Jump to content


Higher Skilled Players Like Artillery Less - Confirmed, But Why?

artillery

  • Please log in to reply
1652 replies to this topic

_Intrepid #81 Posted May 03 2014 - 23:55

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 9878 battles
  • 927
  • Member since:
    06-26-2012

View Postaqollo, on May 04 2014 - 00:33, said:

Isotonic regression please.

 

Sure, not a today turnaround I'm afraid. It's not something I personally have to use day to day. You're welcome to in the interim.



aqollo #82 Posted May 03 2014 - 23:56

    Major

  • Players
  • 21725 battles
  • 3,327
  • Member since:
    02-21-2011

View PostEvocoot, on May 03 2014 - 16:54, said:

Penn and Teller are awesome. But they aren't completely correct on this one. Polling can,is and will be used in nefarious ways. Numbers can dance and make dragons fly out of monkeys butts in the right hands. Properly conducted research can on the other hand produce tangible, truthful results. It's in the presentation and the methodology. Questioning larger and larger relations just starts to look like you have your own axe to grind here, present something tangible as a counter beyond hyperbole. The best counter to bad research is good research.

 

I would love to do this, but I'm occupied with my other forum project atm.



_Intrepid #83 Posted May 03 2014 - 23:56

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 9878 battles
  • 927
  • Member since:
    06-26-2012

View Postaqollo, on May 04 2014 - 00:54, said:

Look at the poll questions they are flawed and CLEARLY biased. I wouldn't say the poll is reliable until the polling questions are reworked. Want an example?

8 = Overhaul, but remove artillery if that's not enough

6 = Overhaul, but keep artillery

 

Yes... there is also "no overhaul necessary, just small changes" and others. Is there an opinion there you believe should not exist, or one missing that should? Or do you disagree with the value weight of those two?



Evocoot #84 Posted May 04 2014 - 00:01

    Captain

  • Players
  • 7974 battles
  • 1,388
  • Member since:
    12-03-2013
I would say that the questions are probably the weakest point in the study. Simplifying the answers and removing the ambiguous "if that's not enough" would go a long way. Overall it would still pass a second year stats course at most universities with a low b probably, might pass as a weekly assignment in third year stats as well. If it's still relevant in a week when my summer starts I'll play a bit for fun.

_Intrepid #85 Posted May 04 2014 - 00:02

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 9878 battles
  • 927
  • Member since:
    06-26-2012

View PostXJCL, on May 04 2014 - 00:18, said:

IDK why ppl are getting so worked up about this, while interpretations of the data may differ, the data itself is somewhere between "mmkay" and "well yeah." 

 

Exactly. They seem to have their own idea for what this would mean though, and because of that, absolutely do not want this to be the result. I have to be lying, manipulating data, using obscure file formats etc. etc. I'd rather understand why things are as they are then spend all my energy trying to convince myself and other they're not as they are. 



aqollo #86 Posted May 04 2014 - 00:03

    Major

  • Players
  • 21725 battles
  • 3,327
  • Member since:
    02-21-2011

View Post_Intrepid, on May 03 2014 - 16:56, said:

 

Yes... there is also "no overhaul necessary, just small changes" and others. Is there an opinion there you believe should not exist, or one missing that should? Or do you disagree with the value weight of those two?

 

I believe both of them be redone and simply replaced with

7, overhaul arty.

By splitting the question up, it bias the poll towards the upper 5-10 ranges by drawing more votes.


Edited by aqollo, May 04 2014 - 00:04.


_Intrepid #87 Posted May 04 2014 - 00:03

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 9878 battles
  • 927
  • Member since:
    06-26-2012

View PostEvocoot, on May 04 2014 - 01:01, said:

I would say that the questions are probably the weakest point in the study. Simplifying the answers and removing the ambiguous "if that's not enough" would go a long way. Overall it would still pass a second year stats course at most universities with a low b probably, might pass as a weekly assignment in third year stats as well. If it's still relevant in a week when my summer starts I'll play a bit for fun.

 

Everyone is able to create their own poll if they like and try to do a better job accounting for all opinions. Good luck, the forum is not populated by the most reasonable of people. 



