Posted by GOAT

So pretty much the best ranked bronze player would be below every sparer from the top tiers. Seems to me that this ranking system goes back to the original problem comet mentioned about needing to constantly spar to be on the board.

Posted by Hikaru

I don't think the problem was constantly sparring to be on board, I believe it was "anyone can spar a lot, and be high on the board". A tier system would require skill, and you can't camp at the top.

Posted by Hikaru

The words you put about comyts quote in bold is basically what my quote was saying. "You have to spar a lot to stay at the top". I fixed that already, by putting prizes as the following and having to spar skilled players to stay at the top/get demoted:

Posted by Hikaru

Godlike: #1. Belt and hat ticket. #2. Chooses a hat (made by gfx) #3. Receives only hat left. (resets every season/3 months)

Posted by Hikaru

Yes, I feel like people started to become disoriented when I started talking about the potential points system.

Not sure if it's too hard to multiply the following based on tiers for some, but I'll do it for you so no worries.

Let's say you are in silver okay, following me?

You have 3 hearts remaining after you win, so that x 5 = 15 points

2.5 hearts x 5 = class? anyone? "ooo, ooo, i know, i know". "Yes pacboy?" "12.5 points?". "Very good pac, 10 gold stars for you"

2.0 x 5 = 10

1.5 x 5 = 7.5

1.0 x 5 = 5

0.5 x 5 = 2.5

More advanced mathmeticinalimicalness equations (based on lower/higher tiers)

WARNING not for the feint of heart or easily cringe-able.

Tier/league Higher than you replace, 5 with 10. Tier/league lower, replace 5 with 2.5