Jump to content

z0m4d

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    789

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by z0m4d

  1. Posted · Edited by z0m4d

    now with PWTs, it basically is (auto-thrusters excepted) because there's absolutely no decision making to be had between arc-dodging and maintaining your shot. When you're free to fart around wherever you wish with minimal consequence

    PWTs don't want to be shot at. Decisions have to be made with more than minimal consequences (chance to suffer damage or not).

    I've mentioned this many of the times you've claimed PWTs don't care at all about arc dodging or movement. I don't know if you've never read the replies, don't understand the concept, or simply refuse to accept because it doesn't support your argument.

  2. Posted

    My perception (this is an opinion) of the way some people (perhaps not you) go on about PWT, and Fat Han in particular, is that it so dominates the meta that it's just about the only thing they ever face and there's no diversity.  These numbers tell me otherwise.

    There's more instances of Chewie than Han in the top 8, but nobody complains about him because he will rip their arms off :P

    Never lose to a Wookie.

  3. Posted

    But as has been said before, it remains a subjective thing. My last games with turrets have been exciting enough. I'm too lazy to insert a witty internet meme here, but "I don't like thing!" comes to mind. Which is totally okay, but there is just not enough reason to really call the turrets broken on that basis alone.

     

    I accept that and have.  My campaign is against the incessant posting of complaints and turret nerfs.  We heard them the first hundred times.  The PWTs are not as hard to play against or quite as meta-dominating as they describe (it's always worse if you don't like something).  The meta will change next Wave and they'll complain about something else.  Maybe Conner Nets are broken and should be nerfed and FFG should have known and should have play tested it first and should have consulted the Wise Forum first.

     

    You seem really mad that people are posting about something you don't want to talk about, as if you can't just move on.  You seem to think FFG couldn't possibly make any mistakes and that anyone who has any problems with anything is some kind of idiot.

    I am frustrated, due to the utter abundance of posts about the same thing over and over and over again with no new content or insight. What's the point? We heard you.

    FFG isn't perfect, but 1) they're much better than most posters give them credit for, 2) their product ideas far exceed those that posters usually produce, and 3) FFG isn't mini g the forums for your brilliant fixes to problems that either don't exist, are blown out of proportion, or already have a minor buff in the works.

    But no, let's rail on. Again.

    DekoPuma reacted to this

  4. Posted

     

    I think you're an exception.  Most complainers complain about Fat Han.

    The bare statistics do not convincingly suggest some change is needed, because some other combination of three ships might just as well become equally popular. What are we supposed to do if three ships happen to be in 60% of winning lists? Look for their common characteristic and nerf that? Of course not.

     

    Thank you!

     

     

     

    I think you're an exception.  Most complainers complain about Fat Han.

    However, the statistics do show that there's a good chance you will play several PWTs in a row. That kind of sucks if you don't like how the game plays when one side has such a ship. So keeping in mind the dislike I mentioned earlier, the statistics confirm what the complaining crowd is saying: the competitions have too many games that they don't like.

    But as has been said before, it remains a subjective thing. My last games with turrets have been exciting enough. I'm too lazy to insert a witty internet meme here, but "I don't like thing!" comes to mind. Which is totally okay, but there is just not enough reason to really call the turrets broken on that basis alone.

     

    I accept that and have.  My campaign is against the incessant posting of complaints and turret nerfs.  We heard them the first hundred times.  The PWTs are not as hard to play against or quite as meta-dominating as they describe (it's always worse if you don't like something).  The meta will change next Wave and they'll complain about something else.  Maybe Conner Nets are broken and should be nerfed and FFG should have known and should have play tested it first and should have consulted the Wise Forum first.

    surly88 reacted to this

  5. Posted

     

    I see it's the most common, but it's not dominating at 40% or so as I suspected, the way some carry on. The Interceptor, Decimator, and Aggressor are close at 17%, 16%, and 15%, respectively. And if it was so op, the percentage of top 8 lists with Fat Han would be higher than the percentage of total lists with Fat Han. That isn't the case.

    Two points: 1) your initial argument was that a decline in showing between earlier stages and final table showed that a ship wasn't overpowered. What should we conlcude if we discover that the reverse is true? 

