1) use the current system, have a lot players beta test and a small subset compete for legends.
2) have significantly fewer players in the beta, and run the risk of improperly tuned content
Seems like a no brainer option 1 to me, unless you are clamoring for the original 7.1 to be the norm.
Or, when people sign up for Beta testing, make it very clear that they won't be able to do a legends run, put a warning on the email/message. That way, everyone knows that by taking part they will gain an unfair advantage and they can decide whether they would prioritise giving feedback or doing the beta.
I would never touch another beta with a 10 foot pole, and I have never seriously attempted a run. It's beyond short sighted to think you'll get correct feedback and also disqualify people.
1) use the current system, have a lot players beta test and a small subset compete for legends.
2) have significantly fewer players in the beta, and run the risk of improperly tuned content
Seems like a no brainer option 1 to me, unless you are clamoring for the original 7.1 to be the norm.
Or, when people sign up for Beta testing, make it very clear that they won't be able to do a legends run, put a warning on the email/message. That way, everyone knows that by taking part they will gain an unfair advantage and they can decide whether they would prioritise giving feedback or doing the beta.
I would never touch another beta with a 10 foot pole, and I have never seriously attempted a run. It's beyond short sighted to think you'll get correct feedback and also disqualify people.
But why? If you want to do a legends run, you shouldn't be able to have a test run first. I think that's fair enough. It should be level ground. I would use an analogy with a race or an obstacle course or a maze, but really i shouldnt need to. This is basic logic and it baffles me how people don't see it. Experience in something is better than no experience.
Legacy didn't get a legends title and he was in the Beta for 7.1.
1 case is not proof. Nobody is saying doing the beta guarantees you getting legend title.
Maybe if he didn’t do the beta he would have got an even slower time.
That's pretty much what this thread is about. The beta gives some unfair advantage. I've been in almost all the betas. I don't see a ton of people from the betas getting the title.
It's no more of an advantage than others having a better roster.
Yeah but you aren’t in a position to say whether it offers enough of an advantage that it’s unfair.
Kabam has the data, they can see the percentage of those who get legend title. They should compare the % of people who attempted a run. Split it into 4 categories,
1) those in the beta who got legend title 2) those not in beta who got legend title 3) those in beta who missed out on legends run 4) those not in beta who missed out
1 and 2 should be roughly similar, 3 and 4 should be roughly similar. Over all the legends runs kabam has done that had betas first there should be a pretty decent sample.
Then, from all those who did a legends run, compare average time of people who were in the beta, with average time of those out of the beta. Again, they should be statistically similar.
It’s pretty simple to perform a statistical test on it. And I’m not gonna be taking “I don’t see a ton of people from betas getting the title” as gospel.
It is reasonable enough to say that doing content makes you more experienced at it. That is a fact. If I never fought a fight, then did it on a beta, I am more experienced at it.
It is reasonable to suggest this could give an advantage, again this is not an opinion. It is a fact that this could be an advantage. It’s then up to kabam to analyse it and see if they’re giving players an advantage to do the content before others can.
But your saying people in the beta have a advantage as gospel but you don't have any proof that those in the beta get the title vs those that aren't. You're just saying they do because the betas exist. I'm sure if there was a distinct advantage for beta users getting the title, Kabam would have done something about it long ago. Seeing as they banned a ton of people for merc'ing and whatnot for the last beta, they are trying their best to make getting the title as fair as possible.
I'll point you back to my post
"It is reasonable enough to say that doing content makes you more experienced at it. That is a fact. If I never fought a fight, then did it on a beta, I am more experienced at it.
It is reasonable to suggest this could give an advantage, again this is not an opinion. It is a fact that this could be an advantage. It’s then up to kabam to analyse it and see if they’re giving players an advantage to do the content before others can. "
Please point out where I said it as gospel, rather than just stating facts. It is reasonable to suggest it gives an advantage. Which part do you disagree with?
Doing content makes you more experienced? or being experienced at something when others are not is an advantage?
I don't think the beta gives anyone an advantage. Do you have proof that it does?
Legacy didn't get a legends title and he was in the Beta for 7.1.
1 case is not proof. Nobody is saying doing the beta guarantees you getting legend title.
Maybe if he didn’t do the beta he would have got an even slower time.
That's pretty much what this thread is about. The beta gives some unfair advantage. I've been in almost all the betas. I don't see a ton of people from the betas getting the title.
It's no more of an advantage than others having a better roster.
Yeah but you aren’t in a position to say whether it offers enough of an advantage that it’s unfair.
Kabam has the data, they can see the percentage of those who get legend title. They should compare the % of people who attempted a run. Split it into 4 categories,
1) those in the beta who got legend title 2) those not in beta who got legend title 3) those in beta who missed out on legends run 4) those not in beta who missed out
1 and 2 should be roughly similar, 3 and 4 should be roughly similar. Over all the legends runs kabam has done that had betas first there should be a pretty decent sample.
Then, from all those who did a legends run, compare average time of people who were in the beta, with average time of those out of the beta. Again, they should be statistically similar.
It’s pretty simple to perform a statistical test on it. And I’m not gonna be taking “I don’t see a ton of people from betas getting the title” as gospel.
It is reasonable enough to say that doing content makes you more experienced at it. That is a fact. If I never fought a fight, then did it on a beta, I am more experienced at it.
It is reasonable to suggest this could give an advantage, again this is not an opinion. It is a fact that this could be an advantage. It’s then up to kabam to analyse it and see if they’re giving players an advantage to do the content before others can.
But your saying people in the beta have a advantage as gospel but you don't have any proof that those in the beta get the title vs those that aren't. You're just saying they do because the betas exist. I'm sure if there was a distinct advantage for beta users getting the title, Kabam would have done something about it long ago. Seeing as they banned a ton of people for merc'ing and whatnot for the last beta, they are trying their best to make getting the title as fair as possible.
I'll point you back to my post
"It is reasonable enough to say that doing content makes you more experienced at it. That is a fact. If I never fought a fight, then did it on a beta, I am more experienced at it.
It is reasonable to suggest this could give an advantage, again this is not an opinion. It is a fact that this could be an advantage. It’s then up to kabam to analyse it and see if they’re giving players an advantage to do the content before others can. "
Please point out where I said it as gospel, rather than just stating facts. It is reasonable to suggest it gives an advantage. Which part do you disagree with?
