I think the presence of SCS will keep grinding alive and well. And those will be straight wppr feeding still.
Smaller areas like KY and southern OH, most players are trying to steal an SCS spot at best and none of these changes are weighing on them at all. Only a handful of top 1000 players in each market anyway.
So I’d be surprised if we see any less grinding. At least in my area I don’t expect it.
well why not both? have an lower number of events for main points but an higher one for local ones?
I don’t think the event grinding is exactly pay to win because not everyone can do it due to the WPPR falloff. If anyone regardless of skill could pay and drive to 20 events to pass their stat I’d agree but in each of those 20 you’ve gotta finish in like the top 4 to really gain any ground, especially in a state with a huge tournament or two that warp the rankings
I’m reaching the point where I have to win my local event to make it into my top 20 results*, but as I’ve played 12 tournaments in state so far, I still have 8 results to at least get the base 20, so there is still a reason to play, other than fun, socializing, keeping in good form.
*Tournaments will still need to have at least 40 players to matter for ranking, and what’s interesting is that poor showings could still tank my rating, and have some marginal impact on eff%.
Thank you for thinking of this change. Could we get an updated spreadsheet like the one in the OP that takes these changes into account?
There’s a second tab on the same spreadsheet labeled “Shepherd Simulation” which has this change taken into account along with a reduction of a player’s resume from top 20 to top 15.
It doesn’t get updated nearly as often because Brian has to generate the rebuild manually on his end to run it. That front spreadsheet I can make in 60 seconds based on the current WPPR rankings, so that happens far more often.
Looks like you go up 40 spots when comparing my current napkin sketch estimates with Brian’s actual implemented version on our side (last updated 4/21).
I just wanted to add that I’m in favor of the change simply because I know I’m not ranked where I should be and this will bump me down appropriately. No “/s” here, I’m serious. I’d rather be ranked as correct as possible so I have something to target and aspire to.
The change will push me from my high 400s to the high 500s (I guess that’s seriously singling me out on the spreadsheet). Even that might not be totally correct and I might be lower–I guess I just enjoy the added incentive to continue to grow.
Iconic.
I only read through the first 200 posts here, before feeling the need to reply, so sorry if it’s already been said. (Also my work can go and F itself for blocking the forum on work computers meaning I have to use my phone to try and write this! 
People are only focussing on how they are going to lose out by competing in more events if they do poorly.
What this may well do is encourage people to compete in smaller local events where they’re amongst the better players present. Even though the WPPRs they earn won’t make their top 20 card, it’ll likely increase their eff% .
I used to compete in some local leagues and actually got bored of winning every season (humble brag), so I backed off going to let others get their glory.
This change will actually give an incentive to play in smaller comps, thus suporting local businesses and growing the competitive pinball
Reading this whole thing was very interesting/entertaining - so thanks for that, everybody.
By the first technical description, I got the typical vibes of the last few years where the changes just seem like reactionary ways to keep D82 from upsetting the apple cart. As it got explained (over and over and OVER) in the thread, it seems like the best change to get a true representation of overall skill in all playing activity that’s happened since I’ve been aware of IFPA changes.
What I find most interesting is that until this change, your ‘card’ was just your 20 highest point value events in the last 3 years; anything else was ignored. Now, your card is everything in the last three years + math, using the point value of the top 20 (or possibly 15) as a representation of the whole.
Edit: I realized re-reading this that it just sounds like I’m re-describing the new change; my badly made point was: I’m surprised it took this long for the formula to include all your play in some form, rather than just your best play.
That’s not correct. Your ‘card’ was just your 20 best events from the past three years, not your most recent.
Argh. I knew that, and meant that and just got sloppy. Edited it to match reality.
So I think I’m an interesting case study @pinwizj after the results have now come in from Germany.
Interested to hear your thoughts in relation to v6.0 and my ranking pre EPC/IFPA and after.
I’m someone who doesn’t play a lot because of life circumstances (I had played in one event this year prior to Germany) but am obviously ok at pinball.
Pre Germany, I was ranked 134th in the world, but under v6.0 would have been ranked 77th in the world. My eff% was 40%.
In my opinion, I played alright in Germany, pretty consistent, some decent finishes, nothing huge, but I was happy with how I played and performed against the best in the world. I went from being someone under v6.0 in a position of under privilege, to massively over privileged in the space of a week. My eff% went from 40% to 27% despite my decent play (other than Classics).
