Jump to content

Do you think the new rule is justified?  

20 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you think the new rule is justified?

    • Yes, I consider it to be a good addition
      11
    • No, I think it should be removed.
      9
    • I'm not sure yet, I'd like it to be tested.
      0


Recommended Posts

Hello, everyone. With this topic I want to make people voice their opinion regarding the new PVP rule:

 

TddlUj7.jpg

 

There are both positive and negative points to be made, the main argumentation being that

 

1. People should be compensated according to their skill: if someone is good enough of a player to bring multiple accounts to the top, he should be rewarded for it.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

2. With only 1 account per user, there are more people who actually win something. This ensures that a high number of people enjoy participating in PVP

 

 

I leave adding positive/negative points to you guys, with this I only want to capture both sides' main concerns.

 

I personally believe that the rule should be abolished: I already posted some criticism on discord and in my opinion, the top of the ladder should consist of the best players exclusively. The argument that it's both important and fair for a plethora of people to be rewarded is flawed in that it destroys the competetive aspect of PVP: the overall skill-level required to join the top is lowered as the best players are restricted to a single account. Furthermore, the idea that more people need to be given something for their efforts raises the question of why a top 25 leaderboard is needed at all: shouldn't the pariticipation itself be rewarded when we want as many people as possible to win something? Why draw a line at 25 players? Allowing alts on the other hand makes getting into the top 25 harder, as the most skilled players will constantly be playing in order to get multiple accounts into the 25-zone; as of now, there is hardly any reason to play ranked for people already high on the ladder.

 

Please try to keep things civilized and refrain from directly attacking others, thank you and have fun arguing!

  • Replies 21
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

 

1. People should be compensated according to their skill: if someone is good enough of a player to bring multiple accounts to the top, he should be rewarded for it.

Beating the same players twice with different accounts isn't skill

 

PS: Change the poll to post to vote

3aTirvj.png


Check out PRO's Official Discord:

https://discord.gg/FdtDfG4

 

1. People should be compensated according to their skill: if someone is good enough of a player to bring multiple accounts to the top, he should be rewarded for it.

Beating the same players twice with different accounts isn't skill

 

PS: Change the poll to post to vote

 

Changed it. To answer to your point: losing twice to the same player isn't skill either.

better to ban all alts than to only ban those on ladder tbh

 

What?

 

was already a rule preventing multiple accounts on ladder

But you are talking about ban alts at all.

Just why?

Changed it. To answer to your point: losing twice to the same player isn't skill either.

Idk.

Put a 10 year old boxer against a professional boxer. The professional will win because they're more skilled.

Then put the same kid against the same boxer but they're wearing a disguise this time. They will lose again because the professional is more skilled.

 

The kid could still be a pretty good boxer for their age but they don't stand more of a chance fighting against the same person twice.

3aTirvj.png


Check out PRO's Official Discord:

https://discord.gg/FdtDfG4

Changed it. To answer to your point: losing twice to the same player isn't skill either.

Idk.

Put a 10 year old boxer against a professional boxer. The professional will win because they're more skilled.

Then put the same kid against the same boxer but they're wearing a disguise this time. They will lose again because the professional is more skilled.

 

The kid could still be a pretty good boxer for their age but they don't stand more of a chance fighting against the same person twice.

 

The point is we don't have any age divisions on here. This means that with this rule, the 10 year old boxer has a chance of being considered as good as a professional and also reaping the same rewards, which is unfair to the professional as he, well, became a professional through years of training.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...