No.
Thanks for your bias and valuable contribution to this discussion!
Really?
You are the one who wants to literally nerf a class into the ground. If there’s any biasedness here, it’s on your part.
Uhhh no.
I don’t think classes that grant might “normally” need to be touched. Only classes that stack it. The idea of being able to spam self-combos that frequently seems somewhat abnormal in the original spirit of the game (two players combining their skills to create something bigger than the sum of their parts).
Would you rather we touch your precious vigor or protection duration? Or get rid of Celestial amulets altogether?
PS: I’m currently playing something that stacks might even harder than your ele.
Why am I advocating nerfing might stacking to the ground? Because I’m tired of killing people with sustain and Geomancy sigils and would like other warrior builds to become viable again.
PPS: I’d even be okay buffing might to +45 or 50 if we reduced the duration from stacking.
No.
Thanks for your bias and valuable contribution to this discussion!
Reduce the might duration granted by battle sigils and blasting fire fields by half.
I don’t think addressing might alone will be nearly enough to bring eles back down though.
Also, boon removal needs to be far more accessible.
Then why do you say people who want to speed run are toxic to people who don’t want to speed run?
This societal/peer pressure thing you bring up is a joke. Pure and simple, it’s social anxiety and lack of initiative and community. Those things are up to the people who want to play how they want “enjoy the game to the fullest”.
We will not build your community for you, as we’ve spent enough time and effort building our own. Please don’t blame our “community” for your unwillingness to turn your own “group” into a “community”.
Those who call you guys “bad”—they do not speak for most of us, and generally most of us simply acknowledge that you are “different”. As I said before, the only times most of us use the word “bad” is when one of you tries to sneak into our groups, or when one of you tries to pass off your PHIW build in chat as optimal or close enough to optimal.
Unless you wish your own “group” and “playstyle” to be judged by the most toxic in your group, I kindly request you please stop judging ours by our worst role models as well.
So in the wrong hands (I would contend in most hands), the DPS meter will indicate that warrior is under-powered. In reality, having the warrior adds another player’s worth of DPS and then some, according to this video. Before you accuse me of straw manning again, keep in mind that this is not conjecture; it’s based on years of WoW experience and extensive use of the Recount DPS meter.
Here’s the thing about most DPS meters: They can track more than personal DPS.
We can also track party DPS and damage multipliers.
That warrior’s (and any player’s) non-direct damage contributions can also be tracked. How much vuln was he stacking on the boss? Did he drop his banners like he should have, and were they in range of the party (or was the party in range of the banners)? If playing PS, how much might did he give the party?
These are things that, while they can be used for evaluation by others, can also be used by the player him-/herself for improvement.
A lot of players know DPS meters aren’t simply about individual DPS, and most meters in most games track far more.
Fair enough. Thanks for a sensible and non-toxic reply, it is appreciated.
I do not play a game to have my performance monitored. I don’t feel it is right to be the “performance monitor” or the “party crasher”. I guess this is the reason I avoid dungeons, I feel no need to put up with any of this type of behavior. Is there a solution? I don’t know.
To be extremely blunt, it’s a degree of social anxiety. It’s not uncommon in multiplayer games, but the initiative ultimately belongs to you.
and no need to remove something working as intended.
How is autobalance farming/stacking teams/5v4 meta working as intended…?
So I went through all the hotjoin maps with people in them
Server 100: 2v3, 71-229, 6 spectators
Server 001: 3v3, 58-32, 5 spectators
Server 002: 4v5, 131-474, 1 spectator
Server 004: 4v4, 132-344, 1 spectator
Welp, make your own conclusions
The progression of a new player through PvP:
tl;dr—New players have no real place to begin since hotjoin is currently a cesspool of everything not to do in a real match.
Proposed ideas:
It has been going to 21 pages. I have seen a few same names going on and on in their own little novels with barely any new arguments at all. Can we reach the consensus or keep getting at each others’ throats?
Yeah I should be playing GW2 instead of talking about GW2…
oh wait it’s been stale for too long, and that’s why I’m back on the forums
Some people absolutely want to get the last word in, and feel empty when they are not able to.
