40 replies to this topic

[HHJFTRU]

I think it would be fairly easy to write an anti-smurf algorithm to prevent things like this that happened on the Euro servers last night:

 

pilot lvl 12. Assault: 266-12-148  CR-T: 132-2-73

 

http://hawken.heroku...m/user/whyudead

 

 

[reVelske]

There are no easy magical surefire algorithm that would solve the issue of smurfing.

 

Take your example, what if he just happens to be god damn MLG? What if he's been playing on someone else's account for god knows whatever reason for a while and finally got around to making his own account? What if it was someone with a hacked/stolen account and was not able to reacquire it for whatever reason so he made a new one?

Edited by reVelske, 04 June 2015 - 01:34 AM.

[HHJFTRU]

There are no easy magical surefire algorithm that would solve the issue of smurfing.

If you score >2x than the other ppl in the match altogether for let's say 3 times in a row, AND your playtime is let's say <1/5 of the server avg, your MMR should be raised by let's say 500.

 

Just a rough idea. 

Edited by HHJFTRU, 04 June 2015 - 01:33 AM.

[reVelske]

I can't say much without knowing exactly what the algorithm is when it comes to how quickly MMR raises, but I'd say it's good enough as it is. Smurfs don't stay in lower bracket beating up newcomers for very long.

[HHJFTRU]

I can't say much without knowing exactly what the algorithm is when it comes to how quickly MMR raises, but I'd say it's good enough as it is. Smurfs don't stay in lower bracket beating up newcomers for very long.

 

They can make a new account daily.

Like in the above case where it was a one-day account. That's why I think that 3 matches-in-a-row evaluation is needed.

 

Take your example, what if he just happens to be god damn MLG? What if he's been playing on someone else's account for god knows whatever reason for awhile and finally got around to making his own account? What if it was someone with a hacked/stolen account and was not able to reacquire it for whatever reason so he made a new one?

These are not likely IMO but of course don't ban them from the game just try to put them fast where they belong.

[EM1O]

what if someone made a smurf because they suct so bad they couldn't get decent matches?  would the algorithm give a reverse mmr "devaluation" to put the fuzzy bunny player back down where he belongs?

heh. uh, hemm....

 

 ????? is censored now? i keep forgetting things--sorry.

Edited by em1o, 04 June 2015 - 01:41 AM.

[HHJFTRU]

what if someone made a smurf because they suct so bad they couldn't get decent matches?  would the algorithm give a reverse mmr "devaluation" to put the fuzzy bunny player back down where he belongs?

heh. uh, hemm....

 

Faster than normal MMR adjustment, also downwards if they were put too high as a result to what I suggested, seems fine to me for smurf-suspects players that have so extreme stats.

 

Or if you were asking what if someone re-starts to have the initial 1250 MMR because he now has only 800, I think it is quite theoretic or at least not much of a concern.

Edited by HHJFTRU, 04 June 2015 - 03:42 AM.

[M4st0d0n]

Yeah what if, what if. This guy is not a smurf. That's obvious. Leave him alone.

 

Facepalm.

[reVelske]

Good job on missing the entire point. We are discussing the idea of a smurf detection, not the particular case OP used as an example... unless, of course, you are suggesting that the single case is more than enough to validate a anti-smurf algorithm based on such stats.

 

So yeah, please lend me your facepalm when you get a moment.

Edited by reVelske, 04 June 2015 - 04:13 AM.

[Panzermanathod]

Given that there are multiple ways to "play the system" or have certain rare players essentially get screwed over by having a few good games in a row, I'm not sure something like this could be implemented and work as intended.

[reVelske]

I'm sure you can add enough conditions to make such a system work and not screw over innocent players, but I'm not entirely sure if the amount of research/effort they would need to pour into this to make it failsafe would are really worth the benefits.

Edited by reVelske, 04 June 2015 - 04:24 AM.

[Silverfire]

I like my smurfs, don't touch em

[Call_Me_Ishmael]

I can't say much without knowing exactly what the algorithm is when it comes to how quickly MMR raises

 

Let me help you with that: https://community.pl...cel-thisisreal/

 

We ALREADY have too-stiff a penalty for trying over your head, and the time spent for a mid-tier player trying to cross the 2000-2200 gap is very long because of it.  1900-2000 level matches (server average) are vicious, fast, dirty-trick-fests, lacking the beauty of the game found in higher-tier play.  Players in the 2200-2400 range often get knocked back 100pts in a single day, then requiring a week to rebuild most of it (because MMR increase in a 1900-level server is about 1 MMR for such a player).

