Intelligent moderation is required.
You're right. And this thread should be closed. There are many misleading conclusions from the interpretation of the data by OP.
Posts: 101
Intelligent moderation is required.
Posts: 615
hmmmm.... i like how the "nose dive" is play rate, and for win rates ofc only 4v4 matches are considered :-D
when in reality, its mostly the play rate for UKF that plummeted, while in turn OKW skyrocketed.
UKF has highest/2nd highest win rate for months? Totally fine.
They dip for a few days after OKW gets buffed? OMG, BUFF ALLIES, NERF AXIS !!!!!!111111oneeleven
it's also funny how it's emphasized that now brits are even worse than OST :-D
maybe if OP played a single game as axis during the last few months (and did a similar thing for ost/okw back then) he could be taken seriously. but, with things they are right now:
Posts: 615
Posts: 322
Posts: 836 | Subs: 5
added in 3v3 and 2v2
Posts: 322
Keep grabbing 3 days of stats and getting worked up over this. It's a waste of time.
Posts: 1617
Posts: 955
Posts: 615
And 1v1 doesn't fit your narrative?
Keep grabbing 3 days of stats and getting worked up over this. It's a waste of time.
Posts: 1108
Keep grabbing 3 days of stats and getting worked up over this. It's a waste of time.
Posts: 239
And 1v1 doesn't fit your narrative?
Keep grabbing 3 days of stats and getting worked up over this. It's a waste of time.
Posts: 2723 | Subs: 1
Couldn't the mods simply make a single thread per topic, one for OKW is OP, one for Calliope, one for Goliath, one for Brits and one for the rest? Relic will fix those things in the next patch at the earliest and it would improve reading experience in this forum a hundredfold if the same threads wouldn't pop up every day saying the same things which are now known and won't be changed until - well - next patch.
Intelligent moderation is required.
Posts: 123
This is game balance. Relic balances with data and to get data you need time, but to find the bounds you need to go to extremes (sledgehammer-like). A good amount of time as people adapt and the new meta stabilises. If they did a lot of changes over a short time, then there will be a lot of back and forth since real trends have not stabilised.
Gradual in your perspective is a linear search. UP? OK. Buff one little thing at a time until OP? The iterative software development process is not a good analogy because generally the gradual changes are all in the right direction; in balance, you buff one thing, it affects other things, and suddenly buffing wasn't the right move so you may have to roll back if you didn't allow enough time to stabilise.
Posts: 1122
Posts: 245
But whats gonna change if you wait, say, week?
Ofc, in analysis the shorter selection the less accurate the results, but its not a rocket science, its a gardening computer game. Lets not pretend it overcomplicated and requires inhuman intellect to understand. To catch a picture in some cases there is no need in playing a game (remember isu, kat, ml20, ptrs buffs? All were predicted to be op as hell just from experienced players taking look at stat changes before patch releases, all predictions turn to be true).
You need a week or maybe whole month to conclude that 10 popcap sections vs 5 popcap volks is outstandingly ridiculous? 100% income on faction with some of most cost-effective vehicle selection is somehow normal? Maybe people should adapt to face 20 minutes double panthers, st+jt or kt with shreck blob roaming around which at the end just swarms their inferior in both numbers and quality tanks and kills them with sheer numbers advantage? Somehow magically learn a way to cost-effectively fight 5 popcap volks?
To see how terribly wrong all those things you need to make some useless complex analysis like one relic claim they do instead of actually balancing the game?
You cant be serious, and only thing which would change in a week is that win ratios difference would be even more drastic.
Posts: 665
But whats gonna change if you wait, say, week?
Ofc, in analysis the shorter selection the less accurate the results, but its not a rocket science, its a gardening computer game. Lets not pretend it overcomplicated and requires inhuman intellect to understand. To catch a picture in some cases there is no need in playing a game (remember isu, kat, ml20, ptrs buffs? All were predicted to be op as hell just from experienced players taking look at stat changes before patch releases, all predictions turned to be absolutely true).
You need a week or maybe whole month to conclude that 10 popcap sections vs 5 popcap volks is outstandingly ridiculous? 100% income on faction with some of most cost-effective vehicle selection is somehow normal? Maybe people should adapt to face 20 minutes double panthers, st+jt or kt with shreck blob roaming around which at the end just swarms their inferior in both numbers and quality tanks and kills them with sheer numbers advantage? Somehow magically learn a way to cost-effectively fight 5 popcap volks?
To see how terribly wrong all those things you need to make some useless complex analysis like one relic claim they do instead of actually balancing the game?
You cant be serious, and only thing which would change in a week is that win ratios difference would be even more drastic.
Posts: 359
Posts: 738
Posts: 707
hmmmm.... i like how the "nose dive" is play rate, and for win rates ofc only 4v4 matches are considered :-D
when in reality, its mostly the play rate for UKF that plummeted, while in turn OKW skyrocketed.
UKF has highest/2nd highest win rate for months? Totally fine.
They dip for a few days after OKW gets buffed? OMG, BUFF ALLIES, NERF AXIS !!!!!!111111oneeleven
it's also funny how it's emphasized that now brits are even worse than OST :-D
maybe if OP played a single game as axis during the last few months (and did a similar thing for ost/okw back then) he could be taken seriously. but, with things they are right now:
Posts: 707
And 1v1 doesn't fit your narrative?
Keep grabbing 3 days of stats and getting worked up over this. It's a waste of time.