Just suck it up, block them back, and move on with your life.
Well people have seemed to focus down on the community problem which was the subject of that post. . .
You mean the toxic entitled vocal minority that doesn’t help themselves by making their own groups or switching gear?
See where this is going now that you’ve opened the can of worms about “perspective”?
Does any of that work toward helping the problem?
The problem about stale content? Make a thread, and I (and all of us filthy toxic elitists) be sure to post in it!
The problem about the “meta”? What problem?
I can agree with you that it is optional but maybe you should try policing up your ‘subset’ every now and then and perhaps there wouldn’t be so much animosity between the do’s and do-not’s.
Segregation only goes so far.
The reason a lot of us don’t buy into this elitism or discrimination/segregation argument is that rather than “do’s vs do-not’s” or “are vs are-not’s”, it’s “choose vs choose-not’s”.
This “meta” is optional on so many levels that people are no longer being excluded against their will. They are choosing to be excluded, and instead of trying to reach out to others who also chose to be excluded, they are choosing to play some victim card and guilt trip everyone else for their own choice.
I’d put money down that any of those other 4 guys would describe the situation exceptionally differently.
Here’s an example.
“We were the 4th and 5th to join, no idea who the instance owner was who offered us a free daily. We thought it just meant we got to skip all the other 3 fractals and help kill Mai Trin. So we went in and started, then kitten hit the fan and 4 of us wiped before the boss hit 75%.”
“This last guy was at low HP and wouldn’t listen to our request that he die so we could start over. I discussed with my friend and decided he was wasting our time, so we kicked him. When it turns out we lost the instance, we realized the mistake we made, but were too proud to apologize to him when he confronted us, so we made something up about him having poor social skills.”
How’s that?
On a side note, given it’s Wethospu and given I’m pretty confident with statistics and expected value, I’ll happily drop my own money down to take yours.
Again, joining a guild just to get something to function properly shouldn’t be mandatory!
Because:
Instead of populating one or two of your five available guild slots (four if we discount that joke bank guild that probably doesn’t have a bank), you demand that ANet solve the problem for you and go as far as stalking post history of people who disagree with you.
Face it, you have nobody to blame except yourself right now. Stop playing the victim card, overcome that social anxiety like the rest of us and put in your own initiative to help yourself before demanding it from us or ANet.
Once you’ve exhausted all of the options where you have initiative, then come back here and post, and we’ll be much less “hostile” or “defensive”.
It’s too ludicrously 1-sided. At the very least the safest bet in the world is that if we could dig up the other 4 players their versions of what happened would be substantially different.
The whole thing, to be frank though, is just too convenient.
He just solo-ground for fun, and then just when he got to mai grabbed some random people, and then they just failed immediately, and then they kicked him for ‘not talking enough’.
Most of the individual pieces work, but taken together it’s pretty hard to swallow (and that’s taking the 15 secs/30 secs hyperbole out of it)
If you’re going to try to call into question his character, goodwill, and credibility, keep in mind he’s uploaded numerous videos and is the person who maintains this extremely comprehensive dungeon guide site with strategy breakdowns for organized, melee, and ranged/PuG tactics for most encounters.
Unlike me, Harper, or some of the other people here, he’s the last one of us here that you want to blindly victim blame.
OP
Nope, it’s certainly not you at all. Definitely us. Definitely…Yep…
Most of us here would and do help newer players. But we will help them on our terms, not theirs. The way you try to guilt trip or demand something you are not at all entitled to…
No offense, but I don’t think you would be missed by many if you erased Windows and never came back here.
It’s the internet, of course I get to say :p
That’s all I wanted from you, an admission that you were applying the term subjectively rather than objectively.
I think the profiling thing is spot on, except it’s not a great profiling tool, and for most runs you don’t need to profile… except people think they do. It’s this self-fulfilling and self-defeating act that people just go with, and it’s harmful.
There’s a subtle key here. When I make a group “CoE P1 zerker meta” I’m not naive enough to think that everyone who joins my group will be running zerker meta stuff. I’m looking for someone who’s confident enough to join me despite those requirements.
