The myth of Death Brackets

Unknown

From about half way through season 1 onwards ALL of my brackets required massively inflated points for top 10 so "death brackets" certainly did exist.... I never, on the other hand, saw you in ANY of my brackets so it is in fact YOU who don't exist!

On a serious note all you're showing is you don't understand those number thingies all that well. IceX said the weighting was slight, people said it was more than slight because plenty of people experienced over-stacked bracket after over-stacked bracket where they SHOULD have seen a much more modest increase in the number of high scoring players per bracket. The fact you didn't is essentially only proof that the weighting isn't 100%, nothing more.

On the other hand, since season 2 started my brackets have been a lot more reasonable with 10th more like 900 than 1100. Whether that's because the bracketing changed, because it's my turn to get lucky on brackets OR (most likely) because people saw how deeply **** the season 1 top end rewards were for the amount of effort you had to put in and aren't trying as hard this time round.

Tharos

I do not know about the reality or myth of death brackets.
But the facts are (from my point of view, so maybe not exacly the real facts ):

1. Season 1 were about to end, whatever the reasons were, many players (me included) got pushed back in leather board. From the usual top 10/top 25 to top 100, with the same amount of points (800/900).
Maybe it was a bad luck for 5-6 events in a row, for many many players, but personnally, it never happened to me before.

2. At the same time, screenshots appears to prove that some other brackets have leaders with 700/800 points, with low/mid players inside.

3. After a few days of people complaining, IceIX told us more about all that in his answers there: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=7382
He said (but didn't said when this change had been made) that old players are more likely to be in the same brackets, and new players with new players. He also confirms that all players brackets are pushing higher for season 1, and that they often change this system because they are not totally happy with it, and the fact that players are not happy.

4. Season 1 came to an end.

5. People saw a huge decrease on overall points, brackets, and achievable rewards.


Conclusion?
These "Death Brackets", whether they were true or not, started when:
- Season 1 was close to end
- Devs made some ninja changes on the pvp bracketing

Death Brackets disappeared when:
- Season ended
- Devs talked about makin more ninja changes on the pvp (and they will continue to do so)

We may never know the truth. Some people will think it's a dev's mistake. Some other will think it is only season ending. Maybe it is both. We don't know, but one thing is sure: unless hundreds of people had a simultaneous hallucinations, for about two weeks, the pvp were way harder than before(in terms of points), then suddenly came back to a more manageable state. Coincidence?

Unknown

Malkavian wrote:

Deimos12 wrote:

If you spent "hundreds on the game" how are your highest characters 105, 103 and 90?
I've spent a little over $60 and have 5 maxed 141's....

being on steam means if you do social media sharing i am netting roughly half the iso as you, and because i did some stupid tinykitty and sold a bunch of level 50-60 2 stars back in the day to respec them, and have a tendency to up new characters to 50 or 60 so they are usable when powered up... and to level up whoever is powered up for an event 5 times.

i also never spent a cent on iso.

non steam players really don't understand how handicapped steam players are.

I have to disagree with you there, I am on android but do not the we facebook and so have also never shared iso rewards. I have spent less than £35 (never for ISO) on this game and started playing late Nov. I have 6 lvl 141 3*s although I only have 2 2* and 0 1* as I sold them all to get iso to build up 3* roster. I think your biggest handicap comes from not being portable

HailMary

Colognoisseur wrote:

It's not that i don't believe you can't end up in a bracket full of high level rosters. I just don't think the sharding of brackets has anything to do with it. It is like it was before. The luck of when you start and when other high level rosters start is what determines if you are facing a death bracket, not some insidious plot by the devs to group them all in the same shard.

We've had 2*-3* transitional alliance members see themselves bracketed in "Top 10 = 1000+ points" brackets, without fail, for at least the past 7 PVPs, save for the last one (944 got one of them Top 10 in the most recent PVP). They have non-alliance friends and relatives with slightly lower roster strengths who consistently got Top 10 (or even won their brackets) with sub-800 scores, all in the second half of Season 1. There definitely were no such jarring disparities before.

