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

Hadronic

this is so easily solved

We move cp back into progression, put it at something stupid, like 60 wins.

Hybrid the 2 systems together.

10cp given out at 16 wins, or 575 points (whichever happens first)
3* given out at 28 wins, or 800 points (whichever happens first)
4* given out at 40 wins, or 900 points (whichever happens first)
25cp given out at 60 wins, or 1200 points (whichever happens first)


Best of both worlds, and has the advantage that you will see yourself progress as you get the same rewards at less wins as you get stronger.

3* players probably would have to play all 40 matches to get the 4*
4* players probably only play like 25 matches to get the 4*

Beer40

Apologies if someone already posted this.

Slice 5, CL 8, unknown bracket

Top: 1422
6th: 1219
7-10: Under 1,200

Maybe they really are trying to space you slice 4 people out?

 Also, pretty sure that these scores can't reflect much of anything accurate now. Case in point, a few "high scorers" move to this slice/CL and start racking up big points and you may see all those under 1,200s rise to meet the challenge. They didn't this event because they didn't need to. Its a thought anyway.

Which brings me to my next thought: I simply think they only want to give out CP to the top 10 in each bracket. Whether that is more or less than before, we'll never likely know...and they know that. They could care less if 30 people go over 1,200 in one bracket now. They have a fixed amount of people for this resource and that is that.

The rockett

Beer40 said:

Apologies if someone already posted this.

Slice 5, CL 8, unknown bracket

Top: 1422
6th: 1219
7-10: Under 1,200

Maybe they really are trying to space you slice 4 people out?

 Also, pretty sure that these scores can't reflect much of anything accurate now. Case in point, a few "high scorers" move to this slice/CL and start racking up big points and you may see all those under 1,200s rise to meet the challenge. They didn't this event because they didn't need to. Its a thought anyway.

Which brings me to my next thought: I simply think they only want to give out CP to the top 10 in each bracket. Whether that is more or less than before, we'll never likely know...and they know that. They could care less if 30 people go over 1,200 in one bracket now. They have a fixed amount of people for this resource and that is that.

Here is the issue as I said before.  S2/3/4 have the least amount of players.   S1/5 have always had the most.  this is because people will select 1 since it is the first one they see.  S5 is because it ends last.  PVE is almost the same way.  S2 PVE is the slowest bracket to flip.  It isn't about spacing.  Its about the number of people that play at a high level compared to the number of people that paly casual.  The one time I was in S1 a few months ago, they had 13 SL8 Brackets.  That is insane compared to the 4-6 S4 has.  Also, yes we know a lot of this data because we track this data. 

Justice Jacks

Blindman13 said:

Bowgentle said:

Dual system - EITHER points or wins would do it.
But they didn't even think of testing that.

I've seen this suggested many times. They probably did think about it for about 2 seconds because that's all it took for them to realize how complicated and problematic that would be for them to implement.
While this would theoretically be a decent compromise for the players, the thought of trying to retrofit this into the current code, and then explain all of it to a new player sounds like a nightmare.
This also wouldn't solve the OP's main complaint: moving CP out of progression and into placement. 

It's a simple retrofit, actually.  Release CL9 and make it purely points based, not wins based.  CL8 should already function that way.  If you want a 4 star cover for 40 wins, play CL7.  If you want progression to be win based, play CL7 and below and if you want points based, play CL8 or 9.  Hybrid might be difficult but this would not.

WelcomeDeath

alaeth said:

Seems to be working just fine...  Those that "have" are getting T10, making it even easier to widen the gap from the "have-nots" (4* and 5* transition players in scl6+).

/sarcasm




Waiting for @Welcome Death to post on how this can be spun as "more people are getting cp".

I dont see how they're not, but I could be wrong.  First of all, this data set is still only s4, where way too many people got cp before anyway.  To get a really balanced result there should have been data included from other shards as well.  Some of it was provided in the original thread, and any missing data could have easily been gathered via Line.  Rickety knows enough people on there.  Hell, *I* saw all kinds of brackets on Line and nobody likes me!  S2 and s5 saw at least a 50-70% *increase * in people getting cp/bracket.  That's not included.
Furthermore, I get not wanting to include scl1-4 because thats less cp.  (To be fair, those brackets saw 100% increase in people getting cp!  )
However, not wanting to include cl5 and cl6 because there isnt a 4* in progression is really just a way to dispose of data that goes against the point youre trying to prove.  If cp isnt as good because people get 1 more 4* cover, then you also can't include anyone that placed below t1 in cl7 and below t5 in cl8.  They got one less 4* cover so their cp isnt as good!  That being said, I can say with pretty high confidence that exactly the same amount of people got cp and their 4* covers in cl7 t1 and cl8 top 5.  So there's really no loss....but I guess no gain either.   So I was mistaken, no more people got cp than they got before.  You're right 

The rockett

@Welcome Death. First. LOL. Second, yes I have people PMing me bracket info from other slices.  I am trying to add some of this in as well. Most I have asked to comment on each thread since I was busy at the time. If you want to send me detailed SS of S5, then do it.  I will try and add it in to my excel sheet. I have heard other slices have changed their game play to lower scores even more then what they were at one time. So does that mean the 84 players that missed from s4, not incudling 1/3, where spread out to 2/5?  I don't know that answer. Nobody does except D3/Demi unless we have the data to truly show the data. The question is simple, Do you trust D3/Demi to tell us the truth on this if and when they ever do?  For me, it's a No. No I do not trust them unless their data is broke down so we can truly see it. 

WelcomeDeath

The rockett said:

@Welcome Death. First. LOL. Second, yes I have people PMing me bracket info from other slices.  I am trying to add some of this in as well. Most I have asked to comment on each thread since I was busy at the time. If you want to send me detailed SS of S5, then do it.  I will try and add it in to my excel sheet. I have heard other slices have changed their game play to lower scores even more then what they were at one time. So does that mean the 84 players that missed from s4, not incudling 1/3, where spread out to 2/5?  I don't know that answer. Nobody does except D3/Demi unless we have the data to truly show the data. The question is simple, Do you trust D3/Demi to tell us the truth on this if and when they ever do?  For me, it's a No. No I do not trust them unless their data is broke down so we can truly see it. 

Why on Earth would d3 or Demi be interested in sharing their own private data with the playerbase as a whole?  Why do we expect them to?  I certainly wouldn't if i were running the company.  It's not really any of our business what their engagement rates are, or how much stuff they're giving away to people that are specifically your friends.  They don't care that they're your friends.  They care how much money is rolling in and overall engagement rates.  Because it's a business and it pays the bills.
What is the whole purpose of this, anyway?  Do we think they didn't look at these numbers *before* making the change?  They knew exactly what they were doing, and I dont see any reason why they would go back on this because 84 of like 100,000 people who played an event are unsatisfied with their own personal results.  It is what it is.  We can adjust to the changes somehow, or quit....pretty much just like every other change that's ever happened. 

Stax the Foyer

You kind of answered the first paragraph with the second one, WD.  Of course they're not going to give us this information, so it's being crowdsourced.

Also, if they looked at the results from this season before this season started, it would be pretty impressive. 

The new structure incentivizes very different behavior than previous seasons.  Nearly everyone hitting T10 in CL5 didn't play a single event there last season, or maybe ever.  Many of the people getting T10 in S1, S2, and S5 may be people who moved there from other slices, which may become more pronounced as the season goes on.

In addition to being interesting data in and of itself, this could be helpful to people looking to adjust to the new normal.  The more information we have, the better.  If T10 is easier in S5, for example, more people might be interested in going there.