Doing content makes you more experienced? or being experienced at something when others are not is an advantage?
I don't think the beta gives anyone an advantage. Do you have proof that it does?
Would you rather go into a fight having fought the fight unlimited times beforehand or go in having only watched videos?
Legacy didn't get a legends title and he was in the Beta for 7.1.
1 case is not proof. Nobody is saying doing the beta guarantees you getting legend title.
Maybe if he didn’t do the beta he would have got an even slower time.
That's pretty much what this thread is about. The beta gives some unfair advantage. I've been in almost all the betas. I don't see a ton of people from the betas getting the title.
It's no more of an advantage than others having a better roster.
Yeah but you aren’t in a position to say whether it offers enough of an advantage that it’s unfair.
Kabam has the data, they can see the percentage of those who get legend title. They should compare the % of people who attempted a run. Split it into 4 categories,
1) those in the beta who got legend title 2) those not in beta who got legend title 3) those in beta who missed out on legends run 4) those not in beta who missed out
1 and 2 should be roughly similar, 3 and 4 should be roughly similar. Over all the legends runs kabam has done that had betas first there should be a pretty decent sample.
Then, from all those who did a legends run, compare average time of people who were in the beta, with average time of those out of the beta. Again, they should be statistically similar.
It’s pretty simple to perform a statistical test on it. And I’m not gonna be taking “I don’t see a ton of people from betas getting the title” as gospel.
It is reasonable enough to say that doing content makes you more experienced at it. That is a fact. If I never fought a fight, then did it on a beta, I am more experienced at it.
It is reasonable to suggest this could give an advantage, again this is not an opinion. It is a fact that this could be an advantage. It’s then up to kabam to analyse it and see if they’re giving players an advantage to do the content before others can.
But your saying people in the beta have a advantage as gospel but you don't have any proof that those in the beta get the title vs those that aren't. You're just saying they do because the betas exist. I'm sure if there was a distinct advantage for beta users getting the title, Kabam would have done something about it long ago. Seeing as they banned a ton of people for merc'ing and whatnot for the last beta, they are trying their best to make getting the title as fair as possible.
I'll point you back to my post
"It is reasonable enough to say that doing content makes you more experienced at it. That is a fact. If I never fought a fight, then did it on a beta, I am more experienced at it.
It is reasonable to suggest this could give an advantage, again this is not an opinion. It is a fact that this could be an advantage. It’s then up to kabam to analyse it and see if they’re giving players an advantage to do the content before others can. "
Please point out where I said it as gospel, rather than just stating facts. It is reasonable to suggest it gives an advantage. Which part do you disagree with?
Doing content makes you more experienced? or being experienced at something when others are not is an advantage?
I don't think the beta gives anyone an advantage. Do you have proof that it does?
Would you rather go into a fight having fought the fight unlimited times beforehand or go in having only watched videos?
Ok so you have no proof it have given the current legends title holders an advantage. Cool.
1) use the current system, have a lot players beta test and a small subset compete for legends.
2) have significantly fewer players in the beta, and run the risk of improperly tuned content
Seems like a no brainer option 1 to me, unless you are clamoring for the original 7.1 to be the norm.
Or, when people sign up for Beta testing, make it very clear that they won't be able to do a legends run, put a warning on the email/message. That way, everyone knows that by taking part they will gain an unfair advantage and they can decide whether they would prioritise giving feedback or doing the beta.
I would never touch another beta with a 10 foot pole, and I have never seriously attempted a run. It's beyond short sighted to think you'll get correct feedback and also disqualify people.
But why? If you want to do a legends run, you shouldn't be able to have a test run first. I think that's fair enough. It should be level ground. I would use an analogy with a race or an obstacle course or a maze, but really i shouldnt need to. This is basic logic and it baffles me how people don't see it. Experience in something is better than no experience.
Because you're taking away something for me providing feedback on the content. Currently there is no tangible benefit to beta testing except for helping the community (or the handful of legends runners I suppose).
But your solution to the problem is for me to actually give something up to help the community. I wouldn't do it, and others have also indicated as much, and the beta test would suffer for it.
Is it possible that beta testing is helpful to a legends run? Sure it absolutely is possible. Is preventing that worth reducing the number of beta testers? Not to me.
Legacy didn't get a legends title and he was in the Beta for 7.1.
1 case is not proof. Nobody is saying doing the beta guarantees you getting legend title.
Maybe if he didn’t do the beta he would have got an even slower time.
That's pretty much what this thread is about. The beta gives some unfair advantage. I've been in almost all the betas. I don't see a ton of people from the betas getting the title.
It's no more of an advantage than others having a better roster.
Yeah but you aren’t in a position to say whether it offers enough of an advantage that it’s unfair.
Kabam has the data, they can see the percentage of those who get legend title. They should compare the % of people who attempted a run. Split it into 4 categories,
1) those in the beta who got legend title 2) those not in beta who got legend title 3) those in beta who missed out on legends run 4) those not in beta who missed out
1 and 2 should be roughly similar, 3 and 4 should be roughly similar. Over all the legends runs kabam has done that had betas first there should be a pretty decent sample.
Then, from all those who did a legends run, compare average time of people who were in the beta, with average time of those out of the beta. Again, they should be statistically similar.
It’s pretty simple to perform a statistical test on it. And I’m not gonna be taking “I don’t see a ton of people from betas getting the title” as gospel.
It is reasonable enough to say that doing content makes you more experienced at it. That is a fact. If I never fought a fight, then did it on a beta, I am more experienced at it.
It is reasonable to suggest this could give an advantage, again this is not an opinion. It is a fact that this could be an advantage. It’s then up to kabam to analyse it and see if they’re giving players an advantage to do the content before others can.
But your saying people in the beta have a advantage as gospel but you don't have any proof that those in the beta get the title vs those that aren't. You're just saying they do because the betas exist. I'm sure if there was a distinct advantage for beta users getting the title, Kabam would have done something about it long ago. Seeing as they banned a ton of people for merc'ing and whatnot for the last beta, they are trying their best to make getting the title as fair as possible.
I'll point you back to my post
"It is reasonable enough to say that doing content makes you more experienced at it. That is a fact. If I never fought a fight, then did it on a beta, I am more experienced at it.
