692 replies to this topic

[GalaxyBluestar]

well it seems everyone wants feather dusters at ten paces, no diversity is balance right?

what maths have you done? you only need 12 IS to fill a match even if there's 200 clanners about. just 10 of them get to fight IS.

preferably 10vs16 but yeah remember we're talking about PGI so you might see IS buffs but you've been here long enough to know how well buffs and nerfs have worked around here.

let your gaming misery be on your head i'm out.

[Funkadelic Mayhem]

Joseph Mallan, on 08 August 2014 - 08:45 PM, said:

Meh... I did a lot of Clan busting over the years, even at two GenCons... I Guess YMMV.

tabletop dont count. This is an all new world for mechwarrior

Maybe you will like...

Edited by Funkadelic Mayhem, 08 August 2014 - 09:45 PM.

[Hobgoblin I]

EgoSlayer, on 08 August 2014 - 05:01 PM, said:

Nope, and you know what? PGI doesn't either. As I said providing just three examples of what PGI's raw numbers can't tell them. To know if it happened one has to be observing the matches. And based on player reports there were lots of players whom the observers didn't think played at the observer's skill level. This points to either deliberate actions, or the next example: Incorrect player rankings (elo).

You are making up a variable that doesn't exist. There is just as much of a reason for clan players to sandbag as there is for IS players and no good reason to think either happened. That is something taht couldn't possibly be a "control" in a large sample of players. Maybe more IS players had colds and didn't play as well because of watery eyes...PGI's raw numbers can't tell that either. Quit making up phantom variables.

EgoSlayer, on 08 August 2014 - 05:01 PM, said:

I'll refer you to the 10,000 threads on Elo and how/why the numbers are inaccurate, but for starters I'll give you a few:
Players only have one Elo rating per class which creates a lot of drift/inaccuracy with lots of player environment changes;
Group player vs. solo PUG Elo. Group play (usually) leads to a better Elo because of better team work. Dropping into the solo queue (where the test happened) means an Elo that is probably artificially high.

ELO is bad for both IS players and clan players, therefore it is a constant and not a variable in this equation. In a statistically large enough sample size the rotten ELO will average out on both sides making your point moot in this discussion.

EgoSlayer, on 08 August 2014 - 05:01 PM, said:

There is no question the pool of players is lower off-peak, by definition. It may not be a representational sample.

Like I said before, there is some validity to the data, but it's also horrendously flawed because they don't have the right controls on the data. There are lots of other values that were not controlled for that pose problems, I just used some well known ones as examples.
I'm all for testing, but flawed data leads to flawed conclusions, which leads to mistaken "balance" fixes. <cough>C-ERLL ghost heat</cough>

PGI knows the pool of players better than you do, but in any case it was comparing how the same pool of player fares with the different tech...the same players...unless somehow you believe that better clan players play at certain times that better IS players don't., which would be truly insane to think. The only flaw you have seen is that the outcome doesn't jibe with the outcome you wanted.

[-Natural Selection-]

Hobgoblin I, on 08 August 2014 - 09:49 PM, said:

You are making up a variable that doesn't exist. There is just as much of a reason for clan players to sandbag as there is for IS players and no good reason to think either happened. That is something taht couldn't possibly be a &quot;control&quot; in a large sample of players. Maybe more IS players had colds and didn't play as well because of watery eyes...PGI's raw numbers can't tell that either. Quit making up phantom variables.

An easy 25% of the matches I was in they did not fight. Went to corner of the map and just sat there. Another they were saying in open chat to not do over 100 damage, and that it worked in other matches.

[Creovex]

I CANNOT say this enough....

Clans are fine (do not nerf).... its the overly nerfed IS mechs that should be seeing quirks, un-nerfs and buffs to their stats. PGI needs to really ask themselves why a clan mech can continue to survive down to 20% with an XL engine while an IS mech ALWAYS explodes above that, closer to 30% (this was a pre clan release known issue) even when running a STD engine.

@PGI - DO NOT nerf clans, but rather buff IS.

Edited by Creovex, 09 August 2014 - 02:35 AM.

[EgoSlayer]

Hobgoblin I, on 08 August 2014 - 09:49 PM, said:

You are making up a variable that doesn't exist. There is just as much of a reason for clan players to sandbag as there is for IS players and no good reason to think either happened. That is something taht couldn't possibly be a "control" in a large sample of players. Maybe more IS players had colds and didn't play as well because of watery eyes...PGI's raw numbers can't tell that either. Quit making up phantom variables.



ELO is bad for both IS players and clan players, therefore it is a constant and not a variable in this equation. In a statistically large enough sample size the rotten ELO will average out on both sides making your point moot in this discussion.





PGI knows the pool of players better than you do, but in any case it was comparing how the same pool of player fares with the different tech...the same players...unless somehow you believe that better clan players play at certain times that better IS players don't., which would be truly insane to think. The only flaw you have seen is that the outcome doesn't jibe with the outcome you wanted.

Using these numbers as gospel without acknowledging the flaws in the data collection is worse than ignoring the numbers entirely.

I am doing neither, and I'll leave it at that.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Mickey Knoxx, on 08 August 2014 - 09:55 PM, said:

An easy 25% of the matches I was in they did not fight. Went to corner of the map and just sat there. Another they were saying in open chat to not do over 100 damage, and that it worked in other matches.

That's sad.

EgoSlayer, on 09 August 2014 - 07:48 AM, said:

Using these numbers as gospel without acknowledging the flaws in the data collection is worse than ignoring the numbers entirely.

