how many ba cost tiers are there in 6/20? (in General)

mikel is at 1435, i am at 1344 and i know there are lower ones as well.

yet, as far as we have tested they all have the same rewards. if there are even more, then the higher you get the less money you have to invest back into gear unless supplemented with other money?

Jon's statements about rewards being based on BA cost contradict what your testing shows.

BTW I'm at $1412

mine's 1321 per. I think there was only one below where I am.

granted, on the day that ranger and i tested i think there was only a couple of tiers between us. our rewards for the same opponent were exact though.

the only thing i remember jon specifically stating was that the different regen zones had different rewards but i do not remember him saying the tiers within a regen zone also had different rewards.

perhaps this would be a good q & a topic for the council if that plan gets implemented. i had hoped ns, or jon if he returns, would let the council gather a handful of questions a month and let one of them pick a few for answering.

today would be the day to test it though nov, or anyone else above him ought to do as well.

i can beat titania, so if we all fight titania and use the method in the wiki to find out our average reward that should tell us.

526 & 438 for me, i will figure out my average reward later.

d'oh! i get a challenge bonus on that target, let's do xanas instead.

A: Stop taking the average and look at them separately.

Currently my BA cost is 7196, but divide that by 445% of ncb bonus. I can't atm, sorry.

rewards vary widely and the average method in the wiki is the best way to normalize them we have found.

i am still getting a cb on xanas so i used FUSE instead, please use this target.

my rewards for fuse are 579 & 661.

752.7 is what i get for my average reward against fuse. i hope nov can get us his or someone else higher than him even in mpr. if others want to do it as well feel free to add your data, non-bonus users only please.

if you aren't sure how to use the wiki formula, just fight fuse twice and put your two monetary award amounts here.

You need to test a variety of targets in order to get the proper results. When you come to the right conclusions I will tell you.

331,331,331,579,661 - too busy watching the Sharks lose to the Ducks to play with the formula

I would say Nem is right... I believe the results are being skewed by other penalties (PR and/or NW comparisons)

your 579 & 661 are exactly the same as my rewards.

more targets would confuse the issue unnecessarily. if we fight the same target and get the same rewards, as well as average rewards, then that tells us that even with pretty varying mpr and nw that the rewards are the same throughout the ba regen zone tiers.

if you are referring to the fact that fighting higher gets higher base rewards then i concur, but those are two very different things.

which one do you mean nem?

Try this one on for size: fight Fuse, then fight Fantastic Four. Your rewards will be lower than if you fought Fuse.

yes, different targets give different rewards, that is well known. what relevance does that have to what i am trying to find out here though?

Why do different targets give different rewards? What makes the rewards different?

You see part of the picture and try to conclude the whole. This skews your view of how things work. Yes, against that target you should get the same rewards. So would I. You still are coming to slightly wrong conclusion.

okay, so if we get the same rewards per target and if at the top there are limited targets and we all fight the same ones then those paying more per ba will come out behind those who pay less or they will have less overall cb dollars to put into gear.

granted, in reality those at higher tiers can beat better targets and get better rewards due to that, but is it enough to offset the cost differential with ba?

that is the only conclusion i am coming to here is that if the tiers are limitless or many, within 6/20 (which is a moving target) then as the game progresses the highest mpr players will have less cash rewards to plow back into net worth.

if you can explain why that is the wrong conclusion then please do so.

You're not factoring in the effect of opponent PR on base rewards...

to be more clear, just because someone pays more for their ba, they do not get any better rewards would be my other conclusion that could be wrong.

again, yes there are other factors that change rewards against different opponents but for the same opponent one person paying one ba gets the same average reward as another paying more.

explain to me why opponent pr should factor in when determining if base rewards are the same for different tiers within a ba regen zone? i factored it out on purpose because i am simply trying to see if paying more per ba with a zone increases rewards.

Maybe this:
Is caused by this:
:)

the theory is that the more you pay for ba within a regen zone, the better your rewards. the best way to determine if that is true is to have two players in different ba cost tiers fight the same opponent. if they get different average rewards the hypothesis is true, but if they get the same average reward then it is false.

how does this experiment fail to prove or disprove the hypothesis?

B/c there are other factors that could increase your rewards on one opponent and not another. So, I'm x char, against y I'm getting this hidden bonus and I have a smaller regen cost than you, your w, against z you have a smaller hidden bonus and larger regen cost. Yet our outcomes could be similar.

but if we are both fighting the same person then that rules out the hidden bonus factor entirely, which is why we test it fighting the same opponent.

Nope, are your scores the same as the person your testing with, are your PRs/MPRs the same, I don't think so. Rewards are more complicated than you think perhaps.

so then, with all of those differences how can our rewards be exactly the same? they aren't similar they are exact against the same opponent.

you rule out any other factors as well as you can, fight on sunday, find a target with no challenge bonus, etc. if after all of that you both get the same exact rewards then that tells you all you need to know.

Maybe the character you fight limits what you can get for rewards.

the same held true when ranger and i tested it a few years back as well, we got exactly the same rewards then also.

I'm at 1321 right now, but I had a slightly lower cost immediately after I switched from 7/20 to 6/20...
Sorry, can't remember exactly how much it was, something like 1295 or thereabouts anyway (I do distinctly remember the 12** though).

i've hit 1435 :)

I am not surprised that you got the same results when you did your testing. You probably only hit targets who couldn't give any challange bonus when you did it right? CB can be factored out rather easily. If you hit some different targets you might see some different results.

Also try to avoid biased testing. You might be trying to look for something where it is really something entirely different.

1344 myself as well.

So we currently have:

12xx
1321
1344
1412
1435

I have had both of these:

1,367
1,389

please enlighten me oh wise one. how would you test it then?

remember though that to prove there is an increase in rewards from paying more per ba, you will have to separate out the hidden bonus for fighting better targets, otherwise you won't know which of those two you would be dealing with.

unless the hidden bonus is what increases as the tiers change. in which case there is now way to prove it unless you actually know how to figure out the hidden bonus or have seen the code and you would need to see the code to figure out the bonus or at least be told what factors into the hidden bonus.

I'm on 1344 at my MPR if it counts. Didn't read much tbh.

I am at 1298 per ba.

So we currently have:

1298
1321
1344
1367
1389
1412
1435

Average difference between them is 22,83

If you at least want to match up MPR with the rates, know that I'm at 1344 with MPR 4,114,671.