Leaderboard

https://www.mmatycoon.com/fighterprofilemanager.php?FID=403159 This fighter got his last fight which was missing from his fighting history back, but the fight does not have commentary and he still can't get booked by Organization manager, he is just not showing up on the list for booking even though he does not have fight under offer or fight coming.

Something funky going on with titles not changing hands. Until we know more this is likely to be a bug rather than something nefarious going on. The fight text in at least 3 bouts says they were for the championship but at the end of those fights there was no text about the title being retained or won. EDIT: I've reported this as a bug now on 5 fights in Highland to let Vlad or Mike investigate what's going on here.

Lately there were some short notice fight offers, not sure if that is because busy owner or managers being inactive so he has to scramble for alternates.

My understanding is that this is only kinda true in a roundabout way. I think besides the hidden age of decline, it's more to do with total skill points. The softcap for that is another hidden, but obviously faster learners tend to more likely be at their soft cap or close to it so faster learners tend to have more points before decline. Decline seems to be more severe for guys with a high total skillpoints. So say you believe the decline is done by a percentage, like you lose a tiny % every day when in decline, but this is somewhat propped up by training and sparring so it's not as noticeable in some skills or at all early on. Someone with maximum skill points (say 2700, which is definitely on the higher end) would lose more points total in raw numbers each day (and it'd be shaved off everything) than someone with a much lower points total (like 2200). Now I'm not saying it's definitely done by percentage or anything like that, but the proof is the relative longevity of specialist grapplers. My 43 year old grappler should definitely be in decline given his age, but he's dropped a total of 1 point (spread over all skills) in over 10 weeks. However, his total skill points are a relatively low amount, because he's got ONLY grappling and physical skills, and basically nothing at all in the others. Those skills though, are all 147+.... so basically 15++ including physicals. I have no idea how close this is to his actual overall softcap, but this trend of specialist grapplers (aka ones that don't also have a heap of points in striking stuff) being more immune to ageing seems to be fairly consistent and supports the idea that total skillpoints play a factor. This is one of the few reasons why people caution against oversparring early and also especially building 'spreaders'. Couple of misplaced training sessions here and there, and they're all points that go towards your softcap even if you're realistically not actually making use of any of those. It's much easier to go from 1 to 10 accidentally in a skill you aren't focusing on than 141 to 150 in a skill you care about, but it counts the same towards the skillpoint softcap. EDIT: But to address the original question, yes you have to train skills at least once every now and then (including physicals) otherwise it'll start to go down. Even if you don't see depops, it doesn't mean they're dropping due to lack of refreshment, it's just that he hasn't dropped below the threshold to depop. On creation with the max 110 points in a skill, you only JUST hit the wonderful mark, which is why even the slightest decline will show a depop

I was supporting you with that message. I do not intend to argue with you, no I am not a duplicate account of Mike. I’m sorry if we got off on the wrong foot, I underestimated the seriousness of this bug, I very much hope it is fixed soon. I have not called you names one time and do not intend you. I am sorry for arguing with you earlier in this thread, I respect your opinion as you are a much more experienced player than me.

Im 100% dedicated to My lil MILF baby right meow! Im here though bromigo!

trying to make the game better, why make it worse by adding Miami?

Suggestion: Benefits from holding titles Suggestions Description: Holding a belt doesn't really do much beyond the bragging rights. I think it would improve the game if there was some actual effect attached to it. Could be as simple as periodic S&W credits for title holders. Or create a few new random events with positive effect that will only happen for title holders. Such events could also make use of non-fighting skills like media training so you can reap even more benefits (for org or for yourself) if you have a title holder that is also a media personality. But ideally I would like something more advanced like hype gains over time for managers holding top titles. At the same time top 10 managers not holding a top title could lose hype to offset that gain. That would fit nicely into the architecture the game already has in that it could run as a periodic script. And you would still have the bragging rights. When I say top titles it should be determined by org hype. Holding a title in the top few orgs in the game should be worth more and have more hype impact. A hard cap on minimum org hype before any effects kick in can be used to avoid pushing new orgs into running title fights right away.. and also make the mechanic harder to exploit using fake orgs. The intended effect is: More competition for the belts themselves, make you WANT that title shot. Being a top 10 manager should be harder without success in any top org, some tie-in with Manager rank weighting. One possible side effect is some champions may not be in any hurry to take fights and risk losing their belt and perks that come with it. This is however one driver for player interaction and maybe also somewhat realistic. And it goes both ways, if you are being difficult as a champ it may also be more difficult to get future title shots. And there is the strip title option if someone becomes unreasonable so I think it should work out. Original thread from years ago: Pros: Make titles more desirable Cons: Could make managers more reluctant risking their titles