I am doing neither, and I'll leave it at that.

Exactly.

[Lefty Lucy]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 09 August 2014 - 08:00 AM, said:

That's sad.



Exactly.

I saw the behavior that Mickey described zero times.

[IraqiWalker]

Lefty Lucy, on 09 August 2014 - 08:18 AM, said:

I saw the behavior that Mickey described zero times.

I have not seen that behavior as well, but when my Crimson match was starting some players on my team were saying that it's useless to fight the clans and everyone should give up. That was during the ready screen. I responded with knowing an easy way to kill them, and that they have nothing to lose by putting up a fight, a few other players echoed what I was saying, and we managed to win once everyone got their act together.

I was so proud to see the team follow instructions and the strategy, it was amazing.

[Mcgral18]

Lefty Lucy, on 09 August 2014 - 08:18 AM, said:

I saw the behavior that Mickey described zero times.

I did have one match where a trial jenner nearly TKed a Cataphract, then ran off to suicide.

So, I can believe it.

[Phaeric Cyrh]

SO funny how the only people reporting that IS conspired to throw matches are the same ones that have been stomping their feet and screaming "CLAN R BALANCED!" with their fingers planted firmly in their ears.

I don't believe you.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Lefty Lucy, on 09 August 2014 - 08:18 AM, said:

I saw the behavior that Mickey described zero times.

So if some people saw it, and some people didn't, does that mean it didn't exist?

Did I say it was widespread?

Did I say everyone was doing it?

NOPE.

All I said was it was sad, because I do believe that people would do that.

Calm the hell down, you are starting to sound like a whacko.

[Mcgral18]

Phaeric Cyrh, on 09 August 2014 - 09:24 AM, said:

SO funny how the only people reporting that IS conspired to throw matches are the same ones that have been stomping their feet and screaming "CLAN R BALANCED!" with their fingers planted firmly in their ears.

I don't believe you.

You don't have to believe...there is the screenshot right above you.

Why doesn't anyone want accurate data....my god.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Phaeric Cyrh, on 09 August 2014 - 09:24 AM, said:

SO funny how the only people reporting that IS conspired to throw matches are the same ones that have been stomping their feet and screaming "CLAN R BALANCED!" with their fingers planted firmly in their ears.

I don't believe you.

Very few people are sitting here claiming the Clans are balanced. I certainly have not said that.

What we have been saying, is the testing methods are something a 3 year old would come up with and nerfs/changes should not be based on the results.

And then of course the first thing that happens is amazingly stupid nerfs, that have to be rolled back immediately because they are so bad.

Do you understand the stupidity that is PGI? Then when you feed that stupidity with the stupid people here who got caught up with that stupid 90/10 number, you have a whole barrel of stupid that should just be taken out back and shot.

So please calm down with the stupidity.

[Phaeric Cyrh]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 09 August 2014 - 09:36 AM, said:

So if some people saw it, and some people didn't, does that mean it didn't exist?

Did I say it was widespread?

Did I say everyone was doing it?

NOPE.

All I said was it was sad, because I do believe that people would do that.

Calm the hell down, you are starting to sound like a whacko.

It's just as likely Clan players nerfed themselves as IS.. Or is everyone driving a clan mech not only a superior pilot, but ethically superior as well?

Again. there are like 3 people on here that say that they experienced that.. They also happen to be the 3 people arguing the hardest that clans are balanced in all these threads. Coincidence? Why is it that no one else experienced this?

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Mcgral18, on 09 August 2014 - 09:39 AM, said:

You don't have to believe...there is the screenshot right above you.

Why doesn't anyone want accurate data....my god.

No they don't, not at all. I'm beginning to understand the people who said that this community sucks. It's not that it's the community is toxic, it's that the vast majority of the community is just stupid.

And you can't develop a thinking mans shooter for a bunch of people who can't think.

[Lefty Lucy]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 09 August 2014 - 09:36 AM, said:

So if some people saw it, and some people didn't, does that mean it didn't exist?

Did I say it was widespread?

Did I say everyone was doing it?

NOPE.

All I said was it was sad, because I do believe that people would do that.

Calm the hell down, you are starting to sound like a whacko.

The sentence you're responding to was written so matter-of-factly that any emotion you're ascribing to it must be generated by yourself.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Phaeric Cyrh, on 09 August 2014 - 09:40 AM, said:

It's just as likely Clan players nerfed themselves as IS.. Or is everyone driving a clan mech not only a superior pilot, but ethically superior as well?

Again. there are like 3 people on here that say that they experienced that.. They also happen to be the 3 people arguing the hardest that clans are balanced in all these threads. Coincidence? Why is it that no one else experienced this?

Most people are arguing that the testing methods were bad, not that the Clans are or aren't overpowered. Do you not understand that?

[Phaeric Cyrh]

Mcgral18, on 09 August 2014 - 09:39 AM, said:

You don't have to believe...there is the screenshot right above you.

Why doesn't anyone want accurate data....my god.

That screen shot proves that the IS players were conspiring to throw matches? Interesting...

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Lefty Lucy, on 09 August 2014 - 09:40 AM, said:

The sentence you're responding to was written so matter-of-factly that any emotion you're ascribing to it must be generated by yourself.

Have you been reading yourself on the boards lately? My posting style has been the same throughout. I'm a PGI hater, who doesn't take anything they do at face value.

You on the other hand have moved all the way to taking this test as gospel. It's sad.