Lately, the mindset of what is considered fairplay and what not seems to have shifted a bit. Some people don't see stalling as unfair but rather as 'strategic'.

Especially among Lynx players that mindset is growing strong. If a clanmember stalls, he gets defended from other members instead of reprimanded.

I would like to know, do you take offense if you get stalled? Do you know how the ladders are working? Do you even care if you get stalled or is it so common that it's a do or die strategy by now?

what is stalled

I see a parallel between 2 issues: (Playing the game x Playing the ladder) vs. (Rewarding rushers x Rewarding stallers)

Playing the game x Playing the ladder:

This one is pretty obvious, in a perfect world, people want to play the game, but on practice everyone plays the ladder, except for those who already have their beloved golden trophies that exist just to brag once or twice about having it. It's fine to an extent because it relies on the issues it implies, this practice is common in various types of sports as well, the different being the parallel issues.

Ultimately, if you only care about what others will think, you're likely to play the ladder rather than the game. People will always do that so I believe that if we were, as a community, to address the stall issue this should not be the target as it's inherent of ladders and competitions in general.

Rewarding rushers x Rewarding stallers:

This is what should be addressed in my opinion. As a naturally slow player I can guarantee i'd hate a ladder that rewards fast players, but at the same time, I share your point of view. There should be a balance between both such that you're neither rewarded for being fast or slow, neither penalized for having an opponent that is either fast or slow. Playing slow is not the same as stalling but for the sake of a healthy discussion we will treat it as the same thing, separating the obvious 2d23h commits after the game is already over into a different category, as the system does not consider it at all.

There is an indirect incentive to such practice that derives from a (probably unplanned) reward to slow players, and given the antiethic nature of stalling, this should be addressed by the competent individuals. In a perfect world, people will take their time and commit, but in the real word, they're being rewarded for stalling, which can be considered toxic and even unfair. It happened before and it will keep happening until this is properly fixed. Personally I lose respect for those who stall but at the same time I can understand why they choose to do it, since from their perspective, it's not even cheating, it's within the rules.

And I do believe stalling should be indirectly allowed within the rules to protect slow players and flexibility, but the fact that the 'perfect world' intentions of the system rewards practices that do not have anything to do with the technical aspects of the game, it's about time this issue is dealt with somehow.

I haven't gone through the numbers personally but I will limit myself to suggest longer seasonals (in games) for a starter, simply going from the premise that players will have more opportunities to translate their ability to the rating, but this lacks any proper numerical analysis.

If you don't surrender a game you expect to lose all with the goal of winning other games first before getting rated (1vs1 ladder) or getting better matchups (seasonal).

I'd like to point out, that i don't want to use this thread to redefine stalling. It's not about slow/fast players imo. If a player always plays slow, i have no issue with that. If he uses the timer to influence his rating it annoys me a lot.

Edited 11/11/2019 12:24:07

@Not Tito:
Wouldn't the banked time option be useful? You can set the boot time to 1 day, and a total banked time of 3 days, with 0 hours being added each turn.

How do you know they are stalling on purpose? Maybe... the actually have a busy life or want to think a little longer to strategize.
I am sure you have done it before too. stalled. I mean, I am busy a lot so I sometimes have to draw my turns out since I don't have time. No, stalling with never be the new "good." and if Lynx players are doing it, blocklist the person(people) who are doing it and move on. If someone else doesn't like it, they should blocklist also. They will get a "consequence" for it... People block-listing them. If you are afraid to blocklist a really good lynx player, don't. other people will.

If the lynx players back up the staller, I think more players will be there for proof (every one who seen the stalling)

I do not get offended if players stall 'cause I know if I was in their place (ONLY IF THEY WERE BUSY) I would be forced to stall too.

The ladders work how the Warzone Wiki says the ladders work. Automatic boot. if they forget to take their turn cause they were stalling too long, let it be. AND IF THEY STALL, DO NOT SAY "GG"!

I have faced stallers and I blocklist them and move on. I tell them to stop. you can also report them ya know

Stallers: me when i try to help viking in a 2v2 ror

Viking if someone admits to be stalling.

besides the fact that you'd be just compressing the equation, 3 days has always been default and changing that would upset a lot of people, including me, imo the system should be revisited

as long as there's room for exploits, people will exploit, specially those who only care about looks

This thread is already diamonds. I genuinely thought MoD, you are just being sarcastic.
You know well enough Fizzer won´t call upon "ethics panel" to start looking over suspicious players, who tend to play fast on wins and slow on losses. Stalling has been and will be part of this game - there is not much to do about it. The only tool you have is a forum shaming, which has been used in extent here. Calling someones Trophy a "cheap stalling trick" could be a thing, but in the end it won´t be taken away from him - just not acknowledged by Elitists here.

Stalling does not happen much at early games. Its relatively easy for average player to win his first 10 1v1 Ladder matches, so changing the current system in a way that it would affect later games could at least ease the issue. For example one would not receive a new game if certain game has been going on too long (sadly this could be abused to hold someone down as well), increase getting rank from 20 to 25 so final games would happen more among equal rank/rating. 1v1 Ladder is just half the issue.

Seasonal is another topic as matches come in sets, first 4 then up to 7 or 10/12 and onward. Everyone plays fast up to 10 to get to top and better matches. Slow playing opponent at early stages already could hinder ones chances of getting better opponents, even if they play up to it. Or an usual Elitist who loses one game from their first four, quit cause they won´t get best opponents - amazing ethics join and quick, harming other of his opponents. Thus far now punishments for this action - which is weird in my opinion, is it so hard to commit to 20 games?

