Smurf tag.

[Emperior]

Another topic of the day.

Massive income of smurfers who make the game unpleasant for those who are new to the game or people who are playing 0ad for long and trying to balance out the game correctly. Rating has nothing with accurate rating's for such reason we have lack of 1vs1's. Smurf's are bad for any game. In 0ad smurf went advanced mode and simply creating massive amout of accounts.

@elexis when used too be around was strict when it comes to changing nicknames but he was doing great job on holding off a lot of smurfs.

Can anything be done with that? There is only @user1 in the lobby who afk more than me at work. lol (no offence to user1, he is a good person) @Stan`

 

[Stan`]

All my attempts to increase or change the lobby management have failed so far. But I keep on trying.

[Emperior]

4 hours ago, Stan` said:

All my attempts to increase or change the lobby management have failed so far. But I keep on trying.

To be honest I never saw anyone except elexis, hannibal or user1. There was for a month or so another person but due lack of time he decided not to do it anymore. Current situation with smurfing is pretty bad. Hopefully there will be some new people as lobby management.

[Stan`]

user1 is the last person. Dunedan was supposed to be a new one but I never managed to get him enough rights to make a change.

[Yekaterina]

On 22/01/2022 at 3:01 PM, Emperior said:

Massive income of smurfers who make the game unpleasant for those who are new to the game or people who are playing 0ad for long and trying to balance out the game correctly. Rating has nothing with accurate rating's for such reason we have lack of 1vs1's. Smurf's are bad for any game. In 0ad smurf went advanced mode and simply creating massive amout of accounts.

You have more than 1 account but we still welcome you!

I demand a clarification: smurf != second accounts. Some people have to create another account because they forgot password or their previous accout has some issues. They don't intend to smurf or troll. For example, if I create an account Yekaterina2 (for whatever reason), am I smurf? You can immediately tell who I am and I am not attempting to hide my identity. It's just that for whatever reason I can't use my previous account anymore. 

Similarly, we have names like:

ValihrSVN

Stickfish

felxfelx

burhudar (he has other accounts but he is not trying to hide here because he actually forgot password)

christoffel-symbol1  christoffel-symbol2 .... christoffel-symbol6 (by this point he had ragequit already)

StanlySweet , Stan`

Hamdich vs hamdich

 

So, do you have to ban all these as well? Most new users can't be bothered to post on the forum then wait for a few days for someone to solve their problem; the easiest way is to create another account. 

A smurf becomes a known player within 3 TGs so really; we don't care unless you try to troll us. 

But of course, not all hosts are as hospitable as I am  

 

The reason why many advanced smurfs exist in 0ad is because we are mostly very smart and tech-savvy people. We can study lobby authentication mechanisms and hence deduce ways to create new smurf accounts then bypass their checks or ban. 

Edited January 29, 2022 by Yekaterina

[Yekaterina]

On 22/01/2022 at 3:01 PM, Emperior said:

smurfers who make the game unpleasant

imo what makes the game unpleasant is rudeness

smurf speculation increases paranoia as well -> everyone think each other is smurf and are motivated to create smurf accounts themselves or be rude to suspected smurfs. Also hosts become very unfriendly to new players. 

 

today, some people thought that I am berhudar's smurf just because I cav rushed everyone in the opposite team and normally I don't do that. This simple case shows you how much paranoia there is and people need to relax! So what if there is 1 smurf? Just play better than them!

Think: when has vali or borg ever complained about smurfs? The correct play is to become a better player yourself instead of wasting effort on harassing and interrogating anyone you don't know.  

[real_tabasco_sauce]

I would say smurfing is one of the more trivial lobby related problems: one or two games in, and people recognize that a new player is likely already exerienced and they are balanced accordingly. Its also funny sometimes, like when it took us forever to figure out akazid was @Dizaka. The smurfing problem certainly pales in comparison to DDOS, which is downright depressing. However, there isn't really a readily attainable fix for DDOS right?