It is reasonable to suggest this could give an advantage, again this is not an opinion. It is a fact that this could be an advantage. It’s then up to kabam to analyse it and see if they’re giving players an advantage to do the content before others can. "
Please point out where I said it as gospel, rather than just stating facts. It is reasonable to suggest it gives an advantage. Which part do you disagree with?
Doing content makes you more experienced? or being experienced at something when others are not is an advantage?
I don't think the beta gives anyone an advantage. Do you have proof that it does?
Would you rather go into a fight having fought the fight unlimited times beforehand or go in having only watched videos?
Ok so you have no proof it have given the current legends title holders an advantage. Cool.
Your lack of an answer seems like an answer itself. There's my proof.
1) use the current system, have a lot players beta test and a small subset compete for legends.
2) have significantly fewer players in the beta, and run the risk of improperly tuned content
Seems like a no brainer option 1 to me, unless you are clamoring for the original 7.1 to be the norm.
Or, when people sign up for Beta testing, make it very clear that they won't be able to do a legends run, put a warning on the email/message. That way, everyone knows that by taking part they will gain an unfair advantage and they can decide whether they would prioritise giving feedback or doing the beta.
Kabam does the beta to get feedback from as many different players as possible. Doing something like this would exclude every single speedrunner from that feedback pool (because none of them would willingly participate). They're not gonna do this because it's diametrically opposed to their goal
When I was given access to test the Grandmaster fight for 6.4, I was told that in doing so, I will forfeit my entitlement in doing a Legends run. So I said no.
A few days later, I was contacted again that beta testing it will not cause my disqualification for the legends run. I then agreed.
Wanna guess why the decision on legends run disqualification was reversed?
1) use the current system, have a lot players beta test and a small subset compete for legends.
2) have significantly fewer players in the beta, and run the risk of improperly tuned content
Seems like a no brainer option 1 to me, unless you are clamoring for the original 7.1 to be the norm.
Or, when people sign up for Beta testing, make it very clear that they won't be able to do a legends run, put a warning on the email/message. That way, everyone knows that by taking part they will gain an unfair advantage and they can decide whether they would prioritise giving feedback or doing the beta.
I would never touch another beta with a 10 foot pole, and I have never seriously attempted a run. It's beyond short sighted to think you'll get correct feedback and also disqualify people.
But why? If you want to do a legends run, you shouldn't be able to have a test run first. I think that's fair enough. It should be level ground. I would use an analogy with a race or an obstacle course or a maze, but really i shouldnt need to. This is basic logic and it baffles me how people don't see it. Experience in something is better than no experience.
Because you're taking away something for me providing feedback on the content. Currently there is no tangible benefit to beta testing except for helping the community (or the handful of legends runners I suppose).
But your solution to the problem is for me to actually give something up to help the community. I wouldn't do it, and others have also indicated as much, and the beta test would suffer for it.
Is it possible that beta testing is helpful to a legends run? Sure it absolutely is possible. Is preventing that worth reducing the number of beta testers? Not to me.
I understand and respect your opinion, but disagree. I think that the ability to do the beta and a legends run is taking away something in game from those who can't access the beta. I also think that the amount of beta testers it would reduce is pretty small in the grand scheme and the amount of feedback available would not impact how successful the beta would be.
Kabam shouldnt put the beta above one of the highest contests in the entire game, legend runs.
Legacy didn't get a legends title and he was in the Beta for 7.1.
1 case is not proof. Nobody is saying doing the beta guarantees you getting legend title.
Maybe if he didn’t do the beta he would have got an even slower time.
That's pretty much what this thread is about. The beta gives some unfair advantage. I've been in almost all the betas. I don't see a ton of people from the betas getting the title.
It's no more of an advantage than others having a better roster.
Yeah but you aren’t in a position to say whether it offers enough of an advantage that it’s unfair.
Kabam has the data, they can see the percentage of those who get legend title. They should compare the % of people who attempted a run. Split it into 4 categories,
1) those in the beta who got legend title 2) those not in beta who got legend title 3) those in beta who missed out on legends run 4) those not in beta who missed out
1 and 2 should be roughly similar, 3 and 4 should be roughly similar. Over all the legends runs kabam has done that had betas first there should be a pretty decent sample.
Then, from all those who did a legends run, compare average time of people who were in the beta, with average time of those out of the beta. Again, they should be statistically similar.
It’s pretty simple to perform a statistical test on it. And I’m not gonna be taking “I don’t see a ton of people from betas getting the title” as gospel.
It is reasonable enough to say that doing content makes you more experienced at it. That is a fact. If I never fought a fight, then did it on a beta, I am more experienced at it.
It is reasonable to suggest this could give an advantage, again this is not an opinion. It is a fact that this could be an advantage. It’s then up to kabam to analyse it and see if they’re giving players an advantage to do the content before others can.
But your saying people in the beta have a advantage as gospel but you don't have any proof that those in the beta get the title vs those that aren't. You're just saying they do because the betas exist. I'm sure if there was a distinct advantage for beta users getting the title, Kabam would have done something about it long ago. Seeing as they banned a ton of people for merc'ing and whatnot for the last beta, they are trying their best to make getting the title as fair as possible.
I'll point you back to my post
"It is reasonable enough to say that doing content makes you more experienced at it. That is a fact. If I never fought a fight, then did it on a beta, I am more experienced at it.
It is reasonable to suggest this could give an advantage, again this is not an opinion. It is a fact that this could be an advantage. It’s then up to kabam to analyse it and see if they’re giving players an advantage to do the content before others can. "
Please point out where I said it as gospel, rather than just stating facts. It is reasonable to suggest it gives an advantage. Which part do you disagree with?
Doing content makes you more experienced? or being experienced at something when others are not is an advantage?
I don't think the beta gives anyone an advantage. Do you have proof that it does?
Would you rather go into a fight having fought the fight unlimited times beforehand or go in having only watched videos?
Ok so you have no proof it have given the current legends title holders an advantage. Cool.
Your lack of an answer seems like an answer itself. There's my proof.
I'm saying either fighting the fight yourself or watching a video on the fight is the same thing. There are people in this world who are visual learners and there are people in this world who learn by doing.
So to answer your question, both ways can give any person an advantage depending how they best learn. You may learn by doing which means you focus strictly on that ability and are applying it to everyone to make it a point.
Then there are some that are just skilled and it won't matter who they fight.
When I was given access to test the Grandmaster fight for 6.4, I was told that in doing so, I will forfeit my entitlement in doing a Legends run. So I said no.
