|
Post by BooBooKitty on Feb 17, 2017 20:56:24 GMT -5
This is the Internet, it's serious business.
Professional reputations are at stake XD
|
|
|
Post by buzzard on Feb 18, 2017 0:39:10 GMT -5
This is the Internet, it's serious business. Professional reputations are at stake XD Nope no one knows who I am. I am sad for the state of STEM education in our country though. I thought scientific method was 6 th grade education, but it seems pretty lacking.
|
|
|
Post by SGT D00M! on Feb 18, 2017 0:54:38 GMT -5
Knock it off, both of you. It's a game; a phone game at that. Go play some matches and chill out.
|
|
|
Post by BooBooKitty on Feb 18, 2017 2:12:39 GMT -5
I am just joking with you buzzard , I get what you are saying, I just think you need to investigate my position more fully. no salt here, just friendly debate
|
|
|
Post by SuperHero on Feb 18, 2017 3:44:56 GMT -5
This isn't an opinion I'm giving you here lol! I'm just telling you how it is. ? Refusing facts and moving goalposts is a tactic hard wired in many, I love how you stick to your guns. Let em argue facts not people... excellent. Browsing the network news channels alone proves this, in less color however as the chumps one booth over, crying a river loud enough to be a part of my lunch... ironically for this forum, both include references to baby seals... and both cannot be infiltrated in the least on any level for any reason, if you're not already sympathetic to that plight or under similar delusions. Averages don't drive anything in War Robots and facts in RL won't convince some of very obvious things like Trump won and is now in charge. Neither is gonna change despite a river of tears at flash flood levels and both topics can be driven by a mountain of facts that will never be acknowledged or shared by half the crowd. Again stellar write up Boo Boo, nice job decrypting the cryptic. I tested your findings hoping they worked and they do. The new MM is now a high paying asset, one I'm guessing will last until about 2.6. Please refrain from bringing politics into this forum.
|
|
|
Post by zr on Feb 18, 2017 4:35:13 GMT -5
This must be the new MM at its best? This is 50/50 game went down to last second with 2 Bots left on each side. Damage is so close
|
|
|
Post by Desolator on Feb 18, 2017 6:15:27 GMT -5
#Buzzard You've done great job here. A suggestion: You could do a t-test on the data you collected assuming blue as sample 1 and red sample 2 (both random, sample size 6, pooled variance) and compare ave. damage.
|
|
|
Post by whatttupG on Feb 18, 2017 10:30:33 GMT -5
Refusing facts and moving goalposts is a tactic hard wired in many, I love how you stick to your guns. Let em argue facts not people... excellent. Browsing the network news channels alone proves this, in less color however as the chumps one booth over, crying a river loud enough to be a part of my lunch... ironically for this forum, both include references to baby seals... and both cannot be infiltrated in the least on any level for any reason, if you're not already sympathetic to that plight or under similar delusions. Averages don't drive anything in War Robots and facts in RL won't convince some of very obvious things like Trump won and is now in charge. Neither is gonna change despite a river of tears at flash flood levels and both topics can be driven by a mountain of facts that will never be acknowledged or shared by half the crowd. Again stellar write up Boo Boo, nice job decrypting the cryptic. I tested your findings hoping they worked and they do. The new MM is now a high paying asset, one I'm guessing will last until about 2.6. Please refrain from bringing politics into this forum. Facts aren't politics, unless your issue is with reality.
|
|
|
Post by SGT D00M! on Feb 18, 2017 10:34:04 GMT -5
This isn't an opinion I'm giving you here lol! I'm just telling you how it is. ? Refusing facts and moving goalposts is a tactic hard wired in many, I love how you stick to your guns. Let em argue facts not people... excellent. Browsing the network news channels alone proves this, in less color however as the chumps one booth over, crying a river loud enough to be a part of my lunch... ironically for this forum, both include references to baby seals... and both cannot be infiltrated in the least on any level for any reason, if you're not already sympathetic to that plight or under similar delusions. Averages don't drive anything in War Robots and facts in RL won't convince some of very obvious things like Trump won and is now in charge. Neither is gonna change despite a river of tears at flash flood levels and both topics can be driven by a mountain of facts that will never be acknowledged or shared by half the crowd.Again stellar write up Boo Boo, nice job decrypting the cryptic. I tested your findings hoping they worked and they do. The new MM is now a high paying asset, one I'm guessing will last until about 2.6. Is that the "facts" that are not political? Alternative facts indeed.
|
|
|
Post by NokiaSåmsung on Feb 18, 2017 14:46:08 GMT -5
Didn't visit this thread for a while.
Reading this last page makes me feel like a lvl 1 gepard who just ran into a TT crossfire in the middle of Shenzen square.