Even if that player isn’t running zerker, he’s almost certainly going to be proficient enough at whatever he is doing that I will hopefully not be able to tell the difference. These kinds of people will be the least risky as far as wiping or having to (re)explain an encounter.
For everyone else, there are always other groups, or they can make their own. After all, initiative in this game is available to everyone and only requires that we abandon our hesitation and social anxiety.
Lol I haven’t played gw2 in nearly 2 months and before that I took like a 10 month break and in about a month and a half I’m getting deployed for another 9 months. You’ll have to give me something more than Lupicus solo attempts to get me back. . .
But by the way people talk about change, I should expect the same game with maybe a pair of maps added when I get back? Not looking good.
Maybe this isn’t the right game for you anymore then. There’s nothing wrong with that.
I do agree that the game has been getting stale. I’m happy to discuss changes, but anything implemented should have to be very thoroughly thought out and discussed. But for anyone who wants to reduce exclusion and elitism in this game, remember that there will always be a balance between inclusive content and challenging content.
This could very well explain why our more recent updates (Pavilion, Mad King’s Labyrinth, Dry Top, Silverwastes) have tended to be loot pinata trains.
Except, the meta in this case is silly. There’s so little gain in most cases that it’s at best flat.
Silly is a subjective word, and unless the gain is exactly zero I don’t think you get to be the sole authority and set the threshold for what is or isn’t trivial.
Back on point, though: we’re profiling. Asking for “zerker meta” is more likely to get us a player who knows the encounter, knows how to use combo fields, has gear specced for optimal DPS, has utilities and traits beneficial to the group (or at least a player with a few of these things).
I’m not even sure you can keep a serious face while telling me that a group of “CoE P2 all welcome” will finish in about the same time as “CoE P2 experienced please”, and even “CoE P2 meta zerker ping gear”.
And if it turns out that we did get a troll who joined without meeting our requirements in LFG, then we’d be justified in retaliation up to and including kicking him at the last boss because he was never legitimately a member of our group.
At least I’m advocating change
You’re talking to someone who’s been following the recent “change” in PvP. Feel free to look at that forum to see the aftermath of that “feature”.
Change itself is not necessarily a good thing. The only time change should happen for the sake of change is when things can’t get any worse. At least in regards to the current issue of elitism and exclusion, the reality is that things can’t get much better than what GW2 has.
Here’s a comparison of the challenges GW2 and some other MMO faces
Most MMOs:
GW2:
It’s not a good case because you’re replying to one problem with a worse problem :P
This “worse problem” (that there has been and always will be meta, elitism, and exclusion in this game) has always been in the game and is not a “reply” to anything or any problem.
It’s simply “baggage” that any solution change to the current “problem” status quo must overcome in a better way than the status quo already does right now.
If anything, it’s just a shift from naivety and idealism back to reality.
No completely mismatched teams are the opposite of competition. LOL.
That would be the fault one of the following:
As i alluded to in your other thread, the MMR algorithm does not need extremely high confidence if the main consequence for being a bit off is 1 point of MMR that could go either direction and evens out over time.
Being wrong and giving a handicap like faster point ticks requires a much higher degree of confidence from the matchmaker, and I don’t think GW2’s population is close to large enough to supply the data and the accuracy to get to that confidence.
I’m seriously wondering if can they really predict, with 95% confidence level, that Team A has exactly a 20-39% chance of winning… based only on the MMRs of the players (which were calculated in matches full of confounding factors like 4×5s, afkers, teams on Teamspeak, groups playing with each other against them and knowing each other;s typical roles!)
Whether MMR in GW2 can stabilize and become a good representation of actual ability remains to be seen. On the other hand, 95% confidence is also something not necessary here, as the cost of being a bit off is also not that high (and expects to average out over the long run so long as the inaccuracies are not non-random).
But in theory and in general, this concept can work very reasonably. All you need is a variable that corrects and stabilizes itself over time and a reasonable expectation that this variable is a good metric for determining ranking/skill/ability/experience/etc.
