My wife and I bought tier 4, we both started with 18 sigils. She has 155 more points than I do…
I’m up to 12,000 gems. They aren’t being spent on these trash events any longer.
2 Likes
So frustrating!
The random rewards are bad enough, but random + increasing base value + different battles offered results in potentially very different results.
Our guild keeps track of scores at 28 battles, we’ve seen scores from 118 to 189, all doing the “optimal” battle selection.
I can’t imagine how frustrating this must be for those aiming for the leaderboard.
2 Likes
so here’s the deal. I’ve lost 1 fight and killed allravens. I am P12 on xbox LB. P10 has had 12 fewer fights but is 80 points ahead. Is this what we can continue to expect from random RNG world events? Clearly he has had significantly more tome fights than I have. Level playing field? Nowhere near.
Edit
I’ve done every highest rarity fight available
The random scoring for World Events was introduced to prevent multiple players getting a tie for the power orb.
Devs won’t ever admit this though 
7 Likes
Personally, I don’t see any evidence that fights other than tome increase in value at higher levels. Others may have screenshots that show this?
Only tome seems to do so, as claimed. Tome appears randomly - I got it 2 times in a row - so I think that randomness likely explains scoring differential.
I don’t think anyone here is claiming that.
I started the day with 4 sigils, that was enough for 10 fights today, 4 of those were Tome. The other 6 gave the points as listed in official post. I suppose it’s possible increased points are only visible at higher levels, but seems unlikely.
The Tome fights were very generous, I got a total of 88 points when the combined base value was only 58.
At least this time the # of collectibles = your points scored. No unnecessary x10.
1 Like
My tome level is now pretty high (around 700 armour and 700 health plus over 300 attack). My last 3 tome fights yielded 38 then 39 then 80. So yes it’s LB rewards based on luck rather than investment. I won’t be spending a single gem on future world events that are based on random scoring.
Based upon my above post, @Saltypatra what is the span of the ‘bonus drop’ from a tome fight victory?
Sad but True
Even with that though, the random part of scoring could be much less.
A tie requires EXACTLY same point, a random point or 2 here and there and you’re done.
This level of RNG is just irritating, as in may other aspect of “the game”
1 Like
According to numerous statements from the devs regarding RNG levelling out, I offer the following critique. I’ve fought (and won) 122 battles on world event and have always taken the most (on paper and as stated in the OP) “profitable” fight available. The player above I am sure has done the same yet is 24 points ahead having won 18 FEWER fights. My average is 11.5 per fight and his is 13.72! This absolutely demonstrates the lunacy of random scoring in any event if you wish to keep your playerbase engaged and buying tiers to compete.
The ‘collective guild effort’ aspect of world events has yet to transpire and this mode just has zero of appeal. If you want me spending gems then bring back doom. Bin this [mis]event once and for all. Appalling.
EDIT
Tome of evil scoring
Level 950: 41 D Lore
Level 955: 42 D Lore
Level 960: 43 D Lore
This doesn’t look like i am getting any random drop at all from the fight and my average score is actually decreasing as fights get tougher. That’s the opposite of what should be happening.
@Saltypatra @Kafka. Please can you explain this.
2 Likes
I’m a little slow catching up…why do the battles move around again? I go to click on the Vash icon and its running away from me.
Not as annoying as the wigglers from a few weeks back, but still annoying. Can we turn off animations, please?
1 Like
I mentioned above a case of me getting 9 lore and the next guy (who just happens to be my brother) getting 27 lore for the same Tome of Evil battle…after a few more days (and me getting 14 lore versus him getting 42 for the same Tome of Evil) he’s got one Tome battle less than me but, at the same time, he’s almost 50 points up on the leaderboard.
I’m still (just like at the beginning of the week) not impressed - the worst kind of random scoring has returned.
