How to deal with Underperformance and Throwing

[Huskyboy.1053]

Here's an automateable idea for the dev team: Amulet-based performance floors, but only for top-rated players. Ban for 24 hours if top-rated players don't meet the floor.

Let's say I'm the top-rated player on my team, i.e. highest MMR rating. If I'm playing Berserker amulet, but I get 20% or less of my team's damage and kills... did I really try my best? I'm the best player on my team, I should be relatively outperforming my teammates. In my humble opinion, if you're the best player on your team and you're using Mender's amulet (even on sword Weaver), you should get at least 30% of team healing. If you don't, your rating is improper or you're throwing. So here's some ideas based on popular amulets, the percentages are just general ideas:

Sage: 25%+ kills and damage, 25% healing.Carrion: 28%+ kills and damage.Berserker: 28%+ kills and damage.Demolisher/Marauder: 25%+ kills and damage.Mender's: 30%+ healing, 28% defense.

To be clear, this should only apply to the top-rated player on each team. This is to penalize players deliberately throwing games, or for being generally unfit to play (drunk/need to sleep/very distracted). I don't think increasing MMR penalty is a good idea, it wouldn't really do all that much to really good players since they'll just rise back up quickly. But bans prevent them from throwing frequently and from annoying people with their unexpectedly bad play.

[Kuma.1503]

And then some rando gets a 1v1 with an enemy minion mancer on far. And because he's hitting 7 different targets that don't dodge, he ends up with 40% of the teams damage.

Better report the zerker thief for throwing. Actually, just nerf thief.

[Zypp.7921]

A berserker thief can carry the entire game with minimal damage and kills. Something like 200k damage can represent 8 unfavorable duels that the thief won. It could also be the amount of damage a trap dh did in three midfights that were won due to some critical interrupts and stomps by the thief.

You can get a lot of damage/healing by 1v1ing on a point that's owned by the enemy team. Which is not a good thing to do.

As far as I know, kills is just how many people died that you tagged at some point before that. How is a berserker roamer supposed to compete with a support for kills?

This 'feature' will just make people throw more because they believe they are the best on their team and so they will start playing for top stats instead of the win when their team starts losing.

I don't think implementing a system sophisticated enough to properly detect game throwing is worth the resources it will cost to implement. It would probably take a machine learning team a couple of years to do this.

[ollbirtan.2915]

I can't believe that some still think that 'top stats' reflect someone's skill.....

[Dawdler.8521]

@Huskyboy.1053 said:To be clear, this should only apply to the top-rated player on each team.So together with the enemy, others on the team can deliberately stack kills in order to get a specific player banned for 24h?

Cant we just have a vote per match to ban players? It skips the unecessarily complex extra steps.

[Psycoprophet.8107]

so say ur opposition knows ur decent and continually outnumber u knowing ur teammates arnt great that player could be banned due to their teammates not providing enough pressure to assure the opposition doesn't have the opportunity to do so.No thanks, plus everyone has great games but also bad games performance wise.

[Sindrener.1592]

Imagine enemy team has an MM necro full tank and a scrapper is clapping on him for minutes? sounds like a great plan!

[felix.2386]

no bro, damage doesnt matter, crucial targets are the squishy ones, not the tank point holder who pump out healing.

kill number is what matter, not damage number

[Tharan.9085]

Holy shit that's some next level trash ideah

[Huskyboy.1053]

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@Huskyboy.1053 said:To be clear,

this should only apply to the top-rated player on each team

.So together with the enemy, others on the team can deliberately stack kills in order to get a specific player banned for 24h?

Cant we just have a vote per match to ban players? It skips the unecessarily complex extra steps.

This is pretty smart tbh. Better than my idea. Most people on here are just criticizing that I included damage in here, not actually discussing it substantively, so I appreciate the response.

