Hmm. I'll try to help you brainstorm Rilla. What did you have in mind so far?

Really it's mostly deciding on how the ranks will work, either player or character based, then deciding on how people progress in rank, either beating the player above them or by a point system. I'm a fan of the point system, and player based system, but it's a group decision.

Player ranks can be coded into the system I think to display under the names like statuses or bios, and would not require keeping track of win/losses of every character you use - something we can add to the characters ourselves.

The point system was used on Hall of Records, and worked Well. It's simple but IN, I think raised a good point about just beating the top guy to advance. We could do it like the Seguleh in the Malazan series, but I don't know if you switch rank or just move one down. I imagine the latter.

Another thing to consider is the judging, if any, for a ranked fight. That should be simple enough, however. As well as win methods and losses. Forfeit, death, surrender.

Rilla. The Hall of Records and the tournaments associated with it ranked fighters by their win/loss record. It kept the top rank fighters continually fighting and led to epic fights between them.

Which is why it's an example and something I want to emulate.

I think the Win/Loss system based on Player is a good way to do it. Early on I imagine there being a lot of movement, but over a long period of time I think people will seperate from the pack and be at the top with others scrambling below. It could lead to things being stagnant.

Versus say, a Win/Loss based on character. Then at least certain characters could be retired after a time and allow for others to come in and fill the gap. Maybe something like a Hall of Fame?

Just brainstorming.

I vote for keeping track of character ranking in the challenge thread and the player ranking could just be under the username if they can do that. Stealing the spot would be too much so perhaps you just go up one spot for a victory and switch with the one above you.

I'm fine with that. It works even if we don't go with a ranking. I would.prefer to go with a ranking system, but there are inherent problems with it.

The two people above thing would be helpful, in making sure there aren't in high jumps in rank, and MIA people could be shuffled down or skipped it they aren't around. It would also stop people from challenging lower level people for easy win/point upkeep.

Stealing spots wouldn't be bad to me. If we nix the two people deal, and say I beat #1 Skally them understandably I should be #1 and he #2. It could keep thefights going and going as people vie for spots.

I would like yo add that player rankings should only count for 1 fight at a time least it.get too confusing. Especially with points. Unless predetermined wagers are listed.

So are we drifting more towards establish a player ranking system?

Just to make sure I am understanding right.

The fight will be based purely off wins and losses then?

Not taking into account writing skill, creativity, or anything else?

I'm not saying we should or shouldn't do the above. Just want to make sure I am on the same page as everyone else.

Just to make sure I am understanding right.

The fight will be based purely off wins and losses then?

Not taking into account writing skill, creativity, or anything else?

I'm not saying we should or shouldn't do the above. Just want to make sure I am on the same page as everyone else.

Ideally writing ability and creativity and the like would yield wins/losses. Assuming all matches are judged.

I don't understand your question. We aren't talking about the fight rather the ranking system which should be based off wins/losses for player.Fights are always judged with writing as a prime criteria.

Most of my battles has just been to win rather than having judges who vote on writing ability. I assume the player ranking would be judged fights with all that criteria, so you could be #1 and loose countless fights in terms of your character getting killed off. The character ranking would take into account their actual win/loses while player ranking cares about how you win with the point system. That way you can play a lot of horrible fighting characters yet still not have it ruin your player ranking, it would just reflect in that character loosing fights in the character ranking. Of course winning the fight would contribute some points from judges, but if you're skilled you could still win the fight with a weaker character who dies at the end.

I. . .what? How can losing, no matter what character you use not affect your ranking? Did I miss something?

You said writing is the prime criteria for judging fights. Your character can meet his maker in a horrific explosion and still win the fight if that's the case because there are judges to vote on how well both sides did. If it's just about your character winning the fight then there doesn't need to be judges looking at criteria to know who won.

Well clearly if you win outright there is no judging. Judges only come into play to resolve disputes. You should be trying to win a fight. If it comes down to a judgement it will come down to how clearly and logically you write.

That makes sense now and fine by me. It would be cool if you could win in an awesome explosion, but that's besides the point now.

I see there being two trains of thought here.

1. The Win/Loss for Characters, and then that characters standing.

2. How well you write as a player, and awarded points for that. Therefore, there is a ranking system.

Personally, I don't care if I win or loose as long as the writing is good and both people have fun. So, while some are more concerned about their characters prowess and that record, others like myself care more about writing quality.

That's not to say that they are mutually exclusive. The best writers could very well have the best win/lost ratio. But, this way people could bring less than optimal combat characters and still get award points (or something) for their writing skill.

Then you could simply go back to having the three tiers of characters that were mentioned earlier; Normal, Enhanced and Powered I believe. Then have a different set of criteria for writing, which could be decided on later. Maybe even have peers grade eachother, someone not fighting? Not sure on that one.

Ohey, an old face and burst of activity.

Howdy Koka. This is not my doing. . .Rilla managed to summon me back with this thread. I am content watching fighters where ever I find them.

Rilla. That dojo idea you mentioned. Those only work with patient and skilled instructors. . . And people willing to learn.

I see there being two trains of thought here.

1. The Win/Loss for Characters, and then that characters standing.

2. How well you write as a player, and awarded points for that. Therefore, there is a ranking system.

Personally, I don't care if I win or loose as long as the writing is good and both people have fun. So, while some are more concerned about their characters prowess and that record, others like myself care more about writing quality.

That's not to say that they are mutually exclusive. The best writers could very well have the best win/lost ratio. But, this way people could bring less than optimal combat characters and still get award points (or something) for their writing skill.

Then you could simply go back to having the three tiers of characters that were mentioned earlier; Normal, Enhanced and Powered I believe. Then have a different set of criteria for writing, which could be decided on later. Maybe even have peers grade eachother, someone not fighting? Not sure on that one.

I've never understood why people insist on judging the characters. Judging, if any, should reflect the persons playing the characters. That's what moreso determined battles. And any ranking system should have judged battles.

As for the ranking system, would anyone consider more of a point-based system? I can't remember if the guild has ever used something like it, but me and a friend once put together the workings for a system that set point values to arena matches, and the players were awarded points based on their performance.

I can go into finer detail on that if it interests anyone.