The 20% rule is ridiculous.

[Toxcatl]

My point is 20% is too extreme.

I disagree. I'm sorry if it sounds harsh, no offence, but...
You had the whole season, and didn't manage to climb from 840 to 900? It means your association just isn't good enough for Gold 2. Why top divisions should be guaranteed to everyone who plays long enough? It's a competition, not farming.
Fly or die.

How do associations with less than 6 teams even stand a chance?

Do they?
Get the full house, I guess it's not that hard. And good luck next season!

[nash123]

...

No.

One of the biggest problems are the exploiter - it doesn't matter, if it's a "whole good" FA with one 180% or if it's a 2 180%-team FA with 3* to drop it, like "Legends never die". That made it for fair, but good FA hard to impossible to made many points.

I'm sure, we are a good FA, we had two times a 1.place streak of 10. This season, we made 3 times 1.place and currently at final for 1.place, because of only one reason: We were lucky and had only one bad exploiter FA for the last 4 weekends.
Last season, we faced every weekend at least one good exploiter-FA. We were good, we never lost like 36:0... we lost around 19:16 or so... but what you wanna do, if there are 2 teams around 40% stronger and loan 9* players? We only made 2x 2.place, 2x 3place. And that costs a lost of points.
Based on this season, we lost ~100points -> 80 pts at new season. This 80pts would save next season our platinum-division, if we make on this weekend another 1.place with at least 20:x pts...

I agree, 20% is fair, but not at that situation with exploiters.