2) Umm, kitten . Don’t think anyones threatennig you (as a group especially), and you’re honestly not making a good case, especially compared to your first point.
This was a reference to Leo’s “sit the kitten down and embrace a hard trinity” to spoj (which you conveniently ignored while calling out me for personal attacks—aside from my directness, I don’t see where I said something more objectionable than that).
Still, attitude aside, I’d describe point 2 as ‘technically right but unfortunate’. The eagerness with which an exclusionary attitude is embraced is the real problem behind the ‘zerker meta’, but you’re right— people would just find something else.
If what I said is “technically right” I’m not sure why it wasn’t a good case then. I’m honestly not all that elitist in game myself, but I fully respect and defend the right of any group to filter as much as they want (or feel they need) for whatever they want.
(edited by Dave.2536)
Being pretty consistently abusive there, Dave <>
I’m more of a messenger than anything else. Perhaps I may come off as arrogant and condescending, and you can certainly choose to have that perception.
What I’m saying is twofold:
Pro football is difficult to predict because teams are relatively equal to each other.
In one of those games the computer could easily say that each team has about 50% (or even the much more lenient 40-60% that GW2 would use) chance of winning.
You’ll find that looking at a combination of odds/predictions as well as the confidence of those predictions will return exactly the information you want, and a very equivalent parallel to what the matchmaker will aim to do.
tl;dr—when a computer says it’s 50% confident about a pick, it’s saying something close to “I’m fairly sure these teams are evenly matched”, rather than “I’m unable to make any conclusions of value”.
PS: there’s no argument from me that the current parameters may not be optimally precise yet. I suspect they aren’t. But the gist of your post seems to argue that they could never be precise enough, which is not the case.
Elitism already exists. My point was, if waiting around to form a specific group to run content with was fun, then waiting longer to form a trinity group should just be a blast!
Elitism at the moment is optional right now. You can easily bypass it by buying a few pieces of equipment that don’t even cost that much. You can also bypass it by forming your own group with your own rules. The alternative would be skill-based and class-based barriers (that cannot be bypassed so easily), in stark contrast to your desired ideal of no barriers.
But most of us have connections and would have little to no issue forming a group even with a trinity. Not least in part because we would have the classes, gear, and experience needed to run any role needed.
We currently wait because we choose to, not because we have to. Why propose something that would make the waiting and exclusion mandatory for players who wouldn’t have a way to opt out? Is it bitterness or saltiness that you’re tasting right now?
The run being smooth is your fun, not the time you burn waiting for the run to start.
If waiting around was fun then sit the kitten down and accept a hard trinity.
Welp, agenda confirmed.
Spoj would be one of the first to adapt to a trinity if one ever became implemented. So would most of the speed run community. Because while PHIW’s generally have one armor set and only the two weapons they have equipped, most people more dedicated to the content will have at least one of every weapon their class can use and multiple armor sets, as well as multiple characters to run a variety of roles.
We aren’t really against a hard trinity because we couldn’t pull it off. It’s because it would introduce too forced exclusion and elitism that whatever is left of the dungeon community would die off completely. Do you really want every dungeon group to be as “elitist” and “toxic” as only some are right now?
If even ANet starts pushing in the direction you want it to go, the meta will shift to a point where more people start getting excluded for things they don’t have a choice in.
EDIT: another prime example of your disgusting egocentricity. Waiting around is okay for some of us. Those who are okay with waiting also understand that not everyone else is as okay with waiting as they are. Why is this concept too hard to grasp?
(edited by Dave.2536)
It recently occurred to me that if you cannot accurately predict pro football games even with all the stats they have…
Sure you can. Those odds, lines, and spreads you see all the time…those are predictions, and if they were not set accurately enough in the first place, then the people hosting bets would lose money.
That said, the purpose of these odds is not actually to predict a winner/point difference. It is to ensure an even volume of bets occurs on either both sides so the house is guaranteed to win on the vigorish. This probably demands at least as much precision, if not more, than simply predicting the margin.
The fact that you generally can’t beat the house in the long run with your calculations means that the house has already taken into account all the stats that you might consider, and then some.