     

    If there was a statistically significant jump, then my first inclination would be that it's over-powered.  However, it could be that the players who outperform other players happen to pick YT-1300s, and other players who don't outperform also pick YT-1300s

     

    If the YT-1300 itself was overpowered, then I'd expect outperforming players who choose the YT-1300 and under-performing players who likewise choose the YT-1300 to both do exceptionally well in tournaments, relative to their initial representation in the field.

     

    Can you tell I used to study quantitative analysis?  Numbers can mean lots of different things, and it's easy to rush to false conclusions.

     

    2) people aren't just whining about the 1300 - there are three ships that share the same characteristics, and those three ships show up 21%, 20% and 16% of the time at the final table.

    That is dominance at a serious level. Throw in the agressor's impressive 21% (the main challenger to the turret homogeny, according to these stats) and there ain't much space left for any other builds at the final table. That's depressing, and it's exactly why people are a bit concerned.

    You mention the interceptor's strong showing as proof of a healthy biodiversity in the game, but that doesn't seem legitimate in the same way as the agressor, as Fel is by far and away the most popular wingman for the decimator. Likewise the bandits and e wing. So, after we've compensated for this, the _only_ other ship to make a good showing is the bwing, at 10%, due to its super-low spammavle points cost.

    Tl;dr Far from proving a lack of dominace or overpoweredness as you supposed, unfortunately this data shows that PWTs are still very much massively overrepresented in the meta.

     

    Given a large number of ships, we can expect only a certain number out of a normal distribution will be outside a standard deviation or two.  Even if all ships were perfectly balanced performance-wise, you would never see every ship represented at 4% each.  Some are going to be more favored, more in fashion, and randomized due to other factors beyond knowing.

     

    So with 25 ships, any ship that is represented around 4% is represented fairly and those above and below are popular or unpopular:

     

    Y-Wing (Rebel) and TIE at 7%; X-Wing at 6%; Firespray-31 (Scum) and A-Wing at 4%; Z-95 (Scum), Y-Wing (Scum), and Lambda at 3%; and Star Viper and Firespray-31 (Imp) at 2%, and HWK-290 (Scum) at 1%.

     

    That's 11 ships out of 25 that are in the expected range.  That's healthy diversity to me.  Those that are popular include:

     

    YT-1300, Aggressor, Decimator, Interceptor, Z-95, E-Wing, B-WIng, and Phantom

     

    That's only 8 out of 25 ships.  The thing that struck me here is that while the YT-1300 is the most popular of the popular ships, it is not widely more popular, only marginally more popular.  My perception (this is an opinion) of the way some people (perhaps not you) go on about PWT, and Fat Han in particular, is that it so dominates the meta that it's just about the only thing they ever face and there's no diversity.  These numbers tell me otherwise.

    banjobenito and VaynMaanen reacted to this

  9. Posted

    I see it's the most common, but it's not dominating at 40% or so as I suspected, the way some carry on. The Interceptor, Decimator, and Aggressor are close at 17%, 16%, and 15%, respectively. And if it was so op, the percentage of top 8 lists with Fat Han would be higher than the percentage of total lists with Fat Han. That isn't the case.

  13. Posted · Edited by z0m4d

     

     

     

    Yeah, pile stress, ionize, or block a PWT fatty and it dies. If it were overpowered, or broken, or whatever, it would consistently pull out wins in those situations.

    Jacob

    Yours, mine, or anyone else's opinion is just an opinion.

    Factually, aren't lists with at least one PWT pulling way more wins than any other kind of ship at Regionals (if I counted well in the Regionals thread there are 41 winning lists with PWTs and 30 without)?

    Wouldn't that hint that maybe PWTs are currently a stronger type of ship than any other?

    What that tells me is that a lot of people are playing them. How many Fat Turrets crash and burn at the bottom of the rankings?

    Less % than make the top 8.

     

    They're being picked often because they give the best chance of winning with the smallest margin of error. Obviously, if everyone and their dog brings a PWT to a tournie, SOMEONE has to lose.