A few days later, I was contacted again that beta testing it will not cause my disqualification for the legends run. I then agreed.
Wanna guess why the decision on legends run disqualification was reversed?
That's an interesting point to be fair, I'll admit I wasn't aware. I think the decision shouldn't have been reversed. I wonder if the decision was based on beta user outrage, the whole community or data.
1) use the current system, have a lot players beta test and a small subset compete for legends.
2) have significantly fewer players in the beta, and run the risk of improperly tuned content
Seems like a no brainer option 1 to me, unless you are clamoring for the original 7.1 to be the norm.
Or, when people sign up for Beta testing, make it very clear that they won't be able to do a legends run, put a warning on the email/message. That way, everyone knows that by taking part they will gain an unfair advantage and they can decide whether they would prioritise giving feedback or doing the beta.
I would never touch another beta with a 10 foot pole, and I have never seriously attempted a run. It's beyond short sighted to think you'll get correct feedback and also disqualify people.
But why? If you want to do a legends run, you shouldn't be able to have a test run first. I think that's fair enough. It should be level ground. I would use an analogy with a race or an obstacle course or a maze, but really i shouldnt need to. This is basic logic and it baffles me how people don't see it. Experience in something is better than no experience.
Because you're taking away something for me providing feedback on the content. Currently there is no tangible benefit to beta testing except for helping the community (or the handful of legends runners I suppose).
But your solution to the problem is for me to actually give something up to help the community. I wouldn't do it, and others have also indicated as much, and the beta test would suffer for it.
Is it possible that beta testing is helpful to a legends run? Sure it absolutely is possible. Is preventing that worth reducing the number of beta testers? Not to me.
I understand and respect your opinion, but disagree. I think that the ability to do the beta and a legends run is taking away something in game from those who can't access the beta. I also think that the amount of beta testers it would reduce is pretty small in the grand scheme and the amount of feedback available would not impact how successful the beta would be.
Kabam shouldnt put the beta above one of the highest contests in the entire game, legend runs.
You’re wrong. The amount of beta testers will reduce drastically, especially on the top end, the most “seasoned and experienced” group.
They are the ones who will give quality feedback given their knowledge and experience, but also the ones who are most interested in doing a legends run.
(I’ve seen beta testers not know how Diss track or buffed up work.. it’s ridiculous.)
When I was given access to test the Grandmaster fight for 6.4, I was told that in doing so, I will forfeit my entitlement in doing a Legends run. So I said no.
A few days later, I was contacted again that beta testing it will not cause my disqualification for the legends run. I then agreed.
Wanna guess why the decision on legends run disqualification was reversed?
That's an interesting point to be fair, I'll admit I wasn't aware. I think the decision shouldn't have been reversed. I wonder if the decision was based on beta user outrage, the whole community or data.
It’s simple really. The group that were contacted to test the GM fight were the top end group, most likely, and as mentioned above, the group that have the deepest rosters and most likely to go for a legends run.
My guess is that no one agreed to test the fight given the disqualification criteria. Not to mention that during the beta test, rewards will never be made known and no one will willingly forfeit their chance at the additional rewards.
Also, with the exception of the first initial closed beta for 6.1 (when a very small group of very experienced players were asked to test it), the subsequent betas (imo) were filled with players with either very limited game knowledge, or shouldn’t be there in the first place.
So yeah.. removing the legends run entitlement for beta testers isn’t the way (not to mention fights are subjected to change in the beta).
Legacy didn't get a legends title and he was in the Beta for 7.1.
1 case is not proof. Nobody is saying doing the beta guarantees you getting legend title.
Maybe if he didn’t do the beta he would have got an even slower time.
That's pretty much what this thread is about. The beta gives some unfair advantage. I've been in almost all the betas. I don't see a ton of people from the betas getting the title.
It's no more of an advantage than others having a better roster.
Yeah but you aren’t in a position to say whether it offers enough of an advantage that it’s unfair.
Kabam has the data, they can see the percentage of those who get legend title. They should compare the % of people who attempted a run. Split it into 4 categories,
1) those in the beta who got legend title 2) those not in beta who got legend title 3) those in beta who missed out on legends run 4) those not in beta who missed out
1 and 2 should be roughly similar, 3 and 4 should be roughly similar. Over all the legends runs kabam has done that had betas first there should be a pretty decent sample.
Then, from all those who did a legends run, compare average time of people who were in the beta, with average time of those out of the beta. Again, they should be statistically similar.
It’s pretty simple to perform a statistical test on it. And I’m not gonna be taking “I don’t see a ton of people from betas getting the title” as gospel.
It is reasonable enough to say that doing content makes you more experienced at it. That is a fact. If I never fought a fight, then did it on a beta, I am more experienced at it.
It is reasonable to suggest this could give an advantage, again this is not an opinion. It is a fact that this could be an advantage. It’s then up to kabam to analyse it and see if they’re giving players an advantage to do the content before others can.
But your saying people in the beta have a advantage as gospel but you don't have any proof that those in the beta get the title vs those that aren't. You're just saying they do because the betas exist. I'm sure if there was a distinct advantage for beta users getting the title, Kabam would have done something about it long ago. Seeing as they banned a ton of people for merc'ing and whatnot for the last beta, they are trying their best to make getting the title as fair as possible.
I'll point you back to my post
"It is reasonable enough to say that doing content makes you more experienced at it. That is a fact. If I never fought a fight, then did it on a beta, I am more experienced at it.
It is reasonable to suggest this could give an advantage, again this is not an opinion. It is a fact that this could be an advantage. It’s then up to kabam to analyse it and see if they’re giving players an advantage to do the content before others can. "
Please point out where I said it as gospel, rather than just stating facts. It is reasonable to suggest it gives an advantage. Which part do you disagree with?
Doing content makes you more experienced? or being experienced at something when others are not is an advantage?
I don't think the beta gives anyone an advantage. Do you have proof that it does?
Would you rather go into a fight having fought the fight unlimited times beforehand or go in having only watched videos?
Ok so you have no proof it have given the current legends title holders an advantage. Cool.
Your lack of an answer seems like an answer itself. There's my proof.
I'm saying either fighting the fight yourself or watching a video on the fight is the same thing. There are people in this world who are visual learners and there are people in this world who learn by doing.
So to answer your question, both ways can give any person an advantage depending how they best learn. You may learn by doing which means you focus strictly on that ability and are applying it to everyone to make it a point.
