455 replies to this topic

[Drogra]

6% is the ABSOLUTE difference of the ENTIRE set, not the comparative difference (ratio).
Hydrocarbon's math is correct.

-----

To give the math is direct mode:
Take the IS win.
THAT number is 100%.
What increase does it take to bring that number to the Clan win #?
12.7%.

[BARBAR0SSA]

Hydrocarbon, on 02 April 2015 - 01:37 PM, said:

If you buy something for $47 then sell it for $53, what's your profit margin?
If you have 47 family members one year then 53 the next, by what percentage did your family grow?
If your mech has an alpha strike of 53 and your friend's mech is 47, what % is yours larger by?
If your company's district sold 53 units of product and a neighboring district sold 47 units, how much % better did yours do?

The number 100 is only used because that's the agreed upon number for "a whole". When we compare 3330 matches to 6323 matches, "100" is literally thrown out the window. Now that we're not using "out of 100", tell me how much more 3330 is compared to 2993?

If you buy something for $2993 then sell it for $3330, what's your profit margin?
If you have 2993 family members one year then 3330 the next, by what percentage did your family grow?
If your mech has an alpha strike of 33.30 and your friend's mech is 29.93, what % is yours larger by?
If your company's district sold 3330 units of product and a neighboring district sold 2993 units, how much % better did yours do?

I dare you to say 6% again.

3330/6323 = %52.66
2993/6323 = %47.33

%5.33

If your company's district sold 3330 units of product and a neighboring district sold 2993 units out of the world wide total of 6323 sold, what % of the market do you have?


What's the difference between you and your competitor?
3330-2993 = 337 Units of 6323

337/6323= 0.0532 (%5.3)


For the IS to win %53 of the time what would need to happen? They would need to win %12.7 more of the time out of the %47 of the wins they got, %12.7 of 47 = 5.969. So if the IS won 6 more matches per 100 games played they would take the clans spot at %53 win rate, 5.969/100=%5.969 rounded up to %6




Side Note: Here's a good read with why arguing about %'s is difficult.
http://mathcentral.u...6/h/other1.html


But for rounding sake lets stick with %6

@Droga
6% is the ABSOLUTE difference of the ENTIRE set, not the comparative difference (ratio).
Hydrocarbon's math is correct.

-----

To give the math is direct mode:
Take the IS win.
THAT number is 100%.
What increase does it take to bring that number to the Clan win #?
12.7%.


I said his math was correct, but what he was claiming was not. Clans did NOT have a %20 advantage in wins, the IS needs a %12.7 increase of their %47 win rate to achieve %53 win rate or 5.969 more wins per 100 matches...oh look 6!! so if they won %6 more of 100 matches played, they would be at %53 Win rate.

Edited by shad0w4life, 02 April 2015 - 02:02 PM.

[Locutos]

We lost hte maps and gain nothing, couse:
almost all games were played on Clan planets,
losing and winning ratios doesnt really matter that way

winning an attack would give u 1 red
winning a defend wouldnt give that loss back
time passing it gets more red
only winning on counterattack would make it blue again

if all defending teams ( even the counter attack defenders ) had a bigger than 50% winning chance
there would be no way the planet would turn blue again

but he succesfully hidded these winning/loosing ratings
http://mwomercs.com/...74#entry4332374

[Scout Derek]

HOORAY! People using %s!!!!

Yeah, Mercs like me can care less. We just want the C-Bills and Loyalty, Dammit, D:<

[ROSS-128]

Tarogato, on 02 April 2015 - 01:21 PM, said:

For the last [redacted] time, the problem is NOT GHOST DROPS!

Keep in mind that almost all of those posts were made BEFORE this data came out. It was intended to be a reasonable guess at the most likely outcome when one faction is ridiculously overpopulated, and has, say, 6 teams queued for a planet with no opponents.

However, the end result is the same: Clans won most of the matches that occured, but their wins were irrelevant because as long as the IS kept their queue completely saturated, it was literally impossible for them to ever lose ground.

So at the end of the day the conclusion is the same: the huge IS gains were a result of leveraging ridiculous overpop, and had nothing to do with the strength of IS mechs.

Edited by Marvyn Dodgers, 02 April 2015 - 02:33 PM.
Language in quote

[Hydrocarbon]

Paint the picture any way you want, the proof is in the pudding. At this point I'm hearing both stories, that "all the mercs went to X side for the entire weekend", so I'm putting NO STOCK into any that.

What I find so damned funny is it's perfectly fine for the CLAN to sweep through half the map with mercs on their side, then suddenly it's hell on Terra when the winds of change blow world after world from clan hands. We cry about it and it's just "QQ, carry harder". You cry "RUSS PLZ NERF SERVERZ!" and it's...okay?


In closing, "QQ, carry harder".