    They're being picked often because people think that. Whether or not its true is only peripherally related: if they're at least balanced to the rest of the game (as opposed to old TIE advanced underpowered) and people think they're power pieces they'll take them and inflate their win numbers, which makes them look powerful. Vicious cycle. We had it with the TIE swarm and we had it with the TIE phantom.

    PWTs win all the time because they're popular and there are a lot of them. They also get some artificial help in tournaments in the form of consistency (often more valuable than power in a tournament) and from the "point forts" that MoV makes them into.

    These things can actually be checked by regionals that have reported in Listjuggler. I've posted this in another thread, and I'm sure analysis as to the degree will vary but current results are as follows:

    YT 1300, YT 2400, and Decimators make up 24.27% of all points in reported regionals.

    Those same ships make up 29.98% of elimination rounds. All three of these ships see an increase, though the YT2400 is very small (.2%).

    (This can be broken down by named pilots as well, but I don't have time right now)

    While I'm not sure how significant this difference is (a 20% increase) this is since I'm not a math expert, I'm going to guess that it's more than simply random. In other words, I'd at least be confident with those numbers saying that it not simply popularity that causes them to be seen so much in the top lists.

    The YT-1300 is under represented (19%) in the final 8 compare to its overall showing (21%). If anything, it under performs slightly relative to other units.

    And let's not kid ourselves. Most of the hate is very specific: Han Solo YT-1300 with Falcon title, engine upgrade and C3P0 crew, possibly also gunner or Chewie or R2D2 crew. Most complainers are complaining with complaints complaining about the YT-2400 or Decimator in their complaints that they complain about.

  14. Posted · Edited by z0m4d

    The following is what I think you're looking for:

    % Appearance based on total number of lists, Top 8:ctDVgpb.png

    % Appearance based on total number of lists, Final Table:iWaZp8m.png

    So this is straight up (Lists that have this ship in them)/(Total lists).

    So the YT-1300 isn't dominating the meta since it comprises only 21% of all lists (popular, but not dominating). And it isn't over-powered since it does worse than that, making it to the top 8 only 19% of the time.

  15. Posted

     

    Make that rule apply only to PWT and attacks made by ships with the "Outrider" title

    That's another hamfisted rule then. When you have to start creating rules for specific ships, you either have a broken game, or else a bad rule.

    There is no real need to nerf PWT's, they're only as effective as they are because of the other things that go along with them. You make them less maneuverable or less survivable, and the problem will mostly go away.

    FFG isn't going to directly nerf the Falcon, VT-49 or Outrider directly. They can and should however do something about the combos you can put on those ships.

     

     

    I don't think they're going to nerf combos.  Not sure we've even seen it before or ever will.  Instead, they'll provide new ships and combos to counter it, as we've seen.

  16. Posted · Edited by z0m4d

    The most interesting part of this that I'm intrepeting, is that the top table percentages are very similar to the initial percentages.  In other words, the only reason there are quite a few Fat Hans winning is because there are quite a few Fat Hans being brought to the table.  Not because the ones showing up are doing proportionally better than the competition.  

     

    Good point.  I've long argued that [certain ship] scores well in tournaments not because it out-performs, but because it's popular.  That's not to say [certain ship] isn't a high performer, only that it's not the only, and perhaps most important, factor.

    jkokura reacted to this

  17. Posted

     

    Yeah some people don't like playing against PWT or YT-2400's but that doesn't make them overpowered, what makes them an issue is the super mobility + super suriviablity + 360 fire. Take away at least one of those and you'll see them a lot less.

     

    You already see a lot less.

     

     

    How is this not a huge victory for everyone who complains about the Fat Turret dominating the meta?

  25. Posted · Edited by z0m4d

    Funny how it's the pro turret side that feels the need to lower things to personal attacks time after time, FYI guys insulting the other side does not make your argument stronger in fact it has quite the opposite effect.

     

     

     

    Until then, Ill stick with my mantra from another thread: 

     

    Playing Interceptors:

     

    hWrA8ws.gif

     

    Playing Fat Turrets:

     

    oFYIk4m.gif

    Best post ever

     

     

    No further comment necessary.

    DekoPuma reacted to this
×
×
  • Create New...