HTAG said: ^We wanted to rank as many players as we could accurately list, and 14 just happened to be that number. 15 was too far from 14 and not well-earned. Click to expand...

The first half of this statement does not follow the same logic as the second lolYou're right that there's a big dropoff but it still seems a bit silly to me not to assign somebody gatekeeper status and go with 15 as originally stated. Although I suppose choosing 15 as the cutoff is equally arbitrary. People just like multiples of 5 I guess. Did you get a clear 15th in voting or did you just cut off voting above 15th to begin with? If voting did happen, should give 15th to whoever got it or have tied contenders play for the spot or something imo. It's encouraging to people sub-14 to see 15th as somebody they can potentially beat; I never liked PRs with only 10 people because they seem way far out of reach to lower folks.Or it should be Top 10 even despite that just for the sake of having a number that makes sense. What's gonna happen if somebody on the list starts losing consistently to everybody else on the list, is the PR gonna shrink to 13 spots? There needs to be a firm number cutoff rather than a subjective one based on approximate skill gaps at the time of the PR-making.All I'm sayin' is I expect a 15th spot to magically appear if somebody lower ****s somebody higher up this Saturday hue hue hue