Smurfing has been casually addressed as something that would be fixed in past messages and updates. Is there any further potential for this to move forward? Nothing is worse than losing a rank me and many others I play with earn over hours of playtime to have it ruined in two games by an unranked level two with a champion hiding behind it. I personally believe (and it had been mentioned) that a minimum spartan rank to play ranked would be an easy quick fix. Considering the life span of the game, most players who want to do ranked are plenty high enough even if you made it level 50. Plus it would make the ranks of smurf accounts more accurately reflect those behind it.
The idea has been discussed at 343 in some capacity - have a read through the matchmaking feedback archives. Dr. Menke has talked about this and other solutions for smurfing in the past. There was also a recent update made to matchmaking to help dissuade smurfing
It would take two lines of code to have Halo identify when different players originate from the same console. Tag the newer profile and match it as if it was an Onyx player. If that profile is a legit younger sibling then too damn bad. He can go back to Minecraft. If, much more likely, it’s a smurf then he can play at Onyx or go back to his original profile. Problem solved.
I cringe everytime I see recruit armor. You would think that represented a weaker opponent but as of late, it typically hides a high level player that wrecks the field. Smurfs are destroying the MM experience for honest players and they need to be removed. This problem was caused by -Yoink!- and they need to fix it!!
> 2533274873843883;4:
> It would take two lines of code to have Halo identify when different players originate from the same console. Tag the newer profile and match it as if it was an Onyx player. If that profile is a legit younger sibling then too damn bad. He can go back to Minecraft. If, much more likely, it’s a smurf then he can play at Onyx or go back to his original profile. Problem solved.
So you want to prevent new players from getting interested in Halo and make it rougher for people who happen to have multiple people use a console, because some people act like -Yoinks!-? Even if it were as simple as you think it is, that doesn’t seem like a good solution.
Plus the Smurf would just play like -Yoink- until that account had deranked enough to do what he wanted to do in the first place, -Yoink!- off everybody he had to play with on the way down.
> 2533274880633045;6:
> > 2533274873843883;4:
> > It would take two lines of code to have Halo identify when different players originate from the same console. Tag the newer profile and match it as if it was an Onyx player. If that profile is a legit younger sibling then too damn bad. He can go back to Minecraft. If, much more likely, it’s a smurf then he can play at Onyx or go back to his original profile. Problem solved.
>
> So you want to prevent new players from getting interested in Halo and make it rougher for people who happen to have multiple people use a console, because some people act like -Yoinks!-? Even if it were as simple as you think it is, that doesn’t seem like a good solution.
>
> Plus the Smurf would just play like -Yoink- until that account had deranked enough to do what he wanted to do in the first place, -Yoink!- off everybody he had to play with on the way down.
I know it’s an unfair and unworkable solution, but it has the virtue of being emotionally satisfying. But it does make me wonder what would happen to the cost of a console if Microsoft built in some kind of biometric log on so that players would forever more have to play as themselves. Oh wait - kinnect did that. Well, it was a nice idea…
> 2533274873843883;7:
> I know it’s an unfair and unworkable solution,.
And that’s the problem in a nutshell. I haven’t seen a workable solution yet. I’m not sure there is one. I would assume most people would agree that smurfing is an issue, but it isn’t a simple one to solve.
> 2533274873843883;7:
> But it does make me wonder what would happen to the cost of a console if Microsoft built in some kind of biometric log on so that players would forever more have to play as themselves. Oh wait - kinnect did that. Well, it was a nice idea…
There isn’t an issue with having multiple accounts in and of itself. There are a variety of reasons to have them, it’s only the misuse of them that is the problem. It doesn’t seem prudent to take away that ability from people, just because some would misuse it.
> 2533274813317074;3:
> The idea has been discussed at 343 in some capacity - have a read through the matchmaking feedback archives. Dr. Menke has talked about this and other solutions for smurfing in the past. There was also a recent update made to matchmaking to help dissuade smurfing
While this is true, it hasn’t stopped it or even remotely slowed it in my searches. I still get Smurphs myself very frequently and has gotten to the point that I haven’t made an effort to play ranked this season past the initial placement matches. You still play 3 champs with a platinum Smurph and still drop 25 points in these scenarios, losing hours and hours of progress from only going up 1-3 points in past matches.
This pretty much forces each team to have a Smurph so win-loss in these scenarios is 15 points each way. Shouldn’t be like this.
> 2533274795739611;9:
> > 2533274813317074;3:
> > The idea has been discussed at 343 in some capacity - have a read through the matchmaking feedback archives. Dr. Menke has talked about this and other solutions for smurfing in the past. There was also a recent update made to matchmaking to help dissuade smurfing
>
> While this is true, it hasn’t stopped it or even remotely slowed it in my searches. I still get Smurphs myself very frequently and has gotten to the point that I haven’t made an effort to play ranked this season past the initial placement matches. You still play 3 champs with a platinum Smurph and still drop 25 points in these scenarios, losing hours and hours of progress from only going up 1-3 points in past matches.
