|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Malkai Inos
Opus Arcana
Covert Intervention
660
   |
Posted - 2013.07.13 14:36:00 -
[1] - Quote
Selection Bias
Your findings, as an individual piece of data, won't have too much significance for anyone but players of roughly your fit, skill and play style.
If you're a tank driver you will find that snipers barely exist. I if you're a sniper you would conclude that people apparently don't use any weapon at all.
Gathering this data is a neat idea but we would also need a somewhat detailed description of your general play style, fit used, kd etc. to get any reasonable conclusions out of it.
And don't even bother preprocessing your findings. Raw, quantitative data or GTFO  |
Malkai Inos
Opus Arcana
Covert Intervention
660
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 14:49:00 -
[2] - Quote
R'adeh Hunt wrote:[...]Either way, only CCP has the ability to provide detailed stats...and would have to normalize it based on the number of people using a specific weapon. I'm sure they're doing just that when deciding if a weapon is OP...at least I hope they do instead of basing it on forum whining This. CCP have all the data they need to monitor weapon usage and relative power. All they need the forums for is the context of these numbers as it is not always clear why a certain weapon feels OP.
While an interesting experiment, the numbers generated by OP and others pale in term of quantity and thus significance if the circumstances are not outlayed in detail. Any conclusion could be invalid by simply having the wrong sample, over analizing of noise or, at worst, pure chance.
Be cautious when dealing with statistics.
Edit:C Saunders wrote:
Also recording my Kills, assists and WP.
Very good. Knowing the fit used and how you generally play (leroy jenkins or tactical player etc.) would also be helpfull. |
Malkai Inos
Opus Arcana
Covert Intervention
660
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 15:24:00 -
[3] - Quote
C Saunders wrote:I've currently only recorded 10 OMS games and died a total of 39 times and not one of those deaths is from a flaylock. n=39 is way too low to draw any conclusions. The next protostomp that nets you 5 flaylock deaths throws the implicated assessment right into the bin.
You need more rounds, especially with that average death count.
And i agree with your observation but that's besides the point. I'm not trying to prove anything. |
Malkai Inos
Opus Arcana
Covert Intervention
661
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 15:32:00 -
[4] - Quote
R'adeh Hunt wrote:Malkai Inos wrote:C Saunders wrote:I've currently only recorded 10 OMS games and died a total of 39 times and not one of those deaths is from a flaylock. n=39 is way too low to draw any conclusions. The next protostomp that nets you 5 flaylock deaths throws the implicated assessment right into the bin. You need more rounds, especially with that average death count. And i agree with your observation but that's besides the point. I'm not trying to prove anything. I take it you're an EVE player too? Only an EVE player would know proper quants and apply it to a video game  Hush! |
Malkai Inos
Opus Arcana
Covert Intervention
661
|
Posted - 2013.07.13 15:42:00 -
[5] - Quote
Scheneighnay McBob wrote:I take it you're some 8 year old kid who doesn't know how to deal with things as simple as LAVs and explosives, so you say they're overpowered while you run around as a caldari logi with an AR. Not to derail this fine thread, but: Is anyone else of the opinion that the new strafing speed reduced deaths by murdertaxi to nearly nil? Heavy users? |
Malkai Inos
Opus Arcana
Covert Intervention
686
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 15:00:00 -
[6] - Quote
Paran Tadec wrote:The only data they are collection is what is used the most, which IS NOT an indicator of OPness.
What would be more important is to note the weapon and gear used by players who continuously go 10-0 and better.
Played an academy game the other night, specced into just flaylocks, and went 27-1, with the advanced flaylock on a gallente suit. Agreed, correlation does not equal causation. The bare fact that one weapon is more common than another is interesting but not proof for anything on its own. Other possible reasons for a weapon being unusually common have to be found and accounted for first.
|
|
|
| |
|