Assault - Confirm Rank-Up Requirements?

[Coephoros]

Reliable JP on my server said something about going from PFC to SP requires a total of 25 points, and that each 2nd tier win nets you 5 points. Though he never beat Lebros supply mission, he was able to get SP rank by beating 4/5 (minus Lebros) then going back and beating Lamia 13 5 times. 5+5+5+5+1+1+1+1+1 = 25 SP.

That has already been categorically rejected by the fact that both Aurik and myself have achieved SP rank with less than 25 PFC points.

[JeanClaudVanDamme]

That has already been categorically rejected by the fact that both Aurik and myself have achieved SP rank with less than 25 PFC points.

Hey, even better. As long as I don't have to do that retarded supply quest again to get SP, I'm happy.

[genome]

So, if you guys can, list all your previous missions and repeated wins.

Already did. If you care that much, go find the post.
And I would say that this information is highly speculative, far from "confirmed".

No I don't care much about your assault win record =P
I was just explaining that showing just a partial record of wins is probably why things just seem speculative or confusing.
Like I said my win record is not speculative, it's factual. If you do the same assault missions, you will get the promotion at the same time.

If you don't care then don't fucking ask.

And the "point system" is highly speculative; you just made up a bunch of numbers and say "HAY LOOK GUYS IT WORKS". It may be right, it may be wrong. The only data you have tried it against is your own.

Take it easy. Why would you assume I care about your old results when you don't care enough to look them up either. I was saying if you guys can(and want to make a useful contribution to the discussion or try to prove or disprove different theories) list all your previous missions and repeated wins (and not just partial ones based on some initial assumption you have of what counts and doesn't count).
Also the only thing that seems highly speculative here is your assumption that the 25 point theory was derived just from my wins. It wasn't, and as you can see it fits quite a lot of people's data, if you have a better one, feel free to add. So far this seems to fit everyone's data, not just the ones posted here. Also it's "Hey" not "HAY".

[aurik]

So, if you guys can, list all your previous missions and repeated wins.

Already did. If you care that much, go find the post.
And I would say that this information is highly speculative, far from "confirmed".

No I don't care much about your assault win record =P
I was just explaining that showing just a partial record of wins is probably why things just seem speculative or confusing.
Like I said my win record is not speculative, it's factual. If you do the same assault missions, you will get the promotion at the same time.

If you don't care then don't fucking ask.

And the "point system" is highly speculative; you just made up a bunch of numbers and say "HAY LOOK GUYS IT WORKS". It may be right, it may be wrong. The only data you have tried it against is your own.

Take it easy. Why would you assume I care about your old results when you don't care enough to look them up either. I was saying if you guys can(and want to make a useful contribution to the discussion or try to prove or disprove different theories) list all your previous missions and repeated wins (and not just partial ones based on some initial assumption you have of what counts and doesn't count).
Also the only thing that seems highly speculative here is your assumption that the 25 point theory was derived just from my wins. It wasn't, and as you can see it fits quite a lot of people's data, if you have a better one, feel free to add. So far this seems to fit everyone's data, not just the ones posted here. Also it's "Hey" not "HAY".

Asking "please post your data" infers some degree of caring. As I said several times, my data is posted on this board. If you don't care, don't ask. If you do care, go find it. In either case, don't put the burden on me to back up your speculation.

As for your theory, it is speculative. Prior to this thread I haven't seen any data what-so-ever that breaks or supports your theory at all. Unless there is more data that you have that you aren't sharing, you formulated your theory on one set of data. That's practically the definition of "speculative"; in fact, it's closer to "wild guess" than "speculative".

Also, it's "HAY", not "hey"

[divisortheory]

Get outside and get some fresh air dawg, lol. "If you don't care then don't fucking ask." Au contraire, if you don't want to retrieve your old data manually, don't fucking retrieve it. You've spent more time being irate about him asking about your old data than it would have taken to just dig up the old post on your own. So clearly this isn't an issue of you not wanting to spend the time to dig up the old post.

