DayvBang wrote: Is this a game mode or a behavioral experiment? I can see it now, the next test is going to designate one group of players as "inmates" and the other as "guards"...
Ungoliant wrote: I'm confused why higher level rosters performing better than lower level rosters is a bad thing in the Rocket and Groot test. Shouldn't that be how it works?
JCTthe3rd81 wrote: I just had a thought but not sure if it would even work. So I'm asking all of those that are computer experts. Would it be possible to give all ties the same reward?
Pongie wrote: JCTthe3rd81 wrote: I just had a thought but not sure if it would even work. So I'm asking all of those that are computer experts. Would it be possible to give all ties the same reward? This will be open to abuse. Just imagine if the whole bracket agreed to not play or simply play the starting node. Everyone would get top prize with minimal effort. I reckon it is not that hard to get 1000 players to join and do this.
Figure15 wrote: Of course humans are not rational and easily 10 (1%) will break ranks.
"David wrote: Moore"]Hi everyone, “During the Meet Rocket & Groot event, we saw that people were playing less overall and higher-level rosters were performing better than low-level rosters. However, we saw that people were still playing according to a schedule and some players were grinding the Easy missions a lot. In Enemy of the State, we will be running the new mission difficulty again but with a few changes to help address playing at specific times and players grinding Easy nodes.
halirin wrote: Figure15 wrote: Of course humans are not rational and easily 10 (1%) will break ranks. Pretty sure that people would defect from collusion because they ARE rational.
aesthetocyst wrote: scottee wrote: Calm down everyone. They're only 3 more tests away from coming to the conclusion that everyone's been saying from the beginning. To get rid of placement rewards. Aww cmon now. That would be too drastic. What they could do to water down the competition is to replace the top 100 placement rewards with serialized tokens. The top 100 players each get a shot at the top 100 reqard packages. 2 lucky winners get the deluxe bundle of 3x 4* covers and 3x 3* covers; 3 almost as lucky winners get 2x 4* covers and 3x 3* covers .... Etc, etc ... Cmon....players love RNG. This preserves the cover distribution micromanagement and takes pressure off the grind.
scottee wrote: Calm down everyone. They're only 3 more tests away from coming to the conclusion that everyone's been saying from the beginning. To get rid of placement rewards.
Welcome Death wrote: slidecage wrote: if they go to a pure progression only Does that mean slices will be removed? I wouldnt think so, people still need a reasonable end time to suit them.
slidecage wrote: if they go to a pure progression only Does that mean slices will be removed?
ThatOneGuyjp189512 wrote: "higher-level rosters were performing better than low-level rosters" OH GOD NO! we can't have this! we can't players think they're progressing against the new people! it's not like they spent a bunch of time and money to get ahead of the game and make it seem like they're progressing! /sarcasm