How accurate are the BEST football predictions? Consistently.
Isn’t it something like 60% accurate at predicting which team will win on any given Sunday?
That says a lot more about the relative parity of teams than about the inaccuracy of the predictions.
It’s not that hard to predict that a team has a 60% chance of winning. But that also means there’s a 40% chance of losing, so you shouldn’t call the system broken when that 40% happens.
The problem with GW2’s matchmaker right now is two-fold
HAHAHA! No.
No. Nononononono. We aren’t going to pretend that that is a probable Avenue of fun to playing meta groups. It’s exactly how you made it sound: like an excuse. Waiting longer to form a perfect team is indeed a downfall to playing meta in a non/semi-permanent group. Just like it is tough to get good permanent fractal groups for a mainly sporadic player likes myself is a downfall. But I’ve accepted it as such and mainly do PuGs for everything for that very reason. Luckily I find PuGs fun so it’s partially mitigated, but not as fun as it used to be in my Guild.
How ridiculously egocentric. Are you American?
I wish the dungeons outside of fractals also forced the players to COPE with mechanics instead of finding ways of bypassing them.
You’d have a dead dungeon community if you extended that sort of difficulty outside Fractals and Arah.
Things like AC and CoF are to dungeons what the Shatterer and Fire Elemental are to world bosses. Not everything has to be like Fractals and Tequatl, and a variety of difficulty is not bad for the game.
I do completely agree that “zerker meta” is run in low level dungeons for ease as much as for speed. But this does not extend to higher level encounters like Arah and Fractals, where it takes considerably more experience/practice/skill to maintain HP and DPS meleeing in glass gear (although it is possible to do so in virtually every encounter, and definitely optimal for any player who is able to)
In short, stop calling “bad” that with which you disagree with.
The only time these players will hear “bad” from most of us is when they join our groups without meeting/reading the requirements, or when someone asks about optimal builds/gear in map chat and they chime in with claims that what they have is close enough to zerker (or that zerker is too squishy/risky).
It’s honestly a two-way street. Most of us filthy toxic communist kitten elitists simply want to be left to ourselves (although we will welcome others who are like us or want to become like us), and will only lash back if provoked in our “own territory”.
In this case zerk puts every single competitor right on the hole. At this point it doesnt matter if its tiger woods or a complete amateur almost anyone can make it.
I’m still waiting for an explanation of how to ez-mode Archdiviner in Fractal 37/49/50 with a full zerker melee/meta group.
It seems like I’m doing it wrong, because I actually have to kite a bit, watch his tells, and even react to those tells! But you seem to know some way to trivialize this encounter so that I win the moment I put on glass cannon gear!
Please share so I can share this newfound discovery with my friends and whoever I group with.
Here you are making assumptions again, without considering that there is a REASON that certain data hasn’t been commented on.
I’ve considered it plenty. Given your ignorance of basic statistical concepts and repeated attempts at deception and befuddlement, I’ve considered that you either forgot to consider it, forgot to observe it, or intentionally left it out.
Because it Does Not Exist. Here’s how many games I’ve played where MY team it the Five and the Other Team is the Four….. Z E R O.
Forgive me for being skeptical at this point. Going by your later use of confidence intervals it is more clear that my initial assessment of your ignorance of statistics has been corrected to one of malicious deception.
At least since I’ve been keeping track.
That last comment reinforces my doubt about your observations.
It is unfortunate, but because of your credibility and history of deception attempts (and the probability of this claim happening in the first place) I would much rather accept the ~5% chance that you fall outside the confidence interval (and ~2.5% change of being above).
I don’t think it needs to be said, but you probably should not read this as a compliment.
Go ahead. PLEASE SAY THAT 4 AGAINST 5 IS CONSISTENTLY WINNABLE. OR that there is even a STRONG (say to 95% confidence) chance that a Four man team will defeat a five man team, given parity of skill. Then I can sit back and watch everyone else tear you apart!
I don’t think I need to go this far. I’ll stick to challenging the reliability and credibility of your memory. And so will “everyone else”.
what is this thread about anymore?
