Battlemaster rating

**Loberg** · February 19, 2017

So. I learned today that 1600 rating is around rank 3100 in SQ. If my math is correct, this means, that in order to recieve battlemaster, you need to be in top 9 in SQ. 30% of players above 1600 = around 930. 1% of 930 = 9,3.
This means, that potentially one could get Supreme-title, without being in Battlemaster-range.
That's 9 people, who will get Battlemaster. There are 10 classes in the game. 10 Supreme every season.
Is that some sort of joke?
The last couple of seasons, Battlemaster was like top 60-ish. There's a core of elite-players on Blackrock, who get's rank 1 and supreme on their chars every season, and they more or less only play with each other, making it even harder to compete against them. Which is fair enough, if theyre actually r1/supreme players. But getting Battlemaster, should not be limited to less players, than Gladiator, and potentially Supreme.

Can we all just agree on that for a second?

At least change requirements to be top 50 SQ or something. Idk

**ludovicostone** · February 20, 2017

About SoloQ, I think "the Supreme" is enough, I don't care much about the others they are not needed imho, also they are not cool titles to be honest I mean Battlemaster is just a BG achievement grinding title, the justicar is vanilla BGs reputation grind..the only decent and nice to have is the "Arena Master".
About other brackets: personally, as already said in other topic(s) I would premiate with titles only r1 of each comp. For example if in top 10 there are 5 hpal/war I would give title only to the highest team of that comp. (I won't talk about players playing 40 chars of same class and "stealing" top places to other, that is completely no sense and sad)
Giving a title to the highest type of comp, will make (almost) every setup played, and motivated most of all (obviously putting some rules like minimum rating 2k to obtain the title, or something like). This would really, really motivate players to try new setup and make the ladder less boring. And I didn't ask for "Gladiator" title, even a custom title would be amazing.

Just my 2 cents.

**Loberg** · February 20, 2017

Originally Posted by ludovicostone

About SoloQ, I think "the Supreme" is enough, I don't care much about the others they are not needed imho, also they are not cool titles to be honest I mean Battlemaster is just a BG achievement grinding title, the justicar is vanilla BGs reputation grind..the only decent and nice to have is the "Arena Master".
About other brackets: personally, as already said in other topic(s) I would premiate with titles only r1 of each comp. For example if in top 10 there are 5 hpal/war I would give title only to the highest team of that comp. (I won't talk about players playing 40 chars of same class and "stealing" top places to other, that is completely no sense and sad)
Giving a title to the highest type of comp, will make (almost) every setup played, and motivated most of all (obviously putting some rules like minimum rating 2k to obtain the title, or something like). This would really, really motivate players to try new setup and make the ladder less boring. And I didn't ask for "Gladiator" title, even a custom title would be amazing.

Just my 2 cents.

The sound of the title has nothing to do with my point. Like, i personally think "Warbringer" sounds cooler than "Battlemaster", yet i'd wear Battlemaster over Warbringer, simply because it's a statement about the kind of player i am, not because of the sound but because it's associated with only the highest rated players in a bracket.
So everything you just covered, had nothing to do with my point, really. No offense.

As to your suggestion about glad in 2s. I think it's a horrible idea, again, no offense. THere would be people getting EZ glads with lamer-setups that aren't even properly viable. Like hunter mage or something like that. And they would get glad, not because theyre good enough to be glads, but because theyre playing an akward comp, that noone else really cares to play. I get your point, but it would be a joke in reality, imo.

**ludovicostone** · February 20, 2017

Originally Posted by Loberg

As to your suggestion about glad in 2s. I think it's a horrible idea, again, no offense.

Originally Posted by ludovicostone