Nvm me
*Leaves Battle*
|
|
|
Post by Muhlakai on Feb 19, 2017 21:48:26 GMT -5
What we do know is that within a match, the average profile damage of the pilots is within 10%, and usually less, of the average profile damage of all 12. When you look at the mean of the average profile damage of the 2 teams and compare them against each other, they are different by 2% different or less (!). My PhD adviser always used to {say}- When you hear hoof beats, think horses, not zebras. The hoof beat here is that the avg dmg scores are incredibly close. The horse is that average profile damage is the primary factor being used by the new MM. Did your adviser also teach you the phrase "correlation does not imply causation"? Players with similar avg damages being matched together is just effect of the new MM, but the not basis on which it matches people. Its all about the artificial points system they have setup. Huh. So in short your premise is that when Pix told all of the Insiders that avg damage was the primary factor in the MM that, in reality, they were telling bold-faced lies? I think I now know what I needed to evaluate your opinion on this.
|
|
|
Post by BooBooKitty on Feb 19, 2017 22:41:24 GMT -5
Did your adviser also teach you the phrase "correlation does not imply causation"? Players with similar avg damages being matched together is just effect of the new MM, but the not basis on which it matches people. Its all about the artificial points system they have setup. Huh. So in short your premise is that when Pix told all of the Insiders that avg damage was the primary factor in the MM that, in reality, they were telling bold-faced lies? I think I now know what I needed to evaluate your opinion on this. It very clearly isn't avg damage based to anyone who has tried experimenting, are you sure they didn't just say damage based and not avg damage based? Because from what I have seen it is damage based, just not based on avg damage in your profile.
|
|
|
Post by ł⸰§ĦȺĐ◎ŴƧŦḀɌ on Feb 20, 2017 0:18:49 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by BooBooKitty on Feb 20, 2017 1:09:09 GMT -5
damn straight
|
|
|
Post by Muhlakai on Feb 20, 2017 12:41:17 GMT -5
Huh. So in short your premise is that when Pix told all of the Insiders that avg damage was the primary factor in the MM that, in reality, they were telling bold-faced lies? I think I now know what I needed to evaluate your opinion on this. It very clearly isn't avg damage based to anyone who has tried experimenting, are you sure they didn't just say damage based and not avg damage based? Because from what I have seen it is damage based, just not based on avg damage in your profile. Let's assume you were correct. If it was only based on your damage from the last match then every time you toasted the competition then you'd have all TT teammates/opponents next match and all Destriers and Natashas after that. It would be much, much worse than it is. Clearly they have to use an average. #stability ...oh, right. And there's this: We do know that within a match, the average profile damage of the pilots is within 10%, and usually less, of the average profile damage of all 12. When you look at the mean of the average profile damage of the 2 teams and compare them against each other, they are different by 2% different or less (!). And if damage was just match-by-match then this wouldn't be the case. The correlation with the profile-based average damage has been shown to be extreme. (Through experimentation, no less, just like you said wouldn't work.)
|
|
|
Post by Ⅎ₹ѺC₭₩ELDEℲ₹ on Feb 20, 2017 14:33:04 GMT -5
This just in..League scoring is the Metric ..and average damage is a really good way to gauge your competitive matchups. Both are great, you are great, I am great... everybody wins!
|
|
|
Post by arakos on Feb 20, 2017 15:58:59 GMT -5
Hello everyone. I am a newby, been playing for five weeks only and this is my second post here However I think there is a mathematical way of solving the issue between League Score (page 21 in this thread) and Average Damage. That is, if Average Damage works as I think it works. I hope it helps: "Smurf" for 25 games. Whatever you do, don't score damage. "Hit hard" for 25 games. Kill kill kill. Now you have an Average Damage Score. Ok great. "Smurf" again for 25 games. If I understood right, your Average Damage Score should not change at all. If you had 200k average after game 50, you will have 200k at game 75. Now: If by game 75 the mechs you find are more or less the same as game 50, Average Damage Score is what matters in the new MM. If you are finding much lighter mechs, then Average Damage Score is irrelevant towards the new MM. League Scoring (page 21) is king. Btw, if this is the case, sacrificing yourself to a clubber in order to elevate his Average Damage is not a good idea: you are helping him. He will be #1 damage dealer dealing 200k or 800k damage, more damage just means more silver. He will get the same League Score points no matter how much damage he does. Sorry I don't have currently the time to do this experiment myself. If I find the time I'll tell you folks the results. And sorry for my poor English... non native English speaker, old man as well Arakos
|
|
[AurN] perfectlyGoodInk
Aurora Clan Moderator
Posts: 729
Karma: 556
Platform: Android
Clan: leader of Aurora Nova [AurN]
League: Gold
Server Region: North America
Favorite robot: Bishop from Aliens, although WALL-E is a close second
|
Post by [AurN] perfectlyGoodInk on Feb 20, 2017 16:07:57 GMT -5
The only interesting political debates are the ones focused on policy instead of the politicians. The latter resembles the pointless cheerleading of most sports arguments.
