88 replies to this topic

[Bud Crue]

pyrocomp, on 20 June 2017 - 02:08 PM, said:

That's the thing. I sometimes see Orions and all sorts of Griffins. Even if I don't see it doesn't mean that it is not played at all in T4-5. So the it is a bold assumption that some mechs are not used at all. They might not see usage in T1 or in some competitive legues. But that does not mean that PGI has no sats whatsoever. My guess is that mechs on heneral in lower tiers see quite a number of drops. So no skewing.

Not necessarily "no stas whatsoever", merely comparatively limited stats is all it takes to create a problem. The more limited the worse off you are. 1 exceptional match, even 10, even 100; out of 100,000 can be easily determined to be outside of the mean and can thus be disregarded or otherwise accounted for as an outlier, etc. But if your data set is only say 150 matches that determination of what is an outlier or merely exceptional becomes a lot harder. That's all.

Hell, if y'all have a better theory to explain why some mechs that PGI historically has pretended are fine for years on end yet no one you know plays them and you've never seen one in game, or why PGI occasionally gives what seems to be a crap mech an out of the blue nerf, I'd love to hear it. I'm just trying to give them the benefit of the doubt.

Edited by Bud Crue, 20 June 2017 - 02:17 PM.

[GoatHILL]

vandalhooch, on 19 June 2017 - 01:57 PM, said:

My favorite Gyrok post was during CW phase I.

He wrote this massive screed about IS being OP and PGI favoring IS over clans. The very first response post in the thread was just three words, "Shut up Gyrok." Made me laugh over and over again for days. I still smile now, thinking about it years later.

Was that the epic thread he deleted? That was pure comedy gold. If so then I still think about that too.

[pyrocomp]

Bud Crue, on 20 June 2017 - 02:15 PM, said:

Hell, if y'all have a better theory to explain why some mechs that PGI historically has pretended are fine for years on end yet no one you know plays them and you've never seen one in game, or why PGI occasionally gives what seems to be a crap mech an out of the blue nerf, I'd love to hear it. I'm just trying to give them the benefit of the doubt.

Mmm. For some time PGI was inclined to keep the game as close to the TT as possible. That didn't help and was quickly abandoned. At some point PGI decided to listen to the comp.players. That played worse and we got powercreep (around clan introduction). Now they are trying to use stats and not somebody's opinion. So the history of decision making is not good, but it's what we have. On top of that at some point it is believed that PGI had no decent programmers at all. So no stat available. Plus the undestanding of just how long it takes for the things to settle is... well, long. And the eneral rude atitude of distinct community memebers drove dev from forums, reddit and shunted down any kind of feedback loop. It's only now that we see some tiny and shy attempts to reestablish any kind of dev-community relations.

[MischiefSC]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 20 June 2017 - 02:13 PM, said:

I'll admit I definitely underestimated the impact of Dual Gauss DPS with the Night Gyr and how the Nova would suddenly become a dominant medium in many matches and how both would basically kill the Timby. Not that I ever thought the Timby was a god mech because it does have some things against it (mostly mount locations and the fact the arms don't really take enough damage) but I didn't expect it to fall as hard as it ended up doing.

It got killed by the reality that can't really be patched out -

A specialist always beats a generalist. When the Gyr and Nova were able to drill down into their specific roles better than the TBR then the TBRs main 'advantage' is as a generalist - which is to say, flat out inferior.

Remember when poptarting first really got going? Gauss + dual PPC Heavy Metal and gauss + dual PPC Victor. Also the dual PPC (sometimes a gauss) Phract 3D.

35pt alpha with mid-low mounts or 20 pts on high mounts.

The dual AC20 Jag was considered so OP it functionally signed the creation of ghost heat. Cuz that 40pt PPFLD was too OP.

Now? 40+ PPFLD isn't uncommon. Not really even special. Laservomit in the 60-80 range isn't atypical. 50s is average. A dual AC20 Jag isn't even worth a second look on the field, certainly not a huge threat.

