... To everybody. It's getting more difficult each reset to reach top 10

What is the reason for this networth inflation? More good players or what?

the # of countries increased.

more countries = more target to LG = more land created
more countries = bigger market

The number of countries increased? It's getting more difficult to make top 10 because of more skilled players playing. In the past #1 would double or triple to NW of #10.

introduction of bonus points really helps NW. introduction of GDI really helped too. Many countries were lost to suicides in early sets, or were forced to grab much more cautiously.

I play every other set, or maybe once every 3 (you can see my profile) and while the game is certainly more competitive this round than any I've played, it is not dramatically so at least IMO. Of course jedioda plays much more frequently, so if he says it is much improved that is an opinion I respect.

This is true, I think looking at the ratio of say winning NW to 10th best NW is a good measure of how competitive it is. Of course some sets, one strategy dominates (like casher should have this set) so it's not a measuring stick without flaws.

generally, more countries results in higher avg nw for the top 100 countries. Look at see for yourself

Of course more players means that there will also be more good players which will push nw up even higher.

Yes, the bonus points helps with nw a lot especially the expense bonus as my country has experienced 0 stockpiling so far and still passed 110m nw.

ya td your reasons for higher NW were also valid. Sorry, wasn't meaning to say it was not.

it's not my reasons. It's just an statistical observation.

The whole certain strategy dominates thing is just luck of the draw. You pick a strat to play at the start. If that strat has the lower % of countries than usual then you will most likely do better because of the market prices being favorable to you.

That has little to do with the higher actual avg nw overall.

I considered that but look at this round:
http://primary.www.earthempires.com/topplayers?round=7

Maybe the biggest ever but scores were not high then like they are now. Maybe that was before the bonus system, or just an exception to the rule. Hopefully the game keeps growing

yes blid GENERALLY!!!

statistic is based on observations of data in GENERAL!

In other words, you can say the mean or average and sometimes even median.

If you flip a coin 100 times. In general, you should get close to 50/50 heads and tails
But there are times where you can get up to 100/0.

"But maybe it's true in general, just not strictly always"
NO fluff!!! that's like me saying the average height may be 5'9" but I'm 6ft tall.
Don't be a crest! You don't have to want to be right that bad. It's not cool!

the example you put is actually in line with what i was saying. You just forgot one thing, look at all the resets before that. They all seem to have low net probably due to the fact that they didn't have the bonus points systems.
If you look at the round right after that, average net jumps up incredibly high and every set after that too. That is probably because the bonus was introduced at that time. You also see commies started to dominate after that round.

Sometimes, i feel like you and crest just argue to be right regardless of what's in front of you. Crest is just really bad at it.

Wow calm down man. I'm just saying, last set, 9 of the top 10 is 100m, and that's with 940 players. Meanwhile round ten had 966 players, and only four players in 100m. Round eleven had 892 players, pretty comparable, and only two players in 100m. I am certain that having a bigger pool of players helps the top finishers as the land "trickles up," that's common sense, but I am not convinced that's the main reason the last two sets have had so many high finishers. In general, yes, it increases networth, but specifically, the last two rounds, I think may be because of more "top" players participating.

Well yes, if you read my post I even said "maybe it's because of bonus system" so I am not really arguing with you.

I wonder why that set apparently had so many countries anyway

Everything brought up by everyone (td, crest, blid, bobby) is a valid contributor to making it more difficult to hit top 10. I don't think there are any disagreements.

# countries increase leads to two things...
1. More Skilled Players
2. More Bad Players - aka. more farm land

Also, Bonus Points - the expense bonus helps significantly for netting.

wow, you're still confused about general vs specific.

In general, more countries = higher nw

In every set there is a specific event that can cause the outcome to somewhat deviate from the average or normal expectations. That specific event in one reset is considered a variable in the overall samples, which is all resets observed.

Gdi, bonus, and number of players are good reasons for the increase nw. But it doesn't explain why it is more difficult (for me) to stay at top: reason is skill increase

tduong is just a useful idiot that makes a whole lotof not very well thought out statements. tduong, do you even know what the topic of this discussion is? It is about the difficulty in staying top 10. It is NOT about the higher NWs of recent, you fluffing moron!

You want statistics? SPECIFIC and GENERAL? Look at Tourny game A. Why is it that the 10th place finisher has a high chance of winning the lower games with his net? Is it because of the large number of players in game A (usually around or less that 40 while the lower game hover around WAAAAAAY more, around 80 players) or is it because of the skills of the players in game A? You are my useful idiot.



Case closed!

higher skilled players increased is resulted from higher overall # of players and a variable factor that one good player might bring in more good players.

Also, you can't ignore the players that have improved.

But i think the real answer to why being in t10 is harder is because T10 ranks is fixed at 10 spots while # of players varies depending on set
If you look at it from a different perspective, You are still in the top 2% of players. You are still on top and doing as well as other sets. Now, there's just more people in your level fighting for the same amount of spots.
Overall, avg skill has probably only increased by a small margin. We just have a larger sample size.

If you have the exact same skilled players next set but 10k ppl played, it would still be tough to get top 10. If you dropped the player base to 500 and removed half the skilled players, it owuld be easier to get into the top 10.

It will be nice to have an all 100M top 10 this set. It's kinda surprising to me how bunched up NWs look like they will be, at least after the top 2/3 countries.

