'Receive' rating while losing a game

Just finished this game: https://dominating12.com/game/1055290 And 1 of the players who lost, got this as a last message for him/her: [i]27 Aug, 22:17:39 lluukkee received 15 tokens. 27 Aug, 22:17:39 lluukkee [b][u]received[/u][/b] 0 rating.[/i] It's nothing major, but it's quite strange to encounter. -Alex

Guessing they have 0 points to lose and it defaults to the received message.

[quote=dough_boy]Guessing they have 0 points to lose and it defaults to the received message.[/quote] Yes, I suppose the calculations lead to a loss for this person between 0 and 1 (but above 0); which then gets floored to be 0 and apparently displays as received. Nevertheless... I suppose the default should be (changed to) lost instead of received, provided the player doesn't win a game.

I guess...but how many people are playing with no rating? Looks like they are 2/127. Honestly, I wouldn't ever want to play against them as 1, I could never win anything (only lose), and 2, if they are that bad they have lost everything it can't be a good game.

[quote=dough_boy]I guess...but how many people are playing with no rating? Looks like they are 2/127. Honestly, I wouldn't ever want to play against them as 1, I could never win anything (only lose), and 2, if they are that bad they have lost everything it can't be a good game.[/quote] Can't really do much against people joining games... before you could place them on your avoid list (if you wanted too), you'd first need a reason for it. If you've never encountered them before, count on it that they're not on your avoid and can just sneak in. His/her win:lose ratio is indeed something I've never seen before...but you can count on it that there's still quite some rating there (I didn't do the math, but ~50?). Regardless; besides the point. To me this results leads towards the "discovery of a bug/anomaly" - it shouldn't be coded such that you can "receive" 0 rating. That's what I intended with this topic. Get awareness. Get it altered.

I don't think there is rating...if you look at their last few games they lost decreasing all the way down to 0. Just means that you should always put a minimum on ratings for people to join. Probably should be a requirement for tournaments too.

Their rating is very very low, but it is not zero. Personally I think the rating lost should be minimised at 1, otherwise such players have no negative consequences of losing, which seems wholly inappropriate to me. In effect they get pointless games.

Even at 1 they have no negative consequences of losing. I mean what happens if they do get to 0? Are they allowed to go negative?

Honestly, I don't know what happens.

The math is set up in such a way that you should never be able to get negative points. Getting to 0 points is hard, but definitely possible.

[quote=dough_boy]I don't think there is rating...if you look at their last few games they lost decreasing all the way down to 0. Just means that you should always put a minimum on ratings for people to join. Probably should be a requirement for tournaments too.[/quote] Evidence: https://dominating12.com/game/1057876 - lost 2 rating (and also 1 in a game before this one). I agree with V98: making people lose at least 1 rating is a good thing - even if that means the rating should be materialised out of thin air (there is also rating lost in thin air - so it won't have a negative impact, if anything, it'll lessen the other negative impact. This rating doesn't need to be subtracted from the individual - or, it can be but whenever the individual does smth, the server runs a check on it, sees negative rating and modifies to 0 (or w/e)). IRT Cireon Yes. Getting to 0 is possible, but almost _only_ in theory. In practise I do not expect this to happen at all (unless if someone is actually setting this as a goal for themselves ;)) - which is actually in violation with the rules.... play to win....

[quote] there is also rating lost in thin air [/quote] Oh? Tell me more.

[quote=Cireon][quote] there is also rating lost in thin air [/quote] Oh? Tell me more.[/quote] Already have sometime. When there's teamgames and uneven rating gets split.

[quote=dough_boy]I don't think there is rating...if you look at their last few games they lost decreasing all the way down to 0. Just means that you should always put a minimum on ratings for people to join. Probably should be a requirement for tournaments too.[/quote] https://dominating12.com/tutorial/thedominating12/36?page=2 Look for the last spot; s/he still has >100 rating Because the calculations are based on ratios, instead of absolutes, it really is extremely difficult to reach that limit of 0. You can't reach it "on your own" - you _need_ several other players who are also dropping hard in rating. Anyway; feels like the topic is spinning away from what I wanted to do with it. @Cireon do you see merit/'easy enough coding' in changing stuff in such a manner that it won't say that someone who lost a game, is still 'receiving' rating (albeit 0)?

It's easy to fix that the string says something "X won or lost no rating". We can't tell whether the player was originally meant to win or lose rating though.