Malkavian wrote:

being on steam means if you do social media sharing i am netting roughly half the iso as you, and because i did some stupid tinykitty and sold a bunch of level 50-60 2 stars back in the day to respec them, and have a tendency to up new characters to 50 or 60 so they are usable when powered up... and to level up whoever is powered up for an event 5 times.

i also never spent a cent on iso.

non steam players really don't understand how handicapped steam players are.

As a member of an alliance with Steam and non-Steam members, I'm gonna call bulls--- on your assertion that the average serious Steam player nets half (or even <75% of) the Iso that non-Steam players get. I share FB rewards only with my fellow alliance members, and net maybe 500 extra Iso a day on a good day. That's about 4-5 PVP fight completions, and far less than the Iso reward you get from good PVP placement.

Nemek

HailMary wrote:

As a member of an alliance with Steam and non-Steam members, I'm gonna call bulls--- on your assertion that the average serious Steam player nets half (or even <75% of) the Iso that non-Steam players get. I share FB rewards only with my fellow alliance members, and net maybe 500 extra Iso a day on a good day. That's about 4-5 PVP fight completions, and far less than the Iso reward you get from good PVP placement.

Yeah, I thought the statement was pretty outlandish, too. I also think players who FB share are way more aware of how much ISO FB sharing gives than players who don't (or can't.)

If the argument was based around not being able to play the game as much due to lack of mobility (train commutes, bathroom breaks, waiting in lines, etc), then I would have been more inclined to believe it.

Unknown

Also add the following items for consideration:

-- The PvP scoring system has been tweaked over time to encourage higher point totals. With 2**s reaching upwards of 900 or more, higher points are needed to place well in brackets than before these changes.

-- The game is reaching the point where an "expansion pack" into 4****s is becoming badly needed. Pretty much anyone that has 100 days or more played (and still plays) at this point is bound to have at least 1 if not 2 141s for PvP (Can't say the same for newer players anymore, but that's not an issue here with the "death brackets"). As most of these players (the "veterans") all have 141s for PvP, the top of the leaderboard is becoming crowded as players are reaching the end of the power scale. Everyone (the veterans) is essentially sitting at the level cap, to use a MMORPG analogy. The odds are highly likely that 10 or more players in each bracket have 141s (the "nudging" isn't helping here either), and that these odds are increasing on a daily basis.

Unless the goalposts are moved farther down the road, eventually the top 25 and then the top 50 and so on... will become clogged with players all with 141s for PvP. The short of the matter is that fielding 141s for PvP is no longer as noteworthy as it used to be, nor does it grant the advantage of guaranteed placement that it once offered.

If the devs truly want to separate the veteran "hardcore" players from the rest of the field, then create the 4**** game and let the veterans occupy that and let the fabled "midcore" audience occupy the 3*** game. The only players in these veteran "death brackets" that are winning the 4**** covers are the ones that don't need them at all.

Unknown

The reason brackets are easier now is because the people that set the pace (most of my alliance) have slowed down considerably. We all burnt out in some fashion or another and after a nerf was targeted as us and we proved what we wanted, most of us have shifted our playstyles to reflect a more HP conscious approach.

As a result scores are down across the board because a) shield hopping is less necessary and b) it is less lucrative and c) there are less points available in the pool.

Arogntbastrd

jozier wrote:

The reason brackets are easier now is because the people that set the pace (most of my alliance) have slowed down considerably. We all burnt out in some fashion or another and after a nerf was targeted as us and we proved what we wanted, most of us have shifted our playstyles to reflect a more HP conscious approach.

As a result scores are down across the board because a) shield hopping is less necessary and b) it is less lucrative and c) there are less points available in the pool.

Speaking of, would you, wyp and your 212 dakens mind pushing a little more so I can stop skipping you, that would be super. Thanks

kidicarus

Phantron wrote:

Colognoisseur wrote:

Phantron wrote:

Some brackets are obviously harder than others but it's still a matter of luck of whether you get it. If everyone is always getting death brackets, they wouldn't be deadly enough to be called such in the first place.

