Profile of MMX

So to be clear, UKF has no potential.



Are you saying, 24 games played faction is problematic compared to 3 games played faction?
USF only been picked 4 more games than a OKW, does that mean USF also have the same problem?


And also, I have to mention that OKW so far has highest WR. UNLIKE someone with 33% WR.

I don't know why you are even bringing up OKW into this. How can they be statically compared?

Game played
24 vs 3

WR
54.2% vs 33.3%

not saying that UKF hasn't go any problems, but presenting the winrate out of 3 (!) games as some sort of credible argument is just ridiculous (seriously, how would you even expect an average over 3 to be anywhere close to 50%?).
the abysmal pickrate is probably a better indicator that something is off, although personal preference plays a big role here as well. many of the top players in the tournament simply prefer USF or SOV over brits and wouldn't choose UKF unless they'd gain a sizable advantage by doing so. so all in all, i wouldn't draw too many conclusions about the state of UKF from the 3 tourney games played so far. the low popularity is certainly worrisome, but i'd rather rely on the data provided by coh2stats to get a more accurate picture.

muted

why not go ahead and mute the remaining 95% of the forum while you're at it? your chances of finding anyone here willing to circlejerk in your echo chamber are nigh zero anyway. just sayin'

Yeah i also dont think it will cause balance issue.

yeah, what could possibly go wrong?

Wasn't it like this for a long time? I can't remember the times it was different.

same here, 10 fu as far back as i can remember.

but i guess you'd have to build one at least every now and then to know

Thank you very much.
Indeed, variance is barely possible. But as I pointed out in another post: If we want to run simulations, we need to know how a model makes a decision which of the enemy models it shoots at. Range is important, but I am fairly certain that if multiple models are in range at the same time, there is a change that a model will be targeted that is not the closest one.
From what I see, variance in infantry fights comes mostly from this model sniping an less from RNG on the weapon stats.
Unless we understand that, we cannot understand variance in infantry fights. Neither with simulations nor with my model.
You could tweak the model by just lowering the DPS output/health/whatever for one of the squads to apply some kind of debuff to them. For example, not shifting HP between models will calculate the power for being 100% model sniped.

thanks for clearing that up. though i don't necessarily agree that a complete understanding of the targeting algorithm would be necessary to simulate things - we can always make assumptions and simplifications to get a rough idea how things line up with the in-game results and tweak accordingly. after all, your model also requires certain informed simplifications to be made, which isn't necessarily a bad thing if the results work out nicely.
anyway, i guess that wasn't really the point of my question. what i meant was pretty much what you outlined in the last sentence. if i understand this correctly the amount of hp shifting kind of simulates the degree of 'focus fire' towards single models? in this case (and assuming this is the major factor that defines the randomness of the outcome of a firefight) it would be interesting to see if the variance in a set of calculations with randomized values for hp transfer would match up with the variance in a set of in-game tests (to some extent at least). well, maybe i'm fetching things a bit too far but i thought i just put this out here nonetheless...