Power creep for years. They release a superior mech and then anything else has to be that good or better to be worthwhile. We get a round of sketchy blanket weapon nerfs and quirk rollbacks but the overall impact is pretty minor.

The Gyr has ideal hardpoints for its role and Clan tech is ideal for deploying it. If you put 2 ballistic and 2 energy hardpoints at head level on a Grasshopper it couldn't effectively pull off the role as well because ISXL and heavier PPCs/Gauss.

If PGI really wanted to nerf the Gyr the best way to do it would be....

velocity buffs for PPCs and heat gen quirks on the TBR.

PGI jumped the shark when they started moving hardpoints up to head level on so many mechs. KDK 3, Gyr, HBK IIC. If the KDK3 and Gyr had nipple level hardpoints they'd still be great - just not the new standard.

Now you can't really debuff a mech to offset those sorts of mounts without crushing it. The smartest choice really is to just give it no quirks and start buffing up its peers. Trying to debuff the Gyr (or KDK3) to make up for high mounts is doomed to fail - it will do nothing right up until it's too much.

Structure/armor quirks, mobility quirks, weapon quirks. Maybe modifiers to skill tree, etc. A lot of ways to go about it but making mechs with high mounts unplayable isn't a good solution.

[Y E O N N E]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 20 June 2017 - 02:13 PM, said:

I'll admit I definitely underestimated the impact of Dual Gauss DPS with the Night Gyr and how the Nova would suddenly become a dominant medium in many matches and how both would basically kill the Timby. Not that I ever thought the Timby was a god mech because it does have some things against it (mostly mount locations and the fact the arms don't really take enough damage) but I didn't expect it to fall as hard as it ended up doing.

See, I've never been impressed with the TBR as a chassis, either. It has always leaned extremely heavily on Clan tech to be good. Its hit-boxes are similar to the Dragon, and actually worse. Its weapons are also mostly at the same height as the Dragon, and even the Cataphract. Without the tremendous firepower afforded it by the reduced weight Clan Tech and the survivability of the cXL, it would be a trash-bin 'Mech because it is just that easy to pick apart. It is awful at trading with lasers because it has to expose a whole side torso before it can bring even half of its guns to bear, where a Black Knight or Grasshopper essentially exposes everything at once in a nice, slim package. Now that Clan Tech is approaching much closer parity, and now that superior chassis have released, we see the TBR for what it really is. It's still solid for PUGs because its firepower is still pretty ferocious, especially at mid-range, but it has a low ceiling to correspond with that low floor.

IMHO, PGI could stand to give it some agility back, give it some moderate structure quirks in the torsos, or something. It's extremely squishy. I'd rather take a Linebacker for pretty much everything (I'm expecting some moderate nerfs to the armor/structure on this one). On the other hand, the reduced burn on the cSPL might actually be a blessing in disguise for it in the brawling bracket.

[Gas Guzzler]

Yeonne Greene, on 20 June 2017 - 02:38 PM, said:

IMHO, PGI could stand to give it some agility back, give it some moderate structure quirks in the torsos, or something. It's extremely squishy.

Yeah I have to say I think it deserves some agility back. Structure quirks? Welll maybe.. but I say at the very least the agility.

The only build I ever run on the Timber is ER PPC - Goose frankly. I don't really like it for anything else.

[PhoenixFire55]

Scout Derek, on 20 June 2017 - 02:06 PM, said:

See Gyrok, this is why people always call you a troll, you don't provide solid statistics. They're always, how do I put it, half-baked?

He provided them "as is". Everyone is free to use their own brain to make what they want out of it. If they do have one of course. You can argue his opinion regarding those stats, but not the way he provided them.

[MischiefSC]

Gas Guzzler, on 20 June 2017 - 02:43 PM, said:

Yeah I have to say I think it deserves some agility back. Structure quirks? Welll maybe.. but I say at the very least the agility.

The only build I ever run on the Timber is ER PPC - Goose frankly. I don't really like it for anything else.

