• 如果有的话，请将你在屏幕上所看到的错误信息粘贴出来.

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".

• 请说明你当时想做什么，你做了什么，然后发生了什么

-

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 请以英文复制／粘贴显示文字而非你的语言。 如果你有这个系统漏洞发生时的屏幕截图(画质不要太差)，你可以使用Imgur.com来把它上传到网络，然后将链接复制/粘贴到这里来。

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".

• 这段文本在翻译系统中吗？如果存在，它被翻译是否已超过二十四小时？

-

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 请简明而精确地解释您的建议，以便让人明白您想表达的意思。

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".

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 当你被封锁的时候，屏幕上出现了些什么呢？(空白的屏幕？部分游戏平台画面？错误的信息？)

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".

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 哪个规则没有被BGA的设计小组写进游戏里？

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".

• 在游戏回放中，是否有不符合游戏规则的地方？如果有的话，请问是在哪一步呢？

-

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 你当时是想做哪个游戏行动？

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".

• 你在想做什么的时候，触发了这个游戏选项？

-

• 当你想这么做时，发生了什么事(错误信息，游戏状态信息，......)？

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 请问这个问题发生在游戏的哪个阶段(当前的游戏说明是什么)？

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".

• 当你想进行一个游戏行动时，发生了什么事(错误信息，游戏状态信息，......)？

-

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 请描述一下显示画面上面的问题。 如果你有这个系统漏洞发生时的屏幕截图(画质不要太差)，你可以使用Imgur.com来把它上传到网络，然后将链接复制/粘贴到这里来。

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".

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 请以英文复制／粘贴显示文字而非你的语言。 如果你有这个系统漏洞发生时的屏幕截图(画质不要太差)，你可以使用Imgur.com来把它上传到网络，然后将链接复制/粘贴到这里来。

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".

• 这段文本在翻译系统中吗？如果存在，它被翻译是否已超过二十四小时？

-

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？

• 请简明而精确地解释您的建议，以便让人明白您想表达的意思。

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".

• 您正使用哪一款浏览器呢？