Titles
 

I think we should get rid of all permanent titles except the HoF. They should instead be given only to the person who won the latest version of that tournament. So a GC title or Topical Champion title or Scheme Champion should be worn by only the people who won the very last GC, Topical or Scheme tournaments that were held, not by EVERYONE who has ever won one of these tournies. To acknowledge past wins, past winners can permanently keep their trophies or whatever award icon/emcee item (belts, etc.) comes with that.
I think this will make titles in general more coveted and will address some of the reasons why we keep looking for new interchangeable titles (LBT, Text King, etc.).
What do you guys think?

I think this is one of the better ideas ive heard in a min. Makes titles more prestigious. Would also make people that have already won the titles, want to step back in the ring again to re claim that blue jawn.
Title holder would get an entire year basically to sport the title. Then switch...
Id say do it, as long as the past winners and history of champions is well documented (i.e trophies, threads) which seems to be up to date.

I agree that the history of champions should be well documented. That way, when a past champion wins again, we'll know whether to make their title 2X or 3X Champion. I also think we should create a new user group fro secondary champions (orange titles) similar to the Grand Champion user group. Their name will be orange, not just their title, but only the current champ will be there at a time so we won't have a bunch of orange names run in around. Sometimes when I log on here, it seems like I can see 5 blue names logged in at the same time. I think that diminishes the value. There should only be one blue name at a time. If you want it that bad, you know what to do.

Agreed

I’m down for this idea

That just screws up LB history . Continuity is important. Besides, titles are still sought.

And hof is only obtained via voting /nomination

This idea is one of the best ideas ive heard presented on the site imo. Take my titles, pimp.

How does it screw up LB history? EVERYTHING is obtained via voting/nomination, including championships and even staff positions

---------- Post added at 12:26 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:25 PM ----------

Past winners will still be acknowledged in some form by trophies, signatures, a history section, etc.

I only disagree with GC. That's the best of the best on LB. HOF has gotten a little loose these days so GC is the last standing greatest accomplishment you can have. The rest, sure.

Sorry wasn't clear enough,

To get hof title, it's not by battling , a thread has to be made and people decide whether one is deserving of it or not, and with all the titles vanquished, how would you even measure one's chances of being hof?

Activity will also greatly go down, because very few people would join a tournament only to have acknowledgement in the form of a signature , and history has shown that.

Specific titles have lost prestige, but titles as a whole didn't. I hate going to NBA illustrations but it's the first thing that came up, but imagine if there were no roty, playoff championships, mvp (season, all star and finals), dunk contest, etc and there was only Hall of Fame? Its those things that draw people (players or fans) to the league. Yes it would make hof more prestigious but the league as a whole will be bland, and competiveness will sink.


Just 2 cents.

I like this amendment. Make the orange titles temporary and GC permanent.

Man. Took me years to get this orange title. Fuck you for this noble.

I think it's a good idea @NOBLE take all my titles.. so if you want to keep it, you keep defending it.same wit the GC..

I sort of wish the tourny titles could be defended outside of tournaments.

Says the guy with "LB Patriarch" lol

Btw people, @RULE fixed the problem of keeping track of this with this section:
https://www.letsbeef.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=534

But yeah, I agree with this idea. Titles would shift to who's currently active, as it should and it would make the LBT more prestigious (But no-showing shouldn't warrant a title change, sure the challenger challenged them, the current champ agreed and they sent bars in time but that doesn't mean they would've won the battle, it should be up for grabs by the next 2 people in the LBT ranking order. I don't get why people can "skip the line" and then get a title because the other guy didn't show up).

Would Hall of Famers get a gold name or is that too much? 90% of them have GC's under their belt but not all of them do, this would help identify them when people just see their name in text.

I think having permenant titles is a big part of what motivates people to enter tourneys.

Taking them away might hamper activity. Which is the last thing we need atm.

1/

Word

If it's not broken don't fix it

This. I think the potential of interchangeable titles is still slightly untapped but theres a reason bigger names crawl out of the woodwork for tournaments...theres prestige attached and you can battle against better comp than whats consistently active then not feel obligated to keep being active afterwards. It would suck to have tourney champs start to no show once they dont want to go thru the rigor of defending it...or tourney attendance go down because the favorites wouldnt be interested in sticking around to defend.

I actually agree with rule. I battle here and there but I enter just about any tourney I can and the title is why. People are hungry for that prestige and recognition. Maybe reduce the number of titles there are. Get rid of the one bar. Get rid of topical if that's a thing of the past.

The thing is a permanent title is a good prize. A temporary title less so. I don't usually buy lottery tickets, but if the jackpot is sky high I'm motivated to try to get in the running. Temporary titles are not as enticing a prize, so the motivation to achieve it will also be diminished.

Most #1 contenders dont skip the line....they win 3,4,5 battles in a row then write a 32. If the champ no shows, why should that contender who did everything asked of them be forced to win yet another battle? If he aint worthy, the next month's #1 contender will win and at least for his trouble, the guy who won all the battles he needed to would have 30 days to call himself champ.

Agree with Row, RULE, Esso etc. A lot of people are only still here trying to win titles from the small names to the big names. I'd probably never enter a tourney again if this happens lol :grass::high:

I know, I'm talking about those occasions when someone calls the current champ out and they're not even on the contender list but the champ "accepts".

Of course, contenders who put in the battles should get a shot.

I feel ya...but if I can recall, thats only happened one time in my 4 years here.

