]
I've written a page about how the Elo ratings are computed at World of Card Games, so you can always check for yourself to make sure you are getting the correct results.
I've also applied a fix for the "list of tables", which had a bug that caused the list to stop updating. Third times the charm? I hope so!
Tuesday, November 17, 2015
Sunday, November 15, 2015
list of tables bug fix, Pinochle bots improvement
This morning, the server was updated to repair a bug in the "list of tables". It's supposed to update every few seconds, but had stopped. This is now fixed.
I've spent a little bit of time updating the bots in Pinochle, based on feedback. They'll still need more work, but overall should be a little bit better in playing their cards now.
 |
| list of tables updates every few seconds |
Wednesday, November 11, 2015
new features! chat after game, spades hand history
This morning, the server was down for a brief time in order to apply some updates.
Registered players can now chat after their game has finished at World of Card Games! After the game finishes, you will now see three buttons: "Home", "Chat", and "Play ..." (see screenshot below).
Clicking the "Home" button takes you back to the main home page, where you can decide what new game you want to play. Clicking the "Play ..." button takes you directly to a new game of the same type that you just finished (for example, Hearts or Spades).
Clicking the "Chat" button takes you to a "chat" table where only the registered players from the game you just finished are invited. This gives you time to discuss the game in as much detail as you like, should you care to do so. The "Chat" button goes away after 30 seconds, so be sure to use it as soon as possible if you are interested in a chat with your group of players. Caveat: No one is obliged to go to the chat table, so you may find that no one joins you there.
If any who played with you goes to the chat table after your game is finished, this chat table will show up in the list of tables. Here's a screenshot of how to recognize it:
Another new feature is the ability to save your "hand history" in Spades. The hand history is already familiar to those who play Euchre. Registered players can download the history of their previous hand, and replay it in the browser to review all the cards played, one step at a time. In Euchre, this feature can be a nice tool to discuss strategy. It is also very useful to report bugs in the bots to me. I'm hoping Spades players will find it useful as well. Sometimes, people report problems with the bots, but it's too time-consuming for me to figure out just what happened. With this new feature, if the bots make a boneheaded mistake, you can grab the hand history and send it to me with a description of what went wrong. I will be more likely to fix a problem when I know exactly what happened, and can reproduce the issue.
To download the hand history, click the old-fashioned "floppy disk" icon that appears next to your avatar after a hand has finished. You can see what it looks like in the screenshot here.
Hm, I can't believe I just called a floppy disk "old-fashioned"! :)
Another important change: at ranked tables, the Elo ratings now reward the first-place player only. Elo ratings in Hearts was discussed in the previous blog post. I did not receive a lot of feedback, one way or the other, about this... but most players appear to like the idea, so I've made the change. I will continue to keep track of any feedback on the issue. Please post to Facebook or Twitter or here on the blog if you have comments. (FYI: anonymous posts are not treated very seriously; anyone can post anonymously multiple times, so I don't consider them to be so useful.)
Registered players can now chat after their game has finished at World of Card Games! After the game finishes, you will now see three buttons: "Home", "Chat", and "Play ..." (see screenshot below).
 |
| Click Chat button to chat with the Registered players after your game |
Clicking the "Chat" button takes you to a "chat" table where only the registered players from the game you just finished are invited. This gives you time to discuss the game in as much detail as you like, should you care to do so. The "Chat" button goes away after 30 seconds, so be sure to use it as soon as possible if you are interested in a chat with your group of players. Caveat: No one is obliged to go to the chat table, so you may find that no one joins you there.
If any who played with you goes to the chat table after your game is finished, this chat table will show up in the list of tables. Here's a screenshot of how to recognize it:
 |
| "chat" table shows up in the list of tables |
To download the hand history, click the old-fashioned "floppy disk" icon that appears next to your avatar after a hand has finished. You can see what it looks like in the screenshot here.
 |
| Click the floppy disk icon to download the hand history in Spades |
Another important change: at ranked tables, the Elo ratings now reward the first-place player only. Elo ratings in Hearts was discussed in the previous blog post. I did not receive a lot of feedback, one way or the other, about this... but most players appear to like the idea, so I've made the change. I will continue to keep track of any feedback on the issue. Please post to Facebook or Twitter or here on the blog if you have comments. (FYI: anonymous posts are not treated very seriously; anyone can post anonymously multiple times, so I don't consider them to be so useful.)
Sunday, October 18, 2015
Hearts ratings should not reward second place - guest blog
This morning, an update was applied to fix a bug which caused some players to be unable to see existing ranked tables in Hearts.