Now, after all the results are in after Germany my rank is 86th in the world, jumping 48 spots. But under v6.0 I’d be ranked 91st. Under v6.0 I now get taxed 147 points for my privilege (about what I earned in Germany). I actually would have been higher in the rankings had I not played in Germany, I would have been 77th!
Now I don’t care about all this (whether I’m 150th or 60th really doesn’t matter to me, as long as I’m in the top 2 in the UK, but I know that really matters to some people), Germany was probably my best pinball trip ever and my result at IFPA is probably my proudest pinball achievement. But I thought it was an interesting discussion to raise as I actually would have been better not going to Germany at all from a rankings perspective! That doesn’t seem quite right, esspecially considering I actually did alright, I certainly didn’t tank.
I know my position is quite unique @pinwizj but does that all still pass the smell test? I guess just about sustaining my ranking with that level of competition is some kind of success?
Yeah, as I suggested over on RayDay Discord, the Eff% really needs to take into account the Strength of Event (based on Ranking and Rating). And @pinwizj has mentioned they’re perhaps considering something like this, just not for v6.0.
I think the word of the day here is “context”.
There’s a ton of moving parts here because your world rank isn’t just about your play. The play of all of your peers impact where you rank. What the play of others does impacts the WPPRtunity average. What the play of others does impacts those players’ cards. What the play of others does impacts those players’ efficiency percentages.
Your world rank under the v6.0 simulation is 91st. Your world rank had you not played in any of the Germany events . . . 91st (not sure where you’re getting that you would be ranked 77th). I show you went from 452.24 before to 453.64 after.
Big picture, I’ll say it’s a better position to be ranked 91st with a 27% Efficiency metric compared to a 40% Efficiency metric, because it’s far easier to play above the 27% rate as you move forward (so you’re allowing yourself a better chance at moving up in the future if you continue to play well).
The distribution change (which my spreadsheet does not include) will also help you as well. Any tournaments with over 128 players where players finished decent will see a pretty strong increase in WPPR’s as the value curve softens between positions, and that’s where the Olympics events especially should move you up a bit.
Work on NOT finishing 143rd in Classics before you talk about consistency 
(I can say that as I enjoy staring at my 124th EPC Main finish lol - holy fuck)
Also, congratulations as you played in over 1300 WPPR’s worth of events in 11 days, which absolutely is a privilege. Most players on Earth won’t hit 1300 WPPR’s in 3 years worth of play. If I look up this dude “Craig Pullen”, the amount of WPPR’s worth of events that person played in the last 3 years going into the Germany week . . . 1240.06. Welcome to the world of the privileged having actually doubled your WPPR’s available number in 11 days
So 1300 wpprs worth of tournaments, a joint 20th in the world finish at the most prestigious competition on the planet. And my wife says to me, ‘wow well done, you must be really moving up the rankings now?’ And I say to her ‘well actually, I went away for 11 days, played (pretty consistently 
) in each of the tournaments and came back with the exact same ranking as I would have had, had I not left you for 11 days with the kids on your own’ 
She loved it as you can imagine!
But it’s ok, I explained to her that what I did get for my 11 days of (mostly) consistent play with the world’s best, was a 13% reduction in my eff% which the president ensures me is a positive thing for future wppr endeavours. She completely understood and asked me when the next trip is…*
*This is all nonsense, my wife doesn’t ask me questions about my ranking…obviously 
Doesn’t it already take that into account though? Eff % = total wpprs earned / total wpprs available, right? So I believe that more wpprs available would generally correlate with a higher strength of opponent.
It’s much more difficult to get a good Eff% against world-class players than it is against newer/less skilled players.
I have to question this reply now after seeing the points for the EPC. I was ranked 82nd highest player at the tournament (5th seed in my group and 185 worldwide) - let’s say I had lived up to my exact strength and finished 5th in my group - that would have given me a tied 74th and 24,71 wppr.
Divided by Eschers 345,66 (*100) = 7,14 eff%. -So playing up to my exact level would be damaging for my overall eff% and costly when put in effect. Is this fair?
Luckily or skillfully I made the top 16, got 143 wpprs and moved up more than 100 spots to 81st worldwide from the whole weeks action. Also raised my total eff% from 15 to 17.
But I’ll still take a hit when new adjustments are made? I don’t care that much about it honestly (I mean I do want to have the highest rank possible of course I’m competitive) but it just doesn’t seem completely accurate imo.
