Yea, since the injection, most of the consistent high rated were able to actually get their mounts instead of walking uphill, backwards, with slippers on.
1 Like
I ran a shuffle on my rogue this past sunday, 96 points for a 4-2. Start of December that was 35ish points.
1 Like
From BC season 1 yes. But I feel like the skill difference between now and legion shouldnt have increased that much?
IMO a league based system with similar rewards would be better. It doesnt have to be just titles but other rewards such as tmog, mounts, glyphs etc.
Did you scrape the data?
Nice to see the numbers.
Mathematically, how mmr works, titles sort of are already % based.
Heya. I didnt use any tools to automate the process. I have considered using python and may use it in a future project.
Mathematically speaking yes this is true. However this data isnt available in game. I think a percentile based counter or dsiplay would be nice.
A ladder with static rewards that had inject mmr and population differences will never be a good thing for the game. Everything being % based is good because you can also show your progress in a season whether it be the start of the end because it is % based.
The reason a lot of people hardly play in the season is because everything is far easier at the end which sucks. Injected MMR sucks, population swings suck, everything sucks with static rewards and it has been 1 of the biggest problems in wow and the most deadly to the ladder.
There are so many people who got glad in s2 shadowlands that no longer play because they have anxiety that they can never get it again because of how easy it was back them, static rewards destroyed the ladder and all the bandaids just suck.
3 Likes
Doesn’t even take that. From my experience anyone above the 90th percentile will pretty hard womp on ~70% of the ladder on freshly capped characters; even of specs they haven’t played previously. Significant smurfing can come from even lower than that, though their womping will stop sooner.
This sentiment is generally accurate. If you have a game that starts small and stays small you’re less likely to have a “peaked” playerbase, and more likely to have the upper echelons occupied people who are nonetheless only playing the game at a middling or mid-high standard. A competitive game that gets big and dwindles is certainly going to lose its less dedicated players first, however.
With WoW having been gigantic, and the average skill in any playerbase going up over time, one would expect the current arena playerbase to be in contention for being the best in an absolute sense. It’s possible that, say, SL’s was better, but unlikely for the peak to have been earlier.
All i read are facts. I will be updating the post soon with the most current numbers for patch 10.2.5 and 10.2.6 with a final update for when the season ends. I also believe that when casual players join at the start of a new expansion it makes it eaiser to push.
And it’s exactly this issue why certain games just straight up ban this practice, which is called smurfing, rightfully so.
In WoW it would have an even bigger impact since you’d have to make a new account every time.
There is no way they could enforce this in wow. It would require them to implement some backend code. I dont think this would be good for the game. It would make queue times longer.
Sadly true as well. I dunno there doesn’t seem to be a really good solution for WoW.
Maybe not a perfect solution, but a good first step would to be to change the rewards structure back to percentage-based. Lower the difficulty (for example make rank 1 top .2%, gladiator top 1%, and add some lower level rewards/titles. Better than doing nothing…