problem with the t500 part of the arena

[tyranim]

i just posted a deck at like 12 something this morning and it got 2 losses (no wins yet), now its in 600-ish-th place and now it wont even be played against, which means that the chances of anything happening for me is so slim its not even funny. my problem is that it can drop so unbelievably fast from just 2 matches and now its not even able to be played against, which means making the deck was a waste. all that JUST because the people who faced it got lucky and it didnt do much to them (its MASSIVE cc). thats my problem. i dont like that it can drop so fast just from a TINY bit of bad luck on my part.

[RootRanger]

Only 500 decks can be in the league, so a deck shouldn't be played if it isn't in the Top 500 in score.
The only solution to tour "problem" is to make a better deck.

[BluePriest]

My deck has 2 losses... and 18 wins. I would have been ticked if those 2 losses happened first. I think what Unit is getting at is that there should be a minimum amount of plays a deck should have before its ranked, instead of just being thrown in the middle and wishing it the best of luck. That way if you faced the perfect counter the first 2 battles, you wouldn't be outta luck since most people wont be carrying the perfect counter.

[RootRanger]

My deck has 2 losses... and 18 wins. I would have been ticked if those 2 losses happened first. I think what Unit is getting at is that there should be a minimum amount of plays a deck should have before its ranked, instead of just being thrown in the middle and wishing it the best of luck. That way if you faced the perfect counter the first 2 battles, you wouldn't be outta luck since most people wont be carrying the perfect counter.

Since your deck wins 90% of the time, there is only a 1% chance that the first 2 games would be losses.

If there was a minimum amount of plays, the bad decks would be played more, and the good decks would have fewer plays.

1 in 100 times a very good deck will last only 2 games, but losing a few good decks is a small price to pay if it means that 99% of the good decks are played more often.

[BluePriest]

My deck has 2 losses... and 18 wins. I would have been ticked if those 2 losses happened first. I think what Unit is getting at is that there should be a minimum amount of plays a deck should have before its ranked, instead of just being thrown in the middle and wishing it the best of luck. That way if you faced the perfect counter the first 2 battles, you wouldn't be outta luck since most people wont be carrying the perfect counter.

Since your deck wins 90% of the time, there is only a 1% chance that the first 2 games would be losses.

If there was a minimum amount of plays, the bad decks would be played more, and the good decks would have fewer plays.

1 in 100 times a very good deck will last only 2 games, but losing a few good decks is a small price to pay if it means that 99% of the good decks are played more often.

For a very good deck yes. But what about an average deck? Say on average I would have gotten 5 wins before getting kicked out on average. The system is flawed. It is good for the time being, however, in the future, needs improvement. Even a best of 5 before going out would be sufficient in my eyes.
ps. If I lost 2 of the first 3 games Id probably be out as well, probably even 2 out of 4.

[Terrilocks]

I assume you're talking about gold league?

The competition is almost too fierce in it which is why you can drop out after so few losses. Perhaps a new league needs to be created to split gold league in half and lighten the load.

[tyranim]

ok, so i was at 3 wins 0 losses about an hour ago. i was at rank 100-ish. i get one win and one loss and my ratings plummet to the negatives and i fall to rank 250-ish. definitely dont like the ranking system

[RRQJ]

Unfortunately, it's probably the only way it can realistically work.  If you try to make it so that decks don't drop out from 2 losses early on, you could have decks that are out of the top 500 right when it's submitted (they don't even get a chance to lose before they're out).

[parasite99]

If you like it or not doesn't really matter...since the system works the same for everyone your deck eventually has to be better than other's to get a better spot.
Positions around 250 don't really matter also. It's just a way for people who just submitted a deck to have at least 2-3 games before they 're out , or lets say that you have a deck that is gonna end something like 70-3 and 2 losses happen when you submitted...you really don't want it to be thrown out instantly.

[Tiko]

Note, that the time you're submitting a deck is quite a big factor also. Decks can be pushed out real fast from more crowded leagues even without a single play, just because of submitting it in the 'wrong' period of the day. There were many occasions when the moment I finished testing my deck it was already pushed down to ~300ish rank, because I submitted it right after the Oracle became available.

[Pineapple]

With how rating works, your deck's win-rate cannot drop below 85% (5 wins before each loss) if you want to be above the 0-0 people.
The highest-ranked 0-0 guy is around 200. The lowest 0-0 guy is around 270, and below that are the 4-1's, 9-2's, 14-3's, 19-4's, etc.
Then the 3-1's, 8-2's, 13-3's, 18-4's...
Then the 2-1's, 7-2's, 12-3's, 17-4's...

Each time a player builds a new deck with a new oracle card, they bump down everyone ranked below the last (oldest) guy with 0 rating.

Now, let's say that you get 2 losses off the bat, but still survive because "each deck gets 5 plays." Where, in the 500 ranks, would you be? If you're at 250, then you're pushing out people who have 5+ matches and don't get "invincibility", such as the guys who have 8-2, 13-3, etc. How is that fair? Or maybe you're outside of the original 500...but that would mean that there are more than 500 decks in Arena, and so a player wouldn't be fighting the top 500 decks but 500 decks plus 200ish decks that should be dropped but haven't played 5 matches yet.