Please do not tie aspirational content to player progression
" Oh no, carry services for any game I’d like to see eliminated, followed by an achievement reset. But how they would come up with a system for that when you have group play and make it 100 % fool-proof would be the issue. But that’s wishful thinking this day and age of gaming, people like shortcuts and handouts rather than the alternative. Gitting gud Mash the clean
|
|
" you know, you presented some data that i overlooked. and yeah thats on me. so ok i will go to say that 1% maybe a flawed assessment and i may have over exaggerated the numbers 1.2% vs 0.9% doesnt seem too big of a difference. then the next point of my contention is something i brought up. we dont have accurate data. that i would say even GGG doesnt have accurate data on. how many percent of that 0.9% are actually people who cleared maven vs how many who bought services? we can safely assume the 1.2% that cleared exarch most likely did it themselves, but what about maven? its also interesting that 1.5% cleared the hunger. i find it interesting because it means that the AVERAGE PLAYER doesnt give a damn about watchstones and all that. i really have a surprisedpikachuface.jpg when sudden realization that really most of the players cant even clear the hunger even tho the hunger is mechanically the easiest of the bunch. makes me really reconsider what aspirational content really is. i also looked thru other achievements. 2% cleared sirus, which is understandable he has an awakening 1 mode that could make him easy 1.6% has cleared the atlas and 1.9% has socket all stones. this data is inaccurate as "socket all voidstones" achievement was just actually GGG changing the wording, i unlocked all voidstones recently but my "socket all voidstones" achievement dated back to my sirus kill achievement. very interestingly 2% player base actually cleared HoGM. i myself have not. i have been in the top 1% all along. man i really need time to chill and reflect on this. that said i would still say that maven invites, maven, uberelder+shaper encounter are currently the hardest content in the game that are tied to player progression. [Removed by Support]
|
|
" For all the viewers What steam data shows: It shows achievements based on every unique account install of the game, since the games release on steam, 23 October 2013, until present day. The implications that come with this are too long to post. You could write entire pages of junk and there would be multiple layers to each implication. So citing the steam achievements with how much baggage it brings, proves just how useless that data is for any statistical inference. It's similar to what gets said about Ninja and build diversity and viability. All of it completely wrong. I played TR this league. Did all content, bosses, sim 30, challenges that I needed to. Characters there you can look, nothing to hide. Go see what Ninja has to "say" about Toxic Rain. This skill was just nerfed this league by the way. I quoted say because that is not my wording, that is just the common misused language that I see on feedback and reddit. Mash the clean Last edited by Mashgesture#2912 on Apr 27, 2022, 2:39:07 AM
|
|
|
Ninja isn't completely useless it just needs posters and readers that understand where its stats come from. It basically does 3-4 meta snapshots of a league.
League starters, what looks like hot shit, what is hot shit, hot shit at 100. If you are trying to draw statistics for any of those sections it is relevant but the further into a league we get the worse quality stats are available. Hot shit just takes over completely by this stage. It doesn't show anything about viability though, only popularity and discoverability. For example there will be players doing skelly mages with fleshcrafter cutting all the content down 3+ leagues prior to it becoming popular. Many great builds are known but not shared and players that never try new shit probably shouldn't talk about diversity like it actually matters to them :p Steam achievement stats are much worse though, OK for player count but for things like Maven kill % you are probably only interested in players that actually engage with maps so you'd need several filters before you could even get to a reasonable starting point. |
|
|
we can filter out a bunch of people using the other steam achievements.
so as a bare minimum you should only look at people who beat the campaign and engage with maps. this number is 14.4%. already here we can see that about 1/15 of people who beat the campaign end up beating the maven. we can do better than this however. there is an achievement of lvl 90, say that anyone who engages with the maven is unlikely to be lower than lvl 90. 6.4% of steam players have reached lvl 90. i would interpret this as at least 1 in 7 who get to the maven end up beating her (by boss carry or on their own, impossible to know). you can then also look at other bosses like searing exarch and eater of worlds and argue that out of the people who have characters that are capable of taking down bosses (1.2%), the majority beat the maven. however there are some issues with this analysis. steam achievements have existed for longer than the maven, and especially the new bosses. this is likely why sirus sits at a respectable 2%, because he has been there for so long. the figure of 6.4% of players reaching lvl 90 is during a much longer time period than the maven has existed. so dont get hung up too much on these numbers this is however a far more useful analysis than saying "only 0.9% of players beat the maven" |
|