 

Don't implement your Smurf detection this way.

 

Instead, give anyone topping a server (first place) under 1700MMR +200 MMR.  First place between 1701-1900 +100 MMR, and between 1901-2000 +50.

 

Smurfs will either quickly be placed into matches at the 1900-2000 level (and if they are truly elite, leave those behind quickly), or will play to moderate their scoring to JUST avoid first place.   Either way, the roflstomp behavior you're kvetching about is fixed.

 

 

edited to add this:  a smurf landing in a 2000-level server after five matches will have a box-stock Assault - every time.  He won't have enough HC for upgrades/alternate mechs (such as, say, Scout), or the XP to use HC for upgrades (such as, say, Orblord).  This will have said smurf spending MC (injection of cash), if they're truly dedicated to creating a new account.

Edited by Call_Me_Ishmael, 04 June 2015 - 04:55 AM.

[HHJFTRU]

MMR penalty for trying over your

 

 

Let me help you with that: https://community.pl...cel-thisisreal/

 

We ALREADY have too-stiff a penalty for trying over your head, and the time spent for a mid-tier player trying to cross the 2000-2200 gap is very long because of it.  1900-2000 level matches (server average) are vicious, fast, dirty-trick-fests, lacking the beauty of the game found in higher-tier play.  Players in the 2200-2400 range often get knocked back 100pts in a single day, then requiring a week to rebuild most of it (because MMR increase in a 1900-level server is about 1 MMR for such a player).

 

Don't implement your Smurf detection this way.

 

Instead, give anyone topping a server (first place) under 1700MMR +200 MMR.  First place between 1701-1900 +100 MMR, and between 1901-2000 +50.

 

Smurfs will either quickly be placed into matches at the 1900-2000 level (and if they are truly elite, leave those behind quickly), or will play to moderate their scoring to JUST avoid first place.   Either way, the roflstomp behavior you're kvetching about is fixed.

Thanks, Luna,  for the link to the MMR explanation topic. It shed some light for me on this matter.

Note that you suggested an even more radical solution (1 time MVP =  +n MMR).

Also note that the problem starts at 1300-1400. Where I think a +500 adjustment would cut it.

Edited by HHJFTRU, 04 June 2015 - 05:06 AM.

[Call_Me_Ishmael]

If we went more than 3x the maximum delta for the MMR alg, we would need to change the b-parameter in the alg based on the current (say, 30-day moving window) standard deviation of the playerbase MMR distribution - to make it reflect/breathe with the playerbase.

 

I think the playerbase is too small currently to suggest that.  If we tried the idea as I've proposed it, we'd need to watch it for a few weeks, then try bigger 'incentive boosts' (your suggestion of 500) if the effect were washed-out.  We'd have a LOT of upper-tier players 'volunteering' to smurf to try it out.

 

I propose this as being something relatively easy to add when Reloaded is successful in rebuilding the game from source/releasing updates, and a lot less radical than, say, resetting everyone's MMR to 1250 and watching the mayhem for two weeks.

 

If we were serious about it, I think Laila may be asked to explain to 'incentive boost' winners what happened and why the competition is getting harder.

 

Josh?

Edited by Call_Me_Ishmael, 04 June 2015 - 05:07 AM.

[CrimsonKaim]

Call out threads, bruh. Smurfs, bruh. Deal with it.

[PoopSlinger]

I like just having a detector that would place smurf in parentheses next to the IGN for a period of time. If you start off the game and maintain a 3 kdr within your first 8 matches then you get labeled a smurf and you bring shame upon yourself whereever you go (or like the next 40 hours of play).

[Panzermanathod]

 you get labeled a smurf and you bring shame upon yourself whereever you go

Yes, shame him for being too good at a game.

 

I find that hilarious.

[reVelske]

As obvious as it may seem, I'd just like to point out that your own MMR in comparison to the room MMR need to be taken into consideration with these suggested bonus MMRs. I'm currently sitting on 1750 MMR and often find myself bumping into 1400 MMR games, often I'd be stomping over people who don't even use dodge, even when I'm playing with 200-250ms. Do I need to get my MMR bumped? Absolutely not. 1700 is absolutely the right spot for me as actual 1700 MMR games are pretty fair on my skill level and competence.