>
> This pretty much forces each team to have a Smurph so win-loss in these scenarios is 15 points each way. Shouldn’t be like this.
I am really starting to think that this smurfing concern is a lot like the farming phenomenon. Yes, it happens, and I think it’s been happening a lot less, but people are thinking/claiming it’s happening more than it really is.
You say frequently. I say, after looking through about 20 games in you history, not happening. I saw no evidence of 3 Champs with a Plat smurf. All the Plats in every game I looked at were over SR100. You say you’re not playing past your initial placement matches. I say 37 matches in Slayer is way past initial.
I think exaggerating how much this is happening doesn’t help.
> 2533274848704527;2:
> There are still new people coming to play Halo everyday. This idea is flawed.
Yeah but that number is extremely low to when the game came out. Furthermore, I know when I first started I didn’t play ranked nearly as much as I do now because I wanted to figure out the game first. I would get beat a lot so I gathered myself and learned it through social and warzone. I can’t be the only one who did this. After a lot of social tinkering I came back to ranked and now earn diamond consistently.
> 2533274813317074;3:
> The idea has been discussed at 343 in some capacity - have a read through the matchmaking feedback archives. Dr. Menke has talked about this and other solutions for smurfing in the past. There was also a recent update made to matchmaking to help dissuade smurfing
Again, I do know they’ve mentioned it and I will acknowledge it is more a problem with the fact that a gold live account supplies online play for smurfs. That being said, I still think a more aggressive strategy that maybe is more black and white should be implemented. Some people say they never see smurfs but I can’t tell you when the last night I’ve played was where i didn’t play at least two separate ones in at least two games. This may not seem like much but when you are diamond 3 and they are plat 1, a loss destroys you. All it takes is one or two games and your rank is down the tubes.
I just really enjoy good, sweaty, competitive play and testing your skill against those similarly matched. It is increasingly hard to come by. Not to mention smurfs are lowering the population in ranked because when they do play people in lower levels or who are fed up, those people don’t come back. I have friends who have given up ranked for good or at least play only enough to qualify each season simply because of this issue.
> 2533274915910026;11:
> > 2533274848704527;2:
> > There are still new people coming to play Halo everyday. This idea is flawed.
>
> Yeah but that number is extremely low to when the game came out. Furthermore, I know when I first started I didn’t play ranked nearly as much as I do now because I wanted to figure out the game first. I would get beat a lot so I gathered myself and learned it through social and warzone. I can’t be the only one who did this. After a lot of social tinkering I came back to ranked and now earn diamond consistently.
Personally, I jumped right into it. I really don’t like Social much. It gets boring after a while. By the way, if you would have done the same, you would have probably been better. The system pits you against the same Skilled opponents, especially at the very beginning. It’s not like you would of been the only one trying to figure things out.
> 2533274863544717;10:
> > 2533274795739611;9:
> > > 2533274813317074;3:
> > > The idea has been discussed at 343 in some capacity - have a read through the matchmaking feedback archives. Dr. Menke has talked about this and other solutions for smurfing in the past. There was also a recent update made to matchmaking to help dissuade smurfing
> >
> > While this is true, it hasn’t stopped it or even remotely slowed it in my searches. I still get Smurphs myself very frequently and has gotten to the point that I haven’t made an effort to play ranked this season past the initial placement matches. You still play 3 champs with a platinum Smurph and still drop 25 points in these scenarios, losing hours and hours of progress from only going up 1-3 points in past matches.
> >
> > This pretty much forces each team to have a Smurph so win-loss in these scenarios is 15 points each way. Shouldn’t be like this.
>
> I am really starting to think that this smurfing concern is a lot like the farming phenomenon. Yes, it happens, and I think it’s been happening a lot less, but people are thinking/claiming it’s happening more than it really is.
>
> You say frequently. I say, after looking through about 20 games in you history, not happening. I saw no evidence of 3 Champs with a Plat smurf. All the Plats in every game I looked at were over SR100. You say you’re not playing past your initial placement matches. I say 37 matches in Slayer is way past initial.
>
> I think exaggerating how much this is happening doesn’t help.
You’re wrong. I just went and looked on 7/8. Found a string where 6 games were won consecutively, resulting in going up 21 total points, and then a loss against a team (that I know plays together) resulting in a loss and dropping 24 points. That’s the frequent thing. Frequent means at least once a night. Kinda hard to have it happen more than a couple times a night when it takes an hour and a half just to play 7 matches due to match length and wait times. That’s what I’m getting at. I’ve been a champ in every playlist that I’m currently ranked in. High champs. But at the start of the season it’s such a faulty read on CSR that you drop significantly more from a match because 1 person is “unranked” yet at the same time the system knows from the previous season what they were? That’s either A: BS, or B: not taken into account. I shouldn’t be 50-60 points under what I start just because of when I decided to play during the season, where it’s more rampant than later on. This is exactly why I never play Ranked until the last 2 weeks of a season, because it’s less of an issue.
