I say they should remove the "Keep" option for a card, and set the % vote required lower.
I assume some people "waste" their votes trying to "Keep" a card, but end up giving it a higher % which can bring them over the 5% and ban them, whereas if they just voted on a different card they could've stayed under the 5% and stayed unbanned.
If "Keep" was removed, I assume more cards being banned as well. May be for the better or for the worse. Who knows.
Cards that were voted to stay (above the 5% needed): Qubik (334 votes 7.64%), Leviatonn (285 votes 6.52%)
Since more than 50% of the votes for Qubik and Leviatonn were voted to "Keep", that leaves at least 312 votes that could've been used to ban a different card.
That's at least 10.34% that could've been distributed to ban a different card, and would've dropped Qubik to under 3.82%, while Leviatonn would've been under 3.26% (which are both under the 5% required for a card to be banned).
I feel like too many people are "wasting" their votes to "Keep" a card. Can we just remove "Keep" and hide a card's votes (not just Keep/Ban status, but number of votes entirely) until the end of the week's ELO?
I'd personally love to see the whole system "rejuvinated" altogether. Have cards that get banned more than twice in the span of 4 weeks be perm-banned for an entire month, and have there be multiple elo tournaments at once (one for beginners, one for "intermediates", and one for experts) with your previous week's elo score determining which one you go in for the next.
"Then some cards would always get above 5% and would never ever see playtime in elo. We should have some diversity now and then."
Wouldn't that promote more diverse decks? If people always use the same cards, and they get banned, people will have to change to other cards. If those got banned, they'd have to switch again. Since there is a limit on how many cards per clan can be put up for the format election (I think it was 4), it still allows for decks from every clan (although probably not mono for every clan).
The 5% could be adjusted. Move up, or down depending on how the votes go. The vote # and % will also be hidden until the entire week is finish and the numbers are already set. Then they would be released, so there would be no knowing on who is close to getting banned, or not.
What they could also do is have a separate election entirely in which one character from each clan is automatically banned for the week. Then all clans would be on an even playing field, and people who relied on specific cards (ie: Bogdan/Leviatonn) would either have to develop an actual strategy or quit playing elo entirely.
Well considering the fact that I never really see the % of used votes go past 30% anyways...