If 1800 is 86.4% percentile only like 13.6% of Shuffle characters have gotten their elite mogs. I’m sure some of this is influenced by people who did 1 or 2 matches of Shuffle on a few characters and then stop Qing or picked 1 to play (like me) but the amount of players with 18hundo mogs is massively surprising for what is supposed to be an award for average players.
Is it really that hard for average players to climb? If so it just suggests Blizzard needs to detach rewards from CR and move them into %s of your spec or even flat out participation. You can’t have a healthy, popular rated community of just elite players, because most players aren’t elite. Average and bad players need incentives they can accomplish too.
i honestly hate this mmr system. i hate being above average one season, then being drastically below average another season, like am i a below average player? am i an above average player? who knows anymore. ive gotten 2100 in shuffle this season on two characters but according to some twitch strummers 2100 is considered below average in shuffle but not in 2s or 3s so who knows anymore
This is my own experiences from S1, S2, and S3 so far.
This season has been much more of a struggle (see my earlier post today re: Tol’viron arena positioning) than previously in S1 and S2 of Dragonflight. Whether it’s not the same number of people queueing as before, or deflation, the meta, or facing just better people at all levels, I can’t be sure.
But in terms of things I can control, like addons, if anything I’ve added things that should be making it easier. I have a WA that puts giant icons on totems to help me spot and stomp them better. Another on Observers and Psyfiends to alert me when they’re up. Also another to alert me when my healer is in CC. And redoing my Omnibar so things aren’t so jumbled.
Still the game feels much harder atm. But I really want to complete the Elite tmog set so I guess I’ll just keep grinding until I do.
Yeah, which is the crux of the Arena Forums and having a discussion about this.
The numbers of active characters eligible for rewards have to be more transparent on Blizzard’s part, but again, % based means nothing without total number of participation.
A lot of players will remark that too many people got Gladiator in SL S2, so the mount means “nothing.”
However, if I were to say 150,000 characters were eligible for rewards that season because it was the most played Arena Season in 2 expansions, then the ~7500 who got it would be justified.
5% of 150,000 = 7,500.
You have to have both parts for it to hold merit:
total # playing
% based (or amount) that should get x reward
The same people that say “5% is 5%, no matter the population” will be the same people that say “5% is too high when 100,000 are playing.” >.>
Wanting gladiator mounts to be 5% of the ladder means it’s 100x easier than the previous system’s gladiator & easier to achieve than previous duelist titles; don’t think that was the intention when they introduced it.
Well the % is relative to your goals, if you are trying to sell video games and increase participation, than maybe not? Honestly, it doesn’t matter to me.
But the point is just to show the good and bad to having % based rewards.
2% of 12,000 = 240 – that’s too low?
2% of 220,000 = 4,400 – that’s too high?
I’m just saying, without trying to start an internet argument, most players want the numbers to fit their narrative they won’t consider number of players playing and how that effects % based rewards.
You just see 4,400 people have Gladiator and go “that’s too high.”
I understand its subjective, but again, the % is based off a particular goal. You claiming it was far too high fits your narrative, while someone else could say it was just right, or someone else saying it was far too low, right?
Again, not trying to start an argument, just saying these things need to be taken into consideration instead of just saying .5% and that’s that.
In a hypothetical situation, we agreed on 5% to increase participation numbers. And then it’s revealed 60,000 characters are playing.
5% of 60,000 = 3000
Can’t just say “wait 5% is now too high, drop that to 2%.”
Okay, less people are playing because its “harder,” population drops, now its 40,000.
2% of 40,000 = 800
Now that’s too low. Do we bump it back to 5%? How do you swing it from Season to Season? It’s a convoluted situation is all.
I’m not saying it should be any %, I’m just using 5% for simple maths.
I’m just showing that a set % based number is going to vary based off participation numbers.
Season 1:
1% of 60,000 = 600
Season 2:
1% of 260,000 = 2,600
Season 3
1% of 26,000 = 260
That’s a huge swing of “Gladiators” when you live by the “1% is 1% no matter what.” You have to take the good with the bad, even if that means what feels like a repeat of SL Season2.
“Everyone got gladiator in Season2, it means nothing!!!”
Well that’s because there was a lot more people playing.
There’s a healthy middle ground, rank 1 & gladiator shouldn’t be a 1000 rating difference; to put it in perspective, Combatant I & Elite are also a 1000 rating difference.
That’s a huge skill gap, the Gladiator title & mount aren’t supposed to be as sweaty as rank 1 but it should still be more difficult than you’d like.
You want SL S2 levels of inflation? That’s fine but have the titles scale with the ladder so it doesn’t become a participation trophy.
