692 replies to this topic

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Thorn Hallis, on 08 August 2014 - 02:43 AM, said:

Conclusion: Clans are unbalanced in PUG play.

In play where 90% of the outcome is based on who has the poorest scrubs.

[Noth]

Be Rough With Me Plz, on 08 August 2014 - 02:40 AM, said:

Thank you for admitting you have nothing of substance to base your opinion on. Who needs facts when you have conjecture!

ggclose.

I have only what they want to give me. It is not the whole picture of data, thus I'm skeptical as it is easy to misrepresent things with incomplete data.

[Be Rough With Me Plz]

DV McKenna, on 08 August 2014 - 02:42 AM, said:

So the fact the company in question don't give you the facts and data automatically means they are "right"?

Can you prove that the numbers PGI released are false? No.

Stop trying to make a hypothetical into a fact. You have nothing but your own conjecture as a basis for your disbelief at the reported numbers.

Noth, on 08 August 2014 - 02:44 AM, said:

I have only what they want to give me. It is not the whole picture of data, thus I'm skeptical as it is easy to misrepresent things with incomplete data.

So you choose not to believe the numbers PGI released "because".

I see what you did there.

Noth, on 08 August 2014 - 02:35 AM, said:

I could have plenty if I saw the data. But since they are set on using averages to give us data I don't have them.

ggclose

Edited by Be Rough With Me Plz, 08 August 2014 - 02:52 AM.

[Myke Pantera]

I really wonna know why they are so reluctant to introduce 12vs10. Clans could go with their star formation and would be better, which they should be... It all makes sense for me. We don't need the clans to be artificially weak... Sure the matchmaker needs to be rewritten again, but it's all for the greater good

[Noth]

Be Rough With Me Plz, on 08 August 2014 - 02:47 AM, said:

Can you prove that the numbers PGI released are false? No.

Conjecture is conjecture no matter how you want to word it.



So you choose not to believe the numbers PGI released "because".

I see what you did there.

I want to see more because average can hide data.

Here is real life example of how averages do not tell the whole story. The hospital I worked at had an average of 65% satisfaction rating by patients. However looking at the data it was found the majority of the units and shifts recieve much higher than 65% satisfaction rating from patients. Then we had some units and shifts that were much much lower that brought the entire average down. If we took the mode or median, instead it would had been well over 80%. Painting a different picture to people that saw the statistic.

It is that type of thing that makes me want to see more than just averages. If you are so sure the averages are correct then you shouldn't be so hostile about them giving more data, in fact you shoudl want it because it would just cement it all.

Edited by Noth, 08 August 2014 - 02:59 AM.

[Bobby Blast]

What I find funny is whatever they do to weapons to balance them will surely drive lights even further into the ground.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Be Rough With Me Plz, on 08 August 2014 - 02:47 AM, said:

Can you prove that the numbers PGI released are false? No.

Because companies, organisations, governments never misrepresent things for their own ends do they?
The fact you take half of the information you actually need as being correct is baffling.

Are you really that gullible or just a white knight ?

Edited by DV McKenna, 08 August 2014 - 02:58 AM.

[Be Rough With Me Plz]

Noth, on 08 August 2014 - 02:54 AM, said:

I want to see more because average can hide data.

Here is real life example of how averages do not tell the whole story. The hospital I worked at had an average of 65% satisfaction rating by patients. However looking at the data it was found the majority of the units and shifts recieve much higher than 65% satisfaction rating from patients. Then we had some units and shifts that were much much lower that brought the entire average down. If we took the mode or median, instead it would had been well over 80%. Painting a different picture to people that saw the statistic.

Comparing some hospital stat with MW:O

lulz

Irrelevant comparisons for everybody!




ggclose? NOPE!

DV McKenna, on 08 August 2014 - 02:57 AM, said:

Because companies, organisations, governments never misrepresent things for their own ends do they?
The fact you take half of the information you actually need as being correct is baffling.

Are you really that gullible or just a white knight ?

I'm basing my statements on presented evidence. You're basing your statements on the hypothetical that Elo, after 2-3 years, suddenly became invalidated tonight.

Which of the two seems more relevant to a discussion?

Be Rough With Me Plz, on 07 August 2014 - 11:20 PM, said:

Here it is, people. We have now witnessed the shift of focus heading towards "Elo is no longer valid" now that we have a clear indication that Clan Tech gives you a 90% chance to win.

It's not the Tech, it's the people!

Edited by Be Rough With Me Plz, 08 August 2014 - 03:14 AM.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Be Rough With Me Plz, on 08 August 2014 - 03:02 AM, said:

I'm basing my statements on presented evidence. You're basing your statements on a hypothetical.

Which of the two seems more relevant to a discussion?

You basing your statements on half of the evidence.

