There’s not much they can do about smurfing in general
You want to read that again?
There’s plenty they could do. They simply won’t.
1 Like
They could do a lot more than they do.
Smurfs run rampant. They form thrower groups openly in LFG. They offer boosting in match chat. They play completely ridiculous games showing off their abilities, and then they throw in the most obvious way, dancing just off the point while letting the other team cap.
I mean, sure, it could be difficult to stop smurfs who were trying hard to hide their activity. I guess we’ll never know, since there is so little effort made to stop them that they don’t even bother.
4 Likes
Don’t think its a smurf issue though.
They should implement a rule where if the point hasn’t been taken in 5 mins, its a draw and the match ends.
Simple as that. Griefing gone.
PS: Spawn camping is not against the rules.
Like what? Most things people want to stop smurfs are just mild annoyances at best
Just because all 6 players are happy to throw the match together doesn’t mean that throwing the match is acceptable behavior. Playing towards an objective other than winning is Gameplay Sabotage. If nothing else, it’s SR manipulation to fail to win when you could.
5 Likes
They are playing in the ways they subjectively think best helps them control the objective.
Quote the part of gameplay sabotage that says this.
Like banning smurfs that join groups labeled ‘road to bronze’ and blatantly throw games for a few hours, perhaps? I mean, just to start with, how about we don’t let smurfs openly form deranking groups in full public view. Make some effort.
Those ‘annoyances’ add up to bans. On disposable alt accounts, to be sure, but smurfing is such a problem because smurfs don’t mind buying a new account 2 or 3 times a year. But if it were buying new accounts every few weeks? Between the dollar cost and the time invested in leveling up and deranking, that’s would discourage a good number of them from continuing. There just have to be enough ‘annoyances’ to actually get to that point where it’s too ‘annoying’ to just laugh it off.
3 Likes
Are you actually trying to defend someone throwing their rank to abuse bronze players?
16 Likes
Killing the other team is as far from throwing as you can get.
If you’re actively playing it out to not win, then it’s throwing.
6 Likes
So yes, you’re actively defending people who threw their rank in order to bully a set of players who can do nothing about it. Got it.
13 Likes
There is no evidence that anyone threw games to drop rank in OP. Try strawmanning less.
Throwing defined by Blizzard is playing to lose, not playing in ways you subjectively think is not “to win.”
If you read the OP’s account of the situation:
-
The group isn’t playing for point. AKA the point is uncontested, except for when they themselves allow the enemy team to take it. That isn’t playing the objective. The fact that if what the OP said is true, they actually got off the objective before it was ever claimed. That in itself is gameplay sabotage
-
I doubt any bronze player is able to spawn camp consistently enough to not allow them to leave, or be able to control a map so well.
11 Likes
No, that is “playing poorly”, which isn’t against the rules. That is the whole basis of the C9 meme, and OWL teams has been guilty of this.
Reports are for offenses in the current game, not for what you “think” happened in previous games that you were not part of.
No, that’s deciding to ruin a game for 6 other players who want a fair match and instead are being harassed and either have to stay for however long the match takes or be forced to leave and take whatever harsh penalties are laid out.
12 Likes
Not capping an uncontested objective is the opposite of controlling it.
Quoth Jeff, “Doing anything to manipulate your internal MMR or Skill Rating (i.e. Boosting or Throwing) is not fine.”
Refusing to capture the objective and stalling the game until the server times out costs you the victory, i.e., that’s throwing.
10 Likes
Smurfs can easily be regulated by requiring a legal id before beginning competitive play or creating a new account. If the game required identification like a driver license, then it would easy for the company to regulate smurfs. If a player were to use an id that is different to their own, then the company can take legal action for submitting false documentation. The legal actions can vary such as fines, jail, and a record of a misdemeanor. The problem is Blizzard and every gaming company don’t want to implement such a system due to the sales generated by smurfs.
I don’t think it is necessary to take legal action, but requiring ID, would allow the gaming company to ban all of that player’s accounts. Including his or her main account. That threat would probably force players to behave.
In Korea, every player is given an online social security that identifies each person uniquely. A player can’t legally play with another of these online ids without real threat of legal action. Players can still create smurfs, but the excuse that the company can’t distinguish between accounts is not existent.
I personally, think gaming companies use the excuse of not being able to identify accounts in order to keep selling games to smurfs. That’s short term surge of profits at the expense of longer term profitability. American companies seems to only think the short term not the longer term, which is why man companies are worried now. The boomers are dying off and the younger generations aren’t buying their products.
4 Likes