89 replies to this topic

[thelasttrueborn]

Interesting data. Good work.

Keep it up.

[Arkadash]

Thanks for taking the time to make this data available to the community at large.

[hammerreborn]

DATA C, D, F, L, and N were slightly editted due to the user using ECM or me making slight clerical errors. The results overall didn't see any significant changes.

[Lukoi Banacek]

hammerreborn, on 10 April 2013 - 09:32 PM, said:

But seeing as the argument is the team with more ECM = win it doesn't make that much of a difference.

Actually this is more correctly quoted in 8mans or 8man competitive play. I don't necessarily believe it, but people upset with ECM balance will often point out that PUG matches (aka 4mans) don't mean anything in regards to balance since people play all kinds of sub-optimized builds, but in 8man/8man competitive play, people only bring "what works" with very little deviance.

Try this experiment again with 8's sometime and let us know what you find out. I'd be curious.

[hammerreborn]

Lukoi, on 11 April 2013 - 03:13 PM, said:

Actually this is more correctly quoted in 8mans or 8man competitive play. I don't necessarily believe it, but people upset with ECM balance will often point out that PUG matches (aka 4mans) don't mean anything in regards to balance since people play all kinds of sub-optimized builds, but in 8man/8man competitive play, people only bring "what works" with very little deviance.

Try this experiment again with 8's sometime and let us know what you find out. I'd be curious.

8v8 doesn't matter, to be frank. In 8s, skill is so much more important than all else. And frankly, if people are bitching about ECM in 8s, they shouldn't be doing 8s.

Also, for Thontor in particular, I just updated OP with a comparison between my march results and this one.


EDIT: And to be frank, other than a couple teams, doing this study in 8v8 is just going to show 25% Cent 9-A, 25% 3D, 25% D-DC, and 25% HM

Edited by hammerreborn, 11 April 2013 - 03:40 PM.

[hammerreborn]

Thontor, on 11 April 2013 - 03:45 PM, said:

heh, it looks like a lot of the Catapult pilots move to Jagermechs, and Atlas pilots to Highlanders... thanks!

Not terribly surprising, because the Jagermech can pretty much do the same thing as the catapult but better because of the arm mounted ac/20s.

[Teralitha]

What I took away from these charts -

1. Raven3L is the most popular light mech.
2. Atlas is still more popular than any other assault mech.
3. ECM increases your odds of winning by 4%
4. And the most interesting was that a new counter to ECM was discovered. Apparently a c-bill bonus on a mech is a counter to ECM.

I do think the sample size was too small for accurate results. But it was interesting.


Edit: By the way, i answered "maybe" to the fourth question because yes in solo pug the diversity exists, but in 8 man premades... it does not.

Edited by Teralitha, 11 April 2013 - 04:10 PM.

[hammerreborn]

Teralitha, on 11 April 2013 - 04:06 PM, said:

What I took away from these charts -

1. Raven3L is the most popular light mech.
2. Atlas is still more popular than any other assault mech.
3. ECM increases your odds of winning by 4%
4. And the most interesting was that a new counter to ECM was discovered. Apparently a c-bill bonus on a mech is a counter to ECM.

I do think the sample size was too small for accurate results. But it was interesting.


Edit: By the way, i answered "maybe" to the fourth question because yes in solo pug the diversity exists, but in 8 man premades... it does not.

I more meant the distribution for the 4th question. Like the fact that HMs were more prevelant than nearly every other mech was unexpected, at least for me

[Teralitha]

hammerreborn, on 11 April 2013 - 04:17 PM, said:

I more meant the distribution for the 4th question. Like the fact that HMs were more prevelant than nearly every other mech was unexpected, at least for me

But the word diversity is in the question.

[Deathlike]

The c-bill bonus weekend for hero/founders probably does affect the results (none of them are connected to ECM) so I'm not sold on the distribution (other than many of those mechs were showing up).

I'd be more sold if this info was during a competitive session (like the weaksauce tourneys) where ECM would more likely to be fielded (think of the first two tourneys). Then you'll probably see ECM in force.

I'm just grinding a Jenner (currently with the K), so if I happen to be a statistic, it's only because there's no reason to field a 3L at the moment.

Edit:
When there's something to fight for, you'll see them back in force. Most non-ECM light mech options are... grindfully bad.

Edited by Deathlike, 11 April 2013 - 04:28 PM.

[hammerreborn]

Deathlike, on 11 April 2013 - 04:21 PM, said:

The c-bill bonus weekend for hero/founders probably does affect the results (none of them are connected to ECM) so I'm not sold on the distribution (other than many of those mechs were showing up).

I'd be more sold if this info was during a competitive session (like the weaksauce tourneys) where ECM would more likely to be fielded (think of the first two tourneys). Then you'll probably see ECM in force.

I'm just grinding a Jenner (currently with the K), so if I happen to be a statistic, it's only because there's no reason to field a 3L at the moment.

Edit:
When there's something to fight for, you'll see them back in force. Most non-ECM light mech options are... grindfully bad.

Yes well, this weekend when I decided to do it wasn't a tourney weekend. But even those are biased towards whatever they are ranking (like the heavies last time)

[Gristle]

This data set in now on google docs in read only form. You can copy paste itnto your own spreadsheet to slice and dice as you wish.

https://drive.google...REU&usp=sharing

Thanks to Hammerborn for sharing and doing all the heavy lifting!!

Edited by Gristle, 11 April 2013 - 06:06 PM.

[Kasiagora]

Hammer, Don't know if you're still checking in on this but I wanted to say thanks for posting the pie charts as I get quicker comprehension of visual comparisons than gathering and breaking down the data (I was poor at algebra but could work out the most complex geometry in my head, and was no good at trigonometry until I started picturing the trajectories and flight paths in my mind).
And if you do something like this again in a few weeks, months, whatever, then send me a message. It was fun and gave my MW:O playing a little more direction for a while than usual. Maybe next time you'll get a bigger data pool!