[seeh]

saw something interesting last days.

new player comes from other RTS games and wins vs most 1900 players and stronger.

i really believe he is not a smurf. i chat sometimes with him.

but something is crazy for me. we informed him to not use the older version (not his 25b) so he could get rating. rating don't work in his games.

but days later he still has not upgrades to last version. i wonder that. what could be a reason for that? i was observer/spec of some of his 1v1 games. looks normal and very fast booming.

what's maybe the reason that some don't so much time to upgrade or don't want upgrade? maybe he modified the game and build and installed modified version?
 

[UPDATE] he get now some ratings. its dosent matter who is the host. game vs noob , noob hosted. and Deathwing- gets points. game vs borg- Deathwing- won but get no points, but borg- was host also

Edited January 30, 2022 by seeh

[seeh]

4 hours ago, Yekaterina said:

imo what makes the game unpleasant is rudeness

smurf speculation increases paranoia as well -> everyone think each other is smurf and are motivated to create smurf accounts themselves or be rude to suspected smurfs. Also hosts become very unfriendly to new players. 

 

today, some people thought that I am berhudar's smurf just because I cav rushed everyone in the opposite team and normally I don't do that. This simple case shows you how much paranoia there is and people need to relax! So what if there is 1 smurf? Just play better than them!

Think: when has vali or borg ever complained about smurfs? The correct play is to become a better player yourself instead of wasting effort on harassing and interrogating anyone you don't know.  

true. good comment. but think about yourself and some thinks. you nice person i am sure. but there is much confusing  about you. a she a he and much more. anyhow. you helpful and nice person. that counts.

[Feldfeld]

5 hours ago, Yekaterina said:

felxfelx

Hmm sounds like impersonation to me

[Stan`]

On 23/01/2022 at 11:22 AM, Stan` said:

user1 is the last person. Dunedan was supposed to be a new one but I never managed to get him enough rights to make a change.

This might have changed recently, we'll see how that goes.

10 hours ago, Yekaterina said:

StanlySweet , Stan`

Well in the ToS I'm allowed to, because I'm WFG Also, it's the same account. I don't join games, so I can change my nick.

 

 

[Deathwing-]

Probably implementing a way to re-set stats, or even change your name once each 6 mounths would  make those little blue guys stay far!!

Greetings =)

Edited January 30, 2022 by Deathwing-

[Yekaterina]

Iberian fire cavs cause more balancing problems than smurfs.

 

I think we need to agree on why creating a second account is bad. Here is a list of reasons:

1. You can pretend to be noob and ruin a TG

 

can't think of anymore sorry...

[LetswaveaBook]

1 hour ago, Yekaterina said:

Iberian fire cavs cause more balancing problems than smurfs.

 

For iber fire cav it is clear that they are what they are. Smurfs can be an unpleasant surprise.

1 hour ago, Yekaterina said:

1. You can pretend to be noob and ruin a TG

 

You can ruin your opponents rating. Playing half the time on a smurf account also prevents your rating from getting what it needs to be. The points that your main account should have gained, are not awarded. Thus your rating is kept artificially low. Smurfing might be as bad as quitting rated games.

[thephilosopher]

In theory, smurf accounts can be bad because they can mess up the ratings of other players in 1v1 games. In practice, I haven't found that to be much of a problem. Players inflating their ratings into the 1300s and 1400s by only playing noobs is a much bigger force in creating inaccurate player ratings.

[Philip the Swaggerless]

I don't like smurfing.  It may not be trolling exactly, but it is at least cousin of the troll.  It is unnecessary and exploits the other players.

People play at different times and not the same time every day so not everyone recognizes a smurf after the smurf has played a couple games.

Saying that there are other balance issues in the alpha is irrelevant to a person concealing their identity or level and ruining the balance.  "There are already balance problems, so let's make balance worse by hiding our level" ?

Whenever you ask an unknown their level they either don't say it or say something inaccurate like "1300".

If a person lost their password or something and makes a second account they can straight-forwardly tell people who they are and balance can be achieved.

Adding to the list:

1. You can pretend to be noob and ruin a TG

2. You can ruin your opponents rating. Playing half the time on a smurf account also prevents your rating from getting what it needs to be. The points that your main account should have gained, are not awarded. Thus your rating is kept artificially low. Smurfing might be as bad as quitting rated games.

