[Godbody]

Originally Posted by NOBLE

We already have a skilled based ranking system. It's the stars under each person's name. It will say something like 8.1 or 7.63 and it is the average of every rating you have ever received in Text (if its your text stars) or Audio. It's based on how the community ranks your skill level with the way they have been rating you. What we could do is create a listing of top 100 based on the star ratings. However, it might be a bit skewed because people who have been on LB for some years are more likely to be overrated star-wise due to the fact that giving 9's and 10's were common in the past whereas now, a lot of people are dropping more realistic rates and you have to be REALLY good to get anything more than a 6. So someone who just started within the last year might actually be equally or more skilled than someone who has been here for years and still have less star points than the older member. It won't be perfect, but it would probably be the easiest and most practical way to accomplish what you are asking for.

I know, I alluded to the points system ya'll have in place and all but its flawed. The star ranks are flawed too. Those are ratings given to you by other people. Dickriders can give wack dudes 10s and haters can give nice dudes 1s... It's a flawed system

now if I just have a tier, like Bronze or some shit... I can battle someone in my tier, or higher...and algorithms will determine how many points I get or lose if i win/lose to them, and those points count towards my progression

for example... I could be Bronze tier and 2/3rd's of the way to Silver...but if I lose to a really low Bronze, I go back down to 1/3rd of the way or even less...or if I'm 2/3rds done with Bronze and I beat someone that's Silver, I automatically shoot up to Silver, or close to it. If I beat someone that's Gold as a Bronze tiered dude with 2/3rds of his progression done, I'll shoot up to Silver tier with 1/3rd of the progression for silver done. or if I beat a Diamond nigga I'll shoot up to Silver & 2/3rds of the way to Gold. Idk, something like that. Ya'll figure out how many W's it'll take but thats the general idea

its similar to what ya'll have now, but the thing with this current system is its based on how many battles you have, not the quality of the people you battle. and that's what ya'll should do, is create a separate leaderboard entirely with tiers alongside the shit ya'll have now, or wipe the leaderboards completely and implement the tiered shit and only the tiered shit

because while the shit ya'll have now does have some kind of skill based shit goin on, it's more based on how many battles you win. & that's a problem when dudes do 10 snipes a day against shitty cats and reach #1 on the all time leaderboard

[Godbody]

Originally Posted by NOBLE

We already have a skilled based ranking system. It's the stars under each person's name. It will say something like 8.1 or 7.63 and it is the average of every rating you have ever received in Text (if its your text stars) or Audio. It's based on how the community ranks your skill level with the way they have been rating you. What we could do is create a listing of top 100 based on the star ratings. However, it might be a bit skewed because people who have been on LB for some years are more likely to be overrated star-wise due to the fact that giving 9's and 10's were common in the past whereas now, a lot of people are dropping more realistic rates and you have to be REALLY good to get anything more than a 6. So someone who just started within the last year might actually be equally or more skilled than someone who has been here for years and still have less star points than the older member. It won't be perfect, but it would probably be the easiest and most practical way to accomplish what you are asking for.

I know, I alluded to the points system ya'll have in place and all but its flawed. The star ranks are flawed too. Those are ratings given to you by other people. Dickriders can give wack dudes 10s and haters can give nice dudes 1s... It's a flawed system

now if I just have a tier, like Bronze or some shit... I can battle someone in my tier, or higher...and algorithms will determine how many points I get or lose if i win/lose to them, and those points count towards my progression

for example... I could be Bronze tier and 2/3rd's of the way to Silver...but if I lose to a really low Bronze, I go back down to 1/3rd of the way or even less...or if I'm 2/3rds done with Bronze and I beat someone that's Silver, I automatically shoot up to Silver, or close to it. If I beat someone that's Gold as a Bronze tiered dude with 2/3rds of his progression done, I'll shoot up to Silver tier with 1/3rd of the progression for silver done. or if I beat a Diamond nigga I'll shoot up to Silver & 2/3rds of the way to Gold. Idk, something like that. Ya'll figure out how many W's it'll take but thats the general idea

its similar to what ya'll have now, but the thing with this current system is its based on how many battles you have, not the quality of the people you battle. and that's what ya'll should do, is create a separate leaderboard entirely with tiers alongside the shit ya'll have now, or wipe the leaderboards completely and implement the tiered shit and only the tiered shit

because while the shit ya'll have now does have some kind of skill based shit goin on, it's more based on how many battles you win. & that's a problem when dudes do 10 snipes a day against shitty cats and reach #1 on the all time leaderboard