Trying to see how far this guy will distort things to fit his reality. The guy could put Mitt Romney’s whole family to shame.
Don’t create imaginary theoretically based numbers to try to Contradict REALITY.
“shakes head”
The “REALITY” of your confirmation bias is evident when the only games you define to be invalid are the 4v5’s.
Because you (and everyone else) is more likely to reconsider “why I lost” rather than “why I won”, it’s pretty evident you have zero recollection of the 5v4 blowouts (which are equally invalid).
Another lesson in Statistics! (since you apparently never paid attention in your classes beyond the recall level that you used to pass your final)
When you want to adjust data, you must do so in a way that does not introduce bias. I adjusted for your bias with probability and expected value, as I had a reasonable expectation of its accuracy and neither you nor I had nothing better to use.
If you are unable to adjust your data without introducing bias, you must leave the data as-is
EXCEPT. That. This. Does. NOT. REFLECT. REAL. OBSERVED. VALUES.
EXCEPT. That. The. Only. Games. You. Observed. Were. The. Ones. That. Stood. Out. (Negatively). In other words, your observations are statistically useless, and we’d be better not using them (sorry, I had to change from your format because it was getting too nonsensical)
When a problem shows up, is DOCUMENTED, IS OBSERVED, You. Do. NOT. DISCOUNT IT. Because if you DO, then….
Annnnnnd now we have the non sequitur of frustration. The only thing anyone is ignoring and discounting is you, with your confirmation bias. Observations have value, and we will always consider them, but they are also anecdotes and have no place in objective statistical analysis.
(edited by Dave.2536)
That’s part 2, most groups don’t filter for zerker anymore. I was looking at 30s Fractal pugs earlier (to do one), and saw 1 group that demanded ‘zerk melee’ out of 4-5 groups in the time I was looking. It took forever to fill too.
/shrug
Some people are really averse to failure, and would rather spend forever forming a group that was significantly less likely to fail or be “too slow”. Asking for melee zerkers is a pretty surefire way of getting confident and skillful players, despite how long it might take to form.
That’s their right, and probably also their fun. If they didn’t feel it was too long then it wasn’t too long.
Back on topic, though, content is getting more and more stale (and relatively more and more easy), so my point sort of applies here. As stuff becomes easier for the masses, the people will adjust accordingly by strengthening their filters (because it will no longer take impossibly long to get players who meet the stricter requirements).
Tighter filters will come in the form of AP requirements, class requirements, mechanics requirements (i.e., might stacking), gear check, trait/utility/food check, watching your rotations in game, full melee, etc etc. Or they may simply stop using LFG, leaving fewer groups for the less connected.
why is it so important that it be harder?
Because rewarding passive defense play like this will turn dungeons into bigger loot pinatas than they already are.
If it’s easier it has more reason to be meta :p
Forgive me for saying that I want the game to encourage players to play more like this than like the video I posted before.
We could nerf Ice Bow like we nerfed FGS. But remember what happened when that nerf hit? The speed run community adapted within minutes/hours while PuG AC groups are still disbanding at Spider Queen.
The DPS lead that Berserker gear has over other gear means that right now zerker gear is all that most of us filter for. If you can’t stack might…if you can’t weapon swap, if you suck with utility skills…welp, at least you still have zerker gear and the correct weapon.
Narrow that lead too much, and the filters will change to something that not every player will have a choice in.
Funny how you accuse me of straw manning and then come up with this. You don’t stack on those fights, do you? Then why would my statement apply to those?
Sorry, but you’re not getting away from this that easily. Not when multiple others in this thread have taken your very point and ignorantly generalized zerker gear to all content in this game. Barring an admission that you’ve not read the thread up to now, or that you fail to understand the significance of context, I don’t think it was unreasonable to assume you held similar or identical ignorant views.
On the topic of easy dungeons, the elite PvE runners in this game have most dungeons on such a robotic farm with near perfect rotations that they could probably write a bot to do things for them. It is these easy dungeons that DPS meters wouldn’t apply to for most of us.
DPS meters probably wouldn’t even apply to high level fractals anyway, because the gear requirements and agony mechanics already serve that purpose.