Then there are some that are just skilled and it won't matter who they fight.
Ok, but what about those who don't learn by watching. When I watched Grand master fights on youtube it didn't help me one bit, I went into the fight and learned by doing. To some people it might be the same to watch or do. The difference is that it's not like that for everyone.
For visual learners they can watch youtube, for others they can't do the fight unless they are in the beta.
Legacy didn't get a legends title and he was in the Beta for 7.1.
1 case is not proof. Nobody is saying doing the beta guarantees you getting legend title.
Maybe if he didn’t do the beta he would have got an even slower time.
That's pretty much what this thread is about. The beta gives some unfair advantage. I've been in almost all the betas. I don't see a ton of people from the betas getting the title.
It's no more of an advantage than others having a better roster.
Yeah but you aren’t in a position to say whether it offers enough of an advantage that it’s unfair.
Kabam has the data, they can see the percentage of those who get legend title. They should compare the % of people who attempted a run. Split it into 4 categories,
1) those in the beta who got legend title 2) those not in beta who got legend title 3) those in beta who missed out on legends run 4) those not in beta who missed out
1 and 2 should be roughly similar, 3 and 4 should be roughly similar. Over all the legends runs kabam has done that had betas first there should be a pretty decent sample.
Then, from all those who did a legends run, compare average time of people who were in the beta, with average time of those out of the beta. Again, they should be statistically similar.
It’s pretty simple to perform a statistical test on it. And I’m not gonna be taking “I don’t see a ton of people from betas getting the title” as gospel.
It is reasonable enough to say that doing content makes you more experienced at it. That is a fact. If I never fought a fight, then did it on a beta, I am more experienced at it.
It is reasonable to suggest this could give an advantage, again this is not an opinion. It is a fact that this could be an advantage. It’s then up to kabam to analyse it and see if they’re giving players an advantage to do the content before others can.
But your saying people in the beta have a advantage as gospel but you don't have any proof that those in the beta get the title vs those that aren't. You're just saying they do because the betas exist. I'm sure if there was a distinct advantage for beta users getting the title, Kabam would have done something about it long ago. Seeing as they banned a ton of people for merc'ing and whatnot for the last beta, they are trying their best to make getting the title as fair as possible.
I'll point you back to my post
"It is reasonable enough to say that doing content makes you more experienced at it. That is a fact. If I never fought a fight, then did it on a beta, I am more experienced at it.
It is reasonable to suggest this could give an advantage, again this is not an opinion. It is a fact that this could be an advantage. It’s then up to kabam to analyse it and see if they’re giving players an advantage to do the content before others can. "
Please point out where I said it as gospel, rather than just stating facts. It is reasonable to suggest it gives an advantage. Which part do you disagree with?
Doing content makes you more experienced? or being experienced at something when others are not is an advantage?
I don't think the beta gives anyone an advantage. Do you have proof that it does?
Would you rather go into a fight having fought the fight unlimited times beforehand or go in having only watched videos?
Ok so you have no proof it have given the current legends title holders an advantage. Cool.
Your lack of an answer seems like an answer itself. There's my proof.
I'm saying either fighting the fight yourself or watching a video on the fight is the same thing. There are people in this world who are visual learners and there are people in this world who learn by doing.
So to answer your question, both ways can give any person an advantage depending how they best learn. You may learn by doing which means you focus strictly on that ability and are applying it to everyone to make it a point.
Then there are some that are just skilled and it won't matter who they fight.
Ok, but what about those who don't learn by watching. When I watched Grand master fights on youtube it didn't help me one bit, I went into the fight and learned by doing. To some people it might be the same to watch or do. The difference is that it's not like that for everyone.
For visual learners they can watch youtube, for others they can't do the fight unless they are in the beta.
It's never ending with you. So now by what you just said, anyone who can learn by watching has an unfair advantage.
When I was given access to test the Grandmaster fight for 6.4, I was told that in doing so, I will forfeit my entitlement in doing a Legends run. So I said no.
A few days later, I was contacted again that beta testing it will not cause my disqualification for the legends run. I then agreed.
Wanna guess why the decision on legends run disqualification was reversed?
That's an interesting point to be fair, I'll admit I wasn't aware. I think the decision shouldn't have been reversed. I wonder if the decision was based on beta user outrage, the whole community or data.
It’s simple really. The group that were contacted to test the GM fight were the top end group, most likely, and as mentioned above, the group that have the deepest rosters and most likely to go for a legends run.
My guess is that no one agreed to test the fight given the disqualification criteria. Not to mention that during the beta test, rewards will never be made known and no one will willingly forfeit their chance at the additional rewards.
Also, with the exception of the first initial closed beta for 6.1 (when a very small group of very experienced players were asked to test it), the subsequent betas (imo) were filled with players with either very limited game knowledge, or shouldn’t be there in the first place.
So yeah.. removing the legends run entitlement for beta testers isn’t the way (not to mention fights are subjected to change in the beta).
Fair enough, I think I'm beginning to see the other side of the argument a lot more. I now agree that the removal from legend runs would reduce beta testing numbers/quality.
I do still think it's pretty obviously unfair on others who are not able to do the beta, but at the moment I'm not sure what the best solution is. I have changed my mind on ruling out those who do legends runs who have been in the beta though, I don't think it is a good option .
Legacy didn't get a legends title and he was in the Beta for 7.1.
1 case is not proof. Nobody is saying doing the beta guarantees you getting legend title.
Maybe if he didn’t do the beta he would have got an even slower time.
That's pretty much what this thread is about. The beta gives some unfair advantage. I've been in almost all the betas. I don't see a ton of people from the betas getting the title.
It's no more of an advantage than others having a better roster.
Yeah but you aren’t in a position to say whether it offers enough of an advantage that it’s unfair.
Kabam has the data, they can see the percentage of those who get legend title. They should compare the % of people who attempted a run. Split it into 4 categories,
1) those in the beta who got legend title 2) those not in beta who got legend title 3) those in beta who missed out on legends run 4) those not in beta who missed out
1 and 2 should be roughly similar, 3 and 4 should be roughly similar. Over all the legends runs kabam has done that had betas first there should be a pretty decent sample.
Then, from all those who did a legends run, compare average time of people who were in the beta, with average time of those out of the beta. Again, they should be statistically similar.
