laa (league addicts anonymous) How you doing in the "League"

[bane]

5 hours ago, Gambit126 said:

So far so good but it won't last.  Still too many challenges I cannot win.  The fickle RNG also isn't helping.

im in same boat as you, searching for beatable opponents is becomming hard. I recon by end of tomorrow i will be out of them.

[ZackMacKenzie]

Mods, feel free to move this to Feedback if you feel it is a better fit there.

I managed to eke out 3rd place in W2 last week and I already regret it.

I am way out of my depth in W3, 95th of 101 in terms of level.  74% of my 'peers' are > 50 levels ahead.  62% are > 100 levels ahead and 25% are a whopping 200 or more levels ahead,

I figured, no problem.  I won't be able to win more than 10 or 15 battles, and I'll get demoted down to where I mathematically belong.  I don't believe that's going to happen.

Looking at things, the many of the most experienced players are unhappy with being competitive in this league, they are looking to be demoted so they can absolutely overwhelm in a lower league .  So, if I want to get demoted it won't be enough to lose all my battles. Instead, I'll have to take a full week off of League play to get demoted. And that may take weeks or months depending on my luck of the draw and the levels of those who get promoted into my League.

That having been said, there will still be a significant number of sharks swimming in ponds and puddles where they don't really belong, while hapless newbs will have to choose between non-participation for weeks at a time (thus forgoing xp they need to advance at a respectable pace) or existing as cannon fodder for far more experienced players.  How do I know this?  8 players have earned no points, clearly going for the demotion.  (If they were just inactive players they wouldn't have been promoted in the first place.)  All 8 of them are 193rd level or higher.  Of the other 7 in line to be demoted  5 are from the 10 least experienced heroes.  The other 2 are about L250.  So, at least 10 of the 15 looking to get demoted are a minimum of 150 levels ahead of the actual weakest hero(es).

So, it looks like very experienced players are gaming the system to capture all the best rewards at EVERY level, extending their advantage over the newer, more casual and/or busier players.  Game theory predicts that this would happen as individual players all work to maximize their rewards.  So, clearly the rewards are out of whack if much, much more experienced players are moving to the kiddies pool.

If making the newbs fodder for the old hangs was planned, then I guess congratulations are in order for a great design.  If not, Leagues need some tweaking.

I was going to suggest using different operators for promotion and demotion, and maybe I still will, but in order for it to work, a more significant change is needed.

Currently, players receive 3 points for a win and 1 for a loss,  I'm fairly confident saying that this was intended to give newbs (as well as weaker and unluckier players) a reason to play, and to reward players who spend more time and kobans on fighting battles.  Also, when a hero loses a battle he receives 1/6th of the XP he'd have received for a win.  This isn't working well, as shown above.

In order to remove the incentive to tank, losses should still give XP rewards but should instead COST a point.  So, a weak and active hero will wind up with a highly negative score, which places him BELOW inactive heroes for the purposes of demotion.  Another option is to simply use a different measure for demotion other than raw points.

Sadly, this won't work as things stand as any player can currently choose to fight with common/starter L1 1-star girls and tank that way.  This flaw is easily defeated by FORCING players to use their prime-time orgy team*.  Since girls earn nothing by participating in these battles anyway, there is no real reason to bring less than your best...other than to game the system and tank.  Once everyone is playing with their best, players will have 3 choices: (1) try to win as much as possible while losing as little as possible to maximize their score for better rewards at week's end; (2) try to fight as much as possible to earn the maximum amount of XP, and let things fall where they may regarding score' (3) abstain from winning any fights to hopefully achieve demotion.

I think that gives a more natural and desirable outcome, allows all to participate without feeling cheated, and still gives all players strategic choices.

YMMV

* This is the only technical challenge in implementing a change like this.  It might mean requiring 3 more pointers (Prime_Alpha, Prime_Beta, Prime_Omega) so even when players change their team to earn Aff & XP in the Arena, their primary team remains the same.  Assignment can be automatic or manual though manual assignment would require checks to discourage players from playing the same tanking game here. A simple pre- and post- check to ensure that the change improves the team would suffice.  This could cost kobans in the manner that class changes use.  

[Chthugha]

3 hours ago, ZackMacKenzie said:

Mods, feel free to move this to Feedback if you feel it is a better fit there.

I managed to eke out 3rd place in W2 last week and I already regret it.