3. As Yekaterina pointed out, it creates "paranoia."  I think Yekaterina made it seem like it is the fault of the non-smurfs for being paranoid, but it is not.  When people are deliberately deceiving you, you become less trusting.

 

 

[Pudim]

We could have an account system, linked to google and or facebook, it would help not to lose passwords.

[Yekaterina]

2 hours ago, LetswaveaBook said:

Playing half the time on a smurf account also prevents your rating from getting what it needs to be. The points that your main account should have gained, are not awarded. Thus your rating is kept artificially low. Smurfing might be as bad as quitting rated games.

Nowadays I use my main account and this funny thing happens:

<host> suggest balance!

<player1> Yekaterina is no more than 1400

<player2> no, she is 1700+

<player3> she 1600

<Yekaterina> kids, as you can see the number says 1546 

<Everyone> Rating is never accurate! You smurf!

 

The biggest problem is that ratings mean nothing these days. Just compare reza-math (primary account) or Father to FUBAR. So you can't compare players just by numbers and it becomes more of a knowing-the-player identification. So, if you create a second account and say clearly who you are then it's fine imo. 

About 1.5 years ago I was banned from the lobby for no obvious reason (maybe I was too cosmic) and I came back with a second account called Yekaterina a few months later. Now I don't remember what the first ever account was called and it doesn't matter anymore. 

[sarcoma]

2 hours ago, LetswaveaBook said:

Smurfing might be as bad as quitting rated games.

It's worse. A 1200 beating a 1900+ player knocks off ~100 points from the top player, who has to painstakingly win 20 something games vs top rated players to regain his previous rating.

[Yekaterina]

1 hour ago, Philip the Swaggerless said:

2. You can ruin your opponents rating. Playing half the time on a smurf account also prevents your rating from getting what it needs to be. The points that your main account should have gained, are not awarded. Thus your rating is kept artificially low. Smurfing might be as bad as quitting rated games.

1400+ players don't try to farm points from cosmic noobs, because it's simply not fun. You can't get too much rating gain by beating a 1100...

So in reality it very very rarely happened. 

 

The only time when I agreed to play rated with a 1200 on a smurf account was when he begged me for a 1v1. I warned him that I am good  but he said that he was very confident and was ready to lose, so I agreed. If you observe me carefully I don't really like to do rated 1v1 on smurf account. 

 

As for playing with pro players, most of their games are unrated anyways...

[Yekaterina]

7 minutes ago, sarcoma said:

It's worse. A 1200 beating a 1900+ player knocks off ~100 points from the top player, who has to painstakingly win 20 something games vs top rated players to regain his previous rating.

If you are 1900+ and an unrated player suddenly start pursuing you for a 1v1 game then you know it's either a smurf or a fast-learning cosmic. In either case you shouldn't do rated with them. 

[Gurken Khan]

2 hours ago, Pudim said:

We could have an account system, linked to google and or facebook

I suggest to not link the accounts to commercial companies which collect and sell personal information.

[smiley]

Its honestly extremely weird, for me at least, that people care so much about such useless little details. Why is your ego so tied to this game that you cannot seem to digest the fact when a seemingly new player turned out to be better than you thought. Its not a big deal. Just because "DefinetlyNotExperienced (1278)" beat you who is 1900, doesn't take anything away from you. Next time, just consider that they are underrated.

We should also ban players who refuse to play rated 1v1 games because their rating points are also not accurate. There were several 1200s who played in the "top lobbies" during alpha 21-22 and I am sure they still do. It seems like the arguments contradict each other. At one point it was said that rating number doesn't matter because you know how strong a player is. Well, new accounts also operate under hidden skill only once. I would assume that much like how no one thought faction2 was actually 1200, people would also notice that "DefinetlyNotExperienced (1278)" is also not 1278.

Seems like this is a non-problem being hyped up because certain people are too much offended when losing to a mysterious nickname. Maybe just throw out elo and have average APM + Score Growth Rate or something as your lobby rating if true to skill evaluation is actually needed.