That being said, everyone is well aware that this is a speculative theory, it's why you're getting so upset about it that has everyone puzzled.

[aurik]

That being said, everyone is well aware that this is a speculative theory, it's why you're getting so upset about it that has everyone puzzled.

Everyone, that is, except OP (who called it "pretty much confirmed") and Genome (who said, "the only thing that's speculative here is blah blah blah").

[divisortheory]

That being said, everyone is well aware that this is a speculative theory, it's why you're getting so upset about it that has everyone puzzled.

Everyone, that is, except OP (who called it "pretty much confirmed") and Genome (who said, "the only thing that's speculative here is blah blah blah").

lol forgot about the OP.

[Coephoros]

At this point, there are preceisely two "knowns", no more and no less:

1. Winning all 5 Assaults in a given tier will open the quest to rank up to the next tier.
2. It is possible to open the rank-up quest without winning all 5 assaults in a given tier.

The only other useful nugget that may come from this thread is contingent on the results of Khamsin's next Assault win (assuming that his next win is not Lebros Supplies).

Hmm.

One of the PSC I redid after ranking up to PFC was the Lebros Caverns mission... therefore, my coverage for the next rankup was in fact all 5 areas.

Khamsin - can you please do the following:

1. Get a win on any of the other 4 PSC missions besides Lebros.
2. If that does not rank you, get a win on the Lebros PSC mission (Walls, right?).

I'm curious to see which of those ranks you up.

[genome]

That being said, everyone is well aware that this is a speculative theory, it's why you're getting so upset about it that has everyone puzzled.

Everyone, that is, except OP (who called it "pretty much confirmed") and Genome (who said, "the only thing that's speculative here is blah blah blah").

I think you need to read again the first page of this thread before getting so upset. The OP didn't even mention the 25 point assumption, and I just simply stated my assault record of having 5 extra old wins and the fact that it was possible to get from PSC to PFC too, and then I mentioned a couple of theories people came up with from a collection of data, including the 25 point one, mentioning that if fits my data but i didn't test directly other implications from it.

I know someone who got the promotion from PSC to PFC without winning all 5 first missions (winning 4 and just repeating some of them multiple times). I also myself got the promotion from PFC to SP without beating lebros supplies. So I can guarantee both. It's easy to verify because you have a list of assaults you won at least once under your mission menu.

The rule is not 10 wins however. What I know works is winning 4 different (new) assaults, and then you can replace the fifth one with 5 wins in any already won (old) assault. That I know for sure works, from personal experience.

Just doing all 5 new assaults always works too of course.

What I also heard but haven't verified is that basically you need 25 hidden 'points' to rank up, each new assault you win gives you 5 points, every old assault you win gives you 1 point, and losing any assault gives you 0 points. This happens to fit what I said before, but also says that if you wanted to do just 1 type of assault ONLY, you would need to do it 21 times to rank up. So, just to be safe, in case this was trues, you'd be better off doing at least 4 different ones per rank.
Another rumor i heard is that it might go also by assault points, like 7000 new assault points after the last rank up will allow you to get promoted again. It might be whichever of these rules comes first, or some of these rumors might not be true, but the first part I mentioned above is true for sure.

It's useful to have a way to predict what you need to do to get rank up. Everyone who just won 5 different assaults got rank up. That's why we believe that's enough. You can call that 'speculative' too and get upset about it (because not 100% on the server did this yet, so there could be exceptions), but what would be the point? Until you find a counterexample you might as well use the theory that is most useful and has been right so far.

[Coephoros]

Until you find a counterexample you might as well use the theory that is most useful and has been right so far.

That is counterintuitive. You can't "prove" a theory, you can only disprove one or gather supporting evidence and eliminate impossibilities. Your theory is based on a single observation. There is another situation that may or may not support your theory (Khamsin) and there is an observation that now likely disproves your theory (mine).

All told, there's not alot of use in adhering to your theory, not in the absense of further observations. By saying "right so far" you are really meaning "right for me", and you are suggesting that people attempt something based on your single source of validation. That's not very good advice.

