The problem is not the people complaining about smurfing, but a total absence of regulation in terms of consumer law.
You proposed the problem as if we were a self-managed community, where the solution of problem must come from the community to the community. We are not a big family, we are simple customers of a paid service. Service that uses a system called elo (or derivative), a system created for chess which as a prerequisite is not to allow smurf (because with the increase of the time factor it will inevitably increase the smurf up to completely corrupt the functionality of the system itself).
This information blizzard or raiot or whoever you want, have always had it, and since smurfing brings benefits in terms of earnings they have opted for a very bad compromise solution:
-for titles like raiot lolls where the player base is incredibly large and continuously breathing the problem is still sustainable
-for titles like ow or dotoo2 this scenario is no longer sustainable (for this reason dotoo 2 has officially declared war on smurfing in the last month by banning it in all its forms).
(we don’t have official numbers cause are there not regulations in terms of consumer law for this, so publishers don’t provide anything to us)
We are customers and consumers, it is our right and duty to say that something is wrong, we are not a self-managed community.
1 Like
I agree. I’ve made alt accounts to play with friends, too, because I was too high to queue with them on my main account. I always try my hardest, though. No de-ranking. And I got moved up through the ranks too fast to keep playing with them anyway so I didn’t get to do it long. That’s the difference between an alt and a smurf, though. Smurfs are those who de-rank or underperform on purpose to stomp lowbies.
1 Like
if you can’t solve a complex math puzzle (university level) in 1st class at age 6, what makes you think you can handle in the future?
Why do you think they made elo for chess instead public lobby?
1 Like
I’m obviously not talking about a brand new player. I’m talking about people who’ve been playing this game for months to years complaining about being stuck in a certain elo for multiple seasons because of smurfs. If you’re a 3100 player that gets mad at a 3800 player on an alt, you aren’t ready for that next step yet.
2 Likes
does not make any difference cause there are many and many steps, there is no white and black only. You can only learn from the same or 1 step higher than yours (google vigotskij); google Elo.
For science there is no sense to make a bronze to play with a gold (for make an example), so a gold old player experienced can’t be matched with a diamond etc.
Blizzard (and others) adopted a system that was already well known from decades or more on chess on all his shades. Open your eyes.
Your post makes no sense, so I’m just going to leave this alone.
There was actually that one guy last week who was arguing it made him strive to be a better player. But other than him, yes thats true.
It’s so easy to just buy a fake number off Skype.
1 Like
I wouldn’t want that, its a no from me. they cant do that on consoles either, sony and mcirosoft say you can have as many accounts as you want playing the same game and blizzard cant change that.
2 Likes
Its harder for games that have been out longer to have balanced lobbies. spellbreak isnt old enough yet for it to be a big problem.
Skill has gone up in overwatch over time
1 Like
Wouldn’t work. Blizzard tried phone verification to reduce the number of alt accounts in T500, people can just use burner numbers.