Boards›Player Behavior

HYPOTHESIS: Smurfs in Ranked Cause More Harm Than AFK's

Kuthillick·1/31/2020, 10:38:02 PM·3 votes·2,873 views

Hey everyone,

DISCLAIMERS

Before I get started, I wanted to mention that this is not something I have fully developed an opinion on. This hypothesis is based off of observed behaviors and math. I also want to note that I am not advocating for the continuation or glorifying of AFKs, Rage Quits, etc at all. Those are a plague upon the game and should be punished harshly, potentially more so than what is being done now. I also want to say that this primarily concerns smurfing in Ranked Mode. I understand the need and want to play with your friends who are not the same rank as you, however there are Normal game modes for that. I do not have as nearly large of a problem with Diamond and Irons queuing together in Normals as I do with a Diamond smurf queuing with his Iron friend in Ranked. With those disclaimers out of the way, I am going to present my reasoning, thought process, and conclusion. There most likely won't be a TL;DR - TL;DR is the title. While the all the reasoning for this hypothesis may not be 100% true, I believe the viewpoints and assumptions are held by a large majority of the community which will lead to accurate conclusions that do not require a suspension of reality to realize.

HYPOTHESIS

High ranked players who are playing on much lower ranked accounts, known as "smurfs", in solo ranked mode are more damaging to the game than players who leave the game (AFK), quit because of bad attitude (ragers, ragequitting), and players who intentionally feed ("int'ers").

REASONING

Solo ranked queue is designed to be a competitive environment where individual players, or duo's, can play against players of a similar skill level to improve their skills and improve as players. For those who play ranked, the improvement and general skill level is shown through their current rank. To accurately gauge this, there should be an even playing field with as few non-game related variables as possible. An example of a game related variable would be which dragons spawn throughout the game. Non game related variables are electrical surges causing power outage, troll's, intentional feeders, smurfs, etc.

If there is a presence of too many non game related variables, especially those outside of the control of Riot Games, the results of a competitive match become schewed and shy away from being truly accurate, even if by a miniscule amount. When a multitude of these variables occur of the course of a player playing through ranked mode ("climbing the ladder" or "climbing"), the final result of the achieved rank becomes questionable and perhaps not completely accurate.

In order to create an environment that creates a process in which players who play ranked mode on a consistent basis receive the appropriate rank, addressing these issues and removing them as much as possible should be at the forefront of decision making.

In a given game of Summoner's Rift, there are ten players, nine of which you do not have control over. If there is a single player in the game that AFK's, Int's, or rage quits, and assuming the team with that player lose, there are four players who's ranked stats are negatively impacted by a non-game related variable. There are five players who are benefited from this behavior or non game-related variable.

However, if we look at smurfs, we deal with a couple more issues. First, by definition of a smurf, there is an inequality of skill in the game that goes against the spirit and assumed guarantees of ranked mode (that you are playing against players who are considered to be of similar skill). While the winrate for teams with a smurf certainly is not 100%, it is certainly much higher than the 50% win rate average that Ranked Mode has. In the situation that a smurf is part of the game, there are now five players who ranks are negatively impacted due to non game-related variables and four players who are benefited from this non game-related variable. By the simple comparison of AFKers, ragers, and inters versus a smurf, you have four players negatively impacted in the first scenario and five players negatively impacted in the other.

CONCLUSION

Due to the amount of players negatively impacted in each scenario, it can be viewed that smurfs are a bigger issue to the competitive environment in isolated incidents than those of AFKers, ragers, and Int'ers. While the latter category may be more prevalent throughout the climb, there are also systems in place (whose effectiveness is a discussion for another thread) to help address them. Meanwhile an issue that potentially has a greater negative impact upon the system, smurfing, currently has little to no systems or countermeasures in place. If we are able to find ways to eliminate or severely curtail the presence of smurfs in the solo ranked queue, the rank achieved by players should be closer to what it should be and be viewed as more accurate. Not 100% accurate because of the other non game-related variables mentioned, but moreso than it is currently with the presence of smurfs in Ranked mode.

Thanks for reading. As I said above, this is not something I have fleshed out completely or developed a solid opinion on. Rather this is to post a thought I had and read general thoughts and counterpoints to consider. Thanks!

6 Comments

rujitra1/31/2020, 10:42:57 PM2 votes

it can be viewed that smurfs are a bigger issue to the competitive environment in isolated incidents than those of AFKers, ragers, and Int'ers.

Do I disagree? Not necessarily. While Riot's systems are very good at smurf detection, it still can take a couple dozen games for them to be in the proper MMR. That's a couple dozen games negatively affected.

Meanwhile an issue that potentially has a greater negative impact upon the system, smurfing, currently has little to no systems or countermeasures in place.

I disagree completely. Riot's MMR system is very advanced. By evaluating players' performance in games and outcomes of games, the system detects smurfs and puts them into a separate MMR gain rate that relatively quickly places them in their correct MMR. Sure, it takes a couple dozen games - but what do you want them to do?

If we are able to find ways to eliminate or severely curtail the presence of smurfs in the solo ranked queue, the rank achieved by players should be closer to what it should be and be viewed as more accurate

Yes, the operative word here is IF. Riot has thousands of employees. Do you have some solution that thousands of professionals haven't already thought of, and/or tried, and/or had it fail? If you do, I'm sure everyone would love to hear it. Perhaps one doesn't exist at this time.

It's similar to a chronic disease - while we can manage symptoms and make people feel a little bit better, there is no way to magically fix their life and make it how it was before they got cancer, diabetic neuropathy, MS, etc. It's not that we aren't trying - and I guarantee you Riot is still trying to improve systems and policies they have in place. But perfection is not possible.

Make Me Wet2/1/2020, 7:11:08 PM1 votes

They should just do the clash thing for all of league. Accounts have to be linked to phone numbers, if you don't have an account linked to a phone number you cannot play ranked. Multiple accounts can be linked to one phone number but now instead of the account holding your mmr/rank your phone number does. Meaning if you buy a fresh llv 30 account and link it to your phone number, that account will be at the rank/mmr rating that the other account is already placed at. No ruining a dozen games for random people. It would also kill the buying & selling accounts community since there would be no reason to buy a new account since your mmr/ranking isn't fresh anymore.