Devil You Know PVP information from S4 and beyond plus other comments

Avalanche Kincaid

I don't know why they can't extend the cp beyond the top 10.  Cl7 top 25 get 10cp, Cl8 top 25 get 13cp.  It's less then before, but better then the big bagel we get now after 11th place.  First pvp I got top 10 and below 1200 thanks to a good bracket.  Second pvp I got 15th and above 1500.  How is that fair in both cases?  Just remove the bracket placement and give rewards based on number of participants.  Top 2 percent big cp prize, top 5 percent little cp prize, everyone else the big bagel prize.

elvy75

i compiled some data for few s5 brackets. From what i was told there were about 12 Cl8 and 7 CL7 brackets. I dont know their flip order so i will just write as i got info:

5.7.1 
t1 - 1367
t5 - 1293
t10 - 1244
no one else over 1200

5.7.2 
t1 - 1439
t5 - 1316
t10 - 1130

5.7.3 (mine)
t1 - 1398
t5 - 1340
t10 - 1299
t11 - 1238 (last to get to 1200)

5.8.1
t1 - 1360
t5 - 1212
t10 - 1074

5.8.2
t1 - 1474
t5 - 1374
t10 - 1145

5.8.3 
t1 - 1422
t5 - 1241
t10 - 1130

Lucifier

@elvy75
add to the S5.8 series:

5.8.4
t1 - 1538
t5 - 1281
t7 - 1210
t10 - 1064

Sandmaker

Vhailorx said:

Sandmaker said:

Bowgentle said:

Sandmaker said:

TLDR: Mathematically, using this data, the player base as a whole gained more CP from the PVP Wins Change than they lost. 

Only if you assume that everyone who now gets the 4* cover and didn't make it to 900 before is in the very high end of 4* rewards already, which I highly doubt.

Apart from the 1/10 LT your calculations only start coming into effect past 320, and I don't think the whole playerbase has every 4* char at that level.

The first 50 or so champ levels are worth next to nothing.

If you want to make that kind of assumptions, then we need to start talking about people who value 4* covers at 20 CP, because that's what they're pulling classics for.

Tell me, sand, how many 5* covers came from your hypothetical CP gained.

Since they are all simulated cp based on cover acquisitions, the answer is zero, right?

It's not hypothetical or simulated. This would be the LT and CP rewards you will be getting for championing those 4* covers.

So you will be getting 5* when you use those rewards.

Justice Jacks

aesthetocyst said:

FWIW my bracket had 10 players at or above 1200. IIRC. I was #10, and just over 1200 ... I think, kept going back and forth.

Anyway, at least 1 SCL 8 bracket was unaffected by this change.

Alternatively, in my bracket, #11 had 3,996 and #20 was at 2251, so . . . 

Sandmaker

Stax the Foyer said:

Just so we're clear, the minimum value, in CP, of a 4* cover is 0.  Because there are people who don't have some 4*s champed.

Like I mentioned before. If you want to complicate the analysis by including these people, then we need to start including the people who are looking to pull these 4* (20 CP) or targeting these 4* specifically (120 CP).

The truth of the matter is that 5 CP for a 4* would be an absolute steal. If there was a store for where you can buy a 4* cover for 5 CP, it would break the game.  

Daredevil217

While interesting, I don't think these numbers tell us much because we are in a new system with new goals, a new meta, etc.  I know for me, I have been easily able to climb to 900 unshielded under this new system and see less retals despite using weaker teams.  Maybe because I'm entering right at the beginning rather than the middle or end, maybe because more people are playing this system than the old one (so scores are inflated), but I'm seeing higher scores across the board that probably wouldn't be there under the old system.  I have yet to experience the "I'm a match away from 900- only to lose 300 points upon completion of a match" in this system because people are playing with different agendas.  Higher level rosters are probably getting hit less and climbing higher because whereas before I might try punching up for that 75 point payoff, now the points don't matter and I can just press skip and take the easier match.

Basically, there is a lot unaccounted for in the very very very small sample size of numbers that are being reported, and it is hard to draw any sort of conclusions based on them.

BoyWonder1914

My 5.8 Scores (Joined with 1 Day, 5 Hours left)

Top 10

#1 - 1448
#2 - 1357
#3 - 1296
#4 - 1281
#5 - 1279
#6 - 1209
#7 - 1161
#8 - 1051
#9 - 1042
#10 - 1012

Top 11-25

#11 - 1002
#12 - 955
#13 - 952
#14 - 948
#15 - 928
#16 - 910 (Myself)
#17 - 898
#18 - 887
#19 - 868
#20 - 866
#21 - 847
#22 - 847
#23 - 842
#24 - 831
#25 - 810


