A new rank name system has been implemented. These are based off your position in the Rankings (http://www.wargear.net/rankings/show) and are bracketed as follows:

• 5 Star General (rank 1)
• General (ranks 2-4)
• Lieutenant General (ranks 5-14)
• Major General (ranks 15-34)
• Brigadier General (ranks 35-74)
• Colonel (ranks 75-124)
• Major (ranks 125-200)
• Captain (ranks 201-300)
• Lieutenant (ranks 301-400)
• Private (everyone else!)

You should get instant notifications when progressing up and down the ranks.

More changes to come shortly... stay tuned! As usual, any problems please report here.

Oh and huge thanks to Raptor for the rank image designs 

haha.  Tom is just a private.

DROP AND GIVE ME 20 MAGGOT!

j/k - you should make yourself "Commander in Chief" or something.

Hang on a second....I can do that.

Tom, check the Google Drive.  

Small aesthetic issue, but I feel like there needs to be more space between our user names and the rank insignia in these forum posts.

yay for Colonels! lol Nobody will play me in Bomb Factory!!!

just my 2 cents : D

Ras

I've gotta say, this ranking/achievement system has me interested in getting some games going again! It's great!

Very Awesome!

Minor thing, but on the Profile Page, the Rank text is White even on Work Mode which means it's on a White background.

Also, is there any way in which Highest Rank achieved could be kept?  Might be cool as new blood comes in and takes over.

Ozyman wrote:

Small aesthetic issue, but I feel like there needs to be more space between our user names and the rank insignia in these forum posts.

Think you should just need a manual refresh (F5) to update the forum style sheet. I'll update to get around this.

Yertle wrote:

Also, is there any way in which Highest Rank achieved could be kept?  Might be cool as new blood comes in and takes over.

+1 - Had the same thought -

Does it make sense to introduce non-commissioned ranks for everyone below 400? That way everyone could be a part of the system.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army_enlisted_rank_insignia ;


Also, I have to say, it feels a bit unnatural to have the ranks associated with the position in the ranking. On moste websites these types of badges are used for achievements. For example the private rank could be assigned to absolute newbies, and after your first win you are promoted to private first class, and receiving your first championship point would make you an officer, and being top-ranked on one board could make you a general? Something like that, with a proper progression in between those cornerstones. 

How many people are ranked #1 on five boards or more? 

I like the idea of continuous promotion/demotion.

Just jotting down ideas here... I like the basic idea of ranks very much!!

Amidon37 wrote:

Yertle wrote:

Also, is there any way in which Highest Rank achieved could be kept?  Might be cool as new blood comes in and takes over.

+1 - Had the same thought -

This is being tracked now, I just need a way to display it.

Lol, I just realized "I am the very model of a modern Major-General..."  

Raptor wrote:

Hang on a second....I can do that.

Tom, check the Google Drive.  

Sweet!

What's the difference between Rank and # in the Global Ranking. I'm #85 in this, but not a Colonel? (Instead a Seargeant, which is not mentioned in the list above)

The rank your given, Sergeant is based on the number of Championship Points you have, not your Global Ranking score.  

So in the CP your #401, and your global ranking is #85.  Impressive. 

It's not true yet, but I have a sneaky suspicion the next thing to happen will be the creation of an amalgamated score that takes into account all of our different scores, and then our ranks will be based on that. 

ratsy wrote:

The rank your given, Sergeant is based on the number of Championship Points you have, not your Global Ranking score.  

So in the CP your #401, and your global ranking is #85.  Impressive. 

It's not true yet, but I have a sneaky suspicion the next thing to happen will be the creation of an amalgamated score that takes into account all of our different scores, and then our ranks will be based on that. 

+1 Agree that rank should be based on an amalgamation of some sort based on GR, CP, Team, Tournament, and even a roving H ranking.  It seems entirely redundant to me to have it based on CP alone.

berickf wrote:

ratsy wrote:

The rank your given, Sergeant is based on the number of Championship Points you have, not your Global Ranking score.  

So in the CP your #401, and your global ranking is #85.  Impressive. 

It's not true yet, but I have a sneaky suspicion the next thing to happen will be the creation of an amalgamated score that takes into account all of our different scores, and then our ranks will be based on that. 

+1 Agree that rank should be based on an amalgamation of some sort based on GR, CP, Team, Tournament, and even a roving H ranking.  It seems entirely redundant to me to have it based on CP alone.

+1 Oh boy, here we go again..  Aggregate has been discussed before. Consensus is another matter.

ratsy wrote:

The rank your given, Sergeant is based on the number of Championship Points you have, not your Global Ranking score.  

So in the CP your #401, and your global ranking is #85.  Impressive. 

It's not true yet, but I have a sneaky suspicion the next thing to happen will be the creation of an amalgamated score that takes into account all of our different scores, and then our ranks will be based on that. 

-1

Not without a fight.

Okay, easy tigers.  That was just speculation. 

ratsy wrote:

Okay, easy tigers.  That was just speculation.