4 MPLs and 4xSRM6A is a really solid performer. A bit of a struggle with the mobility nerfs though. Especially with the Gyr being so clumsy and the Onion IIC being the fist of an angry god in a brawl giving the TBR the best mobility of them would be a good way to cut it out its own space in the 70-80 ton range for Clans.

Which it should have. The TBR is a great, iconic mech. I should see them as more than just scrubs in LRMs on the field.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Yeonne Greene, on 20 June 2017 - 02:38 PM, said:

See, I've never been impressed with the TBR as a chassis, either. It has always leaned extremely heavily on Clan tech to be good. Its hit-boxes are similar to the Dragon, and actually worse.

Its mounts may be worse but I wouldn't go so far as saying the hitboxes are worse than the Dragon, I still think it is at rotating damage, but then again, it also doesn't have to deal with an IS XL so *shrug*

Considering how everyone is back to favoring the 65 tonners (specifically the Ebjag or Linebacker) over the Timby, I'd be ok with just giving its agility back at least and then giving it structure if that wasn't enough the first iteration.

MischiefSC, on 20 June 2017 - 02:49 PM, said:

4 MPLs and 4xSRM6A is a really solid performer. A bit of a struggle with the mobility nerfs though.

That's way too hot of a build, I mean the 6 cSPL and 4 ASRM6 build was almost too hot before the skill tree dropped and changed heat profiles.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 20 June 2017 - 02:50 PM.

[MischiefSC]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 20 June 2017 - 02:49 PM, said:

Its mounts may be worse but I wouldn't go so far as saying the hitboxes are worse than the Dragon, I still think it is at rotating damage, but then again, it also doesn't have to deal with an IS XL so *shrug*

Considering how everyone is back to favoring the 65 tonners (specifically the Ebjag or Linebacker) over the Timby, I'd be ok with just giving its agility back at least and then giving it structure if that wasn't enough the first iteration.


That's way too hot of a build, I mean the 6 cSPL and 4 ASRM6 build was almost too hot before the skill tree dropped and changed heat profiles.

It's better at a bit more range than the SPL one was. This is the one I usually play. 80pts at ~250m gives it a punch not to far off from the Scorch and significantly more concentrated. I play it much the same way - just faster, more accurate but not as tanky.

The SPL one was a bit of a face-hugger. As I usually play in FW that's a great way to get TKed.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

MischiefSC, on 20 June 2017 - 02:58 PM, said:

It's better at a bit more range than the SPL one was.

If you are running a brawler, you shouldn't really be concerned with range. Sure you could hit something at 250m, but you also lose the ability to do more one-two punches once you get close enough. Not to mention the ability to switch between raw splat and the more accurate SPLs comes in really handy in a brawl, it's one of the few "mixed" builds that I liked because of that capability.

MischiefSC, on 20 June 2017 - 02:58 PM, said:

The SPL one was a bit of a face-hugger. As I usually play in FW that's a great way to get TKed.

Only if you or your team don't know how to brawl, which most teams don't.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 20 June 2017 - 03:04 PM.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Deathlike, on 19 June 2017 - 03:07 PM, said:

Are you that daft?

The numbers show usage... so if you see that 1 Vindi, it's because someone decided to be special. It's a compiled stats of usage of said mechs in DivA, so if the Night Gyr comes up with big drop #s, because it's most used.

Learn to interpret stats.

Usage tells us what? That a mech is popular. Who fricken cares. Popular doesn't have anything to do with balance. I like the PHX, I play it often, I put up fairly big numbers with it at least compared to my other mechs, its POPULAR with me. However that doesn't mean its Over Powered. Hell a mech can be popular based on it looking badass, doesn't mean its a good mech.

As for interpreting stats, that is easy. Show me 10,000 matches with one mech and then 10,000 matches with another. It one is out-performing the other, then I find out why and fix it. 1 match, 5 matches, 50 matches don't mean diddly. In fact there is a statistical term for it, it is called "Small Sample Size"

Here is a small little tidbit about Small Sample Size:

Quote

SMALL SAMPLE SIZE DECREASES STATISTICAL POWER

The power of a study is its ability to detect an effect when there is one to be detected. This depends on the size of the effect because large effects are easier to notice and increase the power of the study.[/color]

The power of the study is also a gauge of its ability to avoid Type II errors. A Type II error occurs when the results confirm the hypothesis on which the study was based when, in fact, an alternative hypothesis is true. A sample size that is too small increases the likelihood of a Type II error skewing the results, which decreases the power of the study.