It's not that i don't believe you can't end up in a bracket full of high level rosters. I just don't think the sharding of brackets has anything to do with it. It is like it was before. The luck of when you start and when other high level rosters start is what determines if you are facing a death bracket, not some insidious plot by the devs to group them all in the same shard.

There are plenty of things to lay at the devs doorstep for improvement, this is not one of them.

The dev did say they try to push players with similar roster strength together, but I'm sure it's still mostly dependent on just luck.

Well, In season 1 averaged 1300 per pvp event so pretty much anyone who was stuck in a bracket with me was in a bracket of death. People joining a bracket might just see Colognoisseur and think dammit - I'm in a bracket of death.

Now with season 2, they have changed MMR. While scores are definitely lower, the effort that I have to put in to place has increased significantly - as I can now be seen and attacked by players with 500 point differentials. Even though I'm more HP conscious this season, I have still been able to place in the top 5 relatively easily.

Anyway, I just posted to say, I believe that the time you join still makes a significant difference to the difficulty of the brackets. I am hypothesising that in the current meta, based on the time it takes to enter a bracket, the earlier you join the better. With the more inexperienced players likely to join whenever or at the first available opportunity you are more likely to join a more lenient bracket during the first half of the tournament. If you're joining on the last day then you're more likely to be lumped with the old school hardcore crowd who prefer wait, to monitor the top alliances to avoid joining a 5dv/xmen/shield bracket and so on. This worked for me towards the end of Season 1 and the early part of season 2.

Spoit

The 500 point people hitting people in the 1ks has been happening for at least the last couple weeks of season one. Since around kyipgate (maybe even a bit before that)

Unknown

Colognoisseur wrote:

They're a myth and the fact that I haven't been placed in one over seven different PvP events is proof.

This is your proof

Couple of things I observed:

-My low level steam account gets placed into considerably easier brackets than my main account, despite joining at the same time ( I'm talking about ~300-400 points difference in top 10 cutoff ) -I've been placed in brackets together with alliance members that I know joined a whole day earlier than me

This is doesn't proof the existence or non-existence of death brackets, but it shows that something is influencing your bracketing other than luck.

Also have you thought about, that you might have a very biased view about death brackets, because you're sitting at the top of the pyramid? You probably finish above 1000 points anyways death bracket or not. That placed you in top 10 since forever. Now try to imagine someone in **->*** looking at 200 points increased top 25 cut off.

Unknown

Malkavian wrote:

Deimos12 wrote:

If you spent "hundreds on the game" how are your highest characters 105, 103 and 90?
I've spent a little over $60 and have 5 maxed 141's....

being on steam means if you do social media sharing i am netting roughly half the iso as you, and because i did some stupid tinykitty and sold a bunch of level 50-60 2 stars back in the day to respec them, and have a tendency to up new characters to 50 or 60 so they are usable when powered up... and to level up whoever is powered up for an event 5 times.

i also never spent a cent on iso.

non steam players really don't understand how handicapped steam players are.

I play on ios, i dont do any social sharing or anything so i dont really see a difference between social sharing or no social sharing.

I am 143 days in and have 4 141 i only spend $10 on this game.

Unknown

In the recent metal tournament at -17 hours the top 20 was ALL shielded. I just never seen anything remotely close before. All recent tournaments shielding was through the roof. For S2 the points went lower a bit, a small one, I guess mostly from some top people finally stopped going for insane points like 1400.
They stop above 1100ish.

But the bottom for t10 is still over 950 and the amount of big rosters is as high. The points are not that spread, that is all the change.

And how could be it a myth when even the devs confirmed the bias?

Unknown

Yeah, these "Death Brackets" are seriously getting blown out of proportion. I finished 8th in Heavy Metal the other day with a score of 865... that seems far from the death bracket scores that everyone else has been talking about. Not to mention the rewards for HM were Lazy Daken covers, which everyone said would make the brackets even more deadly.

