• Παρακαλούμε κάντε αντιγραφή/επικόλληση του μηνύματος που βλέπετε στην οθόνη σας, αν υπάρχει.

Not applicable.

• Παρακαλώ εξηγήστε τι θέλατε να κάνατε, τι κάνατε και τι συνέβη

When I recently created a Groups Stage tournament with five groups (boardgamearena.com/tournament?id=166397), I was surprised to see the groups assigned according to ELO ranking using this "typewriter" method:

GROUP 1: players ranked #1, #6, #11, #16, #21, #26, #31, #36, #41, #46
GROUP 2: players ranked #2, #7, #12, #17, #22, #27, #32, #37, #42
GROUP 3: players ranked #3, #8, #13, #18, #23, #28, #33, #38, #43
GROUP 4: players ranked #4, #9, #14, #19, #24, #29, #34, #39, #44
GROUP 5: players ranked #5, #10, #15, #20, #25, #30, #35, #40, #45.

I call this the typewriter method because after the first "line" of 5 players is assigned to groups 1 to 5, we go back to group 1 before assigning the next "line" (players #6 through #10).

This system is flawed because players in Group 5 have much softer competition than players in Group 1. It makes sense to put the top 5 players in 5 different groups (to give them a measure of "protection" from each other) but on that logic player #1 should face the *softest* competition, not the toughest.

Instead, groups should be assigned by a snake system; Wikipedia labels this a serpentine system: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serpentine_system

Player #6 should be in the same group as #5; #7 should be in the same group as #4; and so on. That way the seeds are meaningful, with every player facing (in theory) competition that is a little bit softer than the next-seeded player. (For example, player #4 faces softer competition than #5, who faces softer competition than #6.)

Discussed briefly in the forums last year: boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=88637#p88637

• Ποιο είναι το πρόγραμμα περιήγησής σου;

• Παρακαλώ κάνε αντιγραφή/επικόλληση του κειμένου που απεικονίζεται στα αγγλικά αντί για αυτό που είναι στη γλώσσα σου.. Αν έχεις ένα screenshot αυτού του bug (καλή πρακτική), μπορείς να χρησιμοποιήσεις μια υπηρεσία φιλοξενίας εικόνων της επιλογής σου (για παράδειγμα snipboard.io) για να το ανεβάσεις και να αντιγράψεις/επικολλήσεις τον σύνδεσμο εδώ. είναι αυτό το κείμενο διαθέσιμο στο σύστημα μετάφρασης; Αν ναι, έχει μεταφραστεί για παραπάνω από 24 ώρες;

Not applicable.

• Ποιο είναι το πρόγραμμα περιήγησής σου;

• Παρακάλώ εξηγήστε την πρότασή σας με ακρίβεια και περιεκτικότητα, ώστε να είναι όσο το δυνατόν πιο εύκολο να γίνει αντιληπτό τι εννοείτε.

Not applicable.

• Ποιο είναι το πρόγραμμα περιήγησής σου;

• Τι εμφανιζόταν στην οθόνη όταν σταμάτησε (Κενή οθόνη; Μέρος του περιβάλλοντος του παιχνιδιού; Μήνυμα σφάλματος;)

Not applicable.

• Ποιο είναι το πρόγραμμα περιήγησής σου;

• Ποιο μέρος των κανόνων δεν έγινε σεβαστό από την μετατροπή του παιχνιδιού για την BGA

Not applicable.

• Είναι η παραβίαση των κανόνων ορατή στην αναπαραγωγή του παιχνιδιού; Αν ναι, σε ποια κίνηση;

When I recently created a Groups Stage tournament with five groups (boardgamearena.com/tournament?id=166397), I was surprised to see the groups assigned according to ELO ranking using this "typewriter" method:

GROUP 1: players ranked #1, #6, #11, #16, #21, #26, #31, #36, #41, #46
GROUP 2: players ranked #2, #7, #12, #17, #22, #27, #32, #37, #42
GROUP 3: players ranked #3, #8, #13, #18, #23, #28, #33, #38, #43
GROUP 4: players ranked #4, #9, #14, #19, #24, #29, #34, #39, #44
GROUP 5: players ranked #5, #10, #15, #20, #25, #30, #35, #40, #45.

I call this the typewriter method because after the first "line" of 5 players is assigned to groups 1 to 5, we go back to group 1 before assigning the next "line" (players #6 through #10).

This system is flawed because players in Group 5 have much softer competition than players in Group 1. It makes sense to put the top 5 players in 5 different groups (to give them a measure of "protection" from each other) but on that logic player #1 should face the *softest* competition, not the toughest.

Instead, groups should be assigned by a snake system; Wikipedia labels this a serpentine system: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serpentine_system

Player #6 should be in the same group as #5; #7 should be in the same group as #4; and so on. That way the seeds are meaningful, with every player facing (in theory) competition that is a little bit softer than the next-seeded player. (For example, player #4 faces softer competition than #5, who faces softer competition than #6.)

Discussed briefly in the forums last year: boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=88637#p88637

• Ποιο είναι το πρόγραμμα περιήγησής σου;

• Ποια ήταν η δράση του παιχνιδιού που ήθελες να κάνεις;

Not applicable.