[Luci.7018]

Reduce the Win/Loss rating late at night (2win /4 loss) .Some players are joining with their friends (core) , and if they happens not to be in the same team , they will start badmouthing others and afk after the 3rd min( check in the opposite team who the other players are , and find a pattern/his friend )Or boosting/unlocking pvp item/tittles > business for real money (use those accounts on MOTA instead...)In retrospect , increase the rewards for winning .

Or in the Leaderboard right next to your win/lose , we can see how many night/day accumulated ratings/currency , you gained .Plus if the majority of their games (1-100%) ended too fast (8 min , afk-trashtalking) , your tittle is a little "distorted/ugly/not noticeable " .If you happen to play 40% morning/60% night , the threshold of 1-100% mechanic , is reduced and your title wont be distorted

[Tharan.9085]

@Huskyboy.1053 said:

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@Huskyboy.1053 said:To be clear,

this should only apply to the top-rated player on each team

.So together with the enemy, others on the team can deliberately stack kills in order to get a specific player banned for 24h?

Cant we just have a vote per match to ban players? It skips the unecessarily complex extra steps.

This is pretty smart tbh. Better than my idea. Most people on here are just criticizing that I included damage in here, not actually discussing it substantively, so I appreciate the response.

How is that smart, allowing players to vote who to ban is even more stupid

[Azure The Heartless.3261]

You deal with underperformance and throwing by letting people play with people they determine to be good at the game or like, instead of forcing them to flip a coin 5* times on whether they have good teammates or not.

Almost all of the throwing, underperformance problems would be solved if throwing a match caused people to actively reject playing with you in the future, and underperformance could be mentored or supplemented with instructions that you know will reach ears willing to listen.

If people fix matches, give them permanent dishonor and take away their ability to join pvp with a party.

*You may be playing a build that works in one team setting, but not another, so you also count on that flip.

[Huskyboy.1053]

@Tharan.9085 said:

@Huskyboy.1053 said:

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@Huskyboy.1053 said:To be clear,

this should only apply to the top-rated player on each team

.So together with the enemy, others on the team can deliberately stack kills in order to get a specific player banned for 24h?

Cant we just have a vote per match to ban players? It skips the unecessarily complex extra steps.

This is pretty smart tbh. Better than my idea. Most people on here are just criticizing that I included damage in here, not actually discussing it substantively, so I appreciate the response.

How is that smart, allowing players to vote who to ban is even more stupid

How so? You are a very antagonistic person, yet don't actually have anything of substance to say. Unranked is a fine place for people to learn how to play. If we were going to use Dawdler's idea then it would simply keep people so bad their teammates hate them out of Ranked. Then when they get good enough that people aren't going to want to ban them from games, they can play Ranked, no problem.

[Tharan.9085]

@Huskyboy.1053 said:

@Tharan.9085 said:

@Huskyboy.1053 said:

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@Huskyboy.1053 said:To be clear,

this should only apply to the top-rated player on each team

.So together with the enemy, others on the team can deliberately stack kills in order to get a specific player banned for 24h?

Cant we just have a vote per match to ban players? It skips the unecessarily complex extra steps.

This is pretty smart tbh. Better than my idea. Most people on here are just criticizing that I included damage in here, not actually discussing it substantively, so I appreciate the response.

How is that smart, allowing players to vote who to ban is even more stupid

How so? You are a very antagonistic person, yet don't actually have anything of substance to say. Unranked is a fine place for people to learn how to play. If we were going to use Dawdler's idea then it would simply keep people so bad their teammates hate them out of Ranked. Then when they get good enough that people aren't going to want to ban them from games, they can play Ranked, no problem.

How do you not see how that could easily get abused at any level to ban better players?

[Disney.7826]

This post is legit the most stupid thing i have ever seen in my life

[Huskyboy.1053]

@Tharan.9085 said:

@Huskyboy.1053 said:

@Tharan.9085 said:

@Huskyboy.1053 said:

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@Huskyboy.1053 said:To be clear,

this should only apply to the top-rated player on each team

.So together with the enemy, others on the team can deliberately stack kills in order to get a specific player banned for 24h?