[Call_Me_Ishmael]

As obvious as it may seem, I'd just like to point out that your own MMR in comparison to the room MMR need to be taken into consideration with these suggested bonus MMRs. I'm currently sitting on 1750 MMR and often find myself bumping into 1400 MMR games, often I'd be stomping over people who don't even use dodge, even when I'm playing with 200-250ms. Do I need to get my MMR bumped? Absolutely not. 1700 is absolutely the right spot for me as actual 1700 MMR games are pretty fair on my skill level and competence.

Then leave the current algorithm alone (it does this), and accept smurfs.

[Call_Me_Ishmael]

Yes, shame him for being too good at a game.

 

I find that hilarious.

 

Much like a certain tiger-skinned G2A pilot does just before he leaves a match.  Use 'smurf', a five-letter word, as a four-letter word.

[HHJFTRU]

As obvious as it may seem, I'd just like to point out that your own MMR in comparison to the room MMR need to be taken into consideration with these suggested bonus MMRs. I'm currently sitting on 1750 MMR and often find myself bumping into 1400 MMR games, often I'd be stomping over people who don't even use dodge, even when I'm playing with 200-250ms. Do I need to get my MMR bumped? Absolutely not. 1700 is absolutely the right spot for me as actual 1700 MMR games are pretty fair on my skill level and competence.

 

You are lvl30, have ~2300 kills, 10 mechs and probably 80+ hours of gameplay.

I brought this topic up in order to find way to identify and properly treat players that typically are below lvl20, have just one Assault and one something in their garages, have <10 hours of gameplay and have a K/D > 20. Which are obvious indicators of a smurf.

 

To fake who wrote:

"Call out threads, bruh. Smurfs, bruh. Deal with it."

I feel the smell of a troll from the distance ;-) but let me reply: I can deal with it but what about the player who just installed Hawken?

Edited by HHJFTRU, 04 June 2015 - 06:09 AM.

[Panzermanathod]

Much like a certain tiger-skinned G2A pilot does just before he leaves a match.  Use 'smurf', a five-letter word, as a four-letter word.

Not entirely sure how I should take this.

[StubbornPuppet]

I still feel that the best way to deal with preventing a bunch of alt accounts is to make it so "the juice isn't worth the squeeze."

 

Right now, making an alt account is as easy as creating a new email address and signing up.  Folks who have played for a while have learned that you don't have to go through the new player training, you can skip right past it and go straight to multiplayer.

 

First: Fix that damn oversight so that new accounts force the player to totally complete all of new player training.

 

Second:  Add more tutorials to the new player training - there is currently nothing that teaches players about how to utilize internals or items in the in-game menu, there is nothing that teaches them how to play any of the game modes and there is nothing that teaches them about teamwork and chat.  I propose that the first time a new account wants to access a new game mode for the first time, they must complete a couple of bot matches in that mode, tutorial style, complete with pauses for explanation and tasks to accomplish.  Then that player can earn certification to play that game mode.

 

Third: The first time an account buys or earns a mech it's never had before, the player must go through a tutorial for that mech... which teaches them everything they might need to know about it's weapons and abilities... and has tasks to complete.

 

I hear so many seasoned players complain that newbies don't know what they're doing... and this would really, really help with that too.  And no seasoned player is gonna want to sit through all of the above more than once or twice.

 

It won't completely stop smurfing... but boy would it help.  Two birds with one stone.

[Hyginos]

 but boy would it help.

 

Doubtful, IMO. 

 

I will state again: smurfing is not the problem. Pubstomping is the problem.

[StubbornPuppet]

Doubtful, IMO. 

 

I will state again: smurfing is not the problem. Pubstomping is the problem.

Which is a result of?

[Panzermanathod]

All Pubstompers are probably Smurfs, but not all Smurfs are Pubstompers, I think that's what he's trying to say.

[StubbornPuppet]

I know, but I must play the devil's advocate.  It's an imperative.

[HHJFTRU]

I will state again: smurfing is not the problem. Pubstomping is the problem.

 

I agree. There can be good reasons for creating an alt account (but not frequently, so I like the idea about the mandatory training when a new account is created).

However, I couldn't resist to make a click-bait topic title.

 

All Pubstompers are probably Smurfs, but not all Smurfs are Pubstompers, I think that's what he's trying to say.

 

Pubstomping sometimes is performed by main accounts. Maybe it is done for amusement, maybe for inflating stats, but I think that in most cases there just aren't any matches available in the player's tier.

