The factor that determines whether you are top 1% or not comes down to the difficulty bonus that you are assigned. When you are assigned a low bonus, the top 1% is inaccessible. When you are assigned a high bonus, the top 1% is given.
My question- why does the difficulty bonus increase rapidly at the start- eg 409 to 442 after a couple of wins in first session- and then gradually reduces eg from 447 to 437?
I observe this repeatedly. The opponents i defeat are the same- broadly. But after say 10 consecutive wins, I see a reduction of difficulty bonus by about 10 points.
When I flee a battle, the next round I see a sudden spike in difficulty bonus- eg 437 back to 440- which then reduces after each win.
Obviously, it’s just a feature reflecting the program logic but unfortunately I don’t see how the logic makes sense- hence, can anyone explain better?
I think you’re looking for a pattern that doesn’t exist. The increases and decreases you’re talking about are just a few points variation.
Looking at my history the first day is somewhat erratic, but after that, it seems to center around 635 or so.
First day: 626, 633, 641, 642, 639
Second day: 637, 636, 636, 636, 635
Third day: 634, 634, (218), 636, 637.
Other than the first day we’re talking about +/- 2 for 9 of the 10 attacks on the second and third days if we center around 635.
Well, the pattern does exist- you just demonstrated that you reach a peak quickly, then a gradual decline- followed by a spike up after a loss.
But that’s not the point- the point is- these values determine your placement. You can see how the top 100 are inaccessibly tight so ‘one or two points’ makes a difference.
And the pattern isn’t random- because it’s repeatable and predictable.
So, why should the ‘rise & decline’ exist at all? Why not fix ‘difficulty bonus’ to some arbitrary value throughout the Tournament?
In the current format- you’re unable to ‘select’ the high bonus values despite having a series of consecutive victories.
Not really, IIRC the opponents are assigned at the start of the day. So the first day will be a bit of a mess for matchmaking. All I see is variation of a few points.
At any rate, you might as well read a player’s guide on this.
The other part has to do with availability of teams at certain sections of the ladder. From what we know of the AI and defense selection, a player that wins an attack should play a harder opponent. However, the top end of the scoring ladder may not always have harder opponents available or may have to draw from a lower pool. While we don’t know how defenses are initially valued at the start of a given tournament, if a lower team power starts off with a lesser value as a defense but is drawn as an opponent, even a few points difference could explain a swing between one team at the top being a 622 and the next a 610 (as an example).
Combined, these two factors would explain why we’re able to see a fairly static progression in scoring up to a certain point in each tournament
