Current rating system can't accurately place lowest performing players

[Aviars]

The current rating system cannot accurately place ANYONE because there's too few people playing >_>

That isn't true. Can you honestly say that someone who has a 5% win rate can be weighted pretty much equally to someone with maybe a 35% win rate in bronze? Can you honestly say that when someone who loses so much yet doesn't drop in rating isn't being placed where they should be? In any other game most matchmaking systems try and place people in a way that nets them a 50% win rate, where their rating stabilizes with their wins and losses. In this game that isn't the case. Someone can lose 100 games in a row in unranked and the way the matchmaking places them does not change simply because they can't lose rating.

A good example of you being wrong is World of Warcraft arena pvp. Everyone there starts at 1500 rating. Their PVP community is probably 100 times larger than ours. But you will still find people managing to get lower than even 1000 or 500 rating. Why is that? If what you say is true then nobody should be lower than 1500 because the WoW community is so huge right?

Anyway it is just common sense that if someone loses that they should have matchmaking somehow compensate that, but since they have a charity window that can cover so many different skill levels, it literally makes it luck on what type of low level player you get, which isn't fair.

If I remember correctly when Feast initially came out it used to be something like multiples of 500 for each rank. As in 500 for bronze, 1000 for silver, 1500 for gold, 2000 for platinum and 2500 for diamond. People then complained about that saying that an abnormally large majority of the population was stuck at bronze/silver, so I don't see your second option being very popular nor lasting unfortunately. I can't remember clearly but I don't think it had that thresh hold preventing loss of points as unranked either initially. Speaking of unranked, these people you claim have been unranked since the season started clearly do not PVP so they don't matter in regards to formulating suggestions to matchmaking imo. It takes 8 wins to get out of unranked, even the shittiest player will get carried to 8 wins if they play enough matches so I'm skeptical that they even PVP at all.

Neither option literally does nothing to change how many people are in silver+. I don't know where you get that idea from. It only makes it possible for people who are currently unranked or sub below 38% win rate to actually drop rating. So you are just wrong there. Again I should clarify my second option has people START at 1000 and allow people to fluctuate from there with bronze being 0-1500, silver 1500-1900 and so on. No other difference in silver plus.

Also, yes there are people that literally do not have what it takes to win with where they are placed. And yes they do pvp, idk why you are making a assumption that they don't when I clearly say that they have been playing since the beginning. That means I still see them PLAYING PVP. And I just got to say, if these players can't actually go negative or w.e, then not even the best players can carry them, it might as well be a 3v4.