How to fix boosted accounts

[☠ ௹ ☠ ௹ ☠]

Void/delete/remove the mmr gain and loss for every match associated with a banned smurf, bought account, or booster. Boosted accounts would be erased with this 1 change

[BossGalaga]

Originally posted by Mistah Meaner:

Void/delete/remove the mmr gain and loss for every match associated with a banned smurf, bought account, or booster. Boosted accounts would be erased with this 1 change

Banning them, which Valve does, also "erases" them. But it won't stop boosters from creating new accounts. The smurf bans which Valve recently implemented will likely put a decent dent in boosters and account sellers though.

[RealCraigS]

Originally posted by BossGalaga:

Originally posted by Mistah Meaner:

Void/delete/remove the mmr gain and loss for every match associated with a banned smurf, bought account, or booster. Boosted accounts would be erased with this 1 change

Banning them, which Valve does, also "erases" them. But it won't stop boosters from creating new accounts. The smurf bans which Valve recently implemented will likely put a decent dent in boosters and account sellers though.

Additionally by making it more difficult for these aholes my guess is the cost will likely go up on these accounts. Hopefully this will serve as a deterrent to anyone considering buying one.

[[ﻮΗc]StarLight]

it's so funny how half acc sellers and boosters are on twitch streaming their job LUL

[Absche]

Boosters and smurfs aren‘t a problem if they are like 5% of all accounts. If there are more, or even much more, you have to ask why is there a significant need for that service. Does the gameplay design or the business model support boosting and/or smurfing?

[☠ ௹ ☠ ௹ ☠]

All i read were people that didnt put forth 1 reason why it is a bad idea....all i read was "it isnt a real problem" and "valve fixed it" but we all know it is a problem and valve did not fix it. In fact, they even said their prior fixes were inadequate related to smurfs which is why they now ban smurfs...........so any constructive criticism other than sounding like lazy devs?

Originally posted by o賢い人:

Originally posted by BossGalaga:

Banning them, which Valve does, also "erases" them. But it won't stop boosters from creating new accounts. The smurf bans which Valve recently implemented will likely put a decent dent in boosters and account sellers though.

Additionally by making it more difficult for these aholes my guess is the cost will likely go up on these accounts. Hopefully this will serve as a deterrent to anyone considering buying one.

At least 1 person recognizes the benefit

[BossGalaga]

Originally posted by Mistah Meaner:

All i read were people that didnt put forth 1 reason why it is a bad idea....all i read was "it isnt a real problem" and "valve fixed it" but we all know it is a problem and valve did not fix it. In fact, they even said their prior fixes were inadequate related to smurfs which is why they now ban smurfs...........so any constructive criticism other than sounding like lazy devs?

I think you misunderstand. There is no need to reset the mmr of boosted accounts that have been identified by Valve, because when Valve identifies them, they BAN them. There's already a far greater deterrent than resetting the account's mmr.

[mimizukari]

Originally posted by Absche:

Boosters and smurfs aren‘t a problem if they are like 5% of all accounts. If there are more, or even much more, you have to ask why is there a significant need for that service. Does the gameplay design or the business model support boosting and/or smurfing?

5% would be a smurf every 2 games, way too much, knock it down to like 0.0001% and then they'll have an almost nonexistent impact on the game.

People participating in this assume they should be a higher bracket than where they're at, get the new account and then realize that they belong exactly where they are after they ruin copious amounts of games, glad to see them all getting banned now.

[MONKA]

Valve bans the account so what? I lost my MMR for that match and he ruined the match for me.

[BossGalaga]

When you say "booster" to me, that's a high mmr player, who shares a low mmr account with another player and "boosts" it to a higher mmr. That's bannable for both the booster and the boosted player. Or when a high mmr player creates an account, gets it calibrated at a high mmr and then sells the account. That's also already bannable, regardless of who currently "owns" the account.

If you're referring to a high mmr player partying with a low mmr player, that's allowed in ranked games if they're within the allowable mmr spread, which is like 2k or something, I think. If you're referring to a high mmr smurf playing on a low mmr account and partying with an actual low mmr player, that's smurfing/boosting, and smurfing is now bannable.

As far as saying that any mmr from any identified "booster" account, gained or lost, should be removed, that's swinging the axe a bit wide. That would mean any smurf/booster playing in solo or party pubs, would revert the mmr of EVERY SINGLE PLAYER IN EVERY SINGLE GAME that smurf/booster ever played in. What's to actually say, it was that smurf/booster who won or lost that game? What about when there are smurfs/boosters on both teams? And how is that fair to other players who had no intent to smurf/boost and no knowledge that another player on their team was doing so?

[☠ ௹ ☠ ௹ ☠]

Originally posted by BossGalaga:

When you say "booster" to me, that's a high mmr player, who shares a low mmr account with another player and "boosts" it to a higher mmr. That's bannable for both the booster and the boosted player. Or when a high mmr player creates an account, gets it calibrated at a high mmr and then sells the account. That's also already bannable, regardless of who currently "owns" the account.