2 Likes
And it continues:
L985 44 D Lore
L1010 63
L1035 64
L1060 66
L1085 48
L1110 49
L1135 50
It is absolutely clear that Tome of evil does NOT drop bonus Lore in every fight. Which is a travesty considering the stats the enemy has at this level. Still no explanation from the devs who are of course enjoying a weekend off while we try and understand this BS.
1 Like
Nothing in the OP says that it would. The base points for it go up by 1 every fight and there is a chance to get more than the base points. Presumably up to 3 times the base points (my highest was x2.4 base points). Never was it claimed you would get more than the base points every fight (“variable number” includes base amounts).
The average of 1.18x points means over thousands of battles, you’ll have approx. 1.18x base points accumulated. Which doesn’t really help us, since we’re not doing enough battles to land on the average, so some players will have more than the average and others will have less. On a small sample for example, if in 10 fights, you get base points 9 times and 3x base points just once, you’re now at an average of 1.2x base points per fight.
I don’t know what else there is to understand here. It’s just a bad scoring system, where you will randomly get more points than other players and vice versa.
1 Like
OK so Base value of ToE is 5 so the minimum increment per level is 1 assuming of course that your variable rate is also 1. We have no idea what the scope of variation is because we (as you correctly pointed out) have merely been given “an average of 1.18” which is completely meaningless because it is based on nothing more than speculation probably (I hope) based on win condition simulation over 1000s of test runs. So what we have is a situation where every gem we invest ends up being worth a different Base value because of how results are calculated. If my Mrs and I go out to dinner and both order the same steak from the menu, I wouldn’t expect her to get a 16oz ribeye when all I get is a meatball.
Next time you spend money on gems ask yourself how much each gem is actually worth? These events are making us gamble with the 'exchange rate" and of course gambling for under 18s is illegal.
How does it feel being a labrat? Don’t bother giving feedback it won’t matter. They don’t care what scoring method we enjoy more. Our enjoyment means nothing to the number crunchers only what makes us spend the most gems.
3 Likes
No but just because my neighbour bought a lotto ticket and won a million, I won’t go out and shout on the rooftops when my ticket doesn’t also get a million. Context is important here.
This is a real point, and some countries are moving to make random loot illegal. Maybe next year, gem keys will work like pity timers. “24 gem keys to your next Mythic”. Heck, maybe even the Mythic cannot be random - some may not want another Doomclaw. I don’t personally like taking all RNG out, but I guess such a change would make it predictable and consistent.
Like Fleg said, it is pointless thinking that the devs will pay any real attention to feedback now, they are probably too busy with their next project.
In the meantime they will just churn out the same barely tested content and hope that enough players will spend real money on it.
2 Likes
Not necessarily. There are implied constraints on the variables in this equation that can be used to derive the likely values being used.
Disclaiming the usual, I’m not a dev, but I’ve never experienced a situation in-game that isn’t derived from mathematical formulae. Remember, the game is just a big database and every action in-game that has some sort of result can be traced to a math formula somewhere in the code.
So, we know that the average of all the outcomes is 1.18, right? It’s safe to assume that 1.00 represents the base outcome. And since the 1.18x formula has been used before, there were outcomes where double and triple rewards were obtained. (An assumption here, but IMO a reasonable one to make.)
If so, then the formula in question is simply:
1x + 2y + 3z = 1.18, where x, y, and z represent the probabilities of base, double, and triple rewards occurring where x, y, and z must be positive real numbers.
There are two likely solutions:
- 85% base reward + 12% double reward + 3% triple reward
- 83% base reward + 16% double reward + 1% triple reward
There are other valid solutions with these constraints beyond these two, but they are not reasonable and are very likely not correct (especially with how rare a triple reward anecdotally appears to be in-game).
Seeing actual data to corroborate these values would be nice, but it would take an awful lot of runs to statistically differentiate which of the two formulae above is most likely the correct one being used. They could be wrong as well, but if so, they are surely “close enough” to the real values being used (especially if the percentages being used require more than two decimal places).
3 Likes