[hammerreborn]

Kasiagora, on 11 April 2013 - 06:29 PM, said:

Hammer, Don't know if you're still checking in on this but I wanted to say thanks for posting the pie charts as I get quicker comprehension of visual comparisons than gathering and breaking down the data (I was poor at algebra but could work out the most complex geometry in my head, and was no good at trigonometry until I started picturing the trajectories and flight paths in my mind).
And if you do something like this again in a few weeks, months, whatever, then send me a message. It was fun and gave my MW:O playing a little more direction for a while than usual. Maybe next time you'll get a bigger data pool!

I probably will. Not sure if I'll do something the week after highlander release, or perhaps a tournament if one pops up. Thanks for your help once again.

And I don't know about a bigger data pool, lol. Took somewhere around 6 hours to manually input all the data.

Gristle, on 11 April 2013 - 06:03 PM, said:

This data set in now on google docs in read only form. You can copy paste itnto your own spreadsheet to slice and dice as you wish.

https://drive.google...REU&usp=sharing

Thanks to Hammerborn for sharing and doing all the heavy lifting!!

Thanks for hosting.

Edited by hammerreborn, 11 April 2013 - 06:55 PM.

[DrSecretStache]

This data was fantastic, thanks for the hard work. It actually didn't surprise me on the frequency of the top mechs, though it did surprise me on a few other things, namely the heavy metal. It kind of saddens me that people don't appreciate the light class as much as they used to...heck, I just bought my first jenner a few days ago and fell in love.

In the future, would you perhaps mind posting the actual numbers on match results, aka 0-8, 4-4, etc. This is actually information that I'm more interested in...how often stomps happen compared to decent matches.

[hammerreborn]

Zoughtbaj, on 11 April 2013 - 06:56 PM, said:

This data was fantastic, thanks for the hard work. It actually didn't surprise me on the frequency of the top mechs, though it did surprise me on a few other things, namely the heavy metal. It kind of saddens me that people don't appreciate the light class as much as they used to...heck, I just bought my first jenner a few days ago and fell in love.

In the future, would you perhaps mind posting the actual numbers on match results, aka 0-8, 4-4, etc. This is actually information that I'm more interested in...how often stomps happen compared to decent matches.

All the raw screenies are there, have at it =P

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

Teralitha, on 11 April 2013 - 04:06 PM, said:

...
4. And the most interesting was that a new counter to ECM was discovered. Apparently a c-bill bonus on a mech is a counter to ECM.

I do think the sample size was too small for accurate results. But it was interesting.
...

I have asserted in a couple of ECM feedback threads that when there is a significant ECM advantage between teams, the team with the advantage (I'm guessing 2 or more) is "much more likely to win".

While I find the data collected very interesting, particularly the weight class distribution, I think the "new car smell" on the Heavy Metal and the 3050 weekend bonus skewed the distribution, and neither proved nor invalidated my assertion.

It was interesting to see that when there was a significant weight difference, that the win % didn't change significantly.

[hammerreborn]

Kageru Ikazuchi, on 11 April 2013 - 07:19 PM, said:

I have asserted in a couple of ECM feedback threads that when there is a significant ECM advantage between teams, the team with the advantage (I'm guessing 2 or more) is "much more likely to win".

While I find the data collected very interesting, particularly the weight class distribution, I think the "new car smell" on the Heavy Metal and the 3050 weekend bonus skewed the distribution, and neither proved nor invalidated my assertion.

It was interesting to see that when there was a significant weight difference, that the win % didn't change significantly.

Well of course a team with 2 ECM or more than the other team is more likely to win. You've just described a premade team.

The overall distribution of ECM mechs is 16% in march, and 12% here. That means if there are more than 2 ECM mechs in a match something is wrong, which highly indicates a premade, which, in previous studies, had a nearly 90% success rate against a full PUG team.

[hammerreborn]

Kageru Ikazuchi, on 11 April 2013 - 07:19 PM, said:

I have asserted in a couple of ECM feedback threads that when there is a significant ECM advantage between teams, the team with the advantage (I'm guessing 2 or more) is "much more likely to win".

While I find the data collected very interesting, particularly the weight class distribution, I think the "new car smell" on the Heavy Metal and the 3050 weekend bonus skewed the distribution, and neither proved nor invalidated my assertion.

It was interesting to see that when there was a significant weight difference, that the win % didn't change significantly.

And because I'm awesome and have all the numbers in front of me.

Games with 2+ ECM: 36
Games where ECM won: 19

Win rate: 53%

Games with 3+ ECM: 3
Games where ECM won: 0

Win rate: 0%

So....there's that. More ECM actually lowered chance of winning.

Edited by hammerreborn, 11 April 2013 - 07:38 PM.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

hammerreborn, on 11 April 2013 - 07:37 PM, said:

Games with 2+ ECM: 36
Games where ECM won: 19

Win rate: 53%

Games with 3+ ECM: 3
Games where ECM won: 0

Win rate: 0%

So....there's that. More ECM actually lowered chance of winning.

Interesting ... doesn't jibe with my experience (pure PUG), but interesting.

If the long term statistics show that an ECM imbalance does not significantly affect the outcome of a match, I'll happily shut up (and maybe change my opinion) ... but when considering only matches where there was a significant ECM imbalance, I'm not convinced the sample size (36) is large enough to come to a valid conclusion, especially when the overall ECM mech population was lower than normal.

Edit:

hammerreborn said:

And because I'm awesome and have all the numbers in front of me.

No argument there ... thanks.

Edited by Kageru Ikazuchi, 11 April 2013 - 08:56 PM.