It’s pretty simple to perform a statistical test on it. And I’m not gonna be taking “I don’t see a ton of people from betas getting the title” as gospel.
It is reasonable enough to say that doing content makes you more experienced at it. That is a fact. If I never fought a fight, then did it on a beta, I am more experienced at it.
It is reasonable to suggest this could give an advantage, again this is not an opinion. It is a fact that this could be an advantage. It’s then up to kabam to analyse it and see if they’re giving players an advantage to do the content before others can.
But your saying people in the beta have a advantage as gospel but you don't have any proof that those in the beta get the title vs those that aren't. You're just saying they do because the betas exist. I'm sure if there was a distinct advantage for beta users getting the title, Kabam would have done something about it long ago. Seeing as they banned a ton of people for merc'ing and whatnot for the last beta, they are trying their best to make getting the title as fair as possible.
I'll point you back to my post
"It is reasonable enough to say that doing content makes you more experienced at it. That is a fact. If I never fought a fight, then did it on a beta, I am more experienced at it.
It is reasonable to suggest this could give an advantage, again this is not an opinion. It is a fact that this could be an advantage. It’s then up to kabam to analyse it and see if they’re giving players an advantage to do the content before others can. "
Please point out where I said it as gospel, rather than just stating facts. It is reasonable to suggest it gives an advantage. Which part do you disagree with?
Doing content makes you more experienced? or being experienced at something when others are not is an advantage?
I don't think the beta gives anyone an advantage. Do you have proof that it does?
Would you rather go into a fight having fought the fight unlimited times beforehand or go in having only watched videos?
Ok so you have no proof it have given the current legends title holders an advantage. Cool.
Your lack of an answer seems like an answer itself. There's my proof.
I'm saying either fighting the fight yourself or watching a video on the fight is the same thing. There are people in this world who are visual learners and there are people in this world who learn by doing.
So to answer your question, both ways can give any person an advantage depending how they best learn. You may learn by doing which means you focus strictly on that ability and are applying it to everyone to make it a point.
Then there are some that are just skilled and it won't matter who they fight.
Ok, but what about those who don't learn by watching. When I watched Grand master fights on youtube it didn't help me one bit, I went into the fight and learned by doing. To some people it might be the same to watch or do. The difference is that it's not like that for everyone.
For visual learners they can watch youtube, for others they can't do the fight unless they are in the beta.
It's never ending with you. So now by what you just said, anyone who can learn by watching has an unfair advantage.
No, because everyone has the facility to watch. That is the definition of fair.
1) use the current system, have a lot players beta test and a small subset compete for legends.
2) have significantly fewer players in the beta, and run the risk of improperly tuned content
Seems like a no brainer option 1 to me, unless you are clamoring for the original 7.1 to be the norm.
Or, when people sign up for Beta testing, make it very clear that they won't be able to do a legends run, put a warning on the email/message. That way, everyone knows that by taking part they will gain an unfair advantage and they can decide whether they would prioritise giving feedback or doing the beta.
I would never touch another beta with a 10 foot pole, and I have never seriously attempted a run. It's beyond short sighted to think you'll get correct feedback and also disqualify people.
But why? If you want to do a legends run, you shouldn't be able to have a test run first. I think that's fair enough. It should be level ground. I would use an analogy with a race or an obstacle course or a maze, but really i shouldnt need to. This is basic logic and it baffles me how people don't see it. Experience in something is better than no experience.
It's not and has never been level ground. People hoovering up every offer and crystal with multiple teams of R3s have an advantage over those that don't. So I guess that's a 3rd bracket that we need now. People that have gotten luckier with champ and catalyst pulls but are f2p have an advantage over those less lucky. There's a 4th bracket. You can make lord knows how many different brackets for every advantage there is but at the end of the day, it's never going to be level. This whole argument is flat out silly imo.
1) use the current system, have a lot players beta test and a small subset compete for legends.
2) have significantly fewer players in the beta, and run the risk of improperly tuned content
Seems like a no brainer option 1 to me, unless you are clamoring for the original 7.1 to be the norm.
Or, when people sign up for Beta testing, make it very clear that they won't be able to do a legends run, put a warning on the email/message. That way, everyone knows that by taking part they will gain an unfair advantage and they can decide whether they would prioritise giving feedback or doing the beta.
I would never touch another beta with a 10 foot pole, and I have never seriously attempted a run. It's beyond short sighted to think you'll get correct feedback and also disqualify people.
But why? If you want to do a legends run, you shouldn't be able to have a test run first. I think that's fair enough. It should be level ground. I would use an analogy with a race or an obstacle course or a maze, but really i shouldnt need to. This is basic logic and it baffles me how people don't see it. Experience in something is better than no experience.
It's not and has never been level ground. People hoovering up every offer and crystal with multiple teams of R3s have an advantage over those that don't. So I guess that's a 3rd bracket that we need now. People that have gotten luckier with champ and catalyst pulls but are f2p have an advantage over those less lucky. There's a 4th bracket. You can make lord knows how many different brackets for every advantage there is but at the end of the day, it's never going to be level. This whole argument is flat out silly imo.
Offers and Crystals are in-game advantages available to everyone. Your account, do what you want with it. Luck is not controlled by kabam.
The beta offers a chance to plan, do and refine your legends run. That is a clear advantage not available to every player.
What Kabam could do is give an overview of the content that is to be released, maps, nodes etc so as to judge the difficulty of the content. They could have their own employees test the gameplay aspect to figure out the bugs. I know its not a perfect solution since the community is huge and will get more done. Alternatively, they could offer the beta testing option to everyone with the rider that Beta testers will have a separate legends run timer with additional rewards(Like 25% nexus t5cc) which can entice more top tier players to go for beta and that legends run. Not perfect ideas but it could be refined.
No one is arguing against that doing the beta absolutely has potential to be an advantage, and a substantial one more than likely. Saying that's what makes things an uneven playing field is what I take a massive issue with.
The advantage some can potentially gain is absolutely worth having those people actually still willing to test content though imo. All you have to do is look at the amount of things players catch in monthly releases that get completely missed in internal testing. If all you want is internally tested content, good luck to all of us.
1) use the current system, have a lot players beta test and a small subset compete for legends.
2) have significantly fewer players in the beta, and run the risk of improperly tuned content
Seems like a no brainer option 1 to me, unless you are clamoring for the original 7.1 to be the norm.