This is one of dozens of explanation about how a small sample size adversely effects the accuracy of an statistical survey. This is why the Vindicator in that data looks OP, because it is based on 1 match where it performed very well. However if you look at it over 1000 matches then your likely to find that the average is much, much lower.

Edited by Viktor Drake, 20 June 2017 - 03:14 PM.

[Gas Guzzler]

MischiefSC, on 20 June 2017 - 02:49 PM, said:

4 MPLs and 4xSRM6A is a really solid performer.

I would run the 6 cSPL 4 SRM6A build personally... of course I don't know about that after the laser changes. Summoner/ON1-IIC are perfectly good brawl heavy options.

[Y E O N N E]

MischiefSC, on 20 June 2017 - 02:49 PM, said:

4 MPLs and 4xSRM6A is a really solid performer. A bit of a struggle with the mobility nerfs though. Especially with the Gyr being so clumsy and the Onion IIC being the fist of an angry god in a brawl giving the TBR the best mobility of them would be a good way to cut it out its own space in the 70-80 ton range for Clans.

Which it should have. The TBR is a great, iconic mech. I should see them as more than just scrubs in LRMs on the field.

I prefer 5x cMPL and 4x cSRM4A with 21 cDHS on mine. The ability to rapidly place a follow-up shot with the SRMs is more valuable than the larger, less efficient punch from cSRM6. Two shots in the time it takes to get one, and better placed. It's not a brawl build, it's a striker build. Pick a target, and relentlessly push on it until it drops.

[Scout Derek]

PhoenixFire55, on 20 June 2017 - 02:45 PM, said:

He provided them "as is". Everyone is free to use their own brain to make what they want out of it. If they do have one of course. You can argue his opinion regarding those stats, but not the way he provided them.

He provided them as if they were reasonable statistics that could be used to relate to the populations favorable mechs.

The statics here I think would fall under half-baked, too. A small interval of matches that involved mechs that not everyone used equally? I could call it a biased chart at that.

Does it make sense that the Vindicator is > a night gyr? Statistic wise here, it apparently would be. Yet considering how underused and how much less we even see this mech in-game...?

You understand what I'm trying to explain? If he wants to provide false statistics, I'll let him, but that isn't going to stop me from giving an opinion of it to him based on what he says.

[Gyrok]

GoatHILL, on 20 June 2017 - 02:30 PM, said:

Was that the epic thread he deleted? That was pure comedy gold. If so then I still think about that too.

No, that was one that got banished to K-town because the guy that got banned derailed it.

Gas Guzzler, on 20 June 2017 - 01:49 PM, said:

I heard you can manipulate statistics to support your own agenda.

You can manipulate statistics to show that it typically rains when elephants in africa get the shits from bad water...

Just saying...

[Gyrok]

Scout Derek, on 20 June 2017 - 02:06 PM, said:

If you really want to see a hole in all of this.... aside from the others here:

It's that not all the mechs were used the same amount of times. If you can give me statistics where mechs all have the same amount of matches used, maybe then, people would actually take you seriously.

See Gyrok, this is why people always call you a troll, you don't provide solid statistics. They're always, how do I put it, half-baked? And then you try to defend yourself amongst in all. No wonder why your other wolf clansman isn't able to post here anymore.


You may be a troll, or you may be a someone who isn't consistent, hell if I know, but I'm just going to do what my gut says and consider this troll material. All of it. Every word said, is just an attempt to rile up people here in the forums by the mockery you put out usually in this sea that's turned quite brown, at least in my eyes.

I provided the numbers in a straight forward fashion. I only prefaced the data with things that stood out to me as being exceptionally "interesting" phenomenon.