As far as I see Warzone moves towards quick-play, even QM MD games are 1dXXh. If game would slow down and force players to play SET of 1-3 games to end before getting new SET of games it could solve some of 1v1 stalling, but would slow down the game a lot.

Current system of rolling games is weak system and gives stallers an angle to rise fast and hide their losses - don´t blame players for gaming the system, that offers them that chance. With rolling games cherry picking opponents in 1v1 is also pretty easy. Giving games in a set would eliminate that option as well.

In the end i think only the community can organize a way to fight stalling by either forum posts or even harsher by excluding such players from all forms of community events. If the community acts together in that matter it could make a real point and change. But if we're honest that's not going to happen as i feel that the community is to divided to make that happen. Especially considering the potential hate organizers would get if they exclude players from their events. So it would be tough to get the support of organizers to really go into that direction.

In the end i think it's just a small number of clans/players who would be willing to take these efforts to fight against stalling. On the other hand just a very small number or clans/players would protest against it, but i think the majority wouldn't care and therefore it isn't possible for either side to gain a majority. I think u need a majority to really change something or at least accept it and without the organizers it wouldn't be possible anyway. But then again there would be other discussions starting again on individual cases. Discussions would be just shifting from stalling yes/no to excluding players due to stalling yes/no as people have different interpretations of stalling. So who is going to make the call to mark someone as a staller?

Would we be able to change anything? I highly doubt it. The easiest way would be to change the system of calculating ladder ratings but that's not going to happen as i think Fizzer already said multiple times in the past.

Edited 11/11/2019 14:27:34

i hate stallers

cheers

Tranquex i was serious in the way, that i wonder if people still consider stalling a problem. Lynx for example clearly doesn't and even supports it by defending stallers.

Stalling pisses me off that's also why i made this thread... I agree that public shaming is the only weapon we got to fight stalling, but it's rendered completely useless if a group of people agrees with each other, that it's no big deal.

I'd like to see another way to fight stalling in a way edge suggests, but it's really too much of an effort and everyone might learn after people tell him it's the wrong thing to do. I also used two accounts as a kid on the ladder and stopped due to people telling me to stop and shaming...

Stalling is clearly bad sportsmanship, and I don't understand how people could think otherwise. When people come in and say it's not against the rules (which it isn't) or that the system encourages it (which it does) they are missing the point completely. It is possible for something to be legal and beneficial to oneself, yet still be morally wrong. There are countless examples in the real world.

Regarding stalling on the ladders in this game, the crux of the issue is that if you stall, you have decided that your outcomes on the ladder are more important than your opponent's. If you are stalling to inflate your rating during a run, you are artificially deflating your opponent's rating during that same time you are stalling (not to mention denying them the opportunity to start playing their next game). If you stall during the seasonal ladder to get a better matchup, you are keeping your rating up and deflating your opponent to deny them the opportunity to get that benefit which they have earned by beating you.

Other people doing the same thing doesn't justify it. They are acting badly. If you do so you are acting badly as well.

Exactly what Beren said.

If you stall during the seasonal ladder to get a better matchup, you are keeping your rating up and deflating your opponent to deny them the opportunity to get that benefit which they have earned by beating you.

Which make games like these even more cringey: https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=19987171

That game was the reason i wondered if people who don't care about stalling even know how the ladder works...

Also, thank you very much for the well worded out explanation beren.

I'm absolutely on your side. The least other way we could do to fight stalling is if clans are coming together and joining forces and refuse to take in staller into their clans. Especially if some of the well known and most respected clans of the side come together to put some importance into that topic. We're doing that anyways and i know other clans refusing tolet stallers join there clans as well.

For some it might just be a symbolic act than a real action to fight stalling, but it would be at least something. And i've never seen something like that before.

Let's say we all put in the words: "NO room for stallers!" or something into the clans tagline.

Obviously some clans wouldn't be interested in it and would still allow stallers to join their clans. Would these clans even benefit from it? Maybe they would, maybe not more than they do anyways. Would it prevent people from stalling. Maybe yes and maybe no. But if there are some respected clans taking part in it it might be a reason for some players to think about it, if they want to join one of these clans in the longterm.

So yeah that's a symbolic act that we could do, but again doing it alone of with a handful of clans won't be successful. If we're getting the support of the majority of the active clans, it might be worth a try.

But yeah if u want to really use actions against it, public shaming is unfortunately the only thing that realistically is possible. And not only shaming. As u said in your game with JoJo and as Beren stated here. If u want to fight it you also have to explain it. Explain the effects that these actions have on other players, too. Inform players about the problem, just as it is done here so they start to think about their actions and maybe change themselves.

Edited 11/11/2019 16:43:56

Huhhh!

I though Lynx reformed and was against stalling seeing how Krunx was complaining about Avengers stalling in CL. Guess rules don't apply to Lynx/101st and who was stalling? If it is in Seasonal I think it is against rules and punishable.

Stalling will never be solved by forum post, shaming, or outright blocking players from clans and events. At most it works as a deterrent. The only one that can solve this is fizzer, so we know it's not ever gonna be solved.

Stalling is obviously bad, and everyone can deal with it as they see fit, but the question doesn't have an answer.

Lynx obviously isn't gonna punish JoJo, if they even acknowledge it at all, because their leadership is guilty of the same thing.

@mayo

Rules only cover forced finishes.