Moderator: Community Team
Dako wrote:I'd like to hear some critics or thoughts. Is it wise to change current system at all? Stating which one you liked is great, but more input from you - better suggestion at the end.
trapyoung wrote:Problem with Option 1 is that w/o rank filters then why would a high rank ever create a public game if low ranks will join it and it is pure risk, no reward.
edwinissweet wrote:hmm, what happens in team games? like a high rank partnered with a low rank
drunkmonkey wrote:I like option 2, because it allows players to participate in tournaments and keep their rank.
Woodruff wrote:drunkmonkey wrote:I like option 2, because it allows players to participate in tournaments and keep their rank.
The current system easily does this. I don't think there should be a change, honestly.
drunkmonkey wrote:Woodruff wrote:drunkmonkey wrote:I like option 2, because it allows players to participate in tournaments and keep their rank.
The current system easily does this. I don't think there should be a change, honestly.
Well, if you're a corporal, I guess it does. If you're a major getting matched up in 1v1 games against cadets, you have to win 5 out of 6 games just to stay even. And anyone who plays 1v1 knows a game can be decided by a drop.
It's just an opinion; I'm fine either way. I can get my rank back eventually; it's just frustrating to win 4 out of 5 games and watch your score drop.
Return to Archived Suggestions
Users browsing this forum: No registered users