I am way out of my depth in W3, 95th of 101 in terms of level.  74% of my 'peers' are > 50 levels ahead.  62% are > 100 levels ahead and 25% are a whopping 200 or more levels ahead,

I figured, no problem.  I won't be able to win more than 10 or 15 battles, and I'll get demoted down to where I mathematically belong.  I don't believe that's going to happen.

Looking at things, the many of the most experienced players are unhappy with being competitive in this league, they are looking to be demoted so they can absolutely overwhelm in a lower league .  So, if I want to get demoted it won't be enough to lose all my battles. Instead, I'll have to take a full week off of League play to get demoted. And that may take weeks or months depending on my luck of the draw and the levels of those who get promoted into my League.

That having been said, there will still be a significant number of sharks swimming in ponds and puddles where they don't really belong, while hapless newbs will have to choose between non-participation for weeks at a time (thus forgoing xp they need to advance at a respectable pace) or existing as cannon fodder for far more experienced players.  How do I know this?  8 players have earned no points, clearly going for the demotion.  (If they were just inactive players they wouldn't have been promoted in the first place.)  All 8 of them are 193rd level or higher.  Of the other 7 in line to be demoted  5 are from the 10 least experienced heroes.  The other 2 are about L250.  So, at least 10 of the 15 looking to get demoted are a minimum of 150 levels ahead of the actual weakest hero(es).

So, it looks like very experienced players are gaming the system to capture all the best rewards at EVERY level, extending their advantage over the newer, more casual and/or busier players.  Game theory predicts that this would happen as individual players all work to maximize their rewards.  So, clearly the rewards are out of whack if much, much more experienced players are moving to the kiddies pool.

If making the newbs fodder for the old hangs was planned, then I guess congratulations are in order for a great design.  If not, Leagues need some tweaking.

I was going to suggest using different operators for promotion and demotion, and maybe I still will, but in order for it to work, a more significant change is needed.

Currently, players receive 3 points for a win and 1 for a loss,  I'm fairly confident saying that this was intended to give newbs (as well as weaker and unluckier players) a reason to play, and to reward players who spend more time and kobans on fighting battles.  Also, when a hero loses a battle he receives 1/6th of the XP he'd have received for a win.  This isn't working well, as shown above.

In order to remove the incentive to tank, losses should still give XP rewards but should instead COST a point.  So, a weak and active hero will wind up with a highly negative score, which places him BELOW inactive heroes for the purposes of demotion.  Another option is to simply use a different measure for demotion other than raw points.

Sadly, this won't work as things stand as any player can currently choose to fight with common/starter L1 1-star girls and tank that way.  This flaw is easily defeated by FORCING players to use their prime-time orgy team*.  Since girls earn nothing by participating in these battles anyway, there is no real reason to bring less than your best...other than to game the system and tank.  Once everyone is playing with their best, players will have 3 choices: (1) try to win as much as possible while losing as little as possible to maximize their score for better rewards at week's end; (2) try to fight as much as possible to earn the maximum amount of XP, and let things fall where they may regarding score' (3) abstain from winning any fights to hopefully achieve demotion.

I think that gives a more natural and desirable outcome, allows all to participate without feeling cheated, and still gives all players strategic choices.

YMMV

* This is the only technical challenge in implementing a change like this.  It might mean requiring 3 more pointers (Prime_Alpha, Prime_Beta, Prime_Omega) so even when players change their team to earn Aff & XP in the Arena, their primary team remains the same.  Assignment can be automatic or manual though manual assignment would require checks to discourage players from playing the same tanking game here. A simple pre- and post- check to ensure that the change improves the team would suffice.  This could cost kobans in the manner that class changes use.  

Isn't it much simpler if players who are tanking it that hard (getting 0 points), are automatically demoted to one big League called the Sex Dungeon I or so with all those players, which is below Wanker I, gives no rewards, and requires you to be in the top 5 to promote to Wanker I? This way inactive players are removed from the Leagues. Just drop them back to below the bottom. That should keep them from going there.

[Urist]

10 hours ago, Chthugha said:

Isn't it much simpler if players who are tanking it that hard (getting 0 points), are automatically demoted to one big League called the Sex Dungeon I or so with all those players, which is below Wanker I, gives no rewards, and requires you to be in the top 5 to promote to Wanker I? This way inactive players are removed from the Leagues. Just drop them back to below the bottom. That should keep them from going there.

If that were the case, then people who are doing it purposefully would just get into 1 fight and be done for the week.

