Nerf Thread on General

Barbarian
#467

Blizzard told you:

  1. You don’t have access to all the data. You only have access to leaderboards data.

  2. You can’t just analyze based on leaderboards data.

So, what’s the point in keep arguing whether you’re right or wrong? Your analysis was never good from the beginning, because you don’t have access to all the data. Blizzard clearly told you so, are they wrong about this?

It doesn’t matter how good you are with numbers, if you don’t have good/complete data to begin with, your analysis is just garbage. You may very well be just shut the f up.

3 Likes
#468

I do not know if I am right or wrong. Neither does anyone else who does not work at Blizzard.

For clarity, I am not arguing that I am right or wrong, I am simply saying that there are some peculiarities in the presented data that seem counterintuitive. Other posters speaking in absolutes “MicroRNA was wrong” also do not know the merits of that statement given what you just wrote.

Yes and Blizzard also mentioned that the leaderboard data overestimates the “average” player. Therefore, you can see how their numbers compare.

Complete data is not needed to analyze relative build strength. What is easily available in bulk for the leaderboard are GR tier, paragon level, clear speed. Manually, you can get the legendary gem levels, augments, and builds for the leaderboard clears in game.

I have actually done this in the past and posted on it. One oddity at that time was I previously assumed that the legendary gem levels for a “meta class” would be higher than a non-meta class (excluding capped gems and pain enhancer). It turns out that wasn’t the case for the “average” players I analyzed at the top end of the leaderboard.

Moreover complete data actually is problematic. You can think of it this way: Informative, high quality data informs, bad/irrelevant data muddies the waters.

For example, there could be a high paragon players that actually avoid the leaderboard to avoid “detection”. This would make “complete data” for classes that are easily botted skewed.

#469

You really like to cherry pick words right? How about this: You don’t have access to all the relevant data for analysis. Therefore your analysis is garbage.

Here is your own quote. Maybe shut the f up now?

3 Likes
#470

When dealing with human behavior, it is not possible to have all the relevant data.

For example, one of the most important pieces of information to compare class strengths is what percent of each class’s players try to push with that class versus playing casually without testing their limits.

This is one of the arguments about why looking at top clears can give insights. These players are pushing a builds limits. Their data may not reflect “the average” player but is much better to use to estimate build potential.

#471

Folks, again: I urge you to STOP REPLYING TO TROLLS.

It’s evident by certain posting trends that some folk will reply ad nauseam even when they are proved wrong, shut down through official channels, and otherwise dunked on. There is no point in replying to these folk because, contrary to their claims, there is no discussion to be had–only endless argument, which is equally pointless, because the Fun Police have (for now at least) been officially shut down.

Please: Don’t feed trolls. Don’t reply to them. Don’t give them attention. Ignore, ignore, ignore.

6 Likes
#472

But Blizzard has more relevant data than you do.

Read this again.

2 Likes
#473

Will do, just made the dumbest mistake ever. Thanks for the reminder Free.

3 Likes
#474

No worries, my friend. I’ve been there plenty of times. It’s very easy to get sucked into “discussions” with trolls because they’ll stick to their guns even when the guns have been taken away, smelted, and made into candlesticks.

Really, the bottom line is this: Blizzard has made an official statement on balance.

They’re doing it the way they’re doing it.

Not everyone is going to like it, and they certainly don’t have to like it, but it is what it is.

The matter of balance is, for now, closed. The Fun Police have been silenced with an official statement, and a few of them still want to make a fuss. As long as we don’t reply to them and feed them, they will, eventually, go away. And we’ll all be happier for it. :slight_smile:

6 Likes
#475

It is not always about having the most complete data but the most informative data.

To illustrate this point, there are cancers of unknown tissue origin. To identify tissue origin, biomedical researchers have used global gene expression profiling to interrogate the expression of ~20,000 or so genes. In terms of specificity and sensitivity, a global analysis works rather poorly in comparison to looking at the most informative genes. The problem with a global analysis is that it has too much “useless” information that makes a predictive classifiers much more noisy and unreliable.

#476

Not worth replying - the ego on some ppl is just to large that they argue for the sake of arguing. Just ignore - eventually they will fade away.

8 Likes
#477

LOL.

I seem to recall a certain post from official channels that you and others argued against vigorously. I am still working through the data, but I am become increasingly convinced that something is demonstrably off-kilter.

#479

Finally something I agree with. I just wanted to stop by and wish you luck in your future endeavors :wink:. I hope you find peace but until then this is the last reply you will get from me. Goodbye :sob:

#480

I dont even read his posts :slight_smile:

4 Likes
#481

I did 141 with no conduit, and no hard cast. Once again, it would be 4/5 tiers. There is no reason to discuss about it

1 Like
#482

That’s good. That means you do not have to explain why Blizzards numbers show that the pandemonium buff reduced a 5k paragon witch doctor’s GR clear by 10 GRs.

5K Paragon “Average” Player Barb Crusader DH Monk Necro WD Wizard
Non-season/Era 12 130 138 125 130 123 130 130
Season 19 135 136 124 134 118 120 130
Benefit of Pandemonium Buff +5 GRS -2 GRs -1 GRs +4 GRs -5 GRs -10 GRs +0 GRs

Or why their data (DH vs. WD = 5 GR difference) conflict with your claim of similar.

#483

Anyone know what time the Super Bowl kicks off?

US time is fine, I’ll try and do a conversion. I’ll be at work for the 8 hours the game takes to play anyway, just want to know when I can try and stream it :joy:

1 Like
#484

Google reckons 10:30 am on Feb 3 AEDT :+1:

What state are you living in, Phoenix?

2 Likes
#485

Google says 3:30pm PST, too late for me to get a bigger TV now :sweat:

On a side note, I was watching Lakers today, really hope they could win this game, at least to honor Kobe. Guess LBJ has more work to do to keep his promise.

1 Like
#486

NSW, so 10.30 it will be for me too.

:joy::joy::joy::joy::joy:

#487

As a Victorian, I think we’re morally obligated to argue now :joy:

1 Like