[Student]

I mean...it's points based on votes based on VP which is better then just straight wins.

It's why @UNKNOWN ARTIST w/ 282 wins & 5 losses is #24 of all time (combined: 4687 points, 287 battles) vs. @The Real Deal w/ 470 wins & 309 losses is #68 of all time (combined 3475 points, 779 battles).

With a difference of 1,212 points and 492 battles you can clearly see why battling shitty opponents doesn't mean you're better.

I'm not sure what my point was but basically it's working as well as it could be.

Side note: If you guys are collectively tired of Bnas being #1 of all time you can battle him, spit the tooley hard and lower his points and with enough big battles (lots of voters) he could eventually has less points then Mayneak and get bumped down. Of course this only works if he stopped battling or battles less scrubs and more high caliber opponents.

[Student]

I mean...it's points based on votes based on VP which is better then just straight wins.

It's why @UNKNOWN ARTIST w/ 282 wins & 5 losses is #24 of all time (combined: 4687 points, 287 battles) vs. @The Real Deal w/ 470 wins & 309 losses is #68 of all time (combined 3475 points, 779 battles).

With a difference of 1,212 points and 492 battles you can clearly see why battling shitty opponents doesn't mean you're better.

I'm not sure what my point was but basically it's working as well as it could be.

Side note: If you guys are collectively tired of Bnas being #1 of all time you can battle him, spit the tooley hard and lower his points and with enough big battles (lots of voters) he could eventually has less points then Mayneak and get bumped down. Of course this only works if he stopped battling or battles less scrubs and more high caliber opponents.