Re: New game?? Time for a new BRAGGING THREAD!!!
Posted: Thu Apr 29, 2010 3:46 pmalldarker wrote:Absolute Zero wrote:I love when people toss out those "Well, when a 2 or 3 hits a level 5 or 6, they gain a crap ton of XP" like it's something that happens a lot. For every 1 person who hits someone 3-4 levels higher than they are and gains a significant amount of XP, 10 more get their doors blown off. I don't think it's worth the risk for a reward meh reward. If you spent that time in missions against your level opponents, you'd have out gained the potential reward for hitting a higher level opponent.
I've had plenty of nice (strafe hits) on MUCH higher levels when I was a low level 'Bot before the big HMW crash of two years ago... And I still see level 3's and even 1's and 2's hitting me, getting killed but still scoring far more XP than me. So yeah, I've seen it happen enough, and more often than I'd like...
But how many times do they get successful in how many missions? 1 of 10? 1 of 3? Though, if they're consistently outscoring you, maybe you should reconfigure? That or... you know, join missions that don't have a all low level opponents in them.
alldarker wrote:Absolute Zero wrote:I understand your points there, and I should have elaborated, but I had assumed you understood how growth works. At your XP level, and mine as well, growth should be right around 5% per week. Yes, newbies will gain more, but once they get to around level 2 or 3, their growth will level off. Now, beyond the point we're at, yes, your growth will drop down, as long as those above you don't level up. It goes back to the previous arguments about guys not leveling up and holding back when they can go up. Yeah, your opponents will make more XP off of you, but it works out to your benefit in the long run, since they go up in level, and become worth more to you.
You crack me up: you are just handing me gold here. If you are at my level, which is debatable, I still have TWICE as much XP as you do. That means that with an equal nominal XP gain, a theoretic 10% total gain for you (compared to your previous total) is in actual fact only a 5% total gain for me!!! See, you really don't have a clue, do you!
Uh... you are aware that the structure of that sentence dictates that your level, and my level, are identified as being different, even if we are both in the top 15 players in the game. Much the way it would be said that RoS's level, and your level, are comparible, yet different. And I see how that confused your argument. Cause, see, the xp growth, is based not on your level, but on your current amount of XP. So, while if I was able to match your XP growth for a week, it would be 10% growth for me, my expected growth would be half yours.
alldarker wrote:Absolute Zero wrote:Now, that 5% XP, that's the minimum you should be gaining. Not the maximum, not the average. The fact that pre-reset during the XP games, people at our levels now were able to pull off 15-20% growth is because of two things; better competition, and more competition. My personal growth is probably more like .5% to 1.5% since my play time has become pretty random.
Your previous dumb comment makes this totally null and void. Still, like you say, before the reset 15%-20% gain was possible BECAUSE THERE WERE LEVEL 8's, 9's and 10's IN THE MIX!!! Nowadays I have mostly rammers, but back then strafe was most definitely the way to go when coming up against high levels. I used to be pissed off when my daily score was under 1,000,000 xp, and that with only one level 8 and nine(!) level 4's!!!
Actually, strafe is pretty effective no matter what, if you have the xp to support it. I'm confused a bit here... Because you could gain much more XP before the reset, because there was higher level people playing, it's dumb to say that you should still be pretty easily maintaining a rather steady XP growth, simply by playing and having more XP than 90% of the people playing with you? You seem to like contradicting yourself more than I usually do. o.O
Alldarker wrote:Absolute Zero wrote:I should also point out, that someone playing their first day, would have a 0% growth. They had 0 XP to start, so any XP they gained for the day would be multiplied by 0, so the result would be zero. Maybe you need a refresher on basic arithmetics as well?
Agan, you are so off base, it's ludicrous! Starting from 0 xp, any gain, including just getting 1 xp, would amount to an infinity amount of % gain. (1 / 0*100%=infinity). In case you don't realize it, there's a BIG difference between 0% gain and infinity % gain. Then, going from 1xp to 10xp, you'd still be getting (10 / 1*100%=)1000% gain. And so on... I could draw you a graph, but I'm sure you wouldn't understand me.
Basic math, if you multiply by 0, you get 0. 10*0 is zero. If you're starting them with XP, then you're not taking their first day. Their first day growth can not be measured. Second day yes, first day no. You are correct though, it would be infinite growth for the day, in theory, however, in real numbers, it's still 0.
*edit* Oh... I just noticed you're formula there... ^_^
Alldarker wrote:Absolute Zero wrote:But, back to the xp gain. How can you claim in one post that you've gained XP faster this week then you had previously, then in the next post claim that you've hit a ceiling for XP growth? There technically isn't really a ceiling until much higher, because you'll always have the ability to gain over the average via playtime. If you put in more play time, you gain more. It's how Galvatron Supreme and RoS have taken the number 1 positions. It's how NV got to where he is. Like I said, that 5% is the lower end expected average, and I could be wrong. It could have been 3% expected growth. It's been a few years since Sustain did the XP games where she posted what expected growth was.
I have no idea how GS and RoS took the nr. 1 spot, but considering I got a iPhone in June of last year and I was able to climb from 35th position to the 4th position in just 6 months, I'm sure that a mobile internet device has something to do with their ranking. Good for them, and considering the results of the recent tournee, I know RoS is still playing WAY more missions than me. However, I'm also pretty sure that both our %-gains are relatively similar. Hey, and count along with me for my xp gain these last 6 days: 28,000,000 xp / 27,000,000 xp * 100% =+3,7% in less than one week! Hey presto, I'm suddenly doing better than your new expected growth of 3% a week!!!
Yeah... because the more you play, the more XP you can get. Which is how they took it. RoS has even said he plays near 24 hours a day with his iphone. But, is your argument here that you're out gaining the expected growth, or that it's hard to out gain the expected growth? And, I'm not sure what Sustain's expected growth was, I'm trying to remember a number from what... 5 years ago? It may have been 5, it may have been 3. Either way, that was, as I said, not the top end growth. Congratulations. You've gained over the low end. Did you want a prize? How about a cookie?
Alldarker wrote:Consider yourself school'ed!!!
I would consider myself schooled, if you where anything close to consistent. You complained that there weren't enough Bots on, and that the cons out numbered the bots. There are more bot players than con players. Active accounts, I can't say since that information was never put on a page that was made available to the players.
You bragged that your win % is higher than Burns, by 3 points, and that you join outnumbered missions all the time. Yet, of the 11 missions you posted to brag about, only 3 had more cons than bots, and all three were loses. So, if you lost 100% of your posted missions where you were out numbered, and if you add the mission I posted where you were in it, to bring the total number of posted missions to 12, than based on those numbers, 1/4th of the missions you join are ones where the Cons have the numbers.
You argued that 5% growth was to high to be expected, and when I said, it may have been 3, I'm unsure (I also said if I recall, it was 5%, which indicates that I was unsure of the number.) you bragged that in less than a week, you almost hit 4% growth, so in a week, you could hit 5% growth, proving that it's feasible. So... What was your point again?
Alldarker wrote:P.S. I'm a statistical analist IRL
Congratulations? You work with simple math? You still need to learn how to read. ^_^ Maybe you don't need to read to be a statistical analyst.
*edit* I'll just leave this here...
% 
