There is this post from Jeff Kaplan, countering the argument of “smurfs” being a problem:
- Smurfing. I would define this as an experienced player buying a second account to reset their account progress and internal matchmaking rating (MMR)
…
Smurfing – and I know this isn’t what you want to hear – isn’t really that big of an issue. For example, a few weeks ago one of the Pro Overwatch players created a smurf account and was streaming from it. We were able to watch his MMR internally and compare it against his “main” account. Within 15 games, the MMR’s were equal. I know there is a very bad perception of Smurfing. But the reality is, skilled players are moved rapidly out of lower skill situations.
However, something that should be mentioned is that Jeff’s definition of a “smurf” is equal to your definition of “alt account”. So alt-accounts aren’t a problem because they get to their proper MMR anyways.
Sonic-Smurf (your definition of smurfs), on the other hand, intentionally play at a lower MMR. That would give them an unfair advantage, making it reportable for cheating.
A counter-argument might be that some players get a low MMR accidentally and then they get reported for cheating, even though they’re innocent. Yet they are not cheating by definition:
Engaging is the keyword here. It means that you deliberately try to get a low MMR thus getting a low MMR accidentally is not cheating by definition.
There’s also the fact that they were doing an ongoing “crime”. Before they get a low MMR, thus cheating, they have to play terribly on purpose. In a nutshell, they have to sabotage the game to get to a low MMR/SR.
While reporting a sonic-smurf for cheating would be justified, the more difficult problem is to identify a smurf. There has to be a system where you can clearly find out whether someone plays a smurf or "just got gud".
A phone verification seems to be a good idea. Blizzard already implemented it by requiring a phone verification to get to the top 500. However, that should be discussed in the relevant forum.