Surely you would want the full picture before forming an opinion.

[oldradagast]

rageagainstthedyingofthelight, on 07 August 2014 - 08:41 PM, said:

The stats on the IS vs Clan queues came in with clan wining 90% of the time. 90%.

So I thought I'd start a thread where everyone who said Clan mechs weren't more powerful could apologize, you know, to keep it all in one place. You were wrong, there's no shame in that, but you were wrong.

No doubt we'll get tons of laughable defense, including the usual suspects:

1) "The IS pilots must have been bad - and only them." Because buying a Clan mech magically improves your skill... or only skilled people are allowed Clan mechs... or the Matchmaker conspired to set this up... right...

2) "I do better in my IS mech than my Clan mech, so IS mechs are better!" Because one data point somehow overwhelms a large amount of actual statistical data. And I do better in my Awesomes then in my Cataphracts, so clearly Awesomes should be rocking the meta, not the Cataphract 3D

3) "Clan mechs have weaknesses, so they are weak:" More failed logic. All mechs have weaknesses, and Clan weaknesses are not unique. We've all heard the excuses for the Dire Wolf - "it's slow and lacks mobility, so you can take advantage of it." Yeah, so? The only assault mech in the game that doesn't fall into that slow and/or immobile category is the Awesome, and we all know what other problems it has. The only difference between the slow, clunky Dire Wolf and the slow Clunky IS assault is that the Dire Wolf has 50% more firepower basically for free.

4) "IS mechs have front-loaded damage, so they are the best." Because apparently Clan PPC's and Gauss Rifles don't exist... and neither does their overwhelming win statistic vs. the IS.

Face it: Clan mech are, on average, all around better than their IS equivalents. Sure, some IS mechs can compete, and some Clan mechs are subpar, but the reality is in nearly all cases, there's no good reason NOT to play a Clan mech at this point. About the only exceptions are IS lights, the DDC Atlas, and maybe the Victor on a good jump-sniping day.

Edited by oldradagast, 08 August 2014 - 03:08 AM.

[Noth]

Be Rough With Me Plz, on 08 August 2014 - 03:00 AM, said:

Comparing some hospital stat with MW:O

lulz

Irrelevant comparisons for everybody!

Actually it does exactly what I wanted to. It points out a flaw with just using averages to draw conclusions. It was not a direct comparison but an example of such issues with average only comparisons. Again, if you are so sure, you should encourage more data to be released because if you are right it would only cement you side.

Edited by Noth, 08 August 2014 - 03:05 AM.

[Gus VAPOR Rice]

Given that Tweet I'm not sure PGI can do a proper assessmet, to many unknowns in my opinion or way to small sample
For example how many trial mechs, what amount of opimizing made... modules? Consumables? Tonnage? Mastery?
That is a few of the "other factors that comes in to play", most? all? favoring clans since trial mechs puts a serious dent in the statistics.


On the other hand... they have other data so lets hope they know what they doing...

Mohahhahah

sorry about that, could't keep it in...

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Gus VAPOR Rice, on 08 August 2014 - 03:05 AM, said:

For example how many trial mechs, what amount of opimizing made... modules? Consumables? Tonnage? Mastery?
That is a few of the "other factors that comes in to play", most? all? favoring clans since trial mechs puts a serious dent in the statistics.

And thus the problem with their set of data.

Too many variables in an uncontrolled environment, with some varying sometimes wildly skill differentials, mechs like trials and champions which are a handicap to the IS side.

[Be Rough With Me Plz]

Noth, on 08 August 2014 - 03:04 AM, said:

Actually it does exactly what I wanted to. It points out a flaw with just using averages to draw conclusions. It was not a direct comparison but an example of such issues with average only comparisons. Again, if you are so sure, you should encourage more data to be released because if you are right it would only cement you side.

DV McKenna, on 08 August 2014 - 03:07 AM, said:

And thus the problem with their set of data.

Too many variables in an uncontrolled environment, with some varying sometimes wildly skill differentials, mechs like trials and champions which are a handicap to the IS side.

argumentum ad ignorantiam

And none of you have provided a single piece of evidence to substantiate your claims or to refute PGI's conclusions.

Edited by Be Rough With Me Plz, 08 August 2014 - 03:18 AM.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

ironically your two meme's describe your position, flawlessly

[Noth]

Be Rough With Me Plz, on 08 August 2014 - 03:14 AM, said:

argumentum ad ignorantiam

And none of you have provided a single piece of evidence to substantiate your claims.

We don't have any because we don't have access to it.

Also nearly all arguments have some form of fallacy in them I always find it funny when people try to refer to them. There is lack of evidence on both sides. The only evidence we are given is averages, which when analyzing statistic only tell part of the story. There is a reason why more than just average is used in most statistical analysis.