But in any event, high level players being still in W3 is hardly surprising. This week my S1 ranges from 160-309, and it's looking like players currently at levels 293, 291, 276 and 274 will be demoted. So don't underestimate what levels there are in a given league. Perhaps these guys are exactly where they belong based on their activity. 3 of the 4 players I mentioned do have points, just a very small amount. It doesn't matter how high a level a person is, if they're only logging in a few times per week of course they're going to be in lower leagues. Sucks for low level players, but the only solution would be to sort people into leagues based on level AND activity. And I don't see how that could be implemented.

But to the low level players, even if you're only gaining about 100 kobans a week with leagues and ToF combined, at least take solace in the fact that its 100 more kobans per week than I was earning when I was low level.

[asdf10]

16 hours ago, ZackMacKenzie said:

Mods, feel free to move this to Feedback if you feel it is a better fit there.

I managed to eke out 3rd place in W2 last week and I already regret it.

I am way out of my depth in W3, 95th of 101 in terms of level.  74% of my 'peers' are > 50 levels ahead.  62% are > 100 levels ahead and 25% are a whopping 200 or more levels ahead,

I figured, no problem.  I won't be able to win more than 10 or 15 battles, and I'll get demoted down to where I mathematically belong.  I don't believe that's going to happen.

Looking at things, the many of the most experienced players are unhappy with being competitive in this league, they are looking to be demoted so they can absolutely overwhelm in a lower league .  So, if I want to get demoted it won't be enough to lose all my battles. Instead, I'll have to take a full week off of League play to get demoted. And that may take weeks or months depending on my luck of the draw and the levels of those who get promoted into my League.

That having been said, there will still be a significant number of sharks swimming in ponds and puddles where they don't really belong, while hapless newbs will have to choose between non-participation for weeks at a time (thus forgoing xp they need to advance at a respectable pace) or existing as cannon fodder for far more experienced players.  How do I know this?  8 players have earned no points, clearly going for the demotion.  (If they were just inactive players they wouldn't have been promoted in the first place.)  All 8 of them are 193rd level or higher.  Of the other 7 in line to be demoted  5 are from the 10 least experienced heroes.  The other 2 are about L250.  So, at least 10 of the 15 looking to get demoted are a minimum of 150 levels ahead of the actual weakest hero(es).

So, it looks like very experienced players are gaming the system to capture all the best rewards at EVERY level, extending their advantage over the newer, more casual and/or busier players.  Game theory predicts that this would happen as individual players all work to maximize their rewards.  So, clearly the rewards are out of whack if much, much more experienced players are moving to the kiddies pool.

If making the newbs fodder for the old hangs was planned, then I guess congratulations are in order for a great design.  If not, Leagues need some tweaking.

I was going to suggest using different operators for promotion and demotion, and maybe I still will, but in order for it to work, a more significant change is needed.

Currently, players receive 3 points for a win and 1 for a loss,  I'm fairly confident saying that this was intended to give newbs (as well as weaker and unluckier players) a reason to play, and to reward players who spend more time and kobans on fighting battles.  Also, when a hero loses a battle he receives 1/6th of the XP he'd have received for a win.  This isn't working well, as shown above.

In order to remove the incentive to tank, losses should still give XP rewards but should instead COST a point.  So, a weak and active hero will wind up with a highly negative score, which places him BELOW inactive heroes for the purposes of demotion.  Another option is to simply use a different measure for demotion other than raw points.

Sadly, this won't work as things stand as any player can currently choose to fight with common/starter L1 1-star girls and tank that way.  This flaw is easily defeated by FORCING players to use their prime-time orgy team*.  Since girls earn nothing by participating in these battles anyway, there is no real reason to bring less than your best...other than to game the system and tank.  Once everyone is playing with their best, players will have 3 choices: (1) try to win as much as possible while losing as little as possible to maximize their score for better rewards at week's end; (2) try to fight as much as possible to earn the maximum amount of XP, and let things fall where they may regarding score' (3) abstain from winning any fights to hopefully achieve demotion.

I think that gives a more natural and desirable outcome, allows all to participate without feeling cheated, and still gives all players strategic choices.

YMMV

* This is the only technical challenge in implementing a change like this.  It might mean requiring 3 more pointers (Prime_Alpha, Prime_Beta, Prime_Omega) so even when players change their team to earn Aff & XP in the Arena, their primary team remains the same.  Assignment can be automatic or manual though manual assignment would require checks to discourage players from playing the same tanking game here. A simple pre- and post- check to ensure that the change improves the team would suffice.  This could cost kobans in the manner that class changes use.  

