Why Placement Matches Shouldn't Allow Stacking

Placement matches in competitive games are designed to assess a player's skill and assign them to an appropriate rank. The initial placement games determine the starting point for a player's ranked journey. However, a significant issue arises when these matches allow stacking, where players form teams and enter placement games together. This article delves into the problems caused by stacking in placement matches and argues why they should be eliminated to ensure fair and accurate ranking.

The Detrimental Effects of Stacking in Placement Matches

Stacking, in the context of placement matches, allows groups of players to queue together, often coordinating strategies and communication to gain an advantage. This practice undermines the very purpose of placement matches, which is to individually assess each player's skill. Let's explore the key detrimental effects:

Inaccurate Skill Assessment

The primary goal of placement matches is to accurately gauge a player's skill level. When players stack, the outcome of the matches is often skewed. A team of skilled players, even if their individual skill levels are moderate, can easily dominate matches against solo players or less coordinated teams. This leads to an inaccurate assessment of individual skill, as the final rank doesn't reflect the player's true ability. Players might be placed higher than they should be, leading to an inflated rank, while others could be placed lower, hindering their progress.

Unfair Competitive Environment

Placement matches are meant to provide a level playing field where individual skill is the primary factor. Stacking disrupts this balance by creating an unfair competitive environment. Solo players are often at a significant disadvantage when facing stacked teams. The coordinated strategies, improved communication, and synergy of a stacked team give them a distinct edge. This disparity can make the placement experience frustrating and demoralizing for solo players, who may feel that their individual skill is not enough to compete.

Reduced Solo Player Experience

The solo experience is often neglected when stacking is allowed. Solo players face various challenges, including a lack of communication, inconsistent team compositions, and the potential for toxic behavior from teammates. When stacked teams dominate placement matches, the solo experience can be even more negative. Solo players may encounter more skilled opponents or be matched with less experienced teammates. This can lead to frequent losses and a feeling of helplessness, discouraging players from engaging in the ranked mode altogether.

Potential for Boosting and Smurfing

Stacking opens the door to boosting and smurfing, practices that further compromise the integrity of placement matches. Boosters can queue with lower-ranked accounts to quickly climb the ranks, artificially inflating the account's rank. Smurfing, where skilled players create new accounts to play against lower-ranked opponents, can also be facilitated by stacking. Smurfs can easily dominate placement matches, ruining the experience for genuine players and distorting the ranking system. These practices erode the fairness and competitive spirit of the game.

Arguments Against Stacking in Placement Matches

The arguments against stacking in placement matches are compelling. Let's explore the key points:

Preservation of Competitive Integrity

Competitive integrity should be the paramount concern. Eliminating stacking in placement matches ensures that the ranking system accurately reflects individual skill. It promotes fair play and reduces the potential for manipulation. Players can trust that their rank is a true measure of their ability, encouraging them to invest time and effort in improving their skills. This trust is essential for the long-term health and enjoyment of the game.

Fair Assessment of Individual Skill

By prohibiting stacking, the game can focus on a fair assessment of individual skill. Placement matches become a true test of each player's abilities, allowing the system to place players in the appropriate rank based on their performance. This ensures that players are matched against opponents of similar skill levels, promoting competitive and engaging gameplay. The accurate assessment also gives players an incentive to improve their own skills, leading to a more positive and rewarding experience.

Enhanced Solo Player Experience

Addressing the solo player experience is crucial for retaining and attracting players. When solo players are not constantly facing stacked teams, they are more likely to have a positive placement experience. This leads to increased engagement and a more welcoming environment. Improved solo experiences lead to the growth of player base, as more players will be likely to keep playing the game and invite their friends to join.

Discouraging Boosting and Smurfing

Eliminating stacking can significantly discourage boosting and smurfing. The practice of artificially inflating accounts becomes more difficult when players cannot easily queue with lower-ranked accounts. Smurfs also find it harder to dominate placement matches when they cannot coordinate with other skilled players. This reduces the prevalence of these detrimental practices, preserving the competitive atmosphere of the game.

Proposed Solutions to Restrict Stacking

To effectively eliminate the negative impacts of stacking in placement matches, several solutions can be considered. These methods can vary in complexity and effectiveness, but ultimately aim to ensure fair play during the initial ranking phase.

Solo Queue Only

The simplest solution is to enforce a solo queue for placement matches. This means that players can only enter placement matches individually. This eliminates stacking altogether, ensuring that each player's performance is the sole determinant of their rank. While this solution may require some adjustment for players who enjoy playing with friends, it provides the most effective way to eliminate stacking's negative effects.

Limited Team Size

Another approach is to limit the team size allowed for placement matches. For example, a game could allow a maximum of two players to queue together during placement games. This restricts the degree of coordination and strategic advantage that a team can gain, making the matches more balanced. This solution still allows players to play with a friend, while mitigating the problems associated with large stacks.

Skill-Based Matchmaking Adjustments

Skill-based matchmaking (SBMM) can be refined to account for the possibility of stacking. The system can consider the average skill level of the players in a stack and adjust the match accordingly. This helps to balance the matches, even when stacking is allowed. While this may not completely eliminate the issue, it mitigates the advantage that stacked teams have over solo players.

Increased Penalties

Implementing stricter penalties for boosting and smurfing can act as a deterrent. Games can introduce harsher punishments, such as temporary or permanent bans, for players engaging in these practices. This sends a strong message that these behaviors are unacceptable and helps to maintain the integrity of placement matches.

Conclusion

In conclusion, allowing stacking in placement matches undermines the fairness and accuracy of the ranking system. It leads to an inaccurate skill assessment, an unfair competitive environment, a reduced solo player experience, and potential boosting and smurfing. By eliminating stacking, the games can prioritize competitive integrity, provide a fair assessment of individual skill, enhance the solo player experience, and discourage detrimental practices. Implementing solutions like solo queue, limited team sizes, skill-based matchmaking adjustments, and increased penalties can ensure that placement matches remain a fair and rewarding experience for all players.

For more in-depth analysis on competitive gaming and ranking systems, check out resources on sites like Dot Esports and Esports.net.