I think GC needs to stay. Orange titles, ehhh, I was never really huge on them but GC is the big one. GC time is always my favorite time on LB

A compromise to make an exception for the GC is a start. I don't think it would diminish activity. As a matter of fact, it's more likely to increase it. Everyone is different and different people are motivated by different things. However, I think for most people, one of the most appealing things about a title is its exclusivity.

People want a title because it sets them apart, it's something not everybody has, it is exclusive. What can be more exclusive then when you are the ONLY ONE bearing that title? If I were to strive to win a GC, I would be more motivated knowing I would be the only one with that blue name as opposed to knowing I would only be joining the ranks of 20 other motherfuckers, some of whom I think are wack.

As time goes on, there will be more and more blue titleholders. If these titles are permanent, this will naturally diminish its value. Some days when I log on here, it seems like there are five blue names currently online out of only seven active members. That's a problem!

I think LB as a whole needs to have more of a "what have you done for me lately" mentality with regards to a lot of things, but particularly with regards to who we give props to or hold in certain esteem. It will make this place a whole lot more competitive. Cats win a blue name and feel like they don't have to do nothing else. Haven't you guys noticed that people usually become less active after winning a grand championship? If we put more emphasis on honoring the latest and greatest, people will strive to be that. It would make us more forward-looking as opposed to backwards looking.

i agree with noble as for the blue titles as a compromise, but tbh making all titles exclusive would make me want to battle again to reclaim another.

I doubt many people will want to climb that ladder to have nothing to show for it when it's all said and done

Reset the all time rankings x20 before you take away titles

They'll have things to show for it. Trophies are permanent and their wins will be documented in a champions history section. If we do this now and get rid of all the GC titles except the last winner, I guarantee you the next GC will be 10 times more competitive!

Agree.. at this point few new things have been implemented and the site is stagnant. What's wrong with trying a different approach to the titles?

Not that I don't respect some of y'all opinions, but the folks saying take away all the titles, most of em don't battle or barely battle at all. You can find most of the names supporting the other side in nearly every single tournament, a couple of whom said change would affect them personally. Interchangeable titles have a lot more potential as RULE is starting to prove with THC. An overhaul of that system to include a scheme, tag team, etc champ would prolly be the way to go. But at this point? The best battles and highest activity levels mostly come from usertitle tournies....changing the most popular aspect of the site prolly will get mixed reviews at best.

I can only speak personally, but this change would hinder my motivation to continue entering tournies.

^ everyone who currently battles undoubtedly feel the same

I guarantee you it won't be competitive cuz the best dude on the site won't be in it lol :grass::high: Let's reset the all time rankings tho

Put it to a vote that only people with titles can vote on. The people that want them wiped are basically all people that have never obtained one. Why should they even get a say in this! Me included

this pls.

The only people that want this are people with no titles? I guess people totally missed Illokwent and Erupt saying this is a good idea. And saying the only people that want this are people who don't currently battle is grabbing at straws. It's almost an ad hominem, arguing against the person making the argument rather than striking at the argument itself and what is supposedly wrong with it. Yes, I don't battle often and don't have any titles. But that has nothing to do with why I'm suggesting erasing permanent titles. It comes from thinking about what would make this place a lot more competitive and give titles a lot more prestige. Personally, this would make me want to battle again and seek a title and I know I'm not the only one.
If I had won a GC years ago and every time I logged on I still see my name in blue, I would feel like there's nothing else to accomplish, i've already reached and I'm still at the pinnacle. However, if I no longer have it because I didn't defend it in a subsequent GC and the site crowned a new top dog, the competitor in me would feel the urge to prove I'm still the top dog and knock off the new cat. It wouldn't hinder my interest at all, but that's just me.
As far as resetting the all-time rankings, it wouldn't make any sense unless we first come up with an alternative for what rankings are based on. Right now, they are based on battling activity. Macc is at number 1 or 2 because he drops a shitload of battles, not necessarily because he's the hardest. If we simply reset it and leave the same criteria, we'd only end up with the same thing.

And make streaks expire after a period of inactivity

This would be a good idea too. Sometimes getting those flames make people too afraid to battle and risk losing them.

1/

It's not really an argument against you as much as it is your opinion that it would bolster activity. If the active people are saying it would make them less active, we are already assured of seeing less activity if a change goes into place. We have no confirmation at all though that it would make anyone else actually battle more.

What's the end game here? To inspire the Erupt's and Illokwent's and other champs of the past to come back to battling? Maybe it will work with a couple but just like tons of folks come outta the woodwork for the GC they'll eventually leave again because there's a reason most of em are inactive to begin with. Why would you want to alienate those who are currently active for the sake of trying to light a fire underneath those that have obviously moved on?

. At this point you are assuming that those that say they won't be thrilled with defensible titles and won't have the motivation to participate is a fair assumption but still speculative... There has to be a reason why @NOBLE would even concieve this narrative in the first place.. it's because activity is still weak ATM, and he is proactively thinking of something DIFFERENT AND REFRESHING.not the same old tried and true formula that everyone's grown accustomed to and tired of . face facts people keep complaining they want new stuff, yet when someone puts out something that actually would be fun and different, it takes someone out of their comfort zone.. trust me, activity will not diminish, because frankly it ain't that great now, but can only get better. And those that say they'll not battle are full of shit, because at the end of the day, this is still the best structured battle site and their competitive spirit will prevail..you need to have more faith in trying something different.. @NOBLE when your ready to do this yank all my titles, I may have to come out of retirement to show these yungins how it's done again