And please stop strawmanning DPS meters a position where they are solely used to filter people. It is these tougher fights where things become more unpredictable and rotations more mixed, where it can be beneficial to test different weapons, traits, and rotations.
We get that some people will try to misuse them, but last I checked ANet does not and should not create its content according to what trolls might do (check Copper/Gold/Silver bosses in the Silverwastes as a prime example).
And just like now, you can avoid all that filthy elitist toxicity by just creating your own group
I view the game as a game, not as a business.
Please get off your strawman-powered moral high ground. Business can be fun for some. You’re entitled to say that our way kills your fun, but to say that it kills ours as well is simply reaching and egocentric. “Your fun is not my fun” goes both ways.
By all means play with zerker gear and stack behind an obstacle so that you can nullify all boss mechanics.
Please show me how I can nullify the Archdiviner or Imbued Shaman in Fractal 37/38/49/50 by stacking on them with zerker gear. I would be happy to pass that information to my group the next time we do it, and we would all be eternally grateful.
Until then, please realize the conversation extends beyond the Spider Queen in AC or that Flame Legion boss in CoF1.
Until we get a larger playerbase in PvP, you’re going to see a big discrepancy either in quality of matchup or length of queue.
ANet has nobody to blame but itself for the small PvP playerbase. Until then, players who have had bad experiences will rightly keep speaking up about those bad experiences.
GUYS you’re having a Stats War over a SINGLE person’s PERSONAL average with THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF THAT PERSON xD You’re making Confidence Intervals – do you know what they are? They say that you are “95% Sure the true Mean sits in this bracket” YOU ARE USING THE POPULATION MEAN TO CALCUATE IT xD You already know it…
I was just kind of miffed seeing the dude throw around statistics buzzwords randomly.
The thing with the confidence intervals was in jest, but I don’t see any issues with my calculations. Of course I acknowledged the possibility of improvement and that the mean over time was not static, but this was a simplified calculation and I was not corrected on that point. At this point I’m just replying to see how many more times the guy wants to double down and continue to embarrass himself.
That said…no, I am not using the “population mean” (perhaps “true mean” would be better here, so people aren’t confused with the virtually exact 50% mean for the whole population), although with n=1000 (or 894 if we take out “bad” games) we are going to be pretty close to it with the sample mean.
Be careful that you aren’t going down the same road of using buzzwords randomly. The smiley faces and random caps aren’t helping your credibility either.
Why are we still talking about “ridicule”? lol…
The only 2 times I would ever ridicule you (anyone) for being non-zerker:
1.) You join my “80 exp’d zerkers” party as a non-zerker. Sorry, but if you can’t read/follow, I’d be justified in far more than ridicule, and kicking you at the last boss would not be out of the question as you were never legitimately a member of my party in the first place.
2.) Someone asks in map chat what a good/optimal build/gear setup to run is and you chime in with some defensive/healing crap. (I probably wouldn’t even ridicule here, as much as just mention that anything not maximizing self/party DPS is simply suboptimal.)
Is someone ridiculing you outside of one of those two situations? Then that person does not speak for me, and probably not even for the most of the filthy elitist zerker cesspool.
You continually avoid altering the sample to exclude potential bad data, say like matches that could not be won. Interesting.
I knew you’d go there. Again, if you want to remove 50 games for 4v5 due to AFK/DC, probabilistically there will be about 25% more games (62.5, we can round down to 62 just for you) where you had a 5v4 advantage—remember 5/9 vs 4/9? But instead of 50 games of 4v5 and 62 games of 5v4, it would actually be more like 47 games of 4v5, 59 games of 5v4, and 3 games of 4v4.
If you keep arguing for “real” data, then I’m perfectly happy to take out your unfair games, so long as we can adjust for your confirmation bias (the 5v4s you conveniently ignored) as well. So from your record of 470 wins and 530 losses, we can remove 47 invalid losses and 59 invalid wins.
