Starting off with the previous kills event, some people speculate that the spike in the day few days - or rather the decrease the first couple of days - was due to Christmas and Christmas Eve. Yes, a lot of people were able to get time off work/school, but many people were out with their families or doing something in the community. After Christmas was over, the numbers started spiking because some people were still exempt from work/school but were not obstructed by plans.
You’ve said that the underdogs would try harder if they chose their own team, but you also said that a person’s effort was so insignificant that it doesn’t matter in the grand scheme of things. I don’t believe that every single underdog would work significantly harder - some would give up because the feel that the odds are against them, some don’t have enough time to work harder, some wouldn’t change how much they play, and some would tilt from losing a large margin. So realistically, only a portion would work harder but noting that a person hardly makes a difference, then would that portion really make a difference either? Which is it?
If you argue that it would make a difference, then that also exposes another flaw in your conspiracy. Even when teams are randomized, there will still be a team that is losing and a team that is winning. Surely the losing team would put more effort, right? Why is it that choosing a team would motivate people to win but being randomly put into a team - with the same prize and approximately the same amount of people as the other team- not motivate people to win? If you say that the underdogs will make a difference, then the currently losing gwen team should work harder and surpass reza’s team. Then the underdogs will be reza and they will push harder too. Back and forth it will fluctuate. So, would it really be rigging the system, or will the event play out clean and fair due to the reason you believe is true?
Even you have already agreed that it would be a fair event, which contradicts with what you’ve said in your first post.
Now if you continue to say that a person’s effort would not make a difference, then surely people will know that the 10 fame they’re getting per chest opening would hardly make a difference too. How would this be a successful marketing ploy if you’re getting 10 fame when you could get (70 or 80 idk) fame at least for winning 3 matches per day? If (70 or 80) fame makes little difference at first glance, then people would dare not touch a chest that gives them an even smaller difference.
Also, here you’re saying that it’ll be proof of a rig if the scores turn even but you contradict yourself by giving reason why that is easily possible with a fair system.
Yes I am contradicting myself with these arguments, but remember that it stems from your contradictory assumptions as well. So if you’re going to call me out on contradictions, then that is the same as calling yourself out to an extent.
I think that Semc cannot automatically update the scoreboard because of how they set up the interface and engine. Never have we seen anything updated live - it’s all pictures or videos with occasional buttons. Being limited to pictures means that it can’t have moving or dynamic parts that change over time. If they were limited to pictures and videos, then they would have to upload an infographic every second in order to simulate being live. That’s a lot of picture data being forced into our devices every time we open the game or refresh the market. It’s also a lot of data for a program to be generating a new infographic, send it around the lair, and then sent out. All of this over and over every few seconds. It’s more economic for it to be done manually - as they claim - and at less intervals. And if they really do do it manually, then someone or some people will have to wake up in the middle of the night many times to update it, which is probably not going to happen. Even twice a day would make a group of employees wake up at 4 A.M. every day for a week straight. Three times a day? Every midnight for a week.