My proposition is simple: after exiting the ladder, all of a player’s games should either be annulled or automatically resigned (the latter option seems fairer).
For example, let’s say I’m in 5th place, playing against the 3rd-place player, and I’m confident I will win. Meanwhile, the player in 6th place could potentially overtake me. To exploit the system, a player might leave the ladder, re-enter at the bottom, resign the match against the 6th-place player, and then climb back up by winning against the 3rd-place player later. This is incredibly unfair in many ways, especially to the 6th-place player, who loses their opportunity to advance (now or in the future). Additionally, the cheater in 5th place temporarily becomes untouchable for challenges from higher-ranked players (because their rank resets to the lowest level).
Another topic worth discussing is punishment for players who consistently resign games they are likely to lose, particularly if doing so helps them maintain or improve their rank through victories in other matches. I’m talking about cases where a player defeats the 1st-place player, but before that, they resign all of their current losing or difficult games just to protect their future top position from being overtaken. This issue becomes even more critical at higher ladder positions. I’ve spoken to several top players who openly admitted to using this tactic, which undermines fair competition. Imagine winning a difficult match, only to lose the full benefit of that victory because your opponent manipulated the system to safeguard their future standing.
In summary, I wanted to share some ideas and shed light on what’s happening in the ladder. I’m honestly shocked that for many players, the ranking number has become more important than the principles of ethics and fair play. It’s disheartening to see, and I hope we can do something about this
To exploit the system, a player might leave the ladder, re-enter at the bottom, resign the match against the 6th-place player, and then climb back up by winning against the 3rd-place player later.
… after leaving the ladder, it takes ages to challenge the 3rd place player, because you can only challenge people a certain distance above you.
I don’t understand how this exploit works. It sounds like the “cheater” wins a game and moves up accordingly. There’s how it’s supposed to work isn’t it?
Your proposed cheat does not work currently (I believe), as when you leave a ladder although the games remain in progress and will still count for ratings, they are no longer ladder games (even if the game name suggests they are), so in your example when you beat the 3rd place player you get rating points, but will not jump to 3rd place because that game is no longer a ladder game.
Sorry if I`m being wrong or I couldnt normally explain this, but that’s half of the case.
As I said, yes, cheater wins a game and moves up, fair and square at this point. But this explits allowing him to protect his future or current place from pepole who are actually wining him.
It is critical, because if he wins 1 of 4 games he can still upgrade his position
Just second ago resigned a winning game for you to a 993, now he is a 2 place in the ladder
I will try to find SS proving he was reentering ladder or you can ask him, it would be to lame if I forgot to do it
Howewer my point still stands, it still works, ArsenLapin is now second on the ladder, and I’m sure than after future checks it will be proved that it`s still working
But if you rejoin the ladder they become ladder games again.
Ah, I get it, it’s not about the “cheater” gaining places but preventing those challenging them from climbing.
I wonder if the solution would be for games above the highest point you can challenge from the bottom of the ladder to not become ladder games on rejoin. I.e. how Uber describes it but only for challenges above the limit that GaJ mentioned.
I think good solution for this is just simply transfering this games from ladder ones to simply correspondence, because I dont think limits restriction will aplly to smaller ladders
Wow, I didn’t know such things are possible… Also I think it’s weird that when you resign from a tournament you lose all the games in the tournament, but when you resign from a ladder you still keep the games in the ladder.
This is NOT a typo, please read next words. I’m awful at explaining, honestly I am very sorry, but please try to understand my point - If someone in ladder is about to promote, they can resign all previous games in order not to give them even more higher spot. For example player is about to become top 1, but he could lose another game with top 5 player, so he will just resign it now in order to protect his top 1 in future.
Yes, absolutely, when its clear that he is losing for sure its okay to resign, and it shouldn’t be punishable, but I’m talking about mid game with a hard opponent, that he knows there is a certain possibility that he loses. (0,5 dif in mid game)
Ladder works that way that this hard opponent wont be able to challenge him again, so its really crtitical at highest spots.
But not only that, even in top 200-300 it could be painfull, if I know I win higher spots I resign all other games beforehand if I want my opponents not to be promoted THIS HIGH
So in end of the day when you challenging player higher than you, with this mechanics it can be frightening to win mid game because your opponent cares only about promoting his number, not game itself, and you won 250 player but now he is like 200, and you played only a little with him and you didnt even “win” at reality, so all the fun and the idea of really conquring something just going away
And as I said, in top ranks it is critical, and I saw pepole do it a LOT. (even games resigns just to protect their spot), and you cant challenge his top spot again, and thats for me feels like abusing ladder rules and fun-killer
It happens regulary, I dont want to point fingers here but if you need proof I can get it for you. But honestly even posibility of it it the thing we should work on
Yes it is. For eample I’m losing to a 300 player(as 250 who about to win 200) so I leave the ladder, resign this game with 300, he doesnt promote at all and then I’m back to the ladder at 200 place after winning it. Honestly it could be toxic and awful at any place, example giving.
Mechanic “If I dont want to give this player my spot and I have a winning game in a bag I can just leave the ladder and comeback again”
This mechanic is usable even if you dont have winning game vs higher place, any winning game in ladder works, so for sake of toxicity even that can be usefull
So it is a possible problem at any ranking
I think even if we have one or two people dumb enough to waste their time with this nonsense, regular people will just shrug and challenge someone else.
I think the concern here is a bit overblown. #6 still has the opportunity to challenge whoever is still in the ladder (#2,#4?) They haven’t lost the opportunity to progress in any meaningful way.
There is merit in upholding the integrity of competition on the ladder. You might not take it seriously, but those who have invested a lot in their good ladder position certainly do.
As host of the competition, OGS has the power and responsibility to set the rules for a fair competition.
There have been suggestions to change the behavior to what @Uberdude described: When a player drops from the ladder, decouple their ongoing games from the ladder.
The current behavior, allowing a quick rejoin and shortcut to the top, is a friendly goodwill mechanism that dampens the severity of accidental drop-outs. If it is being exploited, it should be abolished.
Honestly if that’s was the case yeah, but in last month a lot of people starting exploiting this awful strategies, and when I saw current top 1 using it - that was the last bit.
And yeah, of course the can challenge number 2, 4 etc, but if that’s top 1 we talking about this players can’t have real competitive “title” fight, they should wait for top 1 to lose, and pray that person that they losing to aren’t using this strat too
Let me be clear, punishment for people who intentionally losing not lost games(even), because they don’t want their opponents to climb higher. I gave examples how to exploit it, and I can give you real examples how it’s being exploited in top tanks.
Of course I understand stupidity of this proposition, howewer resigning mid game just to make sure opponent won’t grab my new-won spot later - is toxic attitude, that should possibly be warned or punished - especially how the ladder works, and how important it is on the top to being able to challenge your opponent who is on top of you
