• Dear forum visitor,

    It looks as though you have not registered for a forum account, or are not signed in. In order to participate in current discussions or create new threads, you will need to register for a forum account by clicking on the link below.

    Click here to register for a forum account!

    If you already have a forum account, you can simply click on the 'Log in' button at the top right of your forum screen.

    Your Elvenar Team

League Silver Gold World Chart

NightshadeCS

Well-Known Member
I had a similar experience to Eudaemonia. One world with especially good luck ended up in Silver; one city with moderately good luck in Bronze; and one city with no Ash Phoenix and poor luck in Amateur (and minus the Forge).

I like what The Unbeliever says regarding FOE and the distribution of league results. I could live with not getting gold without paying but it seems like a kick in the sensitive spots to have all 3 cities complete all quests and log in multiple times a day to end up so different.
 

Starr621

Member
Someone made a calculation on beta which I thought was very interesting. By only going for the 18s and 45s, the worst case each trial was getting neither and getting the 27 and/or 54 instead.

Expected number of SK per staff: (0.25)(18) + (0.75)(0.67)(22.5)+(0.75)(0.33)(27) = 22.5 SK per staff
Expected number of SK needed to get 260/full set: 22.5 x 260 = 5850
Expected number of SK earned from event after nerf w/o newsletter + ashen phoenix + extra SK:
Quests: ~3800 SK
Dailies: 770 SK
Milestones: 400 SK
City Collections: ~500 SK (around 22 per day even with just a few logins, I'd say 25 per day if you are very active)
Total: ~5470 SK

So based off this strategy, you would need to win around 350-400 extra SK to hit the 5850.

I won 345 extra SK + 100 from newsletter (no Ashen phoenix). I won 4 x 80 and 1 x 25 which was actually from a 30 I went for maybe just 4 times. I was also very active so I'm sure I had more around 550 from city collections which accounts for the occasional 2s and 3s.

So my theoretical results were ~5500 SK + 345 + 100 = ~5945 / 22.5 = 264.2 staffs
I finished with 263 staffs and w/o chasing the larger options at the end I would've been closer to 270.

EDIT: One trick that helped was trying to manipulate the grand prize counter to get it to 18/20. In this case, you are guaranteed to find a 45 as the 3 staff option is replaced with a 2 staff option. Now the calculation gets very complex so let's just say once every 4 grand prizes you can get a 45 instead of the 54. It's a rough estimate but you could save 30-40 SK and reduce some RNG.
 
Last edited:

HeroJAY1

Member
Almost certainly no more than 1 or 2 in the top 5% per server, if any.
Time and time again we've had to explain basic mechanics and issues to the developers that an employee would have brought up long ago if there were any who played in a serious way.
Also, from what I've heard from others the scores are pretty much the same everywhere and there are 20+ regions aside from the US. I don't think inno has enough multi-lingual employees to influence the score even if they all played at a serious level.

Players are perfectly capable of doing this to ourselves. If you go back through the thread many players openly stated in the first few days that they had spent money already and were pushing into Gold.
 

HeroJAY1

Member
Almost certainly no more than 1 or 2 in the top 5% per server, if any.
Time and time again we've had to explain basic mechanics and issues to the developers that an employee would have brought up long ago if there were any who played in a serious way.
Also, from what I've heard from others the scores are pretty much the same everywhere and there are 20+ regions aside from the US. I don't think inno has enough multi-lingual employees to influence the score even if they all played at a serious level.

Players are perfectly capable of doing this to ourselves. If you go back through the thread many players openly stated in the first few days that they had spent money already and were pushing into Gold.
Yes and in the beginning if you spent money. You would be in gold league. That was when it was only 240 scrolls to get in. But by the end of the event. When the gold requirement was moved up to 370. They most likely fell back to silver or bronze. Or they might of spent even more money. Which makes my point. Which was to move the finish line to extort more money from players.
 

StarLoad

Well-Known Member
Yes and in the beginning if you spent money. You would be in gold league. That was when it was only 240 scrolls to get in. But by the end of the event. When the gold requirement was moved up to 370. They most likely fell back to silver or bronze. Or they might of spent even more money. Which makes my point. Which was to move the finish line to extort more money from players.
Not quite, I bought my way into gold by getting "Thank you for your purchase. We are sending you this message to confirm that you have received the following: - 870 x Sorcerers' Knowledge" a Jumpstart. From then on I just played as normal and completed the quests and poof I kept pace above the pack in gold and finished with 3 sets, 2 full and 6/7 of the 3rd. Not spending more and no extortion that jump-start kept me in place as all of us did the quests equally.
 

HeroJAY1

Member
Not quite, I bought my way into gold by getting "Thank you for your purchase. We are sending you this message to confirm that you have received the following: - 870 x Sorcerers' Knowledge" a Jumpstart. From then on I just played as normal and completed the quests and poof I kept pace above the pack in gold and finished with 3 sets, 2 full and 6/7 of the 3rd. Not spending more and no extortion that jump-start kept me in place as all of us did the quests equally.
I am happy for you. This is my whole point. You have to buy your way in. In order to have a good standing in the event. Thank you for making my point for me.
 

StarLoad

Well-Known Member
I am happy for you. This is my whole point. You have to buy your way in. In order to have a good standing in the event. Thank you for making my point for me.
Yes I did "choose" to get a jump start in the event and that is offered every time to all players equally, but you fail to see that it is a choice and I made it on one account and not on others based on my desire to remove the T1 MFG and reclaim the space.

I did not "HAVE TO BUY MY WAY IN" I choose to and after that, there was no extortion nor pressure to buy/spend more.
 

