Ultimate smurf solution to ranked games

Thats nice to hear mate. It sounds like you are really into it. I guess everyone values their free time differently. I dont have enough free time due to obligations and I find myself wanting more and more comfortable games to play. Broodwar’s frustration can really affect me sometimes and I dont have nor the free time or the willpower to become better at this game(and I think I have spend a great amount of time learning how to play it). I just want to have a relaxing fun not hardcore fun these days, thats why I mostly just mess around with games against AI, no matter how easy it they are, and not playing on ladder anymore. I have become, just like the majority of broodwar’s fanbase, a passive broodwar fan.

3 Likes

A passive SC fan…I feel the same. Im have to manage my frustration of losing everytime. THats why im just limiting to play casually with friends or family, even when i wanna play more often. Ill keep on my dream of reach the 100 apm…maybe someday, maybe never…who knows…?

The question is why do you feel frustrated of losing everytime ? …xDDD
Work in small stepps…
if you get overwhlelmed try to fight to the end lol

i Remember a game on fastess possible were my allied was kill and i snipped the main nexus of my opponents … we fought for hourse 2 -4 neither could win … They had toss and i zerg …

neither had the apm or strategy to win it …
They came with dragoons Dts zealots reaver and all… I had dark swarm lurkers plague, ensnare to kill their carrieres with hydras … after some time(4hour), and countless threats and shouting via text chat, we made draw…
Awesome :wink:

You understand why there are smurfs right?
#1 there are three distinct players on this game #Fastest(High$) #Low$ #UMS
#2 there is not enough #Low$ players to keep the circuit active enough so that you can find a game without getting matched up to very different ranks. If blizzard did block smurfs it would only result in you waiting a much longer period of time for a match and you still getting matched up to an A rank as a C rank it would still be very in balanced.

1 Like

I rather would wait 2-3 minutes extra to have a balanced match instead of getting absolutely destroyed by a smurf or much higher ranked player.

2 Likes

I think that Custom Games is the right place to deliberate practice against specific races

What about other issues like “buying new accounts just for smurfing

That’s something no game company have ever solved in any game.

Payed account is a mitigation of multiboxing, smurfing and other abuses but it’s not a solution

A person who wants to smurf will deliberately do so, no matter how many accounts you give him for it.

I really think it does not change anything if a player has 3 accounts or 15 or just 1. If a player wants to throw 20 games in a row to smurf, they will continue to do so.

Okay, you could ban people for doing that, the issue is you have to prove that they are doing it. Innocent until proven guilty. I mean, even IF somebody’s elo rating has a really big standard deviation, who are you to say he is throwing games intentionally. If he wants to play 20 games with Scouts and loses, that is fine. Everybody can play as they wish. And the elo rating pairs them with players who play at a similar skill at that point in time. Is it a well deserved ban because this person loves Scouts and loses loads of rating whenever he feels like playing them?

I hope you get my point, that is: it is really hard to prove, even with statistical measures like standard deviation, to grasp player behavior and to prove that abusive behavior has occured. In general: Cheesy players will have a WAY higher standard deviation than a player who plays mostly standard play. People are free to compete on the ladder with whatever strategy they want though.
This would also lead to innocent people being banned, as a system like this cannot be completely accurate. The consequences of that are clear: people leaving the game, asking for refunds, talking sh it about Blizzard on social media, etc.
Also it would impose a certain way that you are expected to play on the ladder - in a way that minimizes the standard deviation of your elo rating, which is bad for competition. The best strategies shall prevail, not those from a certain pool that the community respects.

Yeah but if he only have one and we for example say during one season it is not possible to delete an account you can smurf only so much time before needing another account.

Smurfing would be almost totally solved if the system counts their APM on matchmaking,
First Condition APM
Second Condition MMR
APM also should be showed on player stats as they enter to a room. Win / Loses dont say anything about player skill.

1 Like

APM means nothing, if you are not doing the right things.

It might as well make matters worse, if you do things just to do something very quickly.

Trust me, most people who have high APM do not even have enough skill to allocate them correctly and efficiently. Also spamming improves pathfinding in BW…

BTW there are people in A rank - or higher - with 120 APM.

Making the system count APM in matchmaking would be the biggest nonsense ever. You are not measuring the things you want to measure with the APM value.

Also you have failed to state WHY it would eliminate smurfs as one can deliberately lower the used APM as well as MMR.

https:/ /postimg. cc/ 47VnrhGW

1 Like

If you have a quick solution to a problem, be vary if it actually is a solution. Just saying…

Yes, it does, more noticable on lower levels. Or tell me any pro player who has 50 APM?
I know about the spaming APM when holding a hotkey, thats kinda bug and should be corrected.
If someone wants to “smurf” how he would lie their APM?, yes he can play slow if want, but that will be easily noticeable when he starts to play seriously.
And after that there stills the MMR so now there are 2 values to evaluate players skill

I would suggest that it is difficult for a pro player to lower their APM without impacting their game.

After all, if a person can play just as effectively with a lower APM, then they were not being particularly efficient… and pro players are meant to be pro because they are efficient!

But, you are correct that by itself it is not a fair assessment of a player. However, I do agree with Maximus:

I would suggest that both values would need to be assessed simultaneously. Possibly also frequency of playing the game. But if we were to list all the factors, then it would be a long list…

You cannot equate APM with efficiency or skill. APM can be an indication of it, mostly it will not be.
Do you have any idea how many people play around 250 APM in C or B rank? Why aren’t they alreay all in S rank since all of them play about as quickly as Stork does?

I do not see why I would not lean back in a winning position and take my hands off the keyboard for a while to lower my APM when it means I am going to face easier opponents later on. Often the opponent is sticking around without having any chances - or slim chances at best - left to win. Why not take advantage of that?

Besides what do you mean with “pro”? Professional are very few KR players who can make a living by playing that game (via streaming or tournament earnings). But we are not talking about pros, we are talking about your every day ladder user trying to get a game and people smurfing.

Also a smurfing player can easily afford to not play his best and not have high APM as he will most likely win anyways.

Creating a system that cannot be abused is really hard as a lot of systems see some abuse in it. Tell me one where nobody abuses it in some way or another. That is because, if people can abuse something, they will, if only because of spite.

Well, the truth is ladder is not moderated. Like, at all. And there is no reasonable way to report a user, which comes from point one - noone is willing to read your report, because ladder is not moderated.
The system which works - lichess fex. You can report an abuse there and expect an action to be taken within reasonable amount of time. But that’s again, because lichess is moderated.

Blizzard does not tell us whether it is or not. If they take actions or not.

Perhaps they do, perhaps they don’t.

Afaik disconnect hackers have been banned from the ladder before.

Well, yes, they removed obvious hackers in the top of the ladder after community got wild about it. It did take several days though.
But it’s not the same as dealing with tons of regular abuses and reports on all ranks constantly.

No, it is fine like it you can bann enought maps…
THis one aspect that really doesnt need improvement…