Although I agree that they should freeze current ratings like they did with CS and start the ladder all over is this not an idea only supported by low level players, it has support among the highest rated player as well. Jidba, you probable have 40 names above 1800, and like 8 of the top 10 names in DM, isn't that a bit ridiculous? You are one guy, the top 10 should be the top 10 guys, so yeah, many of your names will go back to 1800, but you wouldn't need to invest much time in keeping your names high, 1 game in DM takes 1-20 min, and 1 game every other week per account is all it takes. Then again, the community in DM is so small I doubt you would find enough opponents to keep all your names high.
It is a fix for the people that play on one account, should not disregard it just because some people chose to smurf. And people would have to be inactive for several months for the drop to be significant enough to even be able to smurf on an account. As long as they allow smurfing the ladder won't have much credibility anyways. The majority voted to limit peoples maximum accounts, don't know why Voobly didn't do anything about it tho, smurfing will for now be possible and ruin games regardless of ladder system.
Biz said:funny to see mathematically-challenged kids still pretending that ratings need to be ruined even more
when the vast majority of high-rated nicks are smurfs whose sole contribution to the rating system has been to compress a wide range of skill into a narrow point distribution (1600-1800) while leaving negligible difference between a 2k and 2.5k, and when the aoc community has pretty much turned to crap if you want to find a balanced TG below the 2k level, the last thing on your mind should be lowering the rates of high-skilled players
the whole point of ratings is so that large point differences correspond to large difference in skills, and small point differences corresponds to minimal difference in skill.
let's make more experts 1800, because clearly they should only be at 200 points more than a new player. let's forget that most of them are already smurfing and artificially lowering the rates of real 1800-2100 players. actually, let's just make their jobs easier so we can **** up the ratings even more. let's also forget that there needs to be a huge point difference between new players and veterans and instead make it so that 99% of players are between 1600 and 1700 ... that'll fix it for sure. gj guys. keep killing aoc
It is a fix for the people that play on one account, should not disregard it just because some people chose to smurf. And people would have to be inactive for several months for the drop to be significant enough to even be able to smurf on an account. As long as they allow smurfing the ladder won't have much credibility anyways. The majority voted to limit peoples maximum accounts, don't know why Voobly didn't do anything about it tho, smurfing will for now be possible and ruin games regardless of ladder system.