2 hours ago, sarcoma said:

A 1200 beating a 1900+ player knocks off ~100 points from the top player,

This is why ELO is provisional and starts at median for new players. On Lichess for a new account, you will get close to your true rating in 3 or so games. Provisional ratings do not take into account odds to make it fair for established players while also being marked with a question mark to indicate to your opponent that your rating does not actually reflect actual skill level. And they also don't care about new accounts, so there is more than one difference.

In fact, I have no clue why the lobby ELO doesn't implement this, because its pretty much necessary because without it, a 1200 can knock off 100 points from a 1900+ as you said. Or maybe it does and the parameters are just bad. Ratings are not supposed to stabilize if players keep upsetting while their rating is provisional.

I like how online chess operates, somehow they don't need you to stick to one account for the pool to remain fair for everybody else. But like I said, I suspect its more because people's ego just can't take the loss from a snarky enigma. To be fair, the player base here is actually too small to not get emotionally invested into it. When playing chess, I can just rage after losing to someone 100 points below me for 30 seconds and press find new opponent.

[Dizaka]

BTW, people smurf b/c people get targeted on strategies IG.  If when starting a game a host could make a 'blank' game that doesn't disclose:

• Player civs
• Players playing the particular civs

Then there wouldn't be a problem.  I've played games multiple times where it starts off as a 4v1 and I get defeated but my team wins either way because I'm target #1.  Very frustrating for things like that to happen.  It also happens when playing vs other players.  You know Yekatrina, Letsweaveabook, etc are good players and should be targetted early on.  Same applies for PistolPete, Palaigos, PhillipTheSwaggerless, Rauls (esp Rauls), Ricsand, Borg (this one definitely) etc.

It's weird but game matches are prone to griefing.  But the griefing isn't intentional.  Instead, it is just player strategy.  However, the player strategy is coming from knowledge gleaned outside of the game and especially in team games.

Edited January 30, 2022 by Dizaka

[Yekaterina]

1 hour ago, smiley said:

Why is your ego so tied to this game that you cannot seem to digest the fact when a seemingly new player turned out to be better than you thought.

@LetswaveaBook I would imagine that in your early days in the lobby you were accused of smurfing a lot? In A24, while we waited for players to arrive, the hottest topic of discussion was which smurf is behind LetswaveaBook. The majority of players thought that you were stockfish. Even if they don't say it to your face, I have seen many such discussions back then. 

@KKaslana @Gurken Khan  If you 3 ever come to lobby I bet you will be showered with smurf accusations. Why? Because a lot of players just can't accept an unrated player being better than them. These TG  kids automatically assume anyone they don't "know" to be cosmic, and if you are not cosmic, then you must be a smurf. Their ego is so big that they can't accept the remote possibility of someone improving faster than them or an experienced AI player or an veteran returning that they didn't know about. The next thing that happens is they report you to the clueless user1 then he bans you. Gurken Khan the reason why I used you as an example is I know you are a very good AI player who has never been to the lobby; I don't intend to threaten you or discourage you from joining us, in fact, I would sincerely welcome you (Herzlich Willkommen) you my TGs. But, I am just giving you a warning to expect people to be very rude to you, including people who you thought were your friends. 

If you ever decide to come to the lobby, I will try to defend you from these smurf speculators. It would be appreciated if you can write an account on your experience as a new player in the lobby. 

1 hour ago, smiley said:

We should also ban players who refuse to play rated 1v1 games because their rating points are also not accurate.

I know you are sarcastic, and this is unacceptable because this is a game for people to enjoy, not a forced labour camp where everyone play 1v1 to farm some virtual ratings 24/7. No one can force anyone else to join a game, not to mention whether there is a suitable 1v1 match for them in the lobby. 

 

1 hour ago, smiley said:

I would assume that much like how no one thought faction2 was actually 1200, people would also notice that "DefinetlyNotExperienced (1278)" is also not 1278.

Except that in A25 the lobby is very unfriendly. Instead of accepting the possibility that someone is underrated, they just label you with smurf and then you get banned soon.