Maybe there should be a minimum no. of DMs for someone to be ranked? The rankings are small so perhaps 2 or 3? This could be used to combat inactivity and/or match fixing.

Maybe when you apply you have to do your first DM in your application topic so we don't get any people on the list with 0 points?

Yes, like fight club... you must fight on your first night haha

 

but yeah eventually if DMR does get somewhat more active say 50+ regulars theres bound to be some match fixing....hey maddest let me kill you i'll get 10 points! i'll lend you my rune plate for 24 hrs!!

Yes, like fight club... you must fight on your first night haha

 

but yeah eventually if DMR does get somewhat more active say 50+ regulars theres bound to be some match fixing....hey maddest let me kill you i'll get 10 points! i'll lend you my rune plate for 24 hrs!!

 

Lol

Yes, like fight club... you must fight on your first night haha

 

but yeah eventually if DMR does get somewhat more active say 50+ regulars theres bound to be some match fixing....hey maddest let me kill you i'll get 10 points! i'll lend you my rune plate for 24 hrs!!

 

Lol

 

Oh gosh... :lol:

 

Maybe when you apply you have to do your first DM in your application topic so we don't get any people on the list with 0 points?

 

The thing with this, is what about you fight in your first DM and you lose. You would have already fought but still be at 0 points and I think they should be on the list for they wish to have fought and have, just still don't have any points.

 

 

 

And the point was brought up about fixing matches, and I haven't really thought that far into it. I don't know if there is a full proof method to solve an issue such as this, except for X amount of points earned from one participant per month or whatever cap you want to put on.

 

 

 

Thanks for the suggestions guys!