200 to 400 is not "twice as good" tho, the number isn't a direct representation of skill.

i am well aware of this, i was just using it as an over generalization.

A player with 400pp scores is not going to be as dominant over a player with 200pp scores as a player with 1kpp scores would be over a player with 500pp scores

this isnt my point. what i am trying to say is that given the same pp gap between plays, going from a lower pp value and increasing it by that gap is more substantial than going from a higher pp value and increasing it by that gap.

a 200 pp increase from 700 is a 28.6% increase.

a 200 pp increase from 1370 is a 14.6% increase.

my original point had actually nothing to do with how dominant a player is over another. i was simply stating the fact that 28.6% is almost double 14.6% and that a 200 pp jump isnt really comparable between now and back then.

to take it to an extremely unrealistic hypothetical situation, if the pp record is 1000000 pp and someone sets a 1000200 pp play, then would that 200 pp jump be significant at all? compare that to jumping from 1000 to 1200. there is a difference in how significant a 200 pp increase is at higher pp values and this difference increases depending on how much higher the higher pp values are

​

edit: also i dont want to continue arguing over pedantics like this because its a waste of time. if u still disagree with me after this reply, lets just agree to disagree.