Evocoot #88 Posted May 04 2014 - 00:04

    Captain

  • Players
  • 7974 battles
  • 1,388
  • Member since:
    12-03-2013
You need way more data for why people think the way they do. That's moving into daedulus project levels.

_Intrepid #89 Posted May 04 2014 - 00:04

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 9878 battles
  • 927
  • Member since:
    06-26-2012

View Postaqollo, on May 04 2014 - 01:03, said:

I believe both of them be redone and simply replaced with

7, overhaul arty.

 

There are two very different opinions represented there. One says, give it an attempt via overhaul, but if you cannot find a good solution in a reasonable timeframe, remove them. In other words, removal is an acceptable outcome. The other says overhaul artillery and keep overhauling until you get it right, they shouldn't be removed. Those are worth a 2 point spread of difference to me.



XJCL #90 Posted May 04 2014 - 00:08

    Major

  • Players
  • 17480 battles
  • 7,197
  • Member since:
    08-26-2012
Would agree with Intrepid, I voted for 6 (overhaul, but keep) and was actually the top recent WR player to vote for the choice; I think arty should have higher rof and less alpha, but I definitely think the class should exist. While first choice is overhaul, I would prefer arty stay as it is currently over removal of the class. I think having 1-2 arty per team is good for the game and healthy, but dislike the randomness of the units. I believe this is sufficiently different viewpoint from overhaul, but maybe remove later to warrant two choices. 

Edited by XJCL, May 04 2014 - 00:09.


Evocoot #91 Posted May 04 2014 - 00:08

    Captain

  • Players
  • 7974 battles
  • 1,388
  • Member since:
    12-03-2013
The overhaul part is ambiguous. What is a n overhaul, what are you changing, what represents a successful overhaul? Presenting simpler choices yields clearer results.

Draconis76 #92 Posted May 04 2014 - 00:13

    Major

  • Players
  • 21676 battles
  • 4,729
  • Member since:
    09-20-2012

View Post_Intrepid, on May 04 2014 - 01:04, said:

 

There are two very different opinions represented there. One says, give it an attempt via overhaul, but if you cannot find a good solution in a reasonable timeframe, remove them. In other words, removal is an acceptable outcome. The other says overhaul artillery and keep overhauling until you get it right, they shouldn't be removed. Those are worth a 2 point spread of difference to me.

 

2 of your options say 'Arty is ok' and 5 say 'arty is not ok and needs to be at least modified.' That biases people towards 'arty is not ok' responses.

 

Furthermore, it is only one set of questions with the 'arty is not ok' options at the top. Again, that biases.

 

You have been campaigning pretty hard against arty lately. As such you get less of a benefit of the doubt as to whether those flaws were intentional or not.



_Intrepid #93 Posted May 04 2014 - 00:14

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 9878 battles
  • 927
  • Member since:
    06-26-2012

View PostEvocoot, on May 04 2014 - 01:08, said:

The overhaul part is ambiguous. What is a n overhaul, what are you changing, what represents a successful overhaul? Presenting simpler choices yields clearer results.

 

An overhaul is greater than minor changes. It is impossible to clarify that in a way that is satisfactory to everyone. The best you can do is get their opinion of which it should be based on what they believe each is. Maybe someone can put together a better poll, I'd love to see it. This isn't as fun as playing the game for sure, so yeah, I'd love it if someone else did the work. But I did make every attempt to do the work right. Not just quickly, but as accurately as could be hoped. To me, this was like a study confirming the sky is blue, it's so painfully obvious that unicum or near-unicum players dislike artillery in higher numbers that I was surprised anyone objected. 



_Intrepid #94 Posted May 04 2014 - 00:16

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 9878 battles
  • 927
  • Member since:
    06-26-2012

View PostDraconis76, on May 04 2014 - 01:13, said:

2 of your options say 'Arty is ok' and 5 say 'arty is not ok and needs to be at least modified.' That biases people towards 'arty is not ok' responses.

 

Furthermore, it is only one set of questions with the 'arty is not ok' options at the top. Again, that biases.

