Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Jeruk

Irrevocable ranks

14 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

20
[BOTES]
Members
38 posts
1,238 battles

The absolute latest irrevocable rank should be 14, not 12.

Or better yet, get rid of them completely.  All irrevocable ranks do is encourage people to bumble their way through with 500+ battles.

  • Cool 1
  • Confused 1
  • Boring 2
  • Meh 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
271
[-BMV-]
Members
504 posts
18,149 battles

101360948_3297393110284494_5928072256038109184_n.jpg.b0357bc33d90c0aa77cc2cc43480bec9.jpg

  • Funny 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,005 posts
12 minutes ago, Jeruk said:

The absolute latest irrevocable rank should be 14, not 12.

Or better yet, get rid of them completely.  All irrevocable ranks do is encourage people to bumble their way through with 500+ battles.

And this bothers you Why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27
[WULUF]
[WULUF]
Members
90 posts
9 minutes ago, Nikolay_Kuznetsov_ said:

And this bothers you Why?

He's just being a jeruk is all.

  • Cool 1
  • Haha 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
664
[OIL-1]
Members
954 posts

500 battles to get to Rank 12? I'd quit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,756
[TBW]
Members
9,982 posts
16,773 battles
47 minutes ago, Jeruk said:

The absolute latest irrevocable rank should be 14, not 12.

Or better yet, get rid of them completely.  All irrevocable ranks do is encourage people to bumble their way through with 500+ battles.

They should all be irrevocable and no first star, or maybe every third level, I can't allow myself to call them ranks. Ranking does not occur in Ranked battles.

1. rankings A listing of items in a group, such as schools or sports teams, according to a system of rating or a record of performance.

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
656 posts
52 minutes ago, Nikolay_Kuznetsov_ said:

And this bothers you Why?

Because other people aren't allowed to have fun it seems.

  • Cool 1
  • Haha 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,322
[A-I-M]
Members
2,731 posts
12,540 battles
1 hour ago, Nikolay_Kuznetsov_ said:

And this bothers you Why?

Maybe he has trouble reading the word “irrevocable,” and doesn’t want to see it so often.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,019
[SOV]
Members
4,458 posts
1 hour ago, Jeruk said:

The absolute latest irrevocable rank should be 14, not 12.

Or better yet, get rid of them completely.  All irrevocable ranks do is encourage people to bumble their way through with 500+ battles.

It should be 5

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,645
[SOFOP]
Members
2,363 posts
13,808 battles

2 ranks wont stop anyone.  If they are willing to put in 500 games for it, they are in for the long haul.

If you are worried that your precious gold rank 1 icon is spoiled just because someone can get it eventually by just spamming games...well....I dont know how you fix that.  Maybe different colored stars for different amount of games to rank out maybe?

For the record, highest ranked rank for me is 8 or 9....because anything lower than that just isnt fun for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,985
[WOLF5]
Supertester
3,705 posts
3,929 battles
2 hours ago, Jeruk said:

The absolute latest irrevocable rank should be 14, not 12.

Or better yet, get rid of them completely.  All irrevocable ranks do is encourage people to bumble their way through with 500+ battles.

What difference would it make being at 14 as opposed to 12?

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,387
[PVE]
Members
5,214 posts
22,432 battles
2 hours ago, Jeruk said:

The absolute latest irrevocable rank should be 14, not 12.

Or better yet, get rid of them completely.  All irrevocable ranks do is encourage people to bumble their way through with 500+ battles.

How would removing irrevocable ranks change that?

& better question... why the example of 14...what is so much harder about 2 low level ranks that made 14 jump out at you originally as THE magic number?

It seems as though you figured out 14 wasn't any bigger of a deal than 12...which is why you changed to just removing them all...but why didn't you just edit the original suggestion of 14 out?

Ninja'd by @AJTP89

Edited by IfYouSeeKhaos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,062
[PVE]
Members
3,968 posts
16,850 battles
2 hours ago, Jeruk said:

The absolute latest irrevocable rank should be 14, not 12.

Or better yet, get rid of them completely.  All irrevocable ranks do is encourage people to bumble their way through with 500+ battles.

Without them, I wouldn't ever play ranked.  The level of play is so bad, you can have 10 or 15 losses in a row because of the skill disparity holes in the population.  In fact, every other rank should be a locked rank.  Otherwise, since we can't select whom we play with and our MM doesn't look at skill at all, what's the point of always losing?????  With no hope ever.   The "Barney's" in the game might not care but, the average players would applaud that every other locked rank.   And, more players would play ranked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58
[QQ7]
Members
49 posts
7,651 battles

Ranked is just randoms with rewards, it's not based on player skill (if only am I right?) it's based on how much s**t you can throw against a wall until it sticks. The decline in player skill over the years has become more evident than ever in the past 18 months to a point where a rank holds no basis to identifying a good player from a bad one. Everyone knows that a real rank in competitive game play is based on skill and not how many times a player can fumble their way onto the battle button.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×