Unfortunately I couldn't scroll down far enough to see the difference between T25 and the #26 score, but I honestly feel that that was a very accurate depiction of what Slice 5 - Clearance Level 8 was like before the change as far as top 10 was concerned. I made sure to call out when I joined, because I practically never join with the full 2 days+ left. So I'm assuming I'm always in the first or second flip of that slice & clearance level, with people who have similar attitudes. Before the change, 1200 was a very close guarantee for t5, but it was definitely a shoo-in for T10. 1000 was also generally a very sure bet of T10, though sometimes more contested depending on the placement reward. Never though, in the history of the time that I've been playing this slice and clearance level, has scoring 900+ not been at least t25. Things are even more lax now after the change, though it's important to consider that this is the last slice, so there's probably a lot of people that weren't really trying to push too hard to begin with. A lot of the more savvy vets in my alliance migrated from slice 5 to slice 1, apparently because of a lot of snipers. Could be that of lot of other vets did the same thing, so there's other factors to consider I'm sure. Still, don't feel much of a change. I only bothered with 40 wins this time around because of the Nightcrawler cover. 

Sandmaker

aesthetocyst said:

Sandmaker said:

If you want to make that kind of assumptions, then we need to start talking about people who value 4* covers at 20 CP, because that's what they're pulling classics for.

...
adding low champ levels. They aren't anywhere near lvl 320 on any given 4*.
...

No, if you did the math you would actually see that your argument is not true. The early 10 levels are actually very high value CP wise.

Here is the actual cumulative average CP value for each cover level 271-280:

Champ Level | Total CP Earned to Point | Average CP Value of Covers to Point 

Lvl 271 | 25 | 25

Lvl 272 | 27 | 13.5

Lvl 273 | 27 | 9

Lvl 274 | 29 | 7.25

Lvl 275 | 29 | 5.8

Lvl 276 | 31 | 5.17

Lvl 277 | 31 | 4.43

Lvl 278 | 33 | 4.13

Lvl 279 | 58 | 6.44

Lvl 280 | 58 | 5.8

You can see that for the large majority of this, the value of each cover is higher than 5, with none of them falling below 4.

Vhailorx

Sandmaker said:

aesthetocyst said:

Sandmaker said:

If you want to make that kind of assumptions, then we need to start talking about people who value 4* covers at 20 CP, because that's what they're pulling classics for.

...
adding low champ levels. They aren't anywhere near lvl 320 on any given 4*.
...

No, if you did the math you would actually see that your argument is not true. The early 10 levels are actually very high value CP wise.

Here is the actual cumulative average CP value for each cover level 271-280:

Champ Level | Total CP Earned to Point | Average CP Value of Covers to Point 

Lvl 271 | 25 | 25

Lvl 272 | 27 | 13.5

Lvl 273 | 27 | 9

Lvl 274 | 29 | 7.25

Lvl 275 | 29 | 5.8

Lvl 276 | 31 | 5.17

Lvl 277 | 31 | 4.43

Lvl 278 | 33 | 4.13

Lvl 279 | 58 | 6.44

Lvl 280 | 58 | 5.8

You can see that for the large majority of this, the value of each cover is higher than 5, with none of them falling below 4.

Even if, for the sake if argument, i conceded the average cp value of a 4* cover, you are still ignoring transferability and costs thresholds.  Cp is cp.  If you have it then you can use it however you like (direct buy covers, buy LTs, buy classics, hoard indefinitely for speciality tokens).  A 4* cover is only useful (for your simulated cp value purposes) if you have already rostered and champed the 4* in question (or can do so within 14 days).  That flexibility is a hidden factor that weighs pretty heavily against this most recent change.

Vhailorx

aesthetocyst said:

Sandmaker said:

[Continues to assert price = value]

Infomercials must LOVE you.

You can pay 25cp all day for LTs.

At no time will you average 25cp back from them.

If you had all 4*s rostered and champed to level 365, as well as all 3 latest 5*s rostered and champed to level 452, then your very next legendary token will return precisely 25cp.  But if you open a second one thereafter your expected average return will drop.

Jaedenkaal

Vhailorx said:
If you had all 4*s rostered and champed to level 365, as well as all 3 latest 5*s rostered and champed to level 452, then your very next legendary token will return precisely 25cp.  But if you open a second one thereafter your expected average return will drop.

You can't reasonably say that you've averaged 25 CP per cover, though. There's no way to get to that point for free.

Stax the Foyer

Sandmaker said:

Stax the Foyer said:

Just so we're clear, the minimum value, in CP, of a 4* cover is 0.  Because there are people who don't have some 4*s champed.

Like I mentioned before. If you want to complicate the analysis by including these people, then we need to start including the people who are looking to pull these 4* (20 CP) or targeting these 4* specifically (120 CP).

The truth of the matter is that 5 CP for a 4* would be an absolute steal. If there was a store for where you can buy a 4* cover for 5 CP, it would break the game.  

You're conflating value with CP received.  The price that people are forced to pay for a specific cover isn't indicative of actual value for that cover generally.  The 13th cover is immensely more valuable than the 15th, for example.

Regarding the other chart, the LT at 270 is what you get for your 14th cover, not your first.