Edited by HHJFTRU, 05 June 2015 - 12:39 AM.

[Call_Me_Ishmael]

Not entirely sure how I should take this.

 

We've established that 1900-level matches are the common point where the 2300+ meet the 1700-2200 crowd, or at least I think we generally accept that.

 

For someone to tell me I'm 'smurfing' like it's a bad thing because I top a 1980-level server (which is typically 2-star for me) - every time - gets old.  If I use my main, I'm told that I'm 'ruining Hawken'.

 

No, I don't want to organize play 'at my level'.  I want to use the matchmaker/browser and pick up 5 pub games in the two hours between my evening commute and bed, or 2 games in the 40 min in the morning I can play.  That means I get into 1900-level matches, and to tell me I'm 'smurfing' like I'm doing something dirty and nefarious in that level of match is pretty fuzzy bunnyng ignorant, in my opinion.

 

It gets REALLY old. 

 

As does posting about the same topic many times in two+ years.  I understand ArchMech's 'triggers' post about what will make him rant (except he doesn't have the energy to bother anymore).  I feel your pain.

[Hyginos]

Which is a result of?

 

Ultimately, the size of the population.

 

I'm going to point at LoL here because it is a convenient example: not a lot of complaints in the LoL community about smurfs, but top level players pretty much universally have multiple smurfs, and some streamers even make a theme out of pubstomping their way up the ladder. Why so few complaints? Much larger population means that the pubstomps are diluted by more typical games.

Edited by Hyginos, 05 June 2015 - 05:21 AM.

[BaronSaturday]

Just track the IP. If the new account on the same IP is as good within a few matches, block the account.

[reVelske]

Play your own devil's advocate and consider scenarios where this would screw over legitimate players, they are not out of the realm of possibility.

 

There is a very good reason why there are no known effective anti-smurf measures taken by any popular games out there, at least, not to my knowledge.

Edited by reVelske, 05 June 2015 - 06:14 AM.

[TangledMantis]

I think it would be fairly easy to write an anti-smurf algorithm to prevent things like this that happened on the Euro servers last night:

 

pilot lvl 12. Assault: 266-12-148  CR-T: 132-2-73

 

http://hawken.heroku...m/user/whyudead

How about we just stop punishing good players by preventing them from getting into game - and just let them play in the best game available, even if its a much lower SRD. 

 

People make smurfs (partially) to be able to play a game that doesnt want them playing anymore. 

 

Personally I just use a smurf account to warm up for a couple games before I login to my main account. MMR between the accounts is about the same.

[Amidatelion]

How about we just stop punishing good players by preventing them from getting into game - and just let them play in the best game available, even if its a much lower SRD.

People make smurfs (partially) to be able to play a game that doesnt want them playing anymore.

Personally I just use a smurf account to warm up for a couple games before I login to my main account. MMR between the accounts is about the same.

Because this would put Dave into 1400 games.

Putting people into the first available match is NOT a good idea. It's not fun for anyone. There needs to be a cut-off. It needs to be broad enough to get a MLG into a game and intelligent enough not to throw him into the kiddie pool.

[M4st0d0n]

Why do you even need an algorythm to detect smurfs with such a small playerbase? Especially euro players. Ban this account, or give him +1000 MMR, manually, then delete this whole thread. People here are naming and shaming, because support tickets sent for this kind of problem havent been solved for years. So there is no VAC, there is no votekick, there is no server admin. Do it case by case then. As long as this community conforts them in impunity you wont solve the retention problem. Hope you'll get good times circlejerking in ghost town.

[Lily_from_animove]

Good job on missing the entire point. We are discussing the idea of a smurf detection, not the particular case OP used as an example... unless, of course, you are suggesting that the single case is more than enough to validate a anti-smurf algorithm based on such stats.

 

So yeah, please lend me your facepalm when you get a moment.

 

then try to gther:

 

what makes you realise someone is a smurf.

how do you mae sure its not a random player with skill

 

Just track the IP. If the new account on the same IP is as good within a few matches, block the account.

 

nonsense, people who intentionally want to smurf (for whatever reason) will just change Ip, its no magic required for this. But ohh god, hell forbid you probably live in the same faily sharing a PC not caring about IP changes and boom, one of your family members account is banned.

 

If you want a ban system it needs to be a true proof, its quite unhealthy in a game with small playerbase to handle out false bans.