Or, when people sign up for Beta testing, make it very clear that they won't be able to do a legends run, put a warning on the email/message. That way, everyone knows that by taking part they will gain an unfair advantage and they can decide whether they would prioritise giving feedback or doing the beta.
I would never touch another beta with a 10 foot pole, and I have never seriously attempted a run. It's beyond short sighted to think you'll get correct feedback and also disqualify people.
But why? If you want to do a legends run, you shouldn't be able to have a test run first. I think that's fair enough. It should be level ground. I would use an analogy with a race or an obstacle course or a maze, but really i shouldnt need to. This is basic logic and it baffles me how people don't see it. Experience in something is better than no experience.
It's not and has never been level ground. People hoovering up every offer and crystal with multiple teams of R3s have an advantage over those that don't. So I guess that's a 3rd bracket that we need now. People that have gotten luckier with champ and catalyst pulls but are f2p have an advantage over those less lucky. There's a 4th bracket. You can make lord knows how many different brackets for every advantage there is but at the end of the day, it's never going to be level. This whole argument is flat out silly imo.
Offers and Crystals are in-game advantages available to everyone. Your account, do what you want with it. Luck is not controlled by kabam.
The beta offers a chance to plan, do and refine your legends run. That is a clear advantage not available to every player.
1) use the current system, have a lot players beta test and a small subset compete for legends.
2) have significantly fewer players in the beta, and run the risk of improperly tuned content
Seems like a no brainer option 1 to me, unless you are clamoring for the original 7.1 to be the norm.
Or, when people sign up for Beta testing, make it very clear that they won't be able to do a legends run, put a warning on the email/message. That way, everyone knows that by taking part they will gain an unfair advantage and they can decide whether they would prioritise giving feedback or doing the beta.
I would never touch another beta with a 10 foot pole, and I have never seriously attempted a run. It's beyond short sighted to think you'll get correct feedback and also disqualify people.
But why? If you want to do a legends run, you shouldn't be able to have a test run first. I think that's fair enough. It should be level ground. I would use an analogy with a race or an obstacle course or a maze, but really i shouldnt need to. This is basic logic and it baffles me how people don't see it. Experience in something is better than no experience.
It's not and has never been level ground. People hoovering up every offer and crystal with multiple teams of R3s have an advantage over those that don't. So I guess that's a 3rd bracket that we need now. People that have gotten luckier with champ and catalyst pulls but are f2p have an advantage over those less lucky. There's a 4th bracket. You can make lord knows how many different brackets for every advantage there is but at the end of the day, it's never going to be level. This whole argument is flat out silly imo.
Offers and Crystals are in-game advantages available to everyone. Your account, do what you want with it. Luck is not controlled by kabam.
The beta offers a chance to plan, do and refine your legends run. That is a clear advantage not available to every player.
That's irrelevant though bc those spending advantages may be technically "available" to everyone, but they're just not in reality.
Having an advantage either matters or it doesn't as far as I'm concerned. You either have to eliminate them all or you don't actually have a leg to stand on.
1) use the current system, have a lot players beta test and a small subset compete for legends.
2) have significantly fewer players in the beta, and run the risk of improperly tuned content
Seems like a no brainer option 1 to me, unless you are clamoring for the original 7.1 to be the norm.
Or, when people sign up for Beta testing, make it very clear that they won't be able to do a legends run, put a warning on the email/message. That way, everyone knows that by taking part they will gain an unfair advantage and they can decide whether they would prioritise giving feedback or doing the beta.
I would never touch another beta with a 10 foot pole, and I have never seriously attempted a run. It's beyond short sighted to think you'll get correct feedback and also disqualify people.
But why? If you want to do a legends run, you shouldn't be able to have a test run first. I think that's fair enough. It should be level ground. I would use an analogy with a race or an obstacle course or a maze, but really i shouldnt need to. This is basic logic and it baffles me how people don't see it. Experience in something is better than no experience.
It's not and has never been level ground. People hoovering up every offer and crystal with multiple teams of R3s have an advantage over those that don't. So I guess that's a 3rd bracket that we need now. People that have gotten luckier with champ and catalyst pulls but are f2p have an advantage over those less lucky. There's a 4th bracket. You can make lord knows how many different brackets for every advantage there is but at the end of the day, it's never going to be level. This whole argument is flat out silly imo.
Offers and Crystals are in-game advantages available to everyone. Your account, do what you want with it. Luck is not controlled by kabam.
The beta offers a chance to plan, do and refine your legends run. That is a clear advantage not available to every player.
1) use the current system, have a lot players beta test and a small subset compete for legends.
2) have significantly fewer players in the beta, and run the risk of improperly tuned content
Seems like a no brainer option 1 to me, unless you are clamoring for the original 7.1 to be the norm.
Or, when people sign up for Beta testing, make it very clear that they won't be able to do a legends run, put a warning on the email/message. That way, everyone knows that by taking part they will gain an unfair advantage and they can decide whether they would prioritise giving feedback or doing the beta.
I would never touch another beta with a 10 foot pole, and I have never seriously attempted a run. It's beyond short sighted to think you'll get correct feedback and also disqualify people.
But why? If you want to do a legends run, you shouldn't be able to have a test run first. I think that's fair enough. It should be level ground. I would use an analogy with a race or an obstacle course or a maze, but really i shouldnt need to. This is basic logic and it baffles me how people don't see it. Experience in something is better than no experience.
It's not and has never been level ground. People hoovering up every offer and crystal with multiple teams of R3s have an advantage over those that don't. So I guess that's a 3rd bracket that we need now. People that have gotten luckier with champ and catalyst pulls but are f2p have an advantage over those less lucky. There's a 4th bracket. You can make lord knows how many different brackets for every advantage there is but at the end of the day, it's never going to be level. This whole argument is flat out silly imo.
Offers and Crystals are in-game advantages available to everyone. Your account, do what you want with it. Luck is not controlled by kabam.
The beta offers a chance to plan, do and refine your legends run. That is a clear advantage not available to every player.
So does watching youtube videos.
Yep, and everyone can do that.
So we agree that there isn't an advantage since everyone can plan via youtube videos. Cool.
1) use the current system, have a lot players beta test and a small subset compete for legends.
2) have significantly fewer players in the beta, and run the risk of improperly tuned content
Seems like a no brainer option 1 to me, unless you are clamoring for the original 7.1 to be the norm.