I'm not even trying to prove IS are losing because of bad players at this point, I'm simply wanting more data no matter who it proves right.

Edited by Noth, 08 August 2014 - 03:20 AM.

[oldradagast]

Be Rough With Me Plz, on 08 August 2014 - 03:14 AM, said:

argumentum ad ignorantiam

And none of you have provided a single piece of evidence to substantiate your claims.

The Clan white knights will never be satisfied with any amount of data that proves that Clan mechs are noticeably superior. No matter how much data is shown, it is always "Well, there might have been some trial mechs involved," or "I beat a Dire Wolf yesterday in my flamer Locust, so everything is balanced," or "My win stats in my Centurion are better than those in my Timberwolf, so IS mechs are better, " and so on.

And yet, we're to believe that actual game data that proves the Clan's noticeable edge doesn't count, and that everyone rushed out and bought Clan mechs purely for flavor reasons... nobody did it to get a superior weapon to use to crush IS speed-bumps in the game.

Personally, I just think it's a case of people wanting to keep their "easy button" edge over the competition... admittedly, given PGI's dismal track record for game balance, I can understand their fears, but that doesn't mean denying reality is going to convince me to support the Clanner's position and get me to believe that their mechs are perfectly balanced when every flippin' game I play says otherwise.

[Slackjawlocal]

What I am most afraid of is Clan Mechs will be nerfed so bad we can't compete. What IS has to remember. Its not Clan vrs IS all the time. other then the testing that's gone on is the only time Clan vrs IS ever happen. other then that we fight side by side with IS.

I hear a lot about over powered clan mechs. IS has the Best light, and Assault mechs in the game. The Raven and Jenner beets out the Kit fox np. Kit fox is slow and weak making it an easier target as a 30 ton mech. can't change out the engine to make it faster and is now even more limited on weapons with the new heat sink change.

The Atlus and Awesome, top two Assault mechs IMO. The Dire wolf is Way to slow and with no way to change out the engine the only advantage is its massive armament. Witch by the way will over heat it more often them help it. A fast Raven, Jenner, or any light mech other then a kit Fox can easily solo a novice pilot in a direwolf and never get hit by it. Even after the elite training tier the direwolf turn and twist are slow and small they can stay behind one with no problems.

I am still a green pilot little over a month now playing and I did Invest in the game some. I like MWO I will play this over any FPS. I own 15 mechs with 3 open slots. 3 Kit Fox, 3 Dire wolf, 3 Jagermech, 3 Ravens. One Jagermech being the Hero mech and the Raven as well. I rather play my Raven over my kit fox and I payed money for it. Its a kit fox I had to have it. I Like my Dire wolf but I see myself playing a lighter class mech with shorter queue times then to walk this slow Assault across a map to be taken out by a single light mech if I got nothing to back up into.

I also think they need to look into a lot of the data and what kind of data they are collecting. After all we don't know what information they are collecting and what they feel is relevant data to collect. Piloting skills mean a lot and working as a team even more so. I don't know of any mech IS or Clan that can step out in front of 5 enemy's by themselves and live longer then 40 seconds. (Maybe a light on speed.) Before they go to nerf clan mechs they need to release them for c-bills or Trial Mechs. This is the only way they can truly balance them. One weekend where every Clan Mech is a trial mech then do a clan vrs IS and Clan vrs Clan.

just my view from a new play that has clan mechs.

Edited by Slackjawlocal, 08 August 2014 - 03:25 AM.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

oldradagast, on 08 August 2014 - 03:18 AM, said:

The Clan white knights will never be satisfied with any amount of data that proves that Clan mechs are noticeably superior. No matter how much data is shown, it is always "Well, there might have been some trial mechs involved," or "I beat a Dire Wolf yesterday in my flamer Locust, so everything is balanced," or "My win stats in my Centurion are better than those in my Timberwolf, so IS mechs are better, " and so on.

And yet, we're to believe that actual game data that proves the Clan's noticeable edge doesn't count, and that everyone rushed out and bought Clan mechs purely for flavor reasons... nobody did it to get a superior weapon to use to crush IS speed-bumps in the game.

Personally, I just think it's a case of people wanting to keep their "easy button" edge over the competition... admittedly, given PGI's dismal track record for game balance, I can understand their fears, but that doesn't mean denying reality is going to convince me to support the Clanner's position and get me to believe that their mechs are perfectly balanced when every flippin' game I play says otherwise.

And some people just don't have the IQ to understand the evidence presented does not provide the answers they are jumping too.

We could do this argument all day.

Edited by DV McKenna, 08 August 2014 - 03:22 AM.

[Be Rough With Me Plz]

DV McKenna, on 08 August 2014 - 03:17 AM, said:

ironically your two meme's describe your position, flawlessly

Oh snap, Ad Hominem already?