Vhailorx

Jaedenkaal said:

Vhailorx said:
If you had all 4*s rostered and champed to level 365, as well as all 3 latest 5*s rostered and champed to level 452, then your very next legendary token will return precisely 25cp.  But if you open a second one thereafter your expected average return will drop.

You can't reasonably say that you've averaged 25 CP per cover, though. There's no way to get to that point for free.

I was offering an intentionally absurd example as a joke.

Doc L

Some data from my shard (may have been posted already, apologies if so), 1.8 for NC PvP:

1. 2580
...
10. 1523
...
14. 1249
15. 1197 (arguably he’d have gone to 1200 if it were still a thing).
...
20. 1008

Full disclosure, I was 9th with 1632. 4, arguably 5, people missed out on the Cp in this shard/CL.

Sandmaker

aesthetocyst said:

Sandmaker said:

[Continues to assert price = value]

Infomercials must LOVE you.

You can pay 25cp all day for LTs.

At no time will you average 25cp back from them.

I have never said you can get an average 25 cp back from a cover. I noted very clearly in my initial post that a cover does not return the full CP value. But you can on average get around 5 cp back from them.

You seem to keep ignoring (perhaps intentionally, I can't tell) that there is an actual a Cover->CP conversion system via the champion system.

This is not some price vs value argument. You can quite literally trade covers for CP in this game. It is a function in the game. Every champion you own can be used to serve this purpose.

*Edit* Thinking about it, I see what you're saying. You're arguing that LT should be treated with the same level of CP deprecation as covers. E.g. They are worth less than their initial cost. That is probably true. 

Justice Jacks

Sandmaker said:

Stax the Foyer said:

Just so we're clear, the minimum value, in CP, of a 4* cover is 0.  Because there are people who don't have some 4*s champed.

Like I mentioned before. If you want to complicate the analysis by including these people, then we need to start including the people who are looking to pull these 4* (20 CP) or targeting these 4* specifically (120 CP).

The truth of the matter is that 5 CP for a 4* would be an absolute steal. If there was a store for where you can buy a 4* cover for 5 CP, it would break the game.  

What???  For 113 covers you earn an average of <4.5 CP/cover (if you convert LTs to 25CP for calculation).  And you only really start to escalate into that range in your last 20-30 covers. For the first 80+ covers, you average below 3CP per cover and are at 2 or less until about 50 covers.

Now, to put this in perspective, playing PVP without earning the CP, but getting the 4 star cover (and if we assume no new 4-star releases), you'll reach 50 covers per character in 966 weeks.  So sure, in 18.5 years your roster will be advanced enough that you can begin to average above 2 CP per cover.  

But here's the good news, you'll never develop your roster sufficiently to secure the CP from t10.  Because, as has been hammered on here repeatedly, while you're building your can't-secure-t10 roster with just 4s, those already in the t10 are pulling away from your with both 4s and CP.  And other than buying a Stark (in a full buy club) every 2 weeks or so, there is no way for you to get out of that death spiral.

And to answer your store question, and because LTs aren't actually CP, you'd be spending 565CP on covers to return 255 actual CP and 10 LTs--meaning you spent 310CP for 10 LTs or 31CP for a 25 CP token.  Now you did end up ahead on HP and behind on ISO also, and you'd have a 370 character so that's not bad.  But you'd be a buffoon to spend 5 CP per 4 star cover and consider yourself further along in the game.  Your 5-star transition has gotten further away, not closer.  And you're not considering the opportunity costs that you've sacrificed CP and 4-star covers at some point during this period when your roster would have been big enough to have consistently scored 1200 and also compete for placement (with extra covers being the rewards).

There is literally no way to use math to prove that this PVP change is actually better for the 4-star player.  It will help new players catch up to the 4-star players, and allow 5-stars to pull further away from 4 stars.       

Stax the Foyer

Justice Jacks said:

What???  For 113 covers you earn an average of <4.5 CP/cover (if you convert LTs to 25CP for calculation).  And you only really start to escalate into that range in your last 20-30 covers. For the first 80+ covers, you average below 3CP per cover and are at 2 or less until about 50 covers.

Sandmaker's analysis ignores the 0 CP return on the first 13 covers to get the 5 CP "average."

Justice Jacks

Stax the Foyer said:

Sandmaker's analysis ignores the 0 CP return on the first 13 covers to get the 5 CP "average."

Well that, and many other things. 

GrumpySmurf1002

elvy75 said:

i compiled some data for few s5 brackets. From what i was told there were about 12 Cl8 and 7 CL7 brackets. I dont know their flip order so i will just write as i got info:

5.7.1 
t1 - 1367
t5 - 1293
t10 - 1244
no one else over 1200

5.7.2 
t1 - 1439
t5 - 1316
t10 - 1130

5.7.3 (mine)
t1 - 1398
t5 - 1340
t10 - 1299
t11 - 1238 (last to get to 1200)

5.7.4
1st - 1501
5th - 1389
10th - 1333
13th - 1233 (last to 1200)