If you're referring to a high mmr player partying with a low mmr player, that's allowed in ranked games if they're within the allowable mmr spread, which is like 2k or something, I think. If you're referring to a high mmr smurf playing on a low mmr account and partying with an actual low mmr player, that's smurfing/boosting, and smurfing is now bannable.

As far as saying that any mmr from any identified "booster" account, gained or lost, should be removed, that's swinging the axe a bit wide. That would mean any smurf/booster playing in solo or party pubs, would revert the mmr of EVERY SINGLE PLAYER IN EVERY SINGLE GAME that smurf/booster ever played in. What's to actually say, it was that smurf/booster who won or lost that game? What about when there are smurfs/boosters on both teams? And how is that fair to other players who had no intent to smurf/boost and no knowledge that another player on their team was doing so?

Finally, a list of negatives about my solution. And I have 2 answers to your main issue. 1) only alter the mmr of the players in party with boosters/smurfs. 2) dont discriminate and alter for everyone. I dont see an issue with number 2 like you do, but I'm fine with solution 1. It at least doesnt leave a group of benefitted players when everyone else is losing (ban for booster, time loss for disinterested party, and mmr change for playing in parties with smurfs/boosters). Fine with me tbh

[Ebu-Mendil]

Originally posted by BossGalaga:

As far as saying that any mmr from any identified "booster" account, gained or lost, should be removed, that's swinging the axe a bit wide. That would mean any smurf/booster playing in solo or party pubs, would revert the mmr of EVERY SINGLE PLAYER IN EVERY SINGLE GAME that smurf/booster ever played in. What's to actually say, it was that smurf/booster who won or lost that game? What about when there are smurfs/boosters on both teams? And how is that fair to other players who had no intent to smurf/boost and no knowledge that another player on their team was doing so?

They have that in cs:go and no one complains tho..

[☠ ௹ ☠ ௹ ☠]

Originally posted by Kawa-i Milliye:

Originally posted by BossGalaga:

As far as saying that any mmr from any identified "booster" account, gained or lost, should be removed, that's swinging the axe a bit wide. That would mean any smurf/booster playing in solo or party pubs, would revert the mmr of EVERY SINGLE PLAYER IN EVERY SINGLE GAME that smurf/booster ever played in. What's to actually say, it was that smurf/booster who won or lost that game? What about when there are smurfs/boosters on both teams? And how is that fair to other players who had no intent to smurf/boost and no knowledge that another player on their team was doing so?

They have that in cs:go and no one complains tho..

3rd option is the LoL way - League gives a set amount per week for recovery with regards to ruiners (for example players can only recover 100 or 120 mmr a week).

Regardless of option 1 2 or 3, valve should start addressing the underlying issues in the mmr system that can be exploited by ruiners and boosted players alike

Idk why valve cant set a max-min with a similar feature so there arent huge fluctuations in any mmr. All ruiners (whether troll, smurf, booster, whatever) are motivated by the fact other players lose a digital commodity and/or their own personal gain of a digital commodity (mmr)......so remove that motivation.

Banning accounts only solves the 1 motivation (gaining mmr for personal gain) but doesnt really address the other (losing mmr for personal gain), which is why valve should start:
1) refunding mmr from games ruined by boosters; and/or,
2) removing mmr gained by playing with boosters in party and/or team.

[BossGalaga]

Originally posted by Kawa-i Milliye:

Originally posted by BossGalaga:

As far as saying that any mmr from any identified "booster" account, gained or lost, should be removed, that's swinging the axe a bit wide. That would mean any smurf/booster playing in solo or party pubs, would revert the mmr of EVERY SINGLE PLAYER IN EVERY SINGLE GAME that smurf/booster ever played in. What's to actually say, it was that smurf/booster who won or lost that game? What about when there are smurfs/boosters on both teams? And how is that fair to other players who had no intent to smurf/boost and no knowledge that another player on their team was doing so?

They have that in cs:go and no one complains tho..

No, CSGO reverts any matches for games with identified and banned cheaters. Not quite the same thing.

I have no problem with removing results for games with banned cheaters. As far as identified and banned boosters, I think it's fine to revert mmr gains for players partied with said booster.

[76561198417712902]

They want everyone to be equally dumb & win with as minimum effort as possible. Instead of grinding & learning from experienced players, they punish them for having a higher skill ceiling & performing better than them. Devs want new players to be taught by the game itself rather than actual players who have actually spent time playing & experienced the game themselves.

In a way, coaching is a subtle contradiction to their objective as it allows better players to interfere with inferior players indirectly.

[76561198417712902]

Originally posted by imlagging:

u mean coaching is boosting??

Yes. It's just another word for boosting. A rather more pleasant term to hide the truth. Changing words to a more acceptable tone doesn't solve any issue. It just further convolutes an already congested predicament.

In fact, the influence of coaching is far greater than a smurf in-game as it provides a 6th pseudo-player for a team & that player sees everything from everyone, albeit the overall impact is greater when a smurf is directly involved in a game. However, the premise of having a more experienced player being involved in games of inexperienced players that influences the outcome directly or indirectly still exists.