Edit: Kinda funny that the post above me says top 10 is a minimum of 950, when I had almost 100 pts less and finished 8th -_-

Unknown

I think some people are taking "I'm not in a death bracket" to mean "death brackets don't exist." The nudging mechanic isn't getting every top player, and not everyone it's getting is a top player, but a bunch of us are consistently finding ourselves in these things. I (weirdly) finished 28th two PVPs in a row, with 904 and 825 points respectively. With the exception of the most recent Krakadoom, I haven't had 900 be enough for top ten since this started a while back. Oddly, I'm usually (but not quite always) in Nemek's bracket, which indicates that something slightly fishy is going on.

Unknown

Pshhh death brackets. You are placed in brackets of 200 based upon when you first fight in a pvp. The notion of death brackets is funny because I consistently place top ten regardless of who is in my bracket or who my opponents are. If you find yourself playing against high level opponents all the time then your match making rating is too high (mmr). MMR is based upon the number of matches you win in a row; so basically if you do not want to fight teams of 141's constantly you can lower your mmr by losing matches consistently (also known as tanking mmr). That is usually done by losing about 30 - 50 matches in the simulator.

Unknown

to the OP - why should the system put You in the death bracket and this way limit Your fun from the game, when You spend so much? It would be counterproductive to the developers.

Makes me wonder about reckless and bugpop brackets...

Especially as I myself spend 300-500$ and my brackets were tough maybe 1-2times. but I was able to have top5 easily. And I was in reckless bracket twice lately.

So maybe this "gentle nudge" isn't working on spenders? would make sense.

Unknown

magickdonut wrote:

Pshhh death brackets. You are placed in brackets of 200 based upon when you first fight in a pvp. The notion of death brackets is funny because I consistently place top ten regardless of who is in my bracket or who my opponents are. If you find yourself playing against high level opponents all the time then your match making rating is too high (mmr). MMR is based upon the number of matches you win in a row; so basically if you do not want to fight teams of 141's constantly you can lower your mmr by losing matches consistently (also known as tanking mmr). That is usually done by losing about 30 - 50 matches in the simulator.

This has literally nothing to do with mmr and opponents; it's all about packing high scorers into a single bracket.

Emeryt wrote:

So maybe this "gentle nudge" isn't working on spenders? would make sense.

I have a sneaking suspicion that this may be the case. Especially given that getting non-spenders to rage quit, while it does nothing to help their revenue (and might actually hurt it), does help this idiotic ARPDAU metric that they're trying to hit a ludicrous figure that they'll never reach on.

Puritas

Colognoisseur wrote:

Susra wrote:

I'm in my 30s, and have never had chicken pox.

If chicken pox exists, how can I have avoided it for so long?

Chicken pox is a myth, and the fact that I've never gotten it in decades of potential exposure is proof.

Because a vaccination for chicken pox became available in 1995 and so chicken pox has become much rarer.
You haven't been exposed because it is near eradication levels at the current time, if you're in the US.

I suspect that's why susra said in your 30s

Pylgrim

magickdonut wrote:

Pshhh death brackets. You are placed in brackets of 200 based upon when you first fight in a pvp. The notion of death brackets is funny because I consistently place top ten regardless of who is in my bracket or who my opponents are. If you find yourself playing against high level opponents all the time then your match making rating is too high (mmr). MMR is based upon the number of matches you win in a row; so basically if you do not want to fight teams of 141's constantly you can lower your mmr by losing matches consistently (also known as tanking mmr). That is usually done by losing about 30 - 50 matches in the simulator.

I've been told this no longer works, could anyone confirm? My situation is the opposite of OP: I'm not a hardcore player. I'm transitioning from 2* to 3* and I only possess 2 characters over 100 that I don't use that much, anyway, because they're not half as synergistic (and ultimately, powerful) as my tried and true team of 2* Thor, OBW and whatever. I usually end PvP with only 7-800 points, barely managing to get in the top 50. And yet, every single PVP has been getting increasingly more difficult. I just had to call quits in Daken, because after reaching 400, absolutely everyone above me had teams of 2x141s, plus <90 Dakens. I try to "tank" whenever I manage to catch the beginning of a lightning round, but I haven't seen much improvement.