# Hey Kingmudd, I'm Calling You "Butch"!

IamTheBiggs
Posts:

**212**Tile Toppler
You can keep taking me down to gain 8-10 points per round, and I'll keep retaliating, beating your "superior" team and getting 25-30 points each time.

Can you say "diminishing returns"? I knew you could...

Can you say "diminishing returns"? I knew you could...

0

## Comments

427Mover and Shaker245Tile TopplerIt's not really ridiculous. They're both gaining 25-30 points, and losing 8-10, which just means they're injecting points into the economy. That's how it's designed to work. Otherwise, everyone would be passing the same 100 points around and no one would get anywhere.

212Tile TopplerAlso, Kingmudd is okay in my book. I'm just poking some fun using an old west euphimsm to start a conversation about retaliation and point totals (which seems to have worked).

Also, is there a limit to the number of times one can retaliate back-and-forth before the option to retaliate is no longer available witha particular opponent?

Since everyone starts at 0, the amount of points lost is probably about 80% of those gained by the winner. It is sort of a chess system where points are roughly something like

15 - 200 points below

20 - 100 points below

25 - same rank

30 - 100 points above

35 - 200 points above.

If you gain X points your opponent lost X points, but there's a modifier that softens the loss up to a certain point. It ceases being relevent at around the 700 range and is either nonexistent or not-verifiable at the 900+ range (even if it's causing you to lose 1 less point than expected, there's almost no way to verify that).