Iyapo1

Well-Known Member
Which makes my point. Which was to move the finish line to extort more money from players.
I do not like the way the leagues were set up. The mobile finish line pissed me off. So I decided where I was going to finish and in the last hour I threw diamonds at the locked league.
How I feel about the league had nothing to do with how I feel about this set. This set is spectacular. I thought it was worth all my diamonds...other players bought orc ships, expansions, and artifacts...among other things. Players can spend diamond on whatever they want.
 

Iyapo1

Well-Known Member
and finished with 3 sets, 2 full and 6/7 of the 3rd. Not spending more and no extortion that jump-start kept me in place as all of us did the quests equally.
Shame on you and shame on your dog!

You have 3 sets! <DROOLS>
Screen shots or it didnt happen!
20210630_215926.jpg
 

CrazyWizard

Oh Wise One
Ummm, no. He's saying that FoE isn't infused with RNG garbage to the point in FoE you will do everything and almost for sure get top prizes as opposed to having to struggle sometimes here just to get a full set even.
My point is that if 25% of the players do there best, RNG or no RNG still only 1% will get gold and only 5% will get silver.
If just doing your best is enough to get you in silver means that less than 5% do there best.

The RNG does not matter in this case, because there will be ups and downs for many, we have seen that even people who do there best and get enough staffs for a full set, are not able to reach silver.

This tells us that a larger group on elvernar is able qualified for silver, then the group on FOE.

You can manipulate absolute numbers, but you cannot manipulate a %. a percentage is always a portion of. and with that statement that with doing your best on FoE enables you to automaticcally reaches silver can only mean that a smaller portion of the FoE public is willing to spend the effort, because if 10% of FoE would do there best you would not reach silver automatically.
 

CrazyWizard

Oh Wise One
yes that game still exists. But no where near the level it use to be at. Has about 1/10th of the players it use to have. The value of the company has dropped drastically as well. But I get it. Make a game, rob everyone. Then start over with a new game, and rob them.
The point is, the buisness model of that game doesnt seem to be viable on the long term.
You said they give eevrything away unlimited? that doesnt look to me a game thats fun for longer than a little while. more like a game you buy on the PC, play, complete and shelf it again to never look back.
 

CrazyWizard

Oh Wise One
I had a similar experience to Eudaemonia. One world with especially good luck ended up in Silver; one city with moderately good luck in Bronze; and one city with no Ash Phoenix and poor luck in Amateur (and minus the Forge).

I like what The Unbeliever says regarding FOE and the distribution of league results. I could live with not getting gold without paying but it seems like a kick in the sensitive spots to have all 3 cities complete all quests and log in multiple times a day to end up so different.
but thats a fairytale, a top X% does not work like that, unless a huge portion of the game ignores events for a giant portion of the time.

If 100 people play an event and 5 of them het a score of 280 or higher. then the 12 players that reach more than 260 but below 280 will automatically reach bronze or lower.

5% is 5% so even if you score 1000 staffs, if thats not enough to be part of the top 5% of the active players, you will not reach it.
What bracket you will be in all depends on the effort that all the players in elvenar put into it.

The more effort people put into it, the more difficult it is to reach a higher bracket.
In an exrreme case of every player would put maximum effort into it,. and it every player would reach 260 staffs. then you could even end up in the hobby bracket with maximum effort.
 

HeroJAY1

Member
The point is, the buisness model of that game doesnt seem to be viable on the long term.
You said they give eevrything away unlimited? that doesnt look to me a game thats fun for longer than a little while. more like a game you buy on the PC, play, complete and shelf it again to never look back.
I wasn't speaking of FOE. I was speaking of a game from a different developer. I was a tester between 2010-2012. One of many in the game. Because we had everything to test with. We were the top 1% of the game. It was a game much like this game. Every platform has 100's if not 1000's of testers to make sure everything is running right. I'm not trying to be right or prove anyone wrong. I was just giving my insight. Then everyone got defensive. I'm done getting beat up over giving my opinion. Cheers M8
 

DeletedUser27062

Guest
When you choose the most expensive options like 80 and 89 you are reducing the number of trials of randomly generated options/chests. Theoretically, if you obtain around 5500 event currency and only go for the 80s and 89s you have approximately a sample size of about 65. However, if you go for the 1 or 2 staff options (18, 27, 30, 32, 45, 54), the sample size will vary but it will be much larger than 60 (at least 100). By increasing the sample size, you can expect to see 18s closer to 25% of the time and 45s closer to 67% of the time (under the assumption that each chest is equally likely to appear).

The problem doesn't lie in that the 80s and 89s are bad options because based on expected results you would get the complete set if you obtained extra knowledge the expected number of times. The problem lies in that because of the limit in event currency the sample size for these larger chests is significantly smaller than the cheaper chests and your results may not be consistent to the true results (for better or worse).

It's all about expanding your sample size to get results closer to the theoretical results and these are why the cheaper chests are almost always the better options. This is the law of large numbers.

The number of trials in this event (even when choosing the cheapest chests) isn't a big enough sample size to generate a meaningful shift toward correlation with theoretical results.
 

Starr621

Member
The number of trials in this event (even when choosing the cheapest chests) isn't a big enough sample size to generate a meaningful shift toward correlation with theoretical results.

Sure my sample is not a complete representation of the population results, but I'll take any method I can use to increase sample size and mitigate RNG even if it's a small shift. I definitely know for certain I was not lucky when it came to extra currency. I won extra from the 27 once, 45 twice, and 54 once. I definitely know I opened the 27 and 54 both right around 20 times and the 45 w/scrolls close to 40 times (next time I'll keep track, but it was only these and the 18 and 45 w/o scrolls) I was not lucky with any of these options really.

If I had went for the bigger options I would've been sol...;)
 
Last edited:
Top