[Pat Kell]

Yea, the problem was not ghost drops, it was player base being solidly one sided. That being said, if the player base was more balanced, the IS still would have done pretty well I think as winning 47% of the matches will lead to some gains. Surely it wouldn't have been a situation where the clans lost 53 planets and gained none, would have been a lot more swapping going on. Honestly, I think the disparity in % wins has more to do with the skill level of any given match vs the OP of either side. All depends on who is playing the matches and lets face it, there were an whole lot of people playing CW who rarely, if ever play CW and that in itself could account for the % difference. Will be interested to see how the next event after the 50/50 fix is implemented. At least I won't feel like I am fighting for nothing:)

FYI, don't want to nerf anything, just want a chance to have our fights matter and during this event, any attack we made simply didn't matter. The IS had far more players queing up and they locked us down into counter attack mode. In fact, I am asking not to nerf anything. Implement the 50/50 fix first, have another event and lets see what happens there. Argue all the percents you want, the real proof is that the IS only needed to win 47% of the time in order to guarantee that they lost no planets and gained 53. That is the real problem. Heck, I'm willing to bet you could have won a heck of a lot less and still gotten close to the same results. I played 59 matches over the weekend and lost 1 (congrats CI) yet never took a planet....that's what I want fixed, to heck with nerfing this or nerfing that...it wouldn't matter. With the population disparity like it was, you could have lost every single match you played and still kept the planets simply by dropping more in defense then we could send to attack. Only chance we would have had to take a planet was to send 96+ people to attack and win all or most of the matches. again...THAT IS THE REAL PROBLEM.

Edited by Pat Kell, 02 April 2015 - 02:12 PM.

[Gorgo7]

Whatever...one set of stats for a weekend event.
NO conclusions may be drawn from the stats except that they may be manipulated as the user sees fit.

Cars fitted with AC that run it use 10% more fuel.
Cars driven with windows rolled down use 10% more fuel.

Do we get rid of AC or keep it?

Depends on the advocate.

[Hydrocarbon]

shad0w4life, on 02 April 2015 - 01:51 PM, said:

If your company's district sold 3330 units of product and a neighboring district sold 2993 units out of the world wide total of 6323 sold, what % of the market do you have?

Cool story, but "% of the whole" is not "% more than the other number". I am stating "% more", which is a less-cool way to say "advantage percentage". You can have 6% more of the market but be 12% better than the competition. Yes it's a way of using numbers tell a story, twist a tale if you will, but I'm not telling the tale of "% of". In the gaming world of K/D and W/L ratios, "% more" is ALL THAT MATTERS. If two co-op players kill 99 zombies, does the guy with 66 kills say "Nice try dear ole chap, but I had 33.3% more of the total kills" or "w00t! I had TWICE as many kill as you man!!!!!111"

If you have 6% more of the market in this case, you are doing 12.7% BETTER. Same base numbers, same final story. At this point I'm certain PGI will have another similar event after the "fix" on the 21st. The trouble is, even if the clan succeeds this time, the IS can always say, "PGI had to fix a 6-month old bug to allow you to win".



PS the best part is I'm getting clanners to admit over & over & over & over that there is, at the very least, a 6% discrepency ("OP-ness" if you will) between clans & IS. Lol

Edited by Hydrocarbon, 02 April 2015 - 02:24 PM.

[Tarogato]

E Rommel, on 02 April 2015 - 01:59 PM, said:

Keep in mind that almost all of those posts were made BEFORE this data came out. ...

Oh, hmmm. I wasn't paying attention to the dates, I assumed they were all from today or last night.

Well, if that was the case then, I apologise for my outburst.

[Pat Kell]

I'm willing to admit that you're 6% less interesting than you were when you first put up these completely useless numbers. I know that you're all butt hurt over only winning 47% of the time but when you look at the history of how much clan mechs totally outperformed IS mechs, I think it speaks volumes about how much good work PGI has done to balance things now...And unless you put in some sort of ELO matching, you can't really put that much stock into those numbers as skill variables could have a significant impact on those numbers.


I love how you guys are quoting some stats given to us by PGI and acting like they should be taken as gospel but those numbers fail to paint the whole picture.

Edited by Pat Kell, 02 April 2015 - 02:19 PM.

[Dolph Hoskins]

Deleted...
Trying to restrain my sarcasm

Edited by The Ripper13, 02 April 2015 - 06:29 PM.

[MischiefSC]

A 6% margin of error on a sample size of thousands is not what they are talking about.

Clan mechs still have an edge, mech for mech, even with is having 480 more tons of mech available per match.

I get that some people have a vested interest in wanting to pretend that's not true but there is, at no point in any telemetry PGI has ever released, to say otherwise. Just people always trying to say why all the data pointing like a compass to the same conclusion is, coincidentally, always wrong when it involves them losing an advantage.

[Phelan Ward-Kell]

Tarogato, on 02 April 2015 - 01:21 PM, said:

For the last [redacted] time, the problem is NOT GHOST DROPS!

So many people here are so clearly demonstrating that they have no clue what is going on AT ALL.

Figure it out, people. I'm ripping my hair out over here, and if you've ever seen a picture me, you'd know that's a hell of an event.

Don't lump me in with the people blaming ghost drops. If you actually read the post of mine that you decided to quote, you would have clearly understood that I was pointing out how superfluous the ghost drops were in the taking of any planets.