[aurik]

Typical Genome bullshit

The difference is that we have dozens of reports that clearing all 5 unique assaults enables a rank-up, while your theory was based on 1 data set.

speculation:
- a hypothesis that has been formed by speculating or conjecturing (usually with little hard evidence)

[genome]

Typical Genome bullshit

The difference is that we have dozens of reports that clearing all 5 unique assaults enables a rank-up, while your theory was based on 1 data set.

speculation:
- a hypothesis that has been formed by speculating or conjecturing (usually with little hard evidence)

Holy bad mood... You didn't read any of that did you... And sounds like you sorta 'skimmed' through the thread. Again the theory is not mine and is based on a large number of observation, I am not the only one that mentions it in the thread either, I didn't endorse it other than saying that it happened to fit my data, and your anger seems pretty irrational here.
Like I said the only speculations here are the ones you made from not reading carefully this thread and assuming what other people are claiming without actually reading it.

[aurik]

Typical Genome bullshit

The difference is that we have dozens of reports that clearing all 5 unique assaults enables a rank-up, while your theory was based on 1 data set.

speculation:
- a hypothesis that has been formed by speculating or conjecturing (usually with little hard evidence)

Holy bad mood... You didn't read any of that did you... And sounds like you sorta 'skimmed' through the thread. Again the theory is not mine and is based on a large number of observation, I am not the only one that mentions it in the thread either, I didn't endorse it other than saying that it happened to fit my data, and your anger seems pretty irrational here.
Like I said the only speculations here are the ones you made from not reading carefully this thread and assuming what other people are claiming without actually reading it.

I did read your post. It was largely irrelevant. "It's nice to have a heuristic to know when you can rank up." No shit, really? I hear that June also follows May this year, isn't that crazy?

As for the theory, it's based on a "large number of observations", meaning someone invented it on the spot just like this wonderful heap of pure bullshit that gained general acceptance despite being blatantly wrong.

[Krandor]

How is the crafting timer page wrong? <_< I don't do much crafting since none of my actual characters have any crafts leveled, but I use that from time to time when i craft on friend's characters.

[divisortheory]

lol, you just made his point for him even better than he did.

[aurik]

How is the crafting timer page wrong? <_< I don't do much crafting since none of my actual characters have any crafts leveled, but I use that from time to time when i craft on friend's characters.

The most obvious error, advanced support is +3 not +2.

I question the veracity of all his numbers, though, because despite asking in every single discussion about what his sources were for the whole "difficulty" factor, nobody has pointed me to any raw data at all.

I think he just took some prevailing speculations at the time and coded them into a javascript page, and people think he actually did real research into the subject because it looks slick.

[Koyangi]

The most obvious error, advanced support is +3 not +2.

I was told by a 100+60 all subs crafter, that you get +2, and only get+3 once you reach a certain rank (veteran?(not sure)), I'm merely asking to clear this up, and I'll try to remember who told me this.

[aurik]

The most obvious error, advanced support is +3 not +2.

I was told by a 100+60 all subs crafter, that you get +2, and only get+3 once you reach a certain rank (veteran?(not sure)), I'm merely asking to clear this up, and I'll try to remember who told me this.

Completely false. Advanced is always +3.

[Genosync]

And you base this on?

At least the assault shit is provable--you claiming that a certain support is a certain # of skill is completely impossible to figure out, since you don't know any of the % rates for sure. It's all just data, nothing set in stone--like a point system for advancing rank in aht urghan that has quite a few data sets to show that it's 25 points per tier. Stop looking like a dumbass, please... you're trying to defend a dead point...

[draxyl]

Genome, what's your address? I want to come over and beat the 30 minutes I lose out on by reading your bullshit every day. You could say I shouldn't read it, but honestly you just shouldn't post it.

P.s. I'll use dune boots + meat instead of fumas/hume rse 2 aurik, so I should parse ok

P.p.s. Queue typical Genome "why you hate on me, I never posted bad thing about you" post.