>remove ranked matches >online battles earns you BP depending

^

You forgot one
>6v6 singles at level 100

>>30494010
>no ranked
Wait what? Why?

All I want is 6v6 singles.

I am baffled and a little upset that 6v6 singles with strangers is not supported in Pokemon unless I challenge random people. I'd play online twenty times more than I do now.

I'd also love for nicknames to be displayed on Battle Spot but that might be getting a little greedy.

>>30495522
>new player tries out online
>new player loses 3 three matches
>new player has a lower rating than somebody who never even tried
>new player got nothing to show for it
>new player stops bothering

Pokémon does nothing to incentivate people to play online with randoms, even though casuals are the vast majority of the playerbase.

>>30494010
Why not make ranked vs unranked two separate modes, where you need to play X amount of games to unlock ranked? Seems a decent compromise.

>>30496534
Dude...
Dropping rank means higher chance to win and is a sign you need to get better. You can use other people's teams now so it comes down to persistence in learning the meta.

The whole point of ranking isn't to glorify the winners, it's to match you with someone of a similar skill level. If you remove this, there is no point in making a good team because you're more likely to come across people's in-game teams than something actually competitive.

If you get dropped down in ranks, it's because that's where your level is right now. You drop until you get to a level where you can win about 50% of the time and start earning stuff.

Your idea can have 5-year-old newbies against 30-year-old competitive veterans at any moment since they're not separated by rank in matchmaking. Don't be daft.

also
>incentivate
what

>>30496638
>it's to match you with someone of a similar skill level

It's been failing to do that since BW