Cant we just have a vote per match to ban players? It skips the unecessarily complex extra steps.

This is pretty smart tbh. Better than my idea. Most people on here are just criticizing that I included damage in here, not actually discussing it substantively, so I appreciate the response.

How is that smart, allowing players to vote who to ban is even more stupid

How so? You are a very antagonistic person, yet don't actually have anything of substance to say. Unranked is a fine place for people to learn how to play. If we were going to use Dawdler's idea then it would simply keep people so bad their teammates hate them out of Ranked. Then when they get good enough that people aren't going to want to ban them from games, they can play Ranked, no problem.

How do you not see how that could easily get abused at any level to ban better players?

Because I'm assuming that there would be some safeguards against it. It's not reasonable to assume that, when a system is implemented, the developers will do literally nothing to prevent any problems. This is what I mean when I say you're being antagonistic, you hear a good idea and you think "How can I make this situation as negative as possible and have no faith in anybody?" It's not productive, and it's not nice.

[Disney.7826]

@Huskyboy.1053 said:

@Tharan.9085 said:

@Huskyboy.1053 said:

@Tharan.9085 said:

@Huskyboy.1053 said:

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@Huskyboy.1053 said:To be clear,

this should only apply to the top-rated player on each team

.So together with the enemy, others on the team can deliberately stack kills in order to get a specific player banned for 24h?

Cant we just have a vote per match to ban players? It skips the unecessarily complex extra steps.

This is pretty smart tbh. Better than my idea. Most people on here are just criticizing that I included damage in here, not actually discussing it substantively, so I appreciate the response.

How is that smart, allowing players to vote who to ban is even more stupid

How so? You are a very antagonistic person, yet don't actually have anything of substance to say. Unranked is a fine place for people to learn how to play. If we were going to use Dawdler's idea then it would simply keep people so bad their teammates hate them out of Ranked. Then when they get good enough that people aren't going to want to ban them from games, they can play Ranked, no problem.

How do you not see how that could easily get abused at any level to ban better players?

Because I'm assuming that there would be some safeguards against it. It's not reasonable to assume that, when a system is implemented, the developers will do literally nothing to prevent any problems. This is what I mean when I say you're being antagonistic, you hear a good idea and you think "How can I make this situation as negative as possible and have no faith in anybody?" It's not productive, and it's not nice.

its not a good idea, its fucking stupid

[Tharan.9085]

@Huskyboy.1053 said:

@Tharan.9085 said:

@Huskyboy.1053 said:

@Tharan.9085 said:

@Huskyboy.1053 said:

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@Huskyboy.1053 said:To be clear,

this should only apply to the top-rated player on each team

.So together with the enemy, others on the team can deliberately stack kills in order to get a specific player banned for 24h?

Cant we just have a vote per match to ban players? It skips the unecessarily complex extra steps.

This is pretty smart tbh. Better than my idea. Most people on here are just criticizing that I included damage in here, not actually discussing it substantively, so I appreciate the response.

How is that smart, allowing players to vote who to ban is even more stupid

How so? You are a very antagonistic person, yet don't actually have anything of substance to say. Unranked is a fine place for people to learn how to play. If we were going to use Dawdler's idea then it would simply keep people so bad their teammates hate them out of Ranked. Then when they get good enough that people aren't going to want to ban them from games, they can play Ranked, no problem.

How do you not see how that could easily get abused at any level to ban better players?

Because I'm assuming that there would be some safeguards against it. It's not reasonable to assume that, when a system is implemented, the developers will do literally nothing to prevent any problems. This is what I mean when I say you're being antagonistic, you hear a good idea and you think "How can I make this situation as negative as possible and have no faith in anybody?" It's not productive, and it's not nice.

yes because anet is known for their good safeguards against any kind of exploit