The new ranking system needs to be revised. For the first four or five days after it's inception I played a lot to try and improve my ranking but I am now at a stage where I can not play any games I have any chance of winning. It is not sour grapes, I don't mind being beaten by a better team with a better strategy that is close to my level, it is merely a statement of fact and has significantly reduced my overall enjoyment of the game. The first couple of days were not much fun as I was playing teams ranked well below my level and winning easily. The next 2-3 days were a lot of fun as I was playing teams close to my level (lost some and won some) which was realistic. Since then my ranking has improved a lot but I can now only choose to play teams that are 50-70 stars higher overall than my team. This is pointless and makes a mockery of my ranking. The result of this is, I have not played a "ranking" match in a long time and spend an inordinate amount of time "training" instead of playing matches. My ranking should not be so high and to make the system more realistic, the teams you can challenge should be much closer to your overall team star level. Reset the system and rank initially by "Overall Team Stars" then only allow matches between teams that are within a maximum of say 15 Stars either way of each other. This would make it more realistic and would encourage more of us to play more matches. A low division amateur side (any country) would not play a top professional side under any circumstances (lose by 50-100 points, get injuries and learn nothing) but that is what the current ranking system seems to be forcing upon us.

I love the new system, I get to challenge against the best and it has really helped my strat. I think it's about finding your teams sweet spot, not to high and not to low

You are missing the point Black Monks. Fair enough against a team with 15-20 Stars more overall than your own team is a good way to test and perfect strategies. Against teams that are 50-70 Stars above yours, no matter how good your strategies are you will get hammered. This then becomes boring when they are the only teams you can play against as I have found for the past several days. I have simply given up playing "ranking" matches because of this. I guess I could play all these teams, drop my ranking and start from scratch but that would be no fun either. I want to be challenged and have fun, not hammered every time. I don't mind if I lose a fair contest but losing by 30-50 points+ every time to a team you have no hope of beating is just not how the game should be.

Well * rating doesn't matter in the upper echelons quite as much, so how about a league cap then instead? Something like +/- 2 divisions? I consistently (until the last season or three) had way lower rated players who had points in the right areas so was beating teams way above my station. And yes 80* is a lot but if you have 120-140* players with the stats in the right places, you can be competitive against the 205* teams. It's the max of a player that truly kills you when you come up against someone, hence my division suggestion

Hi Croxton. I am not in the "upper echelons" (yet) but give me time and I will be. My overall team rating is currently only 49.81* and my best player only has a 62* rating.

My problem is I can only currently choose to play against teams with the following ratings (I just checked): 93.64*, 114.57*, 90.02*, 107.85*, 95.55*, 89.66*, 102.32* and 123.86*. The lowest of these being 39.85* higher than my team!

I recently played a 94* rated team who challenged me in a friendly and I only lost 3-0. Neither of us used match bonuses (zero injuries in either team...injuries are always a good pointer to who uses MB) so my strategy was sound I reckon but the problem is that was a one off because I reckon (a) his players were fatigued and/or (b) he used the game "default" strategy while I used my best (so far). Most of the time I will lose by a minimum of 15-20 points against a team that is even 30* better than me so what is the point in playing against 50*+ better (rhetorical question...answer=none). I also refuse to use MB in any of these matches.

It would be much fairer to use, as you suggest, a divisional difference or my suggestion of Star Rating limitations.

The problem with those restrictions is that the best champ lvl 10 could theoretically become ranked first as they would have easier draws and nobody particuLarry good could challenge them. The rankings have already leveld off up top for the most part and that will continue to trickle down to the lower levels over time. I think removing inactives from the map might help more than anything. I can have a high rating, retire and for 6 seasons still remain a decent team on the map. If only actives are in the ranking system than the movement and leveling off will occur quicker and if all you can find is people out of your league then it means one thing, you are out of your league.

Once again you have missed the point Black Monks. If you refresh the system with the 205* teams being at the top and the 10* teams at the bottom of the pile and then only allow 205* teams to play against teams that are the same level or 15-20 below their star ratings while the 10* teams can only challenge teams below their level up to 25* maximum then there is no way that the 10* team can get rank #1!

Also a 10* team is never going to be in a Level 22 league so Croxton's point is equally valid!

[EDIT] I don't see any English National League teams playing against Aviva Premiership Sides, I don't see any Irish, Welsh, Scottish or Italian National League amateur sides playing against Pro12 sides....ad-infinitum. That is the analogy we have here currently and it is ruining my enjoyment of the game. I want to play against better teams, sometimes not as good teams but I don't want the current situation where and yes, "I am currently out of my league" there is no point in playing teams that will crush me. I want a challenge that is worthwhile not a hopeless one! It is a "game" and I want to have fun. Currently I am not with the present ranking system which is unfair and totally unrealistic.

I get your point, I think you miss mine. In time this will even out. Right now you are ranked higher than others at your level, thus you are facing people higher ability than you. If they remove the inactives the smoothing out will go faster. I assure you, I completely get your point and I disagree. Disagreement does not mean misunderstanding. Plenty of people can understand all sides and disagree.

I don't miss your point and I get that things will even out in time with the current system but for the past 4 or 5 days I have not played any "ranking" games at all! I have played only friendlies (when challenged), tournaments and league matches. Having nothing to do apart from "train" my team in between the league and cup matches is ruining my enjoyment of the game. I want to play against opponents who are close to my level/ability for a fair match and make small improvements each game but am currently in Limbo.

I just hope by "inactive" that you mean those who do not log in and play at all on a reasonably regular basis rather than me being "inactive" as I currently am in "Ranking" games. Got a tournament 1st round match to play tonight.

I still think that a reset with the highest starred teams at the top and the lowest starred teams at the bottom with a restriction on levels above and below whom you can play thereafter would be a better solution than waiting for the "dust to settle on a poorly thought out system", however, I shall agree to disagree and good luck with your team.

Are you active in the game? If so then you are not inactive. By inactive I mean the privation of activity. And I disagree that it is poorly thought out. I feel they put great thought into the system, it is a system that doesn't suit all, but my bet is that you have the same number of fans that people way above you have. The solution is to remove inactives and not to start based on stars, lots of people have put in real work to get to the top 1, 10, 100 of the game and we shouldn't be thrown to 2500 because it doesn't work for some. It is easier currently to intentionally move up rather than down, but give it time.