 

Yeah I posted about the game theory issues with league after the very first league was completed, though I haven't seen any changes since then other than more reward tiers within the same league which does not address the root of the problem. I do like the negative points solution as well, though adjusting rewards so higher leagues are strictly better than lower leagues would still be my preferred solution.

[Pepe Lolo]

IMPO, rewards are quite ilogical nowadays and that´s what should be changed: It´s quite better to be 16-30th in a league than 46th-60 in the next one. You get almost double reward staying in the lower league.

In order to avoid this, rewards in general should be nerfed so as they can be scalated in a more sensible way. To be honest, I don´t see other posible fix for the current situation (assuming devs are interested in fixing it).

Edited December 2, 2018 by Pepe Lolo

[_shal_]

18 hours ago, ZackMacKenzie said:

Sadly, this won't work as things stand as any player can currently choose to fight with common/starter L1 1-star girls and tank that way.  This flaw is easily defeated by FORCING players to use their prime-time orgy team*.  Since girls earn nothing by participating in these battles anyway, there is no real reason to bring less than your best...other than to game the system and tank.

I'm switching around my beta and omega girls plenty of times in the arena, and it's to improve my chances of winning, not to tank. (Charm class, not that that needs saying...) So no, not only is this an overcomplex solution that will never get implemented, it would also be detrimental to optimal play.

Anyway, why are you trying to judge player strength by level in the first place? Levels as such are meaningless, only battle stats matter. I have some near-level 300's in my current S1 league who are among the 20 weakest players, while I'm among the 20-25 strongest with my piddly level 222 account.

Edit: Oh, and - it's hardly the case that every zero-point player is intentionally tanking. Wanker 2 has over 30% inactive players these days, almost certainly because they either don't take league play too seriously or because they're infrequent players who will go long stretches of time without any game activity. With Wanker 2 thoroughly casualized like that (and you don't want to know what Wanker 1 looks like), it's safe to say that Wanker 3 will also have its share of absentee players. That they're mainly higher-level players is merely selection bias, because they needed to be strong enough to make it to W3 in the first place at some point.

Edited December 2, 2018 by _shal_

[ZackMacKenzie]

3 hours ago, asdf10 said:

Yeah I posted about the game theory issues with league after the very first league was completed, though I haven't seen any changes since then other than more reward tiers within the same league which does not address the root of the problem. I do like the negative points solution as well, though adjusting rewards so higher leagues are strictly better than lower leagues would still be my preferred solution.

Strictly speaking, yes, changing the reward system directly is the most straightforward way of changing player behaviour.

4 hours ago, Urist said:

If that were the case, then people who are doing it purposefully would just get into 1 fight and be done for the week.

Exactly my thoughts when reading the suggestion.

15 hours ago, Chthugha said:

Isn't it much simpler if players who are tanking it that hard (getting 0 points), are automatically demoted to one big League called the Sex Dungeon I or so with all those players, which is below Wanker I, gives no rewards, and requires you to be in the top 5 to promote to Wanker I? This way inactive players are removed from the Leagues. Just drop them back to below the bottom. That should keep them from going there.

This would not be able to differentiate between

• intentional tankers
• people temporarily forced to work virtually around the clock overtime due to a looming deadline
• people on vacation away from technology
• hospitalization / severe illness

We probably don't want to treat these cases as identical.

 

Finally, I'd like to point out that people have been saying that 'the system is new, this will solve itself in a few weeks' for more than TWO MONTHS and we haven't made much (if any) progress towards that predicted equilibrium.  There will NEVER be any stasis when 1st place in Wanker-1 gets better rewards than finishing 61st in Sexpert-3 — FIVE LEAGUES HIGHER.

As I said in my OP, I think I understand what the devs were trying to achieve: giving ample rewards across the entire spectrum of players.  Sadly, that isn't happening as people are correctly recognizing that they can be better paid (b)eating eating 99 amoebas vs. (b)eating 1 'piddly' whale.

It is possible that the original model assumed that people would spend kobans to earn better ranks instead of tanking, but the Leagues don't lend themselves to that as currently constructed.  For that to occur, the Leagues would have to run for shorter periods and/or have larger pool sizes.  7 days of 1 challenge token each 35 minutes equals 288 battle tokens earned each season (week). 99 opponents that you can fight only three times each means just 297 potential battles.  So, theoretically EVERYONE could max out their potential with less than ONE full refill.  Even worse, entering the Season with 9 tokens in reserve means you don't need to spend ANY kobans to max things out!  ( YMMV re. sleeping. )  Thus, the current system doesn't reward pay-players, either.