The new rankings have generated some discussion! Constance, a Hearts player, has written today's guest blog on that topic. Please take a look at what she has to say. - Marya
The new rankings have generated some discussion! Constance, a Hearts player, has written today's guest blog on that topic. Please take a look at what she has to say. - Marya
I
am delighted to see ELO ratings being applied to Hearts, which should
strengthen the competition. The current ELO ratings reflect place
position - that is, 1st is better than 2nd, is better than 3rd, with 4th
being the big loser. Classic Hearts rewards only 1st place; there are 3
last-place finishers - regardless of score. I am in favor of this
Winner-Take-All position and Marya has offered me the opportunity to
defend it.
For
a game with such simple rules, Hearts is remarkably complex. The
primary goal for Low is to end the game as quickly as possible by
eliminating High or to increase his lead at any opportunity. A
temporary, yet shifting alliance is formed by the other players who
attempt to unseat Low using their knowledge in identifying the Q-holder,
suits in which players are void, and how many of a suit are
outstanding. This forms the complex strategy of the game: teamwork with a
selfish goal - becoming Low.
Part
of the strategy is trusting your 'team' to not hurt you in the effort
to go after Low. It means protecting High, who may be on the brink of
elimination, by taking some of his point-tricks and possibly helping him
moon. It means doing what is necessary to prolong the game at the
expense of increasing your own score: taking a Q to stop a moon, not
leading spades until you are sure it will not hurt the wrong person,
leading suits which Low holds and in which the Q-holder is void, passing
cards that will not prematurely end the game, avoiding dumping the Q on
first opportunity until you are reasonably sure it will target Low.
Having
a rating system which has proportional rewards weakens the game.
Strategy will change to the extent that ratings matter. Players will
begin to strategize for place position. Trust will deteriorate. Dumping
the Q and ducking points will become more frequent, at least as end-game
approaches or in games with skewed scores. If Low has a substantial
lead, he will most likely be given a pass by the 'team' who will now
turn on each other for 2nd place and a resulting ELO rating increase, in
most cases.
Decisions
become more conflicted in Proportional-Reward games. A 2nd place player
may end the game by dumping the Q on high in order to ensure a 2nd
place position. A moon-stopper may not be employed if it results in the
player's own position to be shifted downward. In Winner-Take-All games,
where 2nd is no better than 4th, players make decisions that will
extend the game - not to end it. There is no benefit to ending a game in
which the 'team' places last to a single winner.
I
have no doubt that there will be players who will continue to play
traditional, classic Hearts and that at the beginning of the game,
everyone will strive to win. But traditional players will find
themselves at odds with an increasing number of new players who are
conditioned to a Proportional-Reward game of Hearts, bringing with it a
changed strategy - one which includes trying to improve place position
behind the winner, especially if it appears too risky to go after Low.
The
primary argument I have heard in favor of a 2nd place reward is to keep
players in the game longer - that they find a consolation prize
justification that they did better than 3rd & 4th, that there is no
incentive for high-scorers to remain in the game just to come in last.
To that I say So What! Who wants to play with people of such fragile
egos anyway? On this issue, I would like to reference Marya's Hearts Strategy & Tips: "With 4 players in Hearts, and only 1 winner,
your odds of losing are good: 75%, all other things being equal. So if
you are going to play Hearts, you need to be willing to accept taking a
loss in most of your games. The game is a good test of character, in
this respect!"
I leave with a quote from G Berns: "To
watch 3 excellent hearts players playing cooperatively, stalking the
low-scorer adept at evading, is to watch hearts at its very best."
Monday, October 12, 2015
Bidder Out option in Double Deck Pinochle is the default
This morning, a change was made to Double Deck Pinochle at World of Card Games. I did this because I had enough feedback to think it was necessary.
According to Pagat's Double Deck Pinochle page, Pinochle "is won by the first partnership to achieve a score of 500 or more. If both sides reach 500 on the same hand, the bidding side wins." Some people call this the "bidder out" rule.
I've consulted with some Pinochle experts - by asking about it at Stack Exchange, Power Pinochle forums, and Board Game Geek - and they all tell me it is true: if both players reach 500 or more on the same hand, it is not the high score that decides who wins. Rather, the win is awarded to the bidding team.
This makes the game a little more intense towards the end if the scores are close enough. It might encourage each team to take a little more risk in winning the bid, in order to win that last hand and thus the game.
I had not implemented the game this way when I introduced it. However, it is now the default option. If you feel strongly enough, you can change your settings so that the high-scoring team always gets the win by unchecking your Pinoche "Bidder Out" option. I hope you like the change!
According to Pagat's Double Deck Pinochle page, Pinochle "is won by the first partnership to achieve a score of 500 or more. If both sides reach 500 on the same hand, the bidding side wins." Some people call this the "bidder out" rule.
I've consulted with some Pinochle experts - by asking about it at Stack Exchange, Power Pinochle forums, and Board Game Geek - and they all tell me it is true: if both players reach 500 or more on the same hand, it is not the high score that decides who wins. Rather, the win is awarded to the bidding team.
