This post has been downvoted below -5 and collapsed, click here to expand
Alright. Gonna get straight to business.
There are smurfs. Lots of them. Thousands, maybe even millions.
And we have 32 admins, quite a few of which are inactive.
SO, in order to solve this, I made up a system, which hopefully can maybe be implemented without too much hassle. Basically (Since we haven't released on Steam yet) We label the game as in the Beta phase. This would mean that, to play the game, you would have to apply, and your apply would be verified with your IP. IF, you already have a account with that IP, the system would automatically give the user a "You already have an account" message and redirect you to the login screen. There would also be a "lost password" button, whereas you would enter your email and a lost password email, along with your password, would be sent back to your email. This would verify anyone actually trying to sign up with a new account as a normal user, and automatically make sure smurfs could not create new accounts. This way, admins could also still ban/temp ban people.
Anything I missed? Suggestions?
+0 / -6
|
This post has been downvoted below -5 and collapsed, click here to expand
You have to take account that most admins have a genetically low IQ. Any system has to make up for this.
+0 / -7
|
|
|
Yeah. IP is not a unique criterium. It's possible that multiple people play from the same house (family?), and it's also possible for the same person to show up on changing IPs (everybody in Germany for example).
+2 / -0
|
There is no way to stop smurfs which is not unnecessarily burdensome to players. The solution is to grow the playerbase and shrink game sizes such that players are put in higher elo games when their elo goes up, rather than with lower elo teammates. When this happens there is virtually no incentive to smurf and anyone who does is put into a nubgame.
+1 / -0
|
quote:
When this happens there is virtually no incentive to smurf and anyone who does is put into a nubgame. |
Really? What about the experience for new players, getting trashed by a smurf? Also, how about replacing IP with email, and making the email require a confirmation link?
+0 / -0
|
As pointed in some other similar threads email verification is pointless because email addresses can be relatively easily created in large numbers.
+1 / -1
|
As pointed in some other similar threads life is pointless because in the end we are all gonna die anyway.
+5 / -0
|
Shrink teamsize to get less smurfs sounds like a vargue trial to me. Why should they stop on small teamsize, did they troll with smurfs because of nice clusterfuck games? As mentioned many many times earlier, just put some obligatory tutorials or lvl 20 and more on team hosts or lvl 10. But if you are so sure about that the reason is the teamsize. Put lvl 10 entry minimum requirements for big teams and let other hosts with no entry requirement.
+1 / -0
|
As we arrived at before. A mandatory query of previous RTS or ZK experience and skill that affects starting Elo is all that is needed to make smurfing either becomes useless (because high starting Elo) or obviously malicious (because selected low Elo and then played like a vet). Removes grey area for admins making second account decisions.
+1 / -0
|
Frankly the way the elo system works now you might as well be able to arbitrarily set your elo as high as you like, it's only a disadvantage.    Chesti You're missing the point, if you split an 8v8 into two 4v4's you get a high skill and a low skill game. Stuff the smurf into the low skill game like you would a new player. If trolls are smurfing so they can teamkill or abuse teammates, we ban them when they do, like we do now any player who does this. If they're smurfing so they can morph their boy or muck around and rush a singu then tek2krog and make a roach launcher, that's fine, it's a nub game, they'll probably actually learn something from watching that (Not anything good, but they will learn this game is awesome). If they play badly on purpose in a game where everyone is playing badly it doesn't matter.
+3 / -0
|
Problem with splitting game sizes: Most people don't like the stress of smaller teams. It's quite stressful, especially more so at the deep end of the pool. Many of us just want a little jog instead of an insane workout. I'd love to see an option to be put into the "Give me a huge team game" option instead of being forced to play the way someone else wants me to play. That's not fun. Just remember that you also have an unrepresented major demographic here: the casual player. The casual doesn't want a huge responsibility. They don't care about stats or optimizing build orders or what not. Right now this matchmaking thing just appeases the competitive and hardcore crowd which makes up about less than 40% of zk. Probably less. You'd be doing a huge disservice by ignoring the inbetweens and casual players. Idea! Have matchmaker allow you to set a minimum and maximum team size of the game you want. For instance, maybe I don't want to play 4v4 and below, but would be willing to play 5v5 - 10v10 and newbie training 1v1. Maybe add a "any game" button that would say 'I don't care about having newbies or ultra pro 'I'm-so-good-I'm-gods-gift' players in my game" or something. Even better yet: add a list of people you don't want to play with to it too! This kind of versatility and robustness would be awesome for a matchmaker. Before you say "well there's coop for you": Maybe I/whoever wants something in between chicken game and super ultra competitive hyper competitive MLG whatever games (lol). There's nothing really inbetween these things with matchmaker as far as I am aware. You can say "But...make your own room" right? Well..if all the things that have been talked about up until now, I'd have to put in a lot of effort just to get the inbetween game I want. Why can't match maker have something for everybody?
+4 / -0
|
quote:
As pointed in some other similar threads email verification is pointless because email addresses can be relatively easily created in large numbers. |
Yeah, but the email would contain an activation link, so you would have to create every single new email address.
+0 / -0
|
quote:
Yeah, but the email would contain an activation link, so you would have to create every single new email address. |
Not really. If you can mass generate email addresses, you can write a simple bot to scan for urls and automatically visit them. If you try to cut them off from doing that, then they just circumvent your countermeasures.
+1 / -0
|
quote:
If you can mass generate email addresses, you can write a simple bot to scan for urls and automatically visit them. |
And considering the fact that smurfs were already making scripts to automatically spam accounts, join battle, make !votekick, then !vote y with each of the accounts, it won't take long until someone writes a bot for that.
+0 / -0
|
So really, the only way to stop smurfs to have more admin powa?
+0 / -0
|
another way to stop smurfs is to buff them with godlike power and loose repeatedly until they start to feel like they have cheated themselves of an enjoyable and fair challenge.. it could take years to wear down the desire to win unfairly .. in them the desire to win has replaced the desire to compete.
+0 / -0
|
The actions and methods employed by "the smurfs" don't seem to be particularly aligned towards winning any specific objective.
+0 / -0
|
hmm.. this is dark science but it could be like vampirism.. feeding off the frustrations people have.. we must stop the head smurf.. before it spreads
+0 / -0
|
the reason games typically do not prevent more than one person from sharing an ip registration wise is because most residential internet providers provide dynamic ip addresses rather than static. this means that at any time and for any reason,you could get re-assigned. you wouldn't want to have people unable to sign up just because someone across the country using an ip owned by that company had already signed up, and there isn't really a way to predict that. (plus if you can only log in from that ip, you would be unable to play from other locations or when your ip is changed)
+0 / -0
|
