Strange Sights Placement

bbigler

Phumade said:

Why is this hard?

Its like your in a 30 kid class.  The teacher splits you all into 10 kid sections.

You can be the smartest kid in your section, and still be dumber than every other kid in the other 2 sections.


The groups don't have to be evenly mixed or split

I understand that, but after mixing up the sections 2 more times, it's unlikely that you're the smartest kid 3 times in a row, but still dumber overall.  Theoretically, there should be just as many people experiencing the reverse situation where they rank low in each sub, but rank high overall.  Most of what I'm seeing in this discussion is people complaining about ranking low overall, not higher than expected. 

bbigler

OJSP said:

The nodes actually have different values if we do them on day 1, 2 or 3. Furthermore, each branch has different clear times because of the type of opponents we face. So, if we pick the wrong sequence and we are slower on day 3 than we are on day 1, we would be gaining less points.

I didn't see any real time difference in playing the 3 different kinds of opponents. 

Twomp_thaDJ

OJSP said:

The nodes actually have different values if we do them on day 1, 2 or 3. Furthermore, each branch has different clear times because of the type of opponents we face. So, if we pick the wrong sequence and we are slower on day 3 than we are on day 1, we would be gaining less points.

So which doors do u pick to get the best score.. I would think it would be door 2 then door 1 and end with door 3?

crackninja

bbigler said:

Phumade said:

Why is this hard?

Its like your in a 30 kid class.  The teacher splits you all into 10 kid sections.

You can be the smartest kid in your section, and still be dumber than every other kid in the other 2 sections.


The groups don't have to be evenly mixed or split

I understand that, but after mixing up the sections 2 more times, it's unlikely that you're the smartest kid 3 times in a row, but still dumber overall.  Theoretically, there should be just as many people experiencing the reverse situation where they rank low in each sub, but rank high overall.  Most of what I'm seeing in this discussion is people complaining about ranking low overall, not higher than expected. 

You will never finish better overall than in your sub, it's not possible.  If you're the 5th best in your grouping, you either did better than everybody in the other two groupings and finish 5th overall (best case scenario), or at least one person did better than you and you finish 6th or worse in the overall ranking that determines final placement. 
So it's not even a factor of being in easy or tough groupings...except in very rare circumstances you will end up with a worse placement rank than you experienced in the individual subs.

Palookaville

I have a question about "Strange Sights" rankings also, and I am sure there is an explanation I am missing, so if you could tell we what it is, that would be lovely.

I entered the event very late on (with a few hours to go) and ended up 10th overall in my node (Orb of Agamotto) but overall in the event, I ended up 21st with 33,602 points. The top person overall had 41,757 points.

I'm confused how I can be 10th in a node but 21st overall. Do the different nodes (Agamottto, Vishamti and Watoomb) give out different points totals? I assumed they would be the same, but now that I think about it, is that correct?

Phumade

1Twomp_thaDJ said:

OJSP said:

The nodes actually have different values if we do them on day 1, 2 or 3. Furthermore, each branch has different clear times because of the type of opponents we face. So, if we pick the wrong sequence and we are slower on day 3 than we are on day 1, we would be gaining less points.

So which doors do u pick to get the best score.. I would think it would be door 2 then door 1 and end with door 3?

It doesn't matter.  The points change by day not by door.  So no matter what order you do the subs.  The points will allways be

day 1= whatever door you open
day 2 = 1.5* day 1 points.
day 3 = 2.0 * day 1 ponts.


So each day's potential points grows as some multiple of the 1st day's ponts.

People pick doors based on ease of play not amount of points

Phumade

bbigler said:

OJSP said:

The nodes actually have different values if we do them on day 1, 2 or 3. Furthermore, each branch has different clear times because of the type of opponents we face. So, if we pick the wrong sequence and we are slower on day 3 than we are on day 1, we would be gaining less points.

I didn't see any real time difference in playing the 3 different kinds of opponents. 

thats because you'r playing under scaled version of those opponents.   No one sees a time difference when they are killing 3 goons or 3 5* at level 50.  but rest assured, once they are scaled, you'll be very familiar with those differences.

Bulls

@Dormammu tbh 200 points between 1st and 11 isnt that bad. In my bracket 1st person had 112430 points - just 116 more than me at 13th (though I dont mind, Ive joined event around 10min late so I knew it wont end well ). Also both 10th and 11th had exactly same points - 112345 so that's judt 85 points difference between 1st and 10th.
So thing to remind for futrure SS events - if you're aiming for placement - keep an eye on overal group score after each sub, not just your placement in those subs. 

Waddles_Pines

Palookaville said:

I have a question about "Strange Sights" rankings also, and I am sure there is an explanation I am missing, so if you could tell we what it is, that would be lovely.

