Why does my opponent resigning after a minute give me ELO?

This doesn’t make any sense, ELO is supposed to reflect how good you are, resigning in the first 3 minutes shouldn’t impact ELO at all. I don’t want my ELO to be inflated by map dodgers and smurfs…

If it’s meant to be a punishment for quitting early then the devs don’t understand what ELO is actually for, it isn’t a prize, it’s a matchmaking tool.


I actually really like this idea. There are times when a player might have emergencies he needs to tend to. But this could also make you frustrated when you pull off a perfect start and the opponent resigns and you gain nothing. Also this could also be exploited by resigning if they see a bad matchup against a civ.

1 Like

Are you suggesting that early quitters should still lose ELO?

If he doesn’t want his elo to go up doesn’t that imply he doesn’t want them to lose any?

1 Like

Those can occur in any phase of the game though, not just right after you decide you have time for a match.

Yeah that’s what I thought. If early quitters don’t lose ELO then yes, it addresses the problem of smurfs trying to get lower opponents, but I think it will increase the amount of Alt+F4 map dodging.


I suppose the deterrent for that is supposed to be timed ban.

1 Like

No, according to how Elo works means no one should gain or loose any, I thought that was obvious when I mentioned smurfs

As I said, ELO points aren’t prizes, they are a matchmaking tool to figure out the player’s true skill level, using them as punishment is just not the point, something else should deter from map dodging


I like your suggestion, it’s just that it encourages more map dodging. The current system, while flawed, has two deterrents for map dodging. ELO points loss + 5 minute time out. Your suggestion only has the time out.

Yeah but that’s a double edge sword, since it also makes smurfing easier

1 Like

Crazy(?) suggestion to discourage dodging of maps:

  • remove time bans
  • instead, force the player who dodged a map (doesn’t matter if it was intentional or not) to play his next game on this very same map
  • if, due to map rotation, the forced map is no longer in the map pool, then the map dodger is lucky.

Benefits compared to the current system:

  • map dodgers can’t easily escape from their “destiny” of playing the corresponding maps
  • players with unintentional dodges (disconnection or whatever) are not really penalized. If it was not an intenional dodge, then I guess they don’t care if they are forced to play the next match on the same map
  • ELO does not have to serve as an incentive not to dodge maps


  • big one: doesn’t work with the current match-making system that first searches for players and then for a common map
  • map dodgers may create alternative accounts to circumvent the “forced map destiny”. However, the same applies for the current “time ban system”, too.

If my opponent resigns and give me free elo I don’t complain.

Sounds intetesting. You could make it less strict and easier to implement by selecting the map from the other player if this other player banned the dodged map.

But in general, it always feel bad forcing players to play maps they really don’t want (one-map-trick ponies). It would be nice to have at a ranked lobby for them.

I agree.

I think the main problem of such a change (not changing ELO of short games) would be if some players resign early because of getting lamed or having a bad start (vil died to boar, housed, poor woidlines, unsafe main gold,…).
So ############ the fact that many players probably want a high ELO more that opponent at their skill level prevent them from resigning early after a bad start. Not sure what would really happen if ELO only changed after games lasting more than 6 minutes.

Am alternative can be, if a player dodgers a map the next game their enemies favourite map will be prioritised over there’s if both are unbanned.

elo is calculated from lobby. imagine