Match making games are designed to be competitive with people trying to compete. If you don't have the time or willingness to play against a random opponent who might have a slower deck then play custom games. You can justify it in your head all you want, but you're still in the error. If you believe someone has a build designed solely to win due to stalling the game and making you time out then report them for it. However, that's a super rare occurrence and you're really just reaching for things to justify your actions.
There certainly is a problem when a player throws a rang game, but the solution is not punishment, not until other options have been exhausted at least. Those players are merely playing the game by its current rules. The problem stems from the fact that there is no reward for being highly ranked, only the perspective of fighting harder opponents. When you progress, you end up losing more often ; those throwing games merely do it on purpose. This way, they spare their precious time. Playing Card Hunter is fun by itself, even when you're losing. That's one of its best qualities. But if Blue Manchu has developped such an elaborated loot system, it's that they count on external rewards to keep the players playing. So why be surprised when people play for the rewards and not for the fun of the game in itself ? A gamer's behaviour is guided by the design of the game. If we want people to stop losing on purpose, we should try to change the design before punishing their players, by rewarding high ranking better, for example.
It would be nice to reward higher ranked people, like have a "season" where all people above X Elo got a prize at the end of it -- similar to how other games do it. But that is no excuse for throwing games. If you really want to lower your Elo then try a weird build that might not win all the time. However, do not do it JUST to lose -- you should try to win and play the games out. At least give your opponent the satisfaction of a game.
Ok, I should have said : "Those players are merely playing the game by its current design." The rule that you quote is merely a fix for the design flaw, a byproduct. If there was a reward for being highly ranked, which feels only natural, that rule would probably be superfluous.
I'm ALREADY afraid of ranked matches. Have you seen the kind of stuff those other players are using? It's crazy!
By that logic trash talking and trolling your opponent to cause them to rage quit or distract them giving you an advantage would be acceptable behavior. Because that's the game "by its current design" in that there is a time limit and the ability to resign. Just because something can be done a certain way doesn't mean it is correct or allowed.
I didn't say that throwing ranked matches was acceptable behaviour. I said that it derived logically from the design of the game. There is no easy way to fix trash talking and trolling, which is why they have to be expressly forbidden. On the other hand, there might be a way to fix throwing ranked matches, which is what I'm proposing to try : rewarding high ranking.
~sigh~ That said, it seems semantics over "what makes a good argument" is the only real issue here. Casual42 does have an interesting idea. Rewarding highly rated players -- but only if they actually continue to play instead of sitting on their purple icons like knots on a log.
I would suggest getting a bonus item when you win based upon your rating. So a silver player would get a common, gold player uncommon, etc.
Giving 1500+ ranked players another rare per win seems like a bit too much incentive, especially at the rate they win already. A possible idea could be to give the extra item from the gold chests from the milestone victories, but those are also won by leagues, which seems like incentive to get to 1500 and then play nothing but leagues.
They shouldn't be winning any more likely than someone who is stuck at a certain Elo. Assuming the matchmaking works properly you should eventually settle out at a 50% win rate. Granted, that's with a huge number of players so it will vary a bit, but even winning 60% shouldn't upset it much. I think having an "end of reason rating" that resets (soft or hard reset) could be cool. Lots of games do that like League of Legends, Hearthstone, and more.
That's for guilds and is short term. Yes some people have high win rates, but the vast majority of people have 55% or lower win rate. Only 74 people have a win rate that is higher: http://cardhuntermeta.farbs.org/winrateleaderboard.php
http://cardhuntermeta.farbs.org/playerprofile.php?name=99LenbearsAcademy+Master The leaderboard only shows people that have played in the last week. I'm pretty sure that there are more people out there with a higher winrate, not to mention all the people that took their time before getting good. For example, my winrate is lower than 60%, but that's because of the huge amount of time I spent in the lower ranks losing to Nimble Strike, and me not playing many games recently now that I am a higher ranking.
As long as there is not a in-game rule that says you can't lower your rating on purpose(or have a penalty) people will keep doing it. Plus some people don't even check the forums.
