Originally posted by zozozozo
I think your first suggestion is a bit tricky. Right now the ladders are still based on rating, but when challenges are won and lost, people with a lower rating could end up relatively high on the ladder (because they might put very much effort in thier ladder games or whatever), and vice versa. So if your rating is 1200 and you should be placed somewhere i ...[text shortened]... ll the players below that division position would lose 1 rank without finishing any games.
well, no one really expects a 1200 to be number 1, but that really doesnt matter, the sistem should work equally (giving equal chances to achieve the top positions) for everyone, I don't think rating discrimination is the way to go here. At least as long as this happens in one ladder. Perhaps making different ladders for different rating groups would work, banded ladders would be more fair, giving lower graded players the ability to reach a n1 spot. But I don't think this can made to work very easily: we must remeber that ratings aren't static, and therefore intermediate players could end up being jumbled around.
Anyhow it is clear to see that there just are too many people participating in each ladder. Perhaps make more ladders with different time-controls (no timebank-games/only timebank games/whatever), so the players get more spread out between them. And maybe give maximum number of users in each ladder (100/150/200?)? or restrict players to only playing in one ladder. All of these clearly have disadvantages, but maybe they would make the sistem more fair. I don't know.
Anyhow, once you get in the top 100 the sistem seems to be working great, and I'm having loads of fun 😉 keep up the good work