i never written that.
i clearly wrote that i wanted to stimulate active players to play 1v1, so their rating will be more accurate. losing rating of complete inactive is side effect not more, for example
borg is 1st on ratings board, but he is not active, so move him from throne is not bad idea..
I wasn’t proposing a radical change to the rating system that many players are already used to. I suggested adding a small new feature alongside it.This isn’t a drastic change — it’s actually quite mild. In the first month, a player would lose only 4 Elo.
I didnt catch ur arguments about some problem (whats the problem actually?). u operated with a lot of terms, but without solid idea, i understand only that my solution not matched with patterns u have ever seen. but it is not an argument.
and btw my solution also kinda smooths out some of the unfair rating inflation from smurf accounts, where rating basically gets transferred between accs. the rating decay would partially offset points coming from accounts that just log in, dump rating, and then never play again
just look how easily some high lvl smurf can get to 1700 elo. i can understand concerns about rating becoming too scarce, that’s why i said right away the formula is debatable. you could cap the max decay even lower than 300, like 150 elo for example. but obviously if a player hasn’t played for a month, their actual rating already isn’t the same as it was before