Crest result to personal insults because his thoughts are always clouded by emotions
No one here is disagreeing with the original topic. The discussion had been about blid's question after that.

Crest you are the idiot. The way game A is set up. They let the top players out of every game to be in game A. So yes, a game with entirely higher skilled players will result in higher nw. You also conveniently forgot to mention that the market is shared between game a,b, and c. A bigger market will generally increase overall nw.
So if you compared game A to game b/c, even crest has to agree that game b and c is less skilled which will result in lower networth than game A.
The other big difference between tourney and primary is the % of land explored. You can be all explore or mostly explored and get to the top10 while that is impossible in primary. This is due to # of turns. That means that the # of players in tourney still plays a role in increasing nw but a smaller role than primary because of the combined market.

Of course, it's a very crestful thing to do to change the scenario to his favor.

so you are just proving my point. But thanks for rewording my statements so you can feel like you're right :)

Most of the top 10 are probably consistently the same group of skilled players each set. There are probably only a handful (maybe 50~ if even?) primary players capable of a t10 finish (also depending on the strategy, market, suicides, laziness, etc...). Assuming 50 players are capable of top 10, you have a 20% chance to get in.

As skilled players increases (ie. those coming in from Alliance or with netting experience), then it will just be harder to make it in since everyone is contending for the same spots.

thank you for elaborating. Maybe people will understand it better this way.

t10 spots = fixed or constant
skilled players capable = variable

if # of skilled players capable = x
then your chances of getting t10(assuming equal skills) would be

10/x

*waits for crest to come in and start another argument about everyone has different skills and luck factor in picking strats/market/etc...

Someone like tduong (first top ten), me (the previous two sets), ingle (last set and this one) are "new" players adding to the competition for top 10 every round. I think we're all experienced or returning players of course but newly in the mix competing for Primary. Even for oldman, I think this is only his fifth Primary set or so. And for crest something like 3-4. If all these players are capable of 100m and none of them were playing 5 sets ago, that would really increase the number of 100m and the difficulty of getting top 10.

Just want to point out this reset is my second in Primary. That's why my first country was named "Happy New Year 2012" (it was made on the new year) and I didn't change that this set either.

Xin we are talking about skilled players who finished t10 this set. Perhaps you will be more suited to the rookie thread:P

no not quite blid

I've stated too many times already. I don't care much for t10 or these fixed nw records. I play for my own goals. Next set, I may just go for fattest techer ever or 100m/100kacres.

And in the old earth days, even with 20k players and the clan like activities in solo games, i was a consistent top 3 player until the last 7 days where I always eat mad missiles, ABs, PS, etc... That was when i lost hope in the game of ever finishing good because of multies. You just can't win back then unless you are "friendly" with these top players running multies or you are one of them yourself. Else, you always get knocked off randomly even when carrying 2mil tanks and being a dictator.

Xin - You should send your "rookie" jets on a PS to Bobby :)

Pffft, <3 Bobby. I've lost track of the number of times we spied each other's country this reset!

rookie jets are worth only half of veteran jets

Yep, Xinhuan too as a player not coming back to the game but expanding from playing strictly alliance

BTW for anyone not in the know, just to be clear Xin had a great country this set, probably the best commie (no offense to ingle) but got hit by Viva a couple times...so I'm just joking with him=)

Xin's country was definitely looking the best for most of the set. I was rooting for him the whole time.

And no offense taken - I was in mexico for a week the first few days of the set so got farmed quite a bit and was off to a rocky start with missing bonuses/turns. How do you even know which country is mine? :P

he has spies in your alliances

hanlong told me:P j/k...

Another factor is more people getting accustomed to using the right bonuses?
(me not included, i just take turns like a noob:) well i am a techer anyway this set)

hahahahaha...never too soon? ;)

you picked the best bonus for that job. Unless you don't stockpile, there's no point in investing in anything else being a techer. Hiding your food on the market is as good as the decay bonus.

Again, the topic was about the difficulty in getting top 10, you just chose to run with blid's response asking questions and then answering them. Even if for whatever reason no one made it to 100 mill NW this set, there would still be a difficulty in getting into top 10 because of the skill in the game.

If Primary was noob enough I dare say someone like oldman would be able to place a top 10 all-x in Primary. And if Tourney gets tough enough with more skill players getting in, it would become impossible to place a top 10 all-x there. I don't even know if anyone remains in game A with an all-x anymore.

I hope now that I have clearly re-worded you statement, it is clearer to you.

Yeah i know I was just kidding. What i picked wrong was the strat this set.
Tech was bloody cheap. Even though I had a relatively good set, with these prices i stood no chance.

Tottering does an all-x in tourney and regularly finishes top ten.

Tech has been on alternating rounds lately, this round wasn't even the worst
14 (current) 1578
13 2236
12 1497
11 2389

Swings of $700-800! That's huge for a techer.

It may not have been the worst, but it was definitely poor. It was quite painful selling tech at 1600-1800

Im actually surprised last set was 2236. I remember being unable to buy and bus and res below 2800 for most of the set.

He also complains every set about how difficult it is and hasn't made top 10 the past 2 sets. Heck, I don't even know if he stayed in game A after last set.

Last set was kinda low the 1st month and only turned around the 2nd half of the month, but I'm actually very greedy and think selling tech sub 2500 is just wrong :-)

yes you are still just proving my point and making yourself look dumb. Do you know what "generally" means?
I think you just want to argue with me