That puts you at 411-483, or 45.97%…
N = 894, avg = 0.4597315, stdev = 0.4986548
New 95% confidence interval…[0.4270, 0.4924]
GG WP…removing unbalanced matches from your record has made you even worse. Now I can remove the “almost” in “we can be almost 95% sure you are worse than average”.
cheers
Cheers indeed. Someone’s going to be drinking a lot.
EDIT: I just noticed this again…
a 95% confidence interval calculates to 49.7 +/- 3.2. Which then places me squarely at or above “average”.
Plus/minus goes both ways. The interval [46.5, 52.9] still averages under .500, and I’d still come out slightly ahead betting you were below .500 than betting you were above.
(edited by Dave.2536)
IT’S a theory. There’s a reason it’s Not Called the central limit LAW. There is an unsubtle scientific difference. And N=30 is a MINIMUM for a reason. Larger is always preferred because it’s BETTER.
And I notice you deride Real World Results. Tsk Tsk. Which is another reason you Can Not apply something like the Central Limit Theory. Not until you can CONFIRM, via a LARGER Sample, that said results are due to normal statistical drift. And not a true skew that you need to find a cause for. Something that’s very important in large scale manufacturing, btw.
Replace “stat” and “central limit” with “evolution” and you’ll quickly notice what you’re sounding like.
Your W/L record is a binomial distribution with sample size 1000, significantly larger than 30 and a virtual lock for the central limit “rule of thumb”.
If anything, you might’ve had a case by arguing that you’ve improved over time and that we should put heavier weight on your more recent matches. But I’m going to disallow that now because 1.) the n=1000 and 47% win rate uniform weighting was something you brought up yourself, and 2.) you’ve had multiple chances to bring it up and continually failed to do so.
But don’t take things too personally. I said that basic statistical analysis concluded there was almost 95% chance you were below average. You can cling to that remaining 5% if you want, because I don’t have enough data to go after it, and all the data in the world will not be enough to claim it all.
PS: you can stop the bogus appeals to authority. I’m perfectly happy to evaluate your ideas on their merits alone, and I even look forward to possibly learning something if you can manage to stop going Plaxico Burress on your foot.
You know it’s bad when the dude who’s been trolling all the QQ threads in this forum starts QQing himself.
It’s okay. For some people the Spider Queen in AC is hard endgame content.
At least it’s a step up from loot pinatas world boss trains.
If you want to run full zerk groups feel free. But don’t you DARE act like its harder than it is. You aren’t playing the game in the hardest difficulty.
Have you fought the Archdiviner in lvl 37+ Fractals as a full melee zerker? In a PuG group even? Are you confident enough to not equip a ranged weapon there?
Tell me all about how your 13379001 group kept him stuck on a corner for so long that you could ignore all his mechanics and not have to read all the tells behind them.
(edited by Dave.2536)
Bravo, DaveGan. Are you by chance a stat major? Masters student? Well argued except for one tiny wrong assumption. Which throws all of your good work down the drain.
Masters, yes, but not in statistics (was just a minor). I should mention that confidence intervals are one of the first things you learn in Stat 101.
You ASSUMED a normal distribution. I TOLD you it was SKEW from the beginning. Go ahead. Go back and read it. And SINCE we KNOW this distribution is skew, we CANNOT use this analysis.
Looks like someone failed high school statistics…and didn’t read that link on the Central Limit Theorem.
“n = 30” is roughly the minimum sample size (rule of thumb) where the sample mean takes a normal distribution, regardless of the distribution of the original sample (binomial in this case).
How big is the sample size with your number of games? Oh, 1000…that’s at least 30, right?
Would you like to embarrass yourself some more? Maybe one-up Mitt Romney and triple-down?
It just so happens that in 32 of the 50 or so matches that I have been short a teammate, the game STARTED with ONLY four us in zone.
And statistically, you should have expected to have seen 60-65 matches of 5v4 (or even 4v4) the other way! But hey, let’s play Confirmation Bias 9000!.
Not affiliated with ArenaNet or NCSOFT. No support is provided.
All assets, page layout, visual style belong to ArenaNet and are used solely to replicate the original design and preserve the original look and feel.
Contact /u/e-scrape-artist on reddit if you encounter a bug.