I like to play Team RM with my friends but lately it’s impossible against ELO Boosters. We are a team with 1900 and 2000 ELO players in Team RM. Against this kind of ELO players we can win lose, it depends of the match and it is fun because it is a fair game. The problem is when appears 3 players with 2500 ELO and 1 1200 or 1400. The problem here is that the 2500 are so good that we cannot fight them and we lose every match against them. We are entering to a match that we know that we will lose and the main issue is that the ELO system will take at least 15 points. It’s not fair that they get easy ELO and we lose it. I know that the queues sometimes take too much to find a a match, but facing us against ELO too high and taking us the ELO that we get, is not the way. Before ELO Fix, if we had this match, we lose 1 to 4 ELO points, but now this is punishing us for free.
I think the best way to deal with this is to compare the higher ELO players from both side and make the calculation of points from there. If the winner has 3 players 2500 and 1 player 1000, and they are facing a 2000 ELO players, they should win 1 to 4 points and the defaet team lose 1 to 4. This will stop players for going with a low ELO to do ELO boost.
There is so much wrong with team game matches. As result the ratings will never settle down before the devs will fix the issues.
The previous calculation was terrible and the new one is pretty exploitable by smurfing, so smurfing is becoming an issue (the 1200 players are probably much better, but play on a second account, that is the issue which you descibes). And then we also have the dodging issue (The Alt+F4 Multiplayer Problem)
Solutions for this issue are already posted in multiple threads. I dont feel the need to repost them in this thread as well.
Previous system was terrible. Ratings were inflated and therefore meaningless. They most likely say more about the play rate then about skill. Therefore they made a change, but smurfing was a oversight of the devs in the new system.
it’s not pro players, but since the average elo in team games is like 2000 whoever makes a new account (read: everybody) stays underrated forever and gets to play with people hundreds of elo worse than he is even if he’s just average.
Also there’s people getting 3 digit elo just to boost someone else, tbh any account who reached 3 digit tg elo should get banned from multiplayer because there are no people legimately that noob at the game.
Ah okay. I thought people are complaining about pro player smurf. I dont care about smurf in general. If I get defeated by a pro player smurfing, thats fine for me. It’s really good learning experience in my books. No better way to get better at the game than learning from those who are the best at it
The thing is, these aren’t the pros smurfing.
If there are a lot of smurfs in a game mode it basically forces all others to smurf, too to not get stomped as often. In 1v1 ranked the smurf isn’t as much as a problem as in TG.
There are TG groups really exploiting that smurfing abuse their, as with it you can, opposed to 1v1 ranked, boost your elo.
I think the only way around it would be to evalueate the team elo different. Not averaging the elo of the individual players but weighten them, so players with a high TG elo boost the team elo more than average.
For Example a Team consisting of 3 2.5 k players plus 1 1.5 k player should have an elo of about 2.4 k instead of 2.25 k.
This way this smurf thing could possibly become obsolete, as the benefit in elo gain would be marginal.
If you are a 2000 TG getting beat by a 2200 TG, that’s fine because both have a similar elo and it is a good way to know how to progress. The problem is when you are 1700 and got defeated by a 2800 and lose 20 points. There is no match, a 1700 cannot do nothing against a 3000 (I’m telling this because I have a game against Gary and got killed in feudal).
Basically, the higher rated players in the match should have a bigger impact on matchmaking to ensure fairer teams. I suggested an alternative calculation for team rating a while back that should solve this issue.