55 replies to this topic

[Single Mom]

Someone on reddit was kind enough to pull the season 4 data. I filtered out players with <30 matches and ran some percentile buckets for your amusement.

Google Sheets Link:
https://docs.google....eEvc/edit#gid=0

[meteorol]

Cool.

Is it possible to do the "percentile" more accurate above 99% (not asking you to do it, just asking in general)? Because the best 1% already starts at 335 global matchscore, and it would be interesting to see how the best people (withing the 1%) rank against each other.

[Single Mom]

meteorol, on 04 November 2016 - 07:01 AM, said:

Cool.

Is it possible to do the "percentile" more accurate above 99% (not asking you to do it, just asking in general)? Because the best 1% already starts at 335 global matchscore, and it would be interesting to see how the best people (withing the 1%) rank against each other.

Added a break out of the top 1% of season 4 at the bottom. Currently its ranked by avg score with a 100 min games played filter in place.

[adamts01]

Lights OP

[Bombast]

Hurray! I'm in the upper 50%! Whee!

Other than that, pretty cool.

[Mawai]

Nice analysis ...

Personally, I think PGI should be publishing this type of analysis each season including the 30 game cutoff for binning and 100 game cut offs for top performers.

For the folks who like being competitive, this type of feedback can be a motivator to play ... to try to achieve standing in the top 1% or 5% or top 100 or 500 players. It doesn't appeal to me but it does appeal to some and this sort of feedback should be part of PGIs marketing strategy.

They should also be working on other features to drive longer term player interest and player retention (which they are ... better FW and an improved dynamic skills system ... if they do something good with it ... will also help).

Edited by Mawai, 04 November 2016 - 07:39 AM.

[Ex Atlas Overlord]

Now this is awesome

[Deathlike]

It's good to know "half" of the players on the leaderboard play on average at least "1 game a day".

I mean... that's "retention" for you.

Edited by Deathlike, 04 November 2016 - 08:14 AM.

[Single Mom]

Deathlike, on 04 November 2016 - 08:05 AM, said:

It's good to know "half" of the players on the leaderboard play on average "1 game a day".

I mean... that's "retention" for you.

1 game a day or less!! =P

[meteorol]

Single Mom, on 04 November 2016 - 07:15 AM, said:

Added a break out of the top 1% of season 4 at the bottom. Currently its ranked by avg score with a 100 min games played filter in place.

Wow, cool! Thanks!

[Weeny Machine]

Oh look! Lights have 38 PTS less than the 2nd last place and whooping 101 PTS less than the leading class. That's more than 1/3 of the total. Balance my arse.

[Deathlike]

Bush Hopper, on 04 November 2016 - 08:16 AM, said:

Oh look! Lights have 38 PTS less than the 2nd last place and whooping 101 PTS less than the leading class. That's more than 1/3 of the total. Balance my arse.

Scale doesn't matter though! Volume is everything!

VOLUME OF GAMES IS EVERYTHING!!!1!11!

[Nameless King]

Interesting

[Single Mom]

Bush Hopper, on 04 November 2016 - 08:16 AM, said:

Oh look! Lights have 38 PTS less than the 2nd last place and whooping 101 PTS less than the leading class. That's more than 1/3 of the total. Balance my arse.

The score system values damage very heavily, and lights being capable of the least potential dps greatly contributes to this gap. Unfortunately game winning actions that are most commonly tied to lights such as point capping and peeling off enemy mechs from the front lines is not rewarded to the individual light pilot. It's somewhat unfortunate.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Single Mom, on 04 November 2016 - 08:48 AM, said:

The score system values damage very heavily, and lights being capable of the least potential dps greatly contributes to this gap. Unfortunately game winning actions that are most commonly tied to lights such as point capping and peeling off enemy mechs from the front lines is not rewarded to the individual light pilot. It's somewhat unfortunate.

Not really (unfortunate that is). It just means folks need to take the weight class into consideration when considering average match score and modify their expectations accordingly.

Weight classes need viability and a role. They don't need to be equitable in dealing damage. That match score needs some adjustment to better reflect the role of lighter mechs is a different issue, but in the mean time folks need to learn how to interpret things in context. Clamoring for balance before first understanding the state of the game is a wasted exercise.

Edited by Lukoi Banacek, 04 November 2016 - 09:19 AM.

[Single Mom]

In a perfect world match score probably should be adjusted to reflect the role of lights. The current scoring system undervaluing or omitting certain roles of lights, as well as the resulting skewed opinion of the effectiveness of lights (or lack thereof) is what I feel is unfortunate.

[Lyoto Machida]

Single Mom, on 04 November 2016 - 09:42 AM, said:

In a perfect world match score probably should be adjusted to reflect the role of lights. The current scoring system undervaluing or omitting certain roles of lights, as well as the resulting skewed opinion of the effectiveness of lights (or lack thereof) is what I feel is unfortunate.

Lights are the worst value with current mech pack pricing so no real demand for them (and by extension, no real motivation for PGI to fix or make playing the class more attractive).

[Xephron]

OOO I Ended up on 28

[Cy Mitchell]

I have contributed to some of those top scores on the leaderboards (as a target). You are welcome, gentlemen.

[Lostdragon]

I looked at this for season 1 after getting tired of "MM sucks, I always lose" threads. The average w/l is still ~1, so looks like things are holding steady there. Would be interested to know median w/l as it was also ~1 previously.