please ban all the player who derank to get more resources

Imagine you new player with MK1 and canon lv 3 go play 1 match with 50 infam and booom, MK3 with epic blast canon tier 2 appear. i will quit this game if this thing continue happend. sry my bad english

 

Imagine how it will go if you meet this guy:

 

This is actually really hard to do. You can't solidly define infmay bombing. It's more a general term do define a purposful loss of infamy. But the question is when it is a standard flux opposed to bombing.

Like me, I was battling normally one day and i went from 800 infamy to 500 infamy and stayed there for a while.

 

But think of people, they'd abuse this and report everyone. Maybe there'd be a minimum required damage based on ship, level etc and a limit of 5 reports a day

 

I mean someone would go into a battle, lose/win and report everyone on their team regardless how they did

 

That's fine though, everyone has losing streaks.. but there's a maximum range that you can legitimately drop in one. If people with mk4 boats are at 200 infamy, it's safe to say they did it on purpose.

 

It's not hard to implement an automated flagging mechanism that triggers when a level x player drops below y infamy. Or if someone drops a certain amount in whatever time period.

Penalizing requires someone to spend time looking at the flagged players though & time is money!

 

Probably more about this... like I'm guessing 5

 

And someone doing really bad could be penalized for nothing! But still, I agree with you.

 

I mentioned before in one of the many threads about this topic that I think.it would be more effective to limit the amount of points a person can drop. Maybe set it at league cut off a. If you reach Ace II the lowest you can drop is Ace III for example. If you reach master III, the lowest you can drop is Warrior I. When you reach the point where you would drop lower than 2 tiers off your highest tier you stop losing infamy. And maybe you don't get any rewards from a loss if you don't lose any infamy. That would fix the problem without the need to rely on unreliable reports from the community.

 

Good thinking. (Wow, I nearly said food thinking!)

 

Why not just reduce rewards for winning battles at lower infamy???

The only reason people lower their infamy is because it is easier to get stars, gold and pearl by winning easier games compared to winning games at their natural infamy.

If rewards gained are significantly reduced at lower infamy games (in accordance to max infamy of individual player), there is no longer a reason for people to lower their infamy on purpose.


Correct me if I'm wrong

 

I think you'd have to reduce them a lot to make that work. And people would still do it because the like destroying stuff really easy. Don't know why that's fun for them but whatever. Plus this would have the unfortunate consequence of hurting 99% of the people in those tiers who are there legitimately because they haven't been able to climb up. They need resources to upgrade stuff and this would make that even tougher. It would like feel like an insurmountable challenge and they would quit

 

Look at it this way
If the average hardcore battle bayer spends 1500 hours a year on this (avg 4 hours a day, i bet many do this)
Then in order to get the same resources fighting "competitively" would take an additional 6 months.

Yes,. 6 months.. let that sink in.
Why would anyone make it that much more painful?

System is too easy to work around as it is.

 

I don't agree. I dropped 300 infamy by playing with soloists as opposed to team players and it's been a battle to claw my way up. Still not back and yes, I drive a mk4.

 

so many duplicate threads. makes it a PITA to even look at all of them, when other people can't read. -_-

Look. Clearly there is something driving the de-rankers, and it isn't the intent to be an assh*le to other players. Hint: its economic. Banning them is like giving a sick person a mask. It doesn't fix the underlying issues, and it certainly doesn't stop the symptoms from happening. In other words, de-rankers feel justified in their actions, and straight up bans will lead to negative press. It would be more productive and easier on Rovio to just incentivize people to stay at their best infamy rank. Instead of the knee-jerk reaction that is banning everyone suspected of de-ranking.

 

And you're right David.

The root of the problem is the incentives to lower infamy.

It is more efficient to earn stars/gold at lower infamy. Then why not? It makes perfect economic sense.

Therefore I feel the way to fix this economic problem is to deincentivize battling at low infamy(compared to individual's peak).

I propose lowering stars/gold/pearls for winning games at lower infamy based on your peak infamy. For eg if you have reached 2.1k infamy before, winning at 1.4k infamy now earns you less stars/gold than if you were to win at your peak infamy of 2.1k. Therefore you will earn more the higher you go and makes no economic sense to play at artificially lowered infamy anymore.