I also agree, that finding the right combination of variables upon which to base League distribution isn't easy. That's why developers, researchers and scientists run simulations on their theoretical models. However, since we don't live in an ideal world where resources are unlimited, WE the players ARE the  'simulation'.  I think enough time has passed for patterns to emerge and changes to be made, or at the very least proposed in anticipation of pending implementation.  Just because it isn't easy doesn't justify not doing it.  (Homer Simpson categorically disagrees with this!)  Perhaps a member of the community has the math, coding skills, software, computer power and time to run simulations themselves?

An off the top of my head example of a hybrid Performance / Level scoring system:

Points x Level for wins: skews higher level heroes to the top for POSITIVE points.  Variability will still arise directly from relative advantages in attack power, ego, defense and harmony and indirectly from differences in luck regarding equipment/drops and individual strategy.

Negative Points doesn't require skewing to distribute players more or less by level.  But it should be scaled so it is comparable to the positive scoring.  Points x (Highest_Level_In_League - Level) would push lower level heroes farther down the ladder for losses than relatively higher level players.

The difference in level between the challenger and the opponent could also be used to similar effect.

 

In response to the questions of why level instead of Ego?

Ego is a dimension affected by many things.  In no particular order:

• level (which is itself dependent on length of membership, free time availability and choice to invest free time)
• luck in the market
• luck in pachinko
• luck in girl drops during events
• luck in one's availability for participation in events (AKA timing)
• skill in resource management (including koban purchasing and use)
• skill in team construction

Luck is difficult to quantify and tends to even out over time.  Perception of luck tends to be both individual and in general worse than it actually is.  This is a known consequence of how our brains process information.  So luck isn't a great measure to use as a basis for success.

Skill does have a strong correlation with success but can be hard to measure and prove.  That said, it is both counter-intuitive and counterproductive to normalize based on skill.  Penalizing both the skilled and paying players just isn't in the best interest of management.

Level, is a measure of time and of opportunity.  The most common argument against normalizing by opportunity is "well, you should have joined sooner!"  I've seen it voiced in this very forum.  This view places blame at the feet of the newer players.  My view is quite different.  I joined within 10 minutes of becoming aware of Hentai-Heroes.  (That includes the time to create an account and confirm the associated e-mail account.)  What determined my time in game wasn't a failure to join, it was a failure to advertise in places where I could see it.  For me, that meant a cross-promotion agreement with Hooligapps.  Furthermore, my joining of THAT community was contingent on THEIR advertising where I could see it, so it waited until they promoted their games at a comic book site I tend to visit.  I'd have been here long long ago if only I'd been made aware.  (FWIW, I'd never heard of Nutaku before either.)

Further, game involvement per unit time is exactly what game developers/publishers promote!  Games wouldn't include known addictive elements if this weren't true.

So, the best (only?) measure within Ego is level.

 

Again, that was top-of-the-head and better solutions may well (probably?) exist.  Other proposals couldn't hurt.

 

[jelom]

Well, this thread is derailing from is stated topic: How are you doing in the league (and how you expect to do in the new leagues each thursday).

So on topic: I am currently in the 15-20th positions in S3, but I expect that my final position will probably be 30-40th.

Edited December 2, 2018 by jelom

[[CNO] BananaJoy]

sry but i wont read all that text only because u disagree with the current system. to the topic.think can manage hold my position in the top 15 s3. from next week should get good ranking again ^^

 

[Urist]

2 hours ago, jelom said:

Well, this thread is derailing from is stated topic

Fair enough.

 

17 hours ago, ZackMacKenzie said:

Many words

Let's continue this discussion here:

 

[casey]

As the originator of this thread  I was hoping players would use it to relate their experiences and strategies for playing in the league etc.

Maybe dishing out some shade and starting some rivalries 

So govern yourselves accordingly

[Daniele]

I'm currently 13th in S3, but it won't last. I should finish in the 31-45th group, just like in the first S3 league last week.

[Tommy55]

I'm at 45 now and have gotten all the wins that I can reasonably expect to get so I think I'll finish in the 46-60 range in my S2 league, an improvement over last season.

 

[Sovereign RHB]

Most of the players in my S2 league are surprisingly close to each other with lvls ranging from 315 to 238. If we take away the lowest 10 the range is from 315 to 273. I have had some surprise losses as well so I have no idea where I will end up this season. Last season I was 19th. At the moment I am ranked 8th and the person 45 points behind me is ranked 33rd.