Or, when people sign up for Beta testing, make it very clear that they won't be able to do a legends run, put a warning on the email/message. That way, everyone knows that by taking part they will gain an unfair advantage and they can decide whether they would prioritise giving feedback or doing the beta.
I would never touch another beta with a 10 foot pole, and I have never seriously attempted a run. It's beyond short sighted to think you'll get correct feedback and also disqualify people.
But why? If you want to do a legends run, you shouldn't be able to have a test run first. I think that's fair enough. It should be level ground. I would use an analogy with a race or an obstacle course or a maze, but really i shouldnt need to. This is basic logic and it baffles me how people don't see it. Experience in something is better than no experience.
It's not and has never been level ground. People hoovering up every offer and crystal with multiple teams of R3s have an advantage over those that don't. So I guess that's a 3rd bracket that we need now. People that have gotten luckier with champ and catalyst pulls but are f2p have an advantage over those less lucky. There's a 4th bracket. You can make lord knows how many different brackets for every advantage there is but at the end of the day, it's never going to be level. This whole argument is flat out silly imo.
Offers and Crystals are in-game advantages available to everyone. Your account, do what you want with it. Luck is not controlled by kabam.
The beta offers a chance to plan, do and refine your legends run. That is a clear advantage not available to every player.
That's irrelevant though bc those spending advantages may be technically "available" to everyone, but they're just not in reality.
Having an advantage either matters or it doesn't as far as I'm concerned. You either have to eliminate them all or you don't actually have a leg to stand on.
An offer is offered to everyone in the game, aside from certain IOS and Android offers. That makes it available to everyone and so is not considered here.
With regards to advantages, it’s not as black and white as that. You have to draw a line between fair and unfair advantages. Spending on the game is a fair advantage, hacking is an unfair advantage. Luck is a fair advantage, hypothetically having a 6* in content where only 4* are allowed is an unfair advantage.
I’d argue that fighting fights before anyone else can is pretty obviously an unfair advantage
1) use the current system, have a lot players beta test and a small subset compete for legends.
2) have significantly fewer players in the beta, and run the risk of improperly tuned content
Seems like a no brainer option 1 to me, unless you are clamoring for the original 7.1 to be the norm.
Or, when people sign up for Beta testing, make it very clear that they won't be able to do a legends run, put a warning on the email/message. That way, everyone knows that by taking part they will gain an unfair advantage and they can decide whether they would prioritise giving feedback or doing the beta.
I would never touch another beta with a 10 foot pole, and I have never seriously attempted a run. It's beyond short sighted to think you'll get correct feedback and also disqualify people.
But why? If you want to do a legends run, you shouldn't be able to have a test run first. I think that's fair enough. It should be level ground. I would use an analogy with a race or an obstacle course or a maze, but really i shouldnt need to. This is basic logic and it baffles me how people don't see it. Experience in something is better than no experience.
It's not and has never been level ground. People hoovering up every offer and crystal with multiple teams of R3s have an advantage over those that don't. So I guess that's a 3rd bracket that we need now. People that have gotten luckier with champ and catalyst pulls but are f2p have an advantage over those less lucky. There's a 4th bracket. You can make lord knows how many different brackets for every advantage there is but at the end of the day, it's never going to be level. This whole argument is flat out silly imo.
Offers and Crystals are in-game advantages available to everyone. Your account, do what you want with it. Luck is not controlled by kabam.
The beta offers a chance to plan, do and refine your legends run. That is a clear advantage not available to every player.
So does watching youtube videos.
Yep, and everyone can do that.
So we agree that there isn't an advantage since everyone can plan via youtube videos. Cool.
Nope. We already established there is an advantage from the beta.
Comments
But your solution to the problem is for me to actually give something up to help the community. I wouldn't do it, and others have also indicated as much, and the beta test would suffer for it.
Is it possible that beta testing is helpful to a legends run? Sure it absolutely is possible. Is preventing that worth reducing the number of beta testers? Not to me.
A few days later, I was contacted again that beta testing it will not cause my disqualification for the legends run. I then agreed.
Wanna guess why the decision on legends run disqualification was reversed?
Kabam shouldnt put the beta above one of the highest contests in the entire game, legend runs.
So to answer your question, both ways can give any person an advantage depending how they best learn. You may learn by doing which means you focus strictly on that ability and are applying it to everyone to make it a point.
Then there are some that are just skilled and it won't matter who they fight.
They are the ones who will give quality feedback given their knowledge and experience, but also the ones who are most interested in doing a legends run.
(I’ve seen beta testers not know how Diss track or buffed up work.. it’s ridiculous.)
My guess is that no one agreed to test the fight given the disqualification criteria. Not to mention that during the beta test, rewards will never be made known and no one will willingly forfeit their chance at the additional rewards.
Also, with the exception of the first initial closed beta for 6.1 (when a very small group of very experienced players were asked to test it), the subsequent betas (imo) were filled with players with either very limited game knowledge, or shouldn’t be there in the first place.
So yeah.. removing the legends run entitlement for beta testers isn’t the way (not to mention fights are subjected to change in the beta).
For visual learners they can watch youtube, for others they can't do the fight unless they are in the beta.
I do still think it's pretty obviously unfair on others who are not able to do the beta, but at the moment I'm not sure what the best solution is. I have changed my mind on ruling out those who do legends runs who have been in the beta though, I don't think it is a good option .
The beta offers a chance to plan, do and refine your legends run. That is a clear advantage not available to every player.
Alternatively, they could offer the beta testing option to everyone with the rider that Beta testers will have a separate legends run timer with additional rewards(Like 25% nexus t5cc) which can entice more top tier players to go for beta and that legends run. Not perfect ideas but it could be refined.
The advantage some can potentially gain is absolutely worth having those people actually still willing to test content though imo. All you have to do is look at the amount of things players catch in monthly releases that get completely missed in internal testing. If all you want is internally tested content, good luck to all of us.
Having an advantage either matters or it doesn't as far as I'm concerned. You either have to eliminate them all or you don't actually have a leg to stand on.
With regards to advantages, it’s not as black and white as that. You have to draw a line between fair and unfair advantages. Spending on the game is a fair advantage, hacking is an unfair advantage. Luck is a fair advantage, hypothetically having a 6* in content where only 4* are allowed is an unfair advantage.
I’d argue that fighting fights before anyone else can is pretty obviously an unfair advantage