|
|
|
Post by BooBooKitty on Feb 20, 2017 17:36:09 GMT -5
It very clearly isn't avg damage based to anyone who has tried experimenting, are you sure they didn't just say damage based and not avg damage based? Because from what I have seen it is damage based, just not based on avg damage in your profile. Let's assume you were correct. If it was only based on your damage from the last match then every time you toasted the competition then you'd have all TT teammates/opponents next match and all Destriers and Natashas after that. It would be much, much worse than it is. Clearly they have to use an average. #stability ...oh, right. And there's this: We do know that within a match, the average profile damage of the pilots is within 10%, and usually less, of the average profile damage of all 12. When you look at the mean of the average profile damage of the 2 teams and compare them against each other, they are different by 2% different or less (!). And if damage was just match-by-match then this wouldn't be the case. The correlation with the profile-based average damage has been shown to be extreme. (Through experimentation, no less, just like you said wouldn't work.) Your league score is a running total, it doesn't reset with each individual match. Because it is based on relative damage, after you play enough games to settle your total league score, you will be consistently matched with players that have similar average damages. What I've been saying is that the similarity in the average damage is an effect of the new MM, but not the determinant for MM.
|
|
|
Post by CΛΜΡΞΓ™ on Feb 20, 2017 17:38:26 GMT -5
Phew, 27 pages! And I thought the beaning game was bad...
|
|
|
Post by SlowReflexes on Feb 20, 2017 18:13:23 GMT -5
Rebalancing the hangar for more beacons less damage is hitting a point of diminishing returns because it looks like too many other people are doing it. Lately when I lose I finish anywhere from first to third in damage usually first in beacons, and when I win I generally finish fourth or fifth in damage, *second in beacons* (when I win the high damage people are often maxed hangars, and other people are going all-capper). Long term this is not a recipe for success. So I bought a Gareth. Time to go lighter. When it's leveled my hangar may well be 3 mediums and 2 lights.
|
|
|
Post by buzzard on Feb 20, 2017 19:15:57 GMT -5
Let's assume you were correct. If it was only based on your damage from the last match then every time you toasted the competition then you'd have all TT teammates/opponents next match and all Destriers and Natashas after that. It would be much, much worse than it is. Clearly they have to use an average. #stability ...oh, right. And there's this: And if damage was just match-by-match then this wouldn't be the case. The correlation with the profile-based average damage has been shown to be extreme. (Through experimentation, no less, just like you said wouldn't work.) Your league score is a running total, it doesn't reset with each individual match. Because it is based on relative damage, after you play enough games to settle your total league score, you will be consistently matched with players that have similar average damages. What I've been saying is that the similarity in the average damage is an effect of the new MM, but not the determinant for MM. Time for another circle lol. Or, they are both part of the determination, with league score determining division which sets the pool for the match and avg dmg used as the second layer to pick the teams. We will know which is correct once leagues go live and we can see ihow closely league score and profile dmg match. Until then you don't know. All we can say right now is division placement based on relative per game as shown on bkitty's chart on page 21 and profile dmg scores between 2 teams come out within 2% or less. No one can make any more firm conclusions than that with the info we have available.
|
|
|
Post by buzzard on Feb 20, 2017 19:16:09 GMT -5
Duplicate post
|
|
|
Post by BooBooKitty on Feb 20, 2017 19:34:06 GMT -5
I know it's not avg dmg. I don't know why you refuse to experiment for yourself.
|
|
|
Post by buzzard on Feb 20, 2017 19:50:16 GMT -5
I know it's not avg dmg. I don't know why you refuse to experiment for yourself. Bkitty- in your "experiment" you haven't been able to separate the two. We can have this conversation 100 times and it won't change that. I only comment when you say you know the answer for sure. We will know before long. Let's agree to disagree without making definitive conclusions. whatever correlations you may see, you don't have the only set of data that can settle it.
|
|
|
Post by SGT D00M! on Feb 20, 2017 19:51:14 GMT -5
I know it's not avg dmg. I don't know why you refuse to experiment for yourself. I did. My win% went up, my damage average went down, my opponents got easier. That suggests damage average. The influx of beacon capping hangars would be short lived if the placement score was the MM, since they tend to have higher win%. I'll keep experimenting and watching the red and blue stats.
|
|
|
Post by buzzard on Feb 20, 2017 19:53:12 GMT -5
And I promise you that once we have the info, if it turns out you are correct, I will be the first to acknowledge it! Seriously.
|
|
|
Post by buzzard on Feb 20, 2017 19:56:22 GMT -5
Start taking pics of your data and post. In 40 matches now I see consistent dmg matching and that is w my win rate going as low as 40% and as high as 68. Still team profile dmg match perfectly every time.
|
|
|
Post by Ⅎ₹ѺC₭₩ELDEℲ₹ on Feb 20, 2017 20:02:41 GMT -5
Look out! This man wants the answer... And he is not gonna sleep till he gets it.
|
|
|
Post by BooBooKitty on Feb 20, 2017 20:03:09 GMT -5
And I promise you that once we have the info, if it turns out you are correct, I will be the first to acknowledge it! Seriously. As long as you are prepared for that inevitability... Hehe
|
|