If you want to call me a troll for providing the raw data to you so you can read MY THOUGHTS, and then interpret the data according to your own ability to view it, then that is on you. However, I did not present the data in the least bit of slanted manner.

[Gyrok]

Scout Derek, on 20 June 2017 - 03:29 PM, said:

He provided them as if they were reasonable statistics that could be used to relate to the populations favorable mechs.

The statics here I think would fall under half-baked, too. A small interval of matches that involved mechs that not everyone used equally? I could call it a biased chart at that.

Does it make sense that the Vindicator is > a night gyr? Statistic wise here, it apparently would be. Yet considering how underused and how much less we even see this mech in-game...?

You understand what I'm trying to explain? If he wants to provide false statistics, I'll let him, but that isn't going to stop me from giving an opinion of it to him based on what he says.

I linked you to the league's stat spreadsheet for Division A.

Not sure what else you were looking for there to be honest.

[Scout Derek]

Gyrok, on 20 June 2017 - 04:33 PM, said:

I provided the numbers in a straight forward fashion. I only prefaced the data with things that stood out to me as being exceptionally "interesting" phenomenon.

If you want to call me a troll for providing the raw data to you so you can read MY THOUGHTS, and then interpret the data according to your own ability to view it, then that is on you. However, I did not present the data in the least bit of slanted manner.

It's not slanted Gyrok, It's incomplete. It's not accurate raw data. One match with a vindicator and at that a loss is not Raw at all.


I'm tired of people finding fault with you. Even on outreach. I tried man, I really did try to see it your way. but I can't man, I can't see a VND, or an ENF, or a TBT being better than a Night Gyr or Marauder IIC.

[Gyrok]

Yeonne Greene, on 20 June 2017 - 02:38 PM, said:

See, I've never been impressed with the TBR as a chassis, either. It has always leaned extremely heavily on Clan tech to be good. Its hit-boxes are similar to the Dragon, and actually worse. Its weapons are also mostly at the same height as the Dragon, and even the Cataphract. Without the tremendous firepower afforded it by the reduced weight Clan Tech and the survivability of the cXL, it would be a trash-bin 'Mech because it is just that easy to pick apart. It is awful at trading with lasers because it has to expose a whole side torso before it can bring even half of its guns to bear, where a Black Knight or Grasshopper essentially exposes everything at once in a nice, slim package. Now that Clan Tech is approaching much closer parity, and now that superior chassis have released, we see the TBR for what it really is. It's still solid for PUGs because its firepower is still pretty ferocious, especially at mid-range, but it has a low ceiling to correspond with that low floor.

IMHO, PGI could stand to give it some agility back, give it some moderate structure quirks in the torsos, or something. It's extremely squishy. I'd rather take a Linebacker for pretty much everything (I'm expecting some moderate nerfs to the armor/structure on this one). On the other hand, the reduced burn on the cSPL might actually be a blessing in disguise for it in the brawling bracket.

You and I agreed upon this YEARS ago while there were cries that the TW was a "God Tier mech" among scrubs and forum warriors.

The TW had flaws, I noticed them immediately upon launch, and tried to tell people it was jack of all trades, master of none. People sat back and ridiculed me for being honest about my opinion of the mech. It has always been one to be able to adjust to meta builds relatively well, but did so at the expense of not being as great at anything as a specialized mech. The pod space was always adequate, but not overwhelmingly strong. The weapon mounts were always very average, and even the A torso people whined about is basically there with a large "shoot here" sign on the LT of the mech...much like SRM mounts on the mech become.

I think the cleanest possible lines are either the gauss + ppcs build, or laser vomit, and that tends to shoe horn it pretty strongly. As a striker it is not bad, but easily focused, and once it loses a ST, the mech is pretty crippled.

Without mobility now to prop it up while it pays the tax for a big locked engine, it is really not at all special.

My biggest takeaway from all of these numbers, legitimately, is that the TW is not good right now, and it needs that mobility to make it worth taking again. I would also not be against torso armor quirks, but I think mobility might be enough. It needs to be a very agile mech, and it really is not right now.