I entered the event very late on (with a few hours to go) and ended up 10th overall in my node (Orb of Agamotto) but overall in the event, I ended up 21st with 33,602 points. The top person overall had 41,757 points.

I'm confused how I can be 10th in a node but 21st overall. Do the different nodes (Agamottto, Vishamti and Watoomb) give out different points totals? I assumed they would be the same, but now that I think about it, is that correct?

A possible explanation for your 10th/21st split can be that you're playing in a different order than most people.  For example if all the heavy hitters were in the Hand node, and you picked Maggia, you'd be going against the non-elite for placement.  

And to reiterate others, it's not the 3 nodes that give different points, it's the day (1,2,3) that are worth different values.  Practically, there is a small point variation, but that's due to how long it takes you to clear each node.  Since overall points in a node are based on how long the nodes have to regenerate, if the Doom node takes you 1hr, and Hand takes you 30 min, then on the same day you'd get more from the Hand because your nodes had extra time to regenerate.  

bbigler

crackninja said:

bbigler said:

Phumade said:

Why is this hard?

Its like your in a 30 kid class.  The teacher splits you all into 10 kid sections.

You can be the smartest kid in your section, and still be dumber than every other kid in the other 2 sections.


The groups don't have to be evenly mixed or split

I understand that, but after mixing up the sections 2 more times, it's unlikely that you're the smartest kid 3 times in a row, but still dumber overall.  Theoretically, there should be just as many people experiencing the reverse situation where they rank low in each sub, but rank high overall.  Most of what I'm seeing in this discussion is people complaining about ranking low overall, not higher than expected. 

You will never finish better overall than in your sub, it's not possible.  If you're the 5th best in your grouping, you either did better than everybody in the other two groupings and finish 5th overall (best case scenario), or at least one person did better than you and you finish 6th or worse in the overall ranking that determines final placement. 
So it's not even a factor of being in easy or tough groupings...except in very rare circumstances you will end up with a worse placement rank than you experienced in the individual subs.

OK, I get it now everyone....your true ranking in the event is your overall rank.  Your sub rank is an artificial rank because you're not being ranked against everyone, just a subgroup.  For example, each subgroup will have a 1st place winner, but obviously all 3 winners can't be first place overall.  One of them will be 1st overall, the other "winners" could be 2nd and 3rd, but it's also possible that a 2nd place winner in another sub outscored them.  So, their overall rank is their true rank and their sub rank is the artificial one. 

I think the problem is that we're thinking that our sub ranks should "add up" to our overall rank, but it's not like that at all.  I also want to point out that this is the real reason why your overall rank is usually lower.  The clearing times between the subs is not the reason your overall rank is lower. 

Waddles_Pines

bbigler said:

crackninja said:

bbigler said:

Phumade said:

Why is this hard?

Its like your in a 30 kid class.  The teacher splits you all into 10 kid sections.

You can be the smartest kid in your section, and still be dumber than every other kid in the other 2 sections.


The groups don't have to be evenly mixed or split

I understand that, but after mixing up the sections 2 more times, it's unlikely that you're the smartest kid 3 times in a row, but still dumber overall.  Theoretically, there should be just as many people experiencing the reverse situation where they rank low in each sub, but rank high overall.  Most of what I'm seeing in this discussion is people complaining about ranking low overall, not higher than expected. 

You will never finish better overall than in your sub, it's not possible.  If you're the 5th best in your grouping, you either did better than everybody in the other two groupings and finish 5th overall (best case scenario), or at least one person did better than you and you finish 6th or worse in the overall ranking that determines final placement. 
So it's not even a factor of being in easy or tough groupings...except in very rare circumstances you will end up with a worse placement rank than you experienced in the individual subs.

OK, I get it now everyone....your true ranking in the event is your overall rank.  Your sub rank is an artificial rank because you're not being ranked against everyone, just a subgroup.  For example, each subgroup will have a 1st place winner, but obviously all 3 winners can't be first place overall.  One of them will be 1st overall, the other "winners" could be 2nd and 3rd, but it's also possible that a 2nd place winner in another sub outscored them.  So, their overall rank is their true rank and their sub rank is the artificial one. 

I think the problem is that we're thinking that our sub ranks should "add up" to our overall rank, but it's not like that at all.  I also want to point out that this is the real reason why your overall rank is usually lower.  The clearing times between the subs is not the reason your overall rank is lower. 

Hmmm would it offend Sam Eagle to say "Winner, winner, chicken dinner" 

Dormammu

I think the lesson learned here is that Strange Sights can be quite a disappointing event to put a new release into. Thank you to all those who patiently enlightened those of us who are mathematically challenged.

