If you could magically identify smurfs, you could just put them at the level they should be or ban them without putting them in a match. There’s no such thing as rubber banding that only affects cheating.
A meaningful skill gap resulting in a rout is the whole point of a competitive game. It’s the definition of a competitive game. It’s why people are playing. Go play a casual game with a low skill ceiling it that’s what you want to play. Don’t play a game with a high one then demand that they break it.
There is no possible scenario where rubber banding can ever be better than dogshit game design. The core concept is incompatible with sound mechanics. The person playing better is supposed to get better results.
If you could magically identify smurfs, you could just put them at the level they should be or ban them without putting them in a match
That’s what league does. If it detects early on that you’re probably a smurf, you get tossed into smurf queue where you’ll face other experienced players, and it’s pretty reliable. Both times I’ve made new accounts, I’ve almost immediately gotten placed with experienced players, usually before the account graduates beyond bot games
Low-tier matches have a lower skill ceiling. That is what makes them… low-tier. We are only talking about those matches, and we are only talking about when one player is obviously, measurably, operating on a higher level. If a pro joins some newbies and plays like a newbie - there is no problem.
Even so:
Playing better will always get better results. There are no blue shells in DOTA. Winning isn’t random. Making the game slightly more difficult for people demonstrably kicking ass doesn’t have to stop them from kicking ass. Just make their contribution reasonable for a game that is supposed to be a team effort in the minor leagues.
Skill ceiling is a concept completely independent of the players involved. It’s a trait of the game itself.
A lower skill played having the game of their life playing way above and beyond the other players in the match is supposed to see the results that match that. A lower ranked player learning quickly and progressing faster than average is supposed to see results that reflect that. Having a great match and being nerfed because some idiot thinks it’s broken for you to see the success that fair mechanics earn you isn’t a good experience. Having your performances nerfed by rubber banding also keeps you from getting better by not having your successful and unsuccessful actions provide the consistent feedback correct mechanics do. On top of that, it completely destroys the matchmaking mechanics by not having the outcome be the rout it’s supposed to be when one player is significantly better.
Rubber banding is not a valid solution to any problem in any context. It’s proof that you don’t understand anything about games.
Skill ceiling is both meta and mechanics. That’s why new tech raises the ceiling. What people do matters as much as what’s possible. The game doesn’t have to change, for gameplay to change.
And if we’re talking about smurfing, we’re talking about the game being played badly. Naively. By amateurs. Or at best by experienced played who can’t manage to get their shit together.
Detecting when someone’s doing better than the rank of the current match is how ranking works. It’s not some impossible magic trick. It’s a judgement the game already makes, and that decision already affects people. If you do really well - you get moved to a different group, where you are more likely to get your ass kicked.
When ranking works, the only feedback for your skill is that rank. You will still lose half the time. You will get outmaneuvered half the time. Your execution is on-par with everyone else in the match.
… do you think handing one player an effortless victory is how matchmaking is supposed to work? My guy, one player managing a “rout” is the problem smurfing causes. It’s why Valve is handing out bans.
If you could magically identify smurfs, you could just put them at the level they should be or ban them without putting them in a match. There’s no such thing as rubber banding that only affects cheating.
A meaningful skill gap resulting in a rout is the whole point of a competitive game. It’s the definition of a competitive game. It’s why people are playing. Go play a casual game with a low skill ceiling it that’s what you want to play. Don’t play a game with a high one then demand that they break it.
There is no possible scenario where rubber banding can ever be better than dogshit game design. The core concept is incompatible with sound mechanics. The person playing better is supposed to get better results.
That’s what league does. If it detects early on that you’re probably a smurf, you get tossed into smurf queue where you’ll face other experienced players, and it’s pretty reliable. Both times I’ve made new accounts, I’ve almost immediately gotten placed with experienced players, usually before the account graduates beyond bot games
Low-tier matches have a lower skill ceiling. That is what makes them… low-tier. We are only talking about those matches, and we are only talking about when one player is obviously, measurably, operating on a higher level. If a pro joins some newbies and plays like a newbie - there is no problem.
Even so:
Playing better will always get better results. There are no blue shells in DOTA. Winning isn’t random. Making the game slightly more difficult for people demonstrably kicking ass doesn’t have to stop them from kicking ass. Just make their contribution reasonable for a game that is supposed to be a team effort in the minor leagues.
Skill ceiling is a concept completely independent of the players involved. It’s a trait of the game itself.
A lower skill played having the game of their life playing way above and beyond the other players in the match is supposed to see the results that match that. A lower ranked player learning quickly and progressing faster than average is supposed to see results that reflect that. Having a great match and being nerfed because some idiot thinks it’s broken for you to see the success that fair mechanics earn you isn’t a good experience. Having your performances nerfed by rubber banding also keeps you from getting better by not having your successful and unsuccessful actions provide the consistent feedback correct mechanics do. On top of that, it completely destroys the matchmaking mechanics by not having the outcome be the rout it’s supposed to be when one player is significantly better.
Rubber banding is not a valid solution to any problem in any context. It’s proof that you don’t understand anything about games.
Skill ceiling is both meta and mechanics. That’s why new tech raises the ceiling. What people do matters as much as what’s possible. The game doesn’t have to change, for gameplay to change.
And if we’re talking about smurfing, we’re talking about the game being played badly. Naively. By amateurs. Or at best by experienced played who can’t manage to get their shit together.
Detecting when someone’s doing better than the rank of the current match is how ranking works. It’s not some impossible magic trick. It’s a judgement the game already makes, and that decision already affects people. If you do really well - you get moved to a different group, where you are more likely to get your ass kicked.
When ranking works, the only feedback for your skill is that rank. You will still lose half the time. You will get outmaneuvered half the time. Your execution is on-par with everyone else in the match.
… do you think handing one player an effortless victory is how matchmaking is supposed to work? My guy, one player managing a “rout” is the problem smurfing causes. It’s why Valve is handing out bans.