This makes the game a little more intense towards the end if the scores are close enough. It might encourage each team to take a little more risk in winning the bid, in order to win that last hand and thus the game.
I had not implemented the game this way when I introduced it. However, it is now the default option. If you feel strongly enough, you can change your settings so that the high-scoring team always gets the win by unchecking your Pinoche "Bidder Out" option. I hope you like the change!
 |
| Bidder Out option for Double Deck Pinochle is now the default |
Saturday, October 3, 2015
bots can now replace humans at ranked hearts tables
Yesterday, special ranked tables were added to the Hearts card game. Ranked tables were intended to be exceptional in having strict rules: no robots allowed, and registered players only. Penalties were applied to those who left a game early.
Some players found that the "no robots allowed" policy was making it impossible to finish their games. After someone dropped out (deliberately or accidentally), they'd be stuck waiting for a long time before the game could continue. This was true even though human players are allowed to substitute at ranked tables... so such tables do show up in the "list of tables" (they don't show as ranked once a player leaves because you do not get ranked if you join such a table after it starts). Apparently, tables where "no robots" applies are especially unappealing to Hearts players.
People are not dropping out from ranked games very often, so that's good. Even so, when it happens, it leaves people waiting indefinitely for fear of losing in the rankings, which is no fun. To correct this, I've now changed the rule so that bots may replace a human who left the table. This is only permitted after the game starts. And in case it is not obvious, winning or losing to a bot does not count towards your ranking!
It is still necessary to get 4 humans together to start a ranked game... currently this involves a wait. It appears that most people prefer to start a game with bots. For those who want to play a Hearts game with humans from start to finish, ranked tables are the best way to go. I hope the wait time will lessen as more people discover rankings.
For those who are curious, a description of how "Elo ratings" are computed is given at the site.
Some players found that the "no robots allowed" policy was making it impossible to finish their games. After someone dropped out (deliberately or accidentally), they'd be stuck waiting for a long time before the game could continue. This was true even though human players are allowed to substitute at ranked tables... so such tables do show up in the "list of tables" (they don't show as ranked once a player leaves because you do not get ranked if you join such a table after it starts). Apparently, tables where "no robots" applies are especially unappealing to Hearts players.
People are not dropping out from ranked games very often, so that's good. Even so, when it happens, it leaves people waiting indefinitely for fear of losing in the rankings, which is no fun. To correct this, I've now changed the rule so that bots may replace a human who left the table. This is only permitted after the game starts. And in case it is not obvious, winning or losing to a bot does not count towards your ranking!
It is still necessary to get 4 humans together to start a ranked game... currently this involves a wait. It appears that most people prefer to start a game with bots. For those who want to play a Hearts game with humans from start to finish, ranked tables are the best way to go. I hope the wait time will lessen as more people discover rankings.
For those who are curious, a description of how "Elo ratings" are computed is given at the site.
Friday, October 2, 2015
rankings added to hearts card game
You can now play ranked Hearts card games at World of Card Games. There are more details at that link, so take a look there if you are interested.
I've added two different rankings - an "Elo rating" and a "Skill rating" -
If you are eligible to play at a ranked table, you'll see the "ranked" table in the list of tables panel. Click on a seat to be taken to the table.
Bots are unavailable at ranked tables until near the end of the game, so I expect that it may be difficult to get a ranked game going, especially for players outside the US time zone [Edit: as of Oct 3 2015, bots may be invited as soon as someone drops out]. I don't think it makes a lot of sense to rank individuals against bots, though, since they don't have expert levels of skill.
There are several advantages to playing at a ranked table: because quitting a table has a more serious penalty than simply taking a loss, it can be hoped that players will be less likely to quit. In addition to your Elo rating taking a hit, quitting gets you banned from ranked tables for 4 hours. This means that you should find more reliable players at the ranked tables, on average.
I'll be playing at the ranked Hearts tables on and off during the day, and look forward to hearing from people about their experiences with it.
If you experience any problems or bugs after this update, please let me know. There were some major changes!
I've added two different rankings - an "Elo rating" and a "Skill rating" -
 |
| Elo rating and Skill rating |
 |
| a ranked table in the list of tables with 3 seats available, note purple color |
There are several advantages to playing at a ranked table: because quitting a table has a more serious penalty than simply taking a loss, it can be hoped that players will be less likely to quit. In addition to your Elo rating taking a hit, quitting gets you banned from ranked tables for 4 hours. This means that you should find more reliable players at the ranked tables, on average.
I'll be playing at the ranked Hearts tables on and off during the day, and look forward to hearing from people about their experiences with it.
If you experience any problems or bugs after this update, please let me know. There were some major changes!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)