Edited December 3, 2018 by dirty harry

[[CNO] BananaJoy]

19 hours ago, casey said:

As the originator of this thread  I was hoping players would use it to relate their experiences and strategies for playing in the league etc.

Maybe dishing out some shade and starting some rivalries 

So govern yourselves accordingly

strategy? not really have one. just make more points than the others ^^

[Gambit126]

At this point I'm still eeking out some wins, but that is about to end.  Most of the ones left have much higher egos and attack stats than I do.  Not to mention that most are HC and I am KH.

[Moe Overload]

I'm the 15th lowest ranked person in my S1 league, but I had to start intentionally tanking to drop out of the top 15. I'm at max level, and at the start of the new season, one of the contests was Casino. I dropped over 20M into it, and got three mono legendaries, bringing me up to 4 legendaries and two epics. Combined that with maxed stats for my level, I'm insanely competitive. Although with only 56 winnable fights left, there's a good chance that I might end up running out of winnable battles by the end of the season despite tanking.

[_shal_]

1 hour ago, Moe Overload said:

I'm the 15th lowest ranked person in my S1 league, but I had to start intentionally tanking to drop out of the top 15. I'm at max level, and at the start of the new season, one of the contests was Casino. I dropped over 20M into it, and got three mono legendaries, bringing me up to 4 legendaries and two epics. Combined that with maxed stats for my level, I'm insanely competitive. Although with only 56 winnable fights left, there's a good chance that I might end up running out of winnable battles by the end of the season despite tanking.

Why tank this early? S1 is fully competitive (unlike lower tiers), so 15th place is gonna finish at 800 points or so. As long as you're not anywhere close to that number there's no need to skip battles.

[Moe Overload]

I guess I'm too used to lower tiers where there was a big gap between 4th and 16th place and I'd have to skip a decent amount of battles to drop from out of the promotion tier. I ended up just tanking overnight, and now I'm spending the day staying near full tokens, so I haven't lost too many battles, but I'm staying in 14-16th place.

[jelom]

Congratulations to @isi He has yet won with a perfect score the league I am. Also no surprise with 241000 EGO. (He is french so probably won't read this in the english part of the forum)

I am still holding around 15th position, but tomorrow I sure will lose some battles.

[jaysen]

Im currently #1 in s1 after being demoted from s2. I was not the lowest player but even even with playing i could not keep up with people whos ego was greater then mine. I am currently 293 with 159266 ego. All my equipment is rainbow legendary and 2 of my 3 stats maxed. As for the girls they match me in level and are all 4 star legendary with me just needing to get the 18 mill for each to level up to 5 stars. Btw im also a hardcore player. So thats how im doing and the team im doing it with.

[_shal_]

On 11/29/2018 at 5:27 AM, _shal_ said:

Tough choice to be made this week. I'm almost certainly going to finish top 10 if I go for it (projection says 7th place), but that's no good - not enough kobans to be won there for getting the privilege of a complete destruction the next week. So I'm probably going to tank for 16th place this time. I do expect to be doing some Great Pachinko on Monday or Tuesday, so my plans could change if I get very lucky with item upgrades there and I suddenly have a chance to finish top 4.

Three more battles and I'll be done with all the "safe wins" for 727 points (81 out of 100 opponents, with one strange fluky loss), then it's tanking time. Ended up not doing GP since there are at least 4 opponents also playing hard who I wouldn't be able to exceed even if I got some item upgrades, so top 4 is definitely out of the question this week. So, gonna take half a day or so off and restart battling once I've dropped from my current 3rd place to outside the top 15.

[Makinen]

I'm in W2, and basically 'one hitting' every week since i don't care much about leveling. I'm currently ranked 57th, and will probably end up around... 62nd or so after another day and a half when this round ends.

Amusingly, me being in W2 was a complete fluke: I did the same in W1 as well, only ended up getting pooled with primarily inactives (in Arena, anyway) and ended up in a Top 15 slot with only the one win.

But hey, 4 free kobans, tyvm XD

Anyway, when i first got in W2 i recall ending in the low 70s with 3. Now, as mentioned, it's the mid-60s. Eventually it'll climb further, going by previous experience. That's the only evening out i see taking place in the Arena i'm afraid...

[_shal_]

21 minutes ago, Makinen said:

Amusingly, me being in W2 was a complete fluke: I did the same in W1 as well, only ended up getting pooled with primarily inactives (in Arena, anyway) and ended up in a Top 15 slot with only the one win.

That's no fluke; lots of W1 brackets are now closing with less than 15 players who are active at all, so even 1 point from a loss will usually result in promotion.