Bronze shouldn't exist.

The Ecdysiast·Aug 3, 2017·1 votes·354 views

All it does: Other players get a quantifiable way to tell you're bad at the game, you get no reward because the rank itself is a participation trophy for losers, and you get to feel bad about yourself over a game.

What I propose is a longer placement period (20 games), and a pass/no pass system. If you don't prove within those games that you're at least at the Silver level, you don't get a rank and you get a week to look up guides and/or practice in norms before you can try again. This way, players have to prove they're actually ready for a serious game mode instead of just being stuck down in a completely worthless league.

This would benefit a large number of players, keeping them from a mode they're not actually ready for so they can learn that just reaching level 30 doesn't prepare you to be an asset to a team.

6 Comments

The Leo CatAug 3, 20172 votes

So then Silver becomes the new bronze. And the cycle continues.

NørseAug 3, 20172 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Leo Cat,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=uQ2UWULE,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2017-08-03T15:47:29.831+0000)

So then Silver becomes the new bronze. And the cycle continues.

Pretty much. I mean you only have to win 30% of your placements to achieve silver. This wouldn't really filter anyone out to a meaningful degree. The metal grade of the insult just shifts.

Colgate GatorAug 3, 20171 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Leo Cat,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=uQ2UWULE,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2017-08-03T15:47:29.831+0000)

So then Silver becomes the new bronze. And the cycle continues.

Beat me to it.

SpeeedyAug 3, 20171 votes

So with the current ranked system in NA low elo is a fiesta. You need to change the way the ranked programs work to give players more fair games. The problem is this you have 27 ranks between bronze 5 and challenger/masters (25 ranks to D1). In 10 ranks, bronze 5 to silver 1, you have 70% of the ranked player base. Then you have 30% for 17 ranks. Assuming you did even distribution for the ranks as the player base sits Bronze 5 to Silver 1 = 7% of players, then from gold 1 to challenger is 1.7% of players. The odds of getting someone who is having a bad game or just unskilled for the division is much higher in low elo. A more even distribution of players among the ranks needs to occur to plat 1. This gives low elo players less of a chance of a landslide game with more balanced teams.

FioraWillCarryAug 3, 20171 votes

If you think Silver is a magical place where no one feeds and your teams are all gods, you have a huge surprise to get. Silver is an ocean better than Bronze but it's all relative. The same feeding, the same trolling, same bullshit all day.

KloqdqAug 3, 20171 votes

I mean people in bronze are bronze for a reason. WHere would you place the people in bronze/ Silver? Then you just create silver 2.0 If you don't even rank them then they are just basically in invisible bronze. This post really doesn't solve any problems but just creates new ones. The actual differences between bronze and silver are so small that most people would just end up in there. Silver isn't a very high bar to pass dude.