• Τι προσπαθείτε να κάνετε για να ενεργοποιείσετε αυτήν την ενέργεια του παιχνιδιου;

When I recently created a Groups Stage tournament with five groups (boardgamearena.com/tournament?id=166397), I was surprised to see the groups assigned according to ELO ranking using this "typewriter" method:

GROUP 1: players ranked #1, #6, #11, #16, #21, #26, #31, #36, #41, #46
GROUP 2: players ranked #2, #7, #12, #17, #22, #27, #32, #37, #42
GROUP 3: players ranked #3, #8, #13, #18, #23, #28, #33, #38, #43
GROUP 4: players ranked #4, #9, #14, #19, #24, #29, #34, #39, #44
GROUP 5: players ranked #5, #10, #15, #20, #25, #30, #35, #40, #45.

I call this the typewriter method because after the first "line" of 5 players is assigned to groups 1 to 5, we go back to group 1 before assigning the next "line" (players #6 through #10).

This system is flawed because players in Group 5 have much softer competition than players in Group 1. It makes sense to put the top 5 players in 5 different groups (to give them a measure of "protection" from each other) but on that logic player #1 should face the *softest* competition, not the toughest.

Instead, groups should be assigned by a snake system; Wikipedia labels this a serpentine system: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serpentine_system

Player #6 should be in the same group as #5; #7 should be in the same group as #4; and so on. That way the seeds are meaningful, with every player facing (in theory) competition that is a little bit softer than the next-seeded player. (For example, player #4 faces softer competition than #5, who faces softer competition than #6.)

Discussed briefly in the forums last year: boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=88637#p88637

• Τι συνέβη όταν προσπαθήσατε να το κάνετε αυτό (μνμ σφάλματος, μνμ στην μπάρα κατάστασης, ...);

• Ποιο είναι το πρόγραμμα περιήγησής σου;

• Σε ποια φάση του παιχνιδιού προέκυψε το πρόβλημα (ποιά ήταν η τρέχουσα οδηγία στο παιχνίδι);

Not applicable.

• Τι συνέβη όταν προσπαθήσατε να κάνετε κάποια ενέργεια στο παιχνίδι (μνμ σφάλματος, μνμ στην μπάρα κατάστασης, ...);

When I recently created a Groups Stage tournament with five groups (boardgamearena.com/tournament?id=166397), I was surprised to see the groups assigned according to ELO ranking using this "typewriter" method:

GROUP 1: players ranked #1, #6, #11, #16, #21, #26, #31, #36, #41, #46
GROUP 2: players ranked #2, #7, #12, #17, #22, #27, #32, #37, #42
GROUP 3: players ranked #3, #8, #13, #18, #23, #28, #33, #38, #43
GROUP 4: players ranked #4, #9, #14, #19, #24, #29, #34, #39, #44
GROUP 5: players ranked #5, #10, #15, #20, #25, #30, #35, #40, #45.

I call this the typewriter method because after the first "line" of 5 players is assigned to groups 1 to 5, we go back to group 1 before assigning the next "line" (players #6 through #10).

This system is flawed because players in Group 5 have much softer competition than players in Group 1. It makes sense to put the top 5 players in 5 different groups (to give them a measure of "protection" from each other) but on that logic player #1 should face the *softest* competition, not the toughest.

Instead, groups should be assigned by a snake system; Wikipedia labels this a serpentine system: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serpentine_system

Player #6 should be in the same group as #5; #7 should be in the same group as #4; and so on. That way the seeds are meaningful, with every player facing (in theory) competition that is a little bit softer than the next-seeded player. (For example, player #4 faces softer competition than #5, who faces softer competition than #6.)

Discussed briefly in the forums last year: boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=88637#p88637

• Ποιο είναι το πρόγραμμα περιήγησής σου;

• Παρακαλούμε περιγράψτε το πρόβλημα απεικόνισης που έχετε. Αν έχεις ένα screenshot αυτού του bug (καλή πρακτική), μπορείς να χρησιμοποιήσεις μια υπηρεσία φιλοξενίας εικόνων της επιλογής σου (για παράδειγμα snipboard.io) για να το ανεβάσεις και να αντιγράψεις/επικολλήσεις τον σύνδεσμο εδώ.

Not applicable.

• Ποιο είναι το πρόγραμμα περιήγησής σου;

• Παρακαλώ κάνε αντιγραφή/επικόλληση του κειμένου που απεικονίζεται στα αγγλικά αντί για αυτό που είναι στη γλώσσα σου.. Αν έχεις ένα screenshot αυτού του bug (καλή πρακτική), μπορείς να χρησιμοποιήσεις μια υπηρεσία φιλοξενίας εικόνων της επιλογής σου (για παράδειγμα snipboard.io) για να το ανεβάσεις και να αντιγράψεις/επικολλήσεις τον σύνδεσμο εδώ. είναι αυτό το κείμενο διαθέσιμο στο σύστημα μετάφρασης; Αν ναι, έχει μεταφραστεί για παραπάνω από 24 ώρες;

Not applicable.

• Ποιο είναι το πρόγραμμα περιήγησής σου;

• Παρακάλώ εξηγήστε την πρότασή σας με ακρίβεια και περιεκτικότητα, ώστε να είναι όσο το δυνατόν πιο εύκολο να γίνει αντιληπτό τι εννοείτε.

Not applicable.

• Ποιο είναι το πρόγραμμα περιήγησής σου;