 

You have been campaigning pretty hard against arty lately. As such you get less of a benefit of the doubt as to whether those flaws were intentional or not.

 

If you feel there is a missing artillery opinion in that list, share it. If you feel the weight I gave each is inappropriate, share it. There are two remove, two they're great. There is one "do a bunch of work and remove if it doesn't work out" and one "it needs some minor changes, but they should stay". There is one in the middle that says they need a major rework, but should be kept.

 

That's 4 of 7 saying they should be kept. 5 if you count the chance an overhaul would work. 



Buddha1369 #95 Posted May 04 2014 - 00:16

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 22405 battles
  • 756
  • Member since:
    10-14-2013

View PostEvocoot, on May 04 2014 - 01:08, said:

The overhaul part is ambiguous. What is a n overhaul, what are you changing, what represents a successful overhaul? Presenting simpler choices yields clearer results.

o·ver·haul  [v. oh-ver-hawl, oh-ver-hawl; n. oh-ver-hawl]  Show IPA 
verb (used with object) 

a.  to slacken (a rope) by hauling in the opposite direction to that in which the rope was drawn taut.
b.  to release the blocks of (a tackle).



LonelyGuardian #96 Posted May 04 2014 - 00:21

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 20 battles
  • 595
  • Member since:
    01-30-2014

View Post_Intrepid, on May 03 2014 - 23:25, said:

Yours was one of the votes I had to ignore because the associated account did not qualify (< 100 games).

.

Well then, here's where all my information about the game comes from (this "friend" is perma-banned from forums due to being honest about WG fails last fall/winter): http://www.noobmeter.../na/Guardian54/

.

As you can see his winrate is going swan dive due to too much arty play.

.

If you ever revise your graph, please put it in. Thanks.



Evocoot #97 Posted May 04 2014 - 00:27

    Captain

  • Players
  • 7974 battles
  • 1,388
  • Member since:
    12-03-2013
I agreed early on with your core assumption. Those least affected by random aspects of the game, or able to overcome them , are most likely to dislike the most random element. Just chipping in with opinions since then.

WarStore #98 Posted May 04 2014 - 00:28

    Major

  • Players
  • 39528 battles
  • 13,516
  • Member since:
    01-31-2011

View PostLonelyGuardian, on May 03 2014 - 23:21, said:

.

Well then, here's where all my information about the game comes from (this "friend" is perma-banned from forums due to being honest about WG fails last fall/winter): http://www.noobmeter.../na/Guardian54/

.

As you can see his winrate is going swan dive due to too much arty play.

.

If you ever revise your graph, please put it in. Thanks.

Your "friend" should know better that the truth is not welcome in this forum.



Draconis76 #99 Posted May 04 2014 - 00:34

    Major

  • Players
  • 21676 battles
  • 4,729
  • Member since:
    09-20-2012

View Post_Intrepid, on May 04 2014 - 01:16, said:

 

If you feel there is a missing artillery opinion in that list, share it. If you feel the weight I gave each is inappropriate, share it. There are two remove, two they're great. There is one "do a bunch of work and remove if it doesn't work out" and one "it needs some minor changes, but they should stay". There is one in the middle that says they need a major rework, but should be kept.

 

That's 4 of 7 saying they should be kept. 5 if you count the chance an overhaul would work. 

 

You have 7 options, 5 of which consider artillery bad in its current form, and have used the results to conclude people, particularly the most skilled don't like arty.

 

And you can't see a problem with that?

 

Spin away, oh intrepid one.



LonelyGuardian #100 Posted May 04 2014 - 00:36

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 20 battles
  • 595
  • Member since:
    01-30-2014

View PostWarStore, on May 04 2014 - 01:28, said:

Your "friend" should know better that the truth is not welcome in this forum.

.

Yeah, well, that's why "I" don't have any warning points yet, I just drive-by neg most of Content_WG's posts (mind you, not all of them, occasionally I give a +1.... and usually regret it once I realize like last weekend that the event is a lie) and post occasionally. Been a while since I've had a quote-chat with you, WarStore, how have you been?


Edited by LonelyGuardian, May 04 2014 - 00:37.






Also tagged with artillery

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users