For anyone who still is scratching their heads, I think I've figured out the simplest way to explain it: there aren't ten Top 10 finishers every day, there are thirty Top 10 finishers every day, and twenty of them are invisible to you. So your Top 10 finish is actually somewhere in the Top 30.

fmftint

Group A T5
1 100
2 95
3 94
4 92
5 90


Group B T5
1 100
2 99
3 96
4 93
5 91


Group C T5
1 97
2 94
3 92 (you)
4 89
5 87

All combined in event
1 100
2 100
3 99
4 97
5 96
6 95
7 94
8 94 
9 93
10 92
11 92 (you)
12 91
13 90
14 89
15 87

Understand now? 

bbigler

OJSP said:

bbigler said:
I also want to point out that this is the real reason why your overall rank is usually lower.  The clearing times between the subs is not the reason your overall rank is lower.  

I feel that this was a response to my post, because I mentioned clearing times.

The difference in clear times makes the difference in points we are getting. The points determine the ranks. If we are slower than other people in the other subs, we get less points than them. To score the highest, we have to be the fastest every day compared to the 1000 players. Being fastest in the sub doesn’t mean we would be 1st for the day.

OK, let me put it this way.............if each sub had the exact same enemies, you would still have people ranking lower overall than in their individual subs.  This entire "problem" comes from the mechanic of splitting people into 3 different subs during the event.  The difference in enemies is not the cause of the "problem".  The difference in clearing times amongst the subs is simply another factor to determine the ideal clearing order.  If everyone cleared in the ideal order, you would still get lower overall ranks than sub ranks.  

Dormammu

fmftint said:

All combined in event
1 100
2 100
3 99
4 97
5 96
6 95
7 94
8 94 
9 93
10 92
11 92 (you)

Understand now? 

Given the fact that I placed 11th, 1 measly point behind 10th, I understand all too well. 

kk3thess

With me happened something similar, but the opposite at the same time. I finished #6, #7, and #6 and ended up in the top 5 overall. I guess some sub choices must have been sub optimal for some people.

shardwick

9th place for me but this thread does nothing but show how completely broken the current pve system is right now. The fact that you can grind as optimally as possible and still lose out on top 10 placement by ONE point is insane to me. Maybe the worst part of pve to me though is after a new release my cl7 bracket tends to get even more crowded at the top by 5* players than it was before. Like seriously? People begged and begged for cl9, they finally get it, and then many just drop down to lower clearance levels anyway.

HoundofShadow

I got top 3 overall  but end up top 10 in the end. I do agree that players with many champed 4* and 5* going to lower SCL are taking away prizes from other players. I'm not sure how to solve this but gating them like how PvP is gating players from going to lower SCL is not an ideal solution.

shardwick

HoundofShadow said:

I got top 3 overall  but end up top 10 in the end. I do agree that players with many champed 4* and 5* going to lower SCL are taking away prizes from other players. I'm not sure how to solve this but gating them like how PvP is gating players from going to lower SCL is not an ideal solution.

KGB proposed a system where you would be locked out of using higher tier characters in lower clearance levels so let's say that you're an early 4* player, maybe you have like four 4* champs, but for whatever reason you have one champed 5* then in that system on cl7 your champed 5* would be locked out. You could do a similar system that allows you to play at any clearance level and with any character, like champed 5s on cl1, but you would be locked out of getting placement rewards.

Another system that they could try is a more progression focused pve system where placement rewards are included at the end of current progression rewards, or need to be gained through a bonus sub. Overall I think this would be the best one because it gives players more freedom to play how they want so if something comes up when you're grinding on the day 1 sub like a family emergency, your internet drops, MPQ's servers go down unexpectedly or Demi needs to do scheduled maintenance then you're not going to be penalized. You'd be slightly inconvenienced at that moment and couldn't play but at least you could still have the remainder of the event to get all progression rewards. And I mentioned progression focused so there could still be overall placement rewards like heroics, event tokens and iso for those that still wanted the competitive aspect of pve and liked to play fast.

Would love to see them test out any of these soon. God what I would give to see them do a pve test of a progression focused Enemy of the State to see how many people go for all rewards in a seven day event.

Phumade

Once gigantic misunderstanding is

Optimal for you, does not mean most points overall.  Optimal only means you got the most points YOU can earn.  Another player with a bigger faster roster can always earn more points than you.


This is why smaller rosters will ALWAYS lose to bigger rosters.  Bigger rosters can reach more points than smaller rosters,  In fact they have less need to be optimal because their rosters are inherently faster.  90% effort is like 110% effort from your roster.

This is why giving up tapping basically guarantees you can never beat past the established rosters.