[Hydrocarbon]

If you get 53 heads and 47 tails, you get 6 more heads. The margin of difference is 6% but it's still 12.77% more heads than tails.


BTW if you want some telemetry, here's a great link showing some numbers before some of the latest quirk passes. He breaks it down into mechs near the bottom, and IMO the stats to look at is kills per mech & damage per mech.

https://mwomercs.com...s-with-science/

Spoiler: the vast majority of clan mechs beat IS mechs by a large margin in BOTH numbers. Here's another interesting conclusion: "The Clans have some under achievers. So do the IS. The trouble is, IS under achievers are LEGION, and bad Clan robots will decimate bad 'Sphere robots, any day of the week, playing with one hand tied behind their back whilst being half ****faced on pure, hallucinogenic Absinthe."

Edited by Hydrocarbon, 02 April 2015 - 03:08 PM.

[Aresye]

This debate is stupid.

There's a saying that often the simplest explanation is the correct answer. Trying to bring Clan vs IS balance into the equation based off math (faulty at that) is far too complicated, and without knowing the exact distribution of different groups and players of various Elo levels, is faulty. Simply put, you cannot correlate the two.

What we do know however:
- IS numbers outnumbered Clan numbers.
- A fair number of large merc units were Clan at the time of the event, in addition to the overall population of loyalist Clan units.
- Ghost drops had a very small impact.

Using what we know, what we essentially have is a likely higher proportion of solo players on the IS side going up against a smaller, but more organized proportion of Clan players. Given that the IS attacks were frequently stacked 4-5 teams in queue above the Clans, this raises the probability and occurrence that the IS side would face off against an organized group. In other words, the probability that a Clan premade would be matched against a solo IS team was higher than an IS premade being matched against a solo Clan team.

What we also know, based off ghost drops being a relatively low percentage, is that the Clan side determined the pacing. It doesn't matter if the IS outnumbered Clan by 5 teams in the queue. The Clan side ultimately dictated when the games would happen, thus the total number of games played was largely based on a Clan team's ability to ready up in time to take an IS team out of the queue and into the game.

The higher probability of facing a Clan premade, in addition to the Clan side determining when or if the drop takes place, resulted in a condition in which Clan premade units had a much higher turnaround than IS premade units. Faster turnaround with an organized team means more matches won, which is more than enough over a 4 1/2 day event to skew the statistics slightly in their favor.

[Tarogato]

The Phigment, on 02 April 2015 - 03:03 PM, said:

Don't lump me in with the people blaming ghost drops. If you actually read the post of mine that you decided to quote, you would have clearly understood that I was pointing out how superfluous the ghost drops were in the taking of any planets.

Forgive me if I did misinterpret what you were saying, but I read it as you believing that the IS having a numbers advantage was not the reason why the IS reclaimed so much territory this weekend, ghost drops or otherwise, when the very real fact is... numbers advantage had everything to do with it.

[Gyrok]

Hydrocarbon, on 02 April 2015 - 02:12 PM, said:

Cool story, but &quot;% of the whole&quot; is not &quot;% more than the other number&quot;. I am stating &quot;% more&quot;, which is a less-cool way to say &quot;advantage percentage&quot;. You can have 6% more of the market but be 12% better than the competition. Yes it's a way of using numbers tell a story, twist a tale if you will, but I'm not telling the tale of &quot;% of&quot;. In the gaming world of K/D and W/L ratios, &quot;% more&quot; is ALL THAT MATTERS. If two co-op players kill 99 zombies, does the guy with 66 kills say &quot;Nice try dear ole chap, but I had 33.3% more of the total kills&quot; or &quot;w00t! I had TWICE as many kill as you man!!!!!111&quot;

If you have 6% more of the market in this case, you are doing 12.7% BETTER. Same base numbers, same final story. At this point I'm certain PGI will have another similar event after the &quot;fix&quot; on the 21st. The trouble is, even if the clan succeeds this time, the IS can always say, &quot;PGI had to fix a 6-month old bug to allow you to win&quot;.



PS the best part is I'm getting clanners to admit over &amp; over &amp; over &amp; over that there is, at the very least, a 6% discrepency (&quot;OP-ness&quot; if you will) between clans &amp; IS. Lol

Considering the amount of quality players that were playing clans for the event, I am lead to believe the clan win % for the event was likely inflated by masses of IS pugs. As we saw very few real units during the event, and of those few units we saw, the games were usually scary close and went either way based on a bunch of variables.

Reality is, clans are not as OP as you claim, and, may in fact be underpowered depending on the unit vs PUGs numbers.

[Yokaiko]

Hydrocarbon, on 02 April 2015 - 03:05 PM, said:

So do the IS. The trouble is, IS under achievers are LEGION, and bad Clan robots will decimate bad 'Sphere robots, any day of the week, playing with one hand tied behind their back whilst being half ****faced on pure, hallucinogenic Absinthe."

Total and utter tripe.

[Mcgral18]

Yokaiko, on 02 April 2015 - 04:54 PM, said:

Total and utter tripe.

It does beg the question: Vindicator or Ice Fridge?