It’s absolutely ridiculous that 343 still hasn’t fixed the smurfing issue in ranked playlists. Having a set requirement, like having to be at least SR 40 to play any ranked playlist, would seriously cut down on smurphs tremendously.
> 2533274848704527;14:
> > 2533274915910026;11:
> > > 2533274848704527;2:
> > > There are still new people coming to play Halo everyday. This idea is flawed.
> >
> > Yeah but that number is extremely low to when the game came out. Furthermore, I know when I first started I didn’t play ranked nearly as much as I do now because I wanted to figure out the game first. I would get beat a lot so I gathered myself and learned it through social and warzone. I can’t be the only one who did this. After a lot of social tinkering I came back to ranked and now earn diamond consistently.
>
> Personally, I jumped right into it. I really don’t like Social much. It gets boring after a while. By the way, if you would have done the same, you would have probably been better. The system pits you against the same Skilled opponents, especially at the very beginning. It’s not like you would of been the only one trying to figure things out.
I’m glad it worked out for you but this is beside the point. I don’t think it would have helped too much in my overall skill, I think that after a certain amount of playtime “getting better” at the game is extremely minute. Early on it was just too much of a departure from previous gameplay to feel comfortable enough in ranked. Plus though they might have recovered, my stats were abysmal and probably would have kept haunting me. I don’t say this because I think I should be way higher ranked, just that I don’t always want to play people who are obviously more skilled and then suffer on top of that because of the rank system and their cowardice.
Solution: make multiplayer matchmaking available to only Xbox live gold members. That way every account is legit, and if someone really wants to pay for an additional Gold account to smurf, then they can waste money to be jerks. That wouldn’t bother me and it wouldn’t happen often. Smurfing has ruined ranked for me. It’s unbearable–especially HCS, which has honestly been about 50% smurfs in my experience. XBOX LIVE GOLD ACCOUNTS ONLY no silver accounts on a console should be allowed in multiplayer but matchmaking. Simple, workable solution. Also -Yoink- smurfs
The anonymous nature of large portions of the internet make it an attractive place for trolls to ruin other people’s fun. Here is the issue: competitive gaming is supposedly a rules based endeavor, but every single excuse I’ve ever heard for smurfing boils down to an entitled attitude that the player should be able to do whatever they want whenever they want. The two concepts just don’t mesh, and people quit playing because of it. Technology moves very quickly, and like the rest of the world, the internet will soon lose it’s attractiveness as a hiding place for bad behavior. Already forum sites that do not police the conduct of their members quickly become despised as garbage dumps, and the fact that numerous “E-Sports” players defy the rules and cheat at will gives a lot of people outside of gaming the opinion that it’s garbage, or at least not to be taken seriously. There will come a time when the system can affordably tell exactly who you are every time you hold a controller or touch a keyboard, and you will have to agree to those terms of use. When identity verification starts getting added to competitive, rules based gaming systems, companies like 343 will have to include it or get left behind and trolls will have to find new ways to pursue self esteem. Until then you deal with smurfs and boosters if you want to play Halo.
> 2533274795739611;15:
> You’re wrong. I just went and looked on 7/8. Found a string where 6 games were won consecutively, resulting in going up 21 total points, and then a loss against a team (that I know plays together) resulting in a loss and dropping 24 points. That’s the frequent thing. Frequent means at least once a night. Kinda hard to have it happen more than a couple times a night when it takes an hour and a half just to play 7 matches due to match length and wait times. That’s what I’m getting at. I’ve been a champ in every playlist that I’m currently ranked in. High champs. But at the start of the season it’s such a faulty read on CSR that you drop significantly more from a match because 1 person is “unranked” yet at the same time the system knows from the previous season what they were? That’s either A: BS, or B: not taken into account. I shouldn’t be 50-60 points under what I start just because of when I decided to play during the season, where it’s more rampant than later on. This is exactly why I never play Ranked until the last 2 weeks of a season, because it’s less of an issue.
Okay, so those it’s a team, but is it a team with a smurf? The games I looked at of yours did not have any smurfs. I am not saying it doesn’t happen. Is am saying it doesn’t happen as often as we think.
I don’t know why you would think it is BS. This is actually what is happening while you are starting the season.
> 2533274839818445;76:
> After placement matches, we start your CSR behind your expected CSR (MMR) because:
> - It might have overestimated you and we prefer you go up rather than down if it is wrong. - We want you to “prove” you deserve the expect CSR. Just like in, e.g., NCAA sports. The ranking systems can all say a team is #1, but they still have to win the tournament, or win the bowl, to be crowned. The system may expect you to be Diamond, but wants you to first play like one for several games in the season to earn it.In previous seasons, CSR started about 30-50 games behind expected. This season it is about half that (15-25 games), so it should take less time to “prove” you deserve what MMR expected of you. In CSR and MMR terms, CSR was set 200 rating behind your MMR after placement. Now it is 100. So a true 1650 Onyx player will start at 1550, for example. A true 1550 Onyx player will start in Diamond 6.