Arena smurfs are "100% awesome!" according to Blizz
Arena Season 3 has just arrived, and players everywhere are enjoying the end-of-season rewards for Season 2. Whether it's a title of Gladiator, Duelist, Rival, or Challenger, or even the Merciless Nether Drake awarded to the upper .5% percentile of the Arena population, this season seems to be have come to another successful close. Or has it? WoW Insider reported buying the Drake and other interesting sales and trades but it seems that if there's a system, players will find a way to... uh... be creative. A couple of posts over at the PvP forums are hotly debating the latest and greatest technique to achieving the No. 1 Ranking in Arenas -- win trading.
Also called smurfing, in a nutshell, players form (with the help of friends and alts) numerous Arena teams in the same bracket and feed wins to one team. These teams queue at extremely odd hours to ensure that match-ups with the other teams they formed are certain. The teams play the required minimum of ten matches a week in order to qualify for points, although a recent marathon session seemed to have ensued in a last-minute rush for Season 2's Rankings. A quick look at the Vengeance Battlegroup's Arena Ladder will show seven out of the Top 10 teams coming from Mug'thol -- and reportedly not by the sheer awesomeness of the players from the said realm.
That said, it takes a fair bit of effort to raise a team's Arena Rating to higher levels. Starting with equal ratings, a team that loses 10 games straight will drop somewhere around 100 Rating points while raising their opponent's (assuming they only fight one team) by the same number. As the discrepancy between the teams' Ratings grows, the matching system will first look for suitable matches but, finding none, will eventually pit low-ranked teams against high-ranked ones. The returns are relative: a lower-ranked team losing to a high-ranked team will lose little by way of points while the reverse is true. It becomes necessary, then, to keep the Ratings of the pool of teams close together in order for points to be "farmed". This means making more teams to feed the teams that feed the top team. Did that make sense? This has resulted in teams of alts, or "placeholders" as one confessed win trader called them, with Arena Ratings in the vicinity of over 2500. That nets over 1400 Arena Points to spend on Gladiator goodness every week! For "placeholders", no less.While some players have been crying foul over the clever use of the Arena matching system, the players from Mug'thol have been crying foul over the players from Hakkar, who apparently started the whole thing. In particular, one Biomojo, who was ranked 1st in all three brackets at one point, is credited with formulating the technique of creating a pool from which to advance his team's ratings. The players from Mug'thol claim that since the win trading done by the teams from Hakkar is upsetting the "real" Rankings and cheating those who rightfully deserve the top spot, they're doing it, too. If you can't beat 'em, as the saying goes, join 'em. It's an ingenious method of advancing Rankings; so ingenious, in fact, that a GM called it 100% awesome.
The players from Mug'thol make no effort to disguise their efforts and with screenshots of a GM condoning their 100% awesome technique, who can blame them? Then again, as Robin has pointed out, Blizzard isn't being totally passive on the matter. Sarcasm for the win? Does this affect your view of Arenas? How do you feel about the first 3000 Arena Rating being a result of rigged games? Who do you think Papa Smurf would choose to be on his 5v5 team? I'm betting on Smurfette.
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Ranking, PvP
Patch 5.3 interview with Ghostcrawler
Mystery of the Unborn Val'kyr
The latest patch 5.3 news
All of the latest Mists of Pandaria news





Reader Comments (Page 2 of 2)
Chris Anthony Nov 28th 2007 7:49PM
yayo, "slanderous" doesn't mean "basing conclusions on incomplete evidence". It means "lying about someone with the specific aim of damaging their reputation". And it's verbal; when the defamatory lie is written, it's libel. Either one is a dangerous term to sling around, since both are illegal in the United States.
If you really meant something other than that Zach was lying to damage someone's reputation, you'd be wise to offer a retraction and clarification.
Naix Nov 28th 2007 2:57PM
Cheaters deserve to have all their pvp rewards and points taken away. Then banned from competing in any pvp/bg/arena again. Just to be sure.
Archaic Nov 28th 2007 3:02PM
Oddly enough, I don't have a huge problem with win trading like this. Seems totally in character to me for goblin run arenas to be rife with fixed and crooked matches, screwing out the betting public of their hard earned gold. ;)
Ian Nov 28th 2007 4:25PM
Wow...I think thats b/s...i have a lot of friends and guildies who actualy work their ass off for their rating only to find out that its truely being smashed into oblivion with great ease by someone who can basicaly legitly cheat (which isn't technicaly cheating...they simply found a loophole in the system)...if i was the GM i probably would've banned the lot of them for screwing with the Arena standings..or atleast warned them to stop the intended matchups to prove they lack any skill what so ever.