 

 

The game could increase MMR for low MMR accounts doing unexpected well, otherwise unless you have a lol like population makign sure every mmr is decently filled you will always have the issue to palce too tsong palyers together with too weak ones. And oen side will always get the short stick of the handle. probably both, because owning people far below you hardly is some form of fun.

[Panzermanathod]

We've established that 1900-level matches are the common point where the 2300+ meet the 1700-2200 crowd, or at least I think we generally accept that.

 

For someone to tell me I'm 'smurfing' like it's a bad thing because I top a 1980-level server (which is typically 2-star for me) - every time - gets old.  If I use my main, I'm told that I'm 'ruining Hawken'.

 

No, I don't want to organize play 'at my level'.  I want to use the matchmaker/browser and pick up 5 pub games in the two hours between my evening commute and bed, or 2 games in the 40 min in the morning I can play.  That means I get into 1900-level matches, and to tell me I'm 'smurfing' like I'm doing something dirty and nefarious in that level of match is pretty fuzzy bunnyng ignorant, in my opinion.

 

It gets REALLY old. 

 

As does posting about the same topic many times in two+ years.  I understand ArchMech's 'triggers' post about what will make him rant (except he doesn't have the energy to bother anymore).  I feel your pain.

Ah, I get you.

 

This kinda proves a point with some of the complaints I see in this forum, where for each "solution" to certain issues will negatively effect X amount of Y that aren't part of the problem.

 

I don't mind you smurfs. I mind people being jerks. Even I know that some people with high MMR can't consistently find good matches. As much as I'd love to oblige I'll never get over 1900 myself, I admit. And if I do I won't stay for long.

[Hyginos]

Just track the IP. If the new account on the same IP is as good within a few matches, block the account.

 

I'm pretty sure this would inhibit craftydus, who at this point is probably responsible for like 15% of Hawken's revenue by himself.

[TheButtSatisfier]

I think of smurfing like I think of the availability of prostitution and drugs: it's going to happen whether you like it or not. You can try to police it, but it will still happen. The more you police it, the more sophisticated the means of acquiring those things will become. I'd rather regulate the drugs / prostitution / smurfing that's going to exist rather than spend nearly limitless resources trying to police them after the fact. That, or create incentives for people to not smurf.

 

For example, I smurf for a carefree game experience while I try to learn new mechs. Since I've maintained that smurf account - and not made any other ones - it's MMR is now within about 100 of my primary account (the one I'm writing this post from). My MMR can go up as high or low on my smurf as I want, and I won't give a fuzzy bunny, because that's my fuzzy bunnyaround account. Did it suck for lower MMR players when I first made it and its MMR was putting me up against them? Yes. Even if I was nice and handicapped myself, or if I sat out during matches after I tipped the score too far in my team's direction, sooner or later some poor guy was gonna get wiped repeatedly when I got bored of playing half-assed. I felt bad, but even when I was smurfing I saw other people smurfing too. Either I could complain or I could join them. I did the latter.

 

What changes could be implemented to prevent those lower MMR players from experiencing smurf destruction? I know I would be less likely to smurf (for the reasons I smurf) if any combination of the below ideas were implemented:

 

1. Allow a player to create one secondary account directly from their primary. That other account automatically comes with the same MMR as your primary account. Now, go forth and play like an idiot or like a pro on that secondary account. Lower MMR players don't have to experience your rampage through lower MMR matches, and you still play with other people in your skill bracket until you adjust yourself out.

 

2. Make an option to play "off the record". Matchmaker will still place you in MMR-appropriate matches, but your account's KDR, MMR, kills, deaths, etc. doesn't get changed while this is enabled.  Maybe this is a account-level setting or maybe it's a server-level setting, I don't know. But that removes some of the desire to play on an alt account. (I don't think private servers currently do this)

 

*** Edit: to make this more interesting, playing "off the record" could also hide your player name in matches. A player's name becomes a prized possession after a while, so playing anonymously might be an interesting mechanic.

 

3. Do a League of Legends dual-MMR system: one for "ranked" matches and one for unranked / regular / public matches. Ranked matches could be those competitive matches between clans or just matches you want to play when you're feeling good about yourself. Your ranked MMR is the shiny one you can show off to others if that's your thing, and the unranked MMR still helps matchmaker put you in the right spot in public matches.

Edited by TheButtSatisfier, 05 June 2015 - 09:57 AM.