I always looked up to the top players as being talented, well geared and skilled players with a freakish amount of time on their hands...that image has been blackend by cheats.
Atleast i havn't noticed this problem in one of my Battlegroups, too bad i dont arena with that character :P
ryno106 Nov 28th 2007 5:36PM
This post seems a bit hysterical. Unfortunately, Blizzard doesn't do a very good job training GMs how to behave, because any of the comments found in the those screenshots floating around are inappropriate. Like others have pointed out, all of the screens and dialogues are likely taken out of context, but the GM was behaving in an inappropriate manner.
All said though, points trading is terrible, but Blizzard's track record with organized play is already pretty bad. They didn't know how to monitor their qualifying tournaments, and they completely ruined the legitimacy of their tournaments when they had to invite teams with bad ratings to play in big events. At Blizzcon, they didn't even put the players in a separate room, meaning that when Leeroy Jenkins yelled that a player was drinking, the other team heard it and got the drinker, something that completely changed how the match played out. There are also stories of them forcing hunter to use the default bear pet instead of their preferred scorpid pet, because the other team whined enough. If Blizzard wants their Organized Play to succeed (which is what Battlegrounds and Arena are), then they really need to call in some people and get these issues ironed out. Otherwise they're never going to make OP what they need it to be to appeal to the competitive base.
Makros Nov 28th 2007 4:35PM
The screenshot in this article may not be up to your standards but on the second page of the forum thread there are several screenshots of various discussions that clearly show Blizzard GM's saying that this type of activity is not against the rules.
I agree that it is a cheap way to get to the top and ignores the purpose of the game, BUT several of the teams specifically asked if they were in any way violating any rules by doing this. The answer from Blizzard across the board was NO. That it was ok. That is until a couple of hours before the season ended and they changed their minds.
Blizzard should acknowledge that they were simply wrong. That they messed up. I don't think banning people and dissolving their teams is right. They asked and Blizzard said it was ok. That is clearly Blizzard's problem, not theirs.
hpavc Nov 28th 2007 6:47PM
This just in ... organized players are more likely to be successful ... causal and nubcake players are not as successful as people willing to put in more time and effort.
More QQ tomarrow, people who are higher level do more damage ... is it fair?
Duncan Nov 28th 2007 7:58PM
Yea losing on purpose takes alot of effort. Time maybe. but no effort
Bestadin Nov 28th 2007 7:18PM
What I want to know is why your just picking MT and Hakkar out of the crazy insane bunch of the other teams on other realms and BG's. Not only is this article bad but it seems like someone got ownd by either my server MT or Hakkar in some way or the other. You could of used any name like "Server 1" lol but you aired out forum dirty laundry and a very good forum / bg battle that is going on between two said realms. Gratz on bad.
robodex Nov 29th 2007 12:01AM
btw, the hakkar/mug'lawl feud has been going on for a very long time. The reason it was MT in particular that did it was because of this feud :P
Rubeus Nov 29th 2007 7:14AM
Did anyone check the screenshot and notice the name of the GM? Do you find it a bit odd that the GM's name is the same as the player who this GM is talking to?
Mordrod Nov 29th 2007 8:35AM
Not only is the chat text suspicious because of the GM name and player name being the same, but the player name in the whisper text does not match the player name in the portrait screen at top left. These screenshots are clearly staged, probably on a private server.
Chris Anthony Nov 29th 2007 9:52AM
I'm baffled at your assertion, Rubeus. The GM's name is Besselthen. The player's name is Biomojo.
Are you confused because the chat box only shows Besselthen's name? That's because whispers/tells never show your name - only the name of the person you're whispering ("To [Besselthen]") or the name of the person who's whispering you ("[Besselthen] whispers").
Like Kate says, whether the discussion was actually about Arena win trading is up for grabs, but the screenshot itself shows exactly no evidence of having been manipulated.
Kate Nov 29th 2007 9:15AM
Mordrod - when you whisper someone, it never says your own name, but the name of the person to who(m?) you're whispering.
Kate Nov 29th 2007 9:17AM
bah, got cut off -
Long story short - there's no evidence that the screenie is staged. Whether or not they're actually talking about win trading is another issue altogether.
Good_Idea Dec 11th 2007 6:18PM
GMs are nobodies and there are hundreds of them. Just because some cashier at McDonalds says something doesn't mean she speaks for the entire company.
Besides, it sounded like sarcasm.
Blizz doesn't want this and the designers will put an end to it. And in the end they did.