That’s entirely up to you. Maybe calm down a bit and actually read the rest of my post sometime.
1 Like
He… didn’t. No all of VS anyway.
For example he said this:
Not your best work today Scrotie.
2 Likes
Telling someone to calm down is often ineffective,the movie margin call has the best approach to such a situation.
What VS calls “vS Deck Power” is literally winrate measured normally — just put a % sign after it — and what they call “Power Score” is literally just the exact same information as winrate, but measured in a goofy way relativistic to the #1 deck and an exact 50% winrate. Transmuted.
I’m going to be real, I don’t see any practical application of Power Score that a non-transmuted winrate doesn’t have, but goofy way or not, it is the exact same information. It’s like putting the winrate in Roman numerals, it’s still the winrate, even if the information in Roman numerals has no practical use except to translate it back to base 10.
Meta Score, on the other hand, IS a total nonsense piece of data that Vicious Syndicate publishes. Transmuted winrate times transmuted popularity doesn’t mean anything. But we never even got to talking about Meta Score.
I don’t care. It’s exactly what he should do and I don’t intend to baby him about it.
1 Like
Yeah, I’m already used to being misquoted here, for the purpose of discrediting me.
That’s not something that hurts me anymore. But one thing does - the fact that’s totally unneccesary thing to do, considering that only 2-3 people here give me credit anyway.
And what’s truly hurting me isn’t even that. I’m grateful for anyone who gives me credit. No, what’s hurting me is that I keep failing to make people realize their mistakes and acknowledge them.
Either my arguments are badly expressed, or my approach is bad, or both.
I am sorry to keep failing this forum and my own vision of it, where people learn and advance. Unfortunately, it appears that some people are content with their current knowledge and situation.
Like the opening post, this also strikes me as 100% pure uncut sarcasm. If it were crystal, Gale Boetticher would be openly jealous.
And I’m not gonna lie, I got a little Gale in me right now.
If this was some attempt at humor, it failed horribly.
You’ve:
-
been caught lying in this thread.
-
been caught misquoting maliciously in this thread.
and yet somehow, your attempts at bad humor are what annoys me the most.
1 Like
No, I haven’t.
First off, I’m not wrong about anything I’ve said. At all. But if you want to think that I’m wrong about something, fine. I am not above criticism.
Second, and most importantly, lying is not merely being wrong. Lying is being wrong deliberately, when one knows the truth. For you to think that of me hurts. I thought you were above that. I certainly wouldn’t think that of you, unless presented with incontrovertible evidence. I don’t think that of you, even now.
Accusing people of being wrong is perfectly acceptable. But accusing people of lying has no place in this forum. Even if I thought you were lying, which I don’t, I wouldn’t be so uncouth as to accuse you of it directly. Hints at most.
Oh come on now. I don’t think I’ve done any quoting out of context, but even if I have by some mistake, people can scroll up.
scrotie try not to be a scumbag challenge (impossible) (3 am)
he’s always like this, people just don’t notice because they aren’t the target
2 Likes
What I was trying to do was give you the benefit of the doubt.
You say you play sludgelock at high legend and have 250+ games and that your win rate is x% and the deck is good.
VS says other people have played Rainbow Shaman, 230+ games and has x% win rate and it’s good.
I believe you both, yours just isn’t tracked on a website. I have always thought you were truthful.
I weighted your experience the same as that Shaman deck equally in my view and conclude both are good at top legend, yours just isn’t tracked on those websites because you aren’t tracking it for them.
I 100% believe you.
I was being fair with that.
But you rejecting the Shaman data and only accepting yours doesn’t make sense to me and shows a weird bias.
If I’m fair with your data and theirs, why can’t you be?
Why can’t you accept that it’s a good deck and so is yours? Like I honestly don’t get why I can accept it but you reject it?
3 Likes
I believe VS calls this power score and scrotie is not lying,
They have a column for Vs Deck power that is just the win rate(Handbuff has 52.94) and a seperate column for Power score that scales from 100 to 0 just as you explained (handbuff has 100)
1 Like
Overheal Priest might be the the best deck in the meta flying way under the radar. It’s starting to show up but it’s still a hard deck to play well. It’s got a skill gap to it which holds it back and well it’s priest so it’s being under-represented.
Seeing lots of Reno decks again including the old DH one retooled with new cards.
HSguru only tracks streamers
VS report has some limit, 1k games I think, and I only have 256, that’s why there’s no sludgelock in it. They somehow found 1,6% * 75k = 1.200 games on Rainbow shaman. I don’t know how, but hey, it’s true, they have more data on Rainbow shaman than on sludgelock.
I don’t know, nor do I care, what’s with other websites you named. It’s common knowledge they’re unreliable.
No, what’s weird is that I can’t find that deck’s winrate on VS, anywhere, I played at most 2-3 games against it in 6 days, yet it’s somehow a tier 1 deck
That’s weird.
What would you do if you played more than you currently do and see a mismatch in VS report vs your own data and experience? Would you seriously allow a website which can’t be checked over yourself?
How do you go through life like that?
Funny, I never for a second had that impression. Mind showing me where I could have got it from?
why can’t you accept that I can’t possibly know how good of a deck that is, because it literally doesn’t exist for me?
When you play as much as I do, from 86 to 1k in a week, and play only 14 games in those 7 days against a class which has 4 decks with total playrate of 6% (average being 1,25% per deck) and then you see one of those decks in tier 1 on a weirdly- calculated statistic without a single % shown in it, what else do you conclude??
Read it from my point of view and then tell me you’re seriously accusing me of being a hypocrite, when in the same thread I’ve been lied to, maliciously misquoted, emotionally manipulated, disrespected, mocked and all that for calling out 1 single dubious statistic on a highly regarded website?
And then when I play the education or rank card, I get attacked for “flexing”, when in fact, people obviously give credit to something which has clout, is “known” over something that’s logical and right under their eyes.
For example, I’ve no idea who the writers of the report are and how educated they are. But I do know that I’m a published author of a scientific article about eSports and Experience Economy.
I do know that I’m right, even if I’m the only one who knows that.
Unlike you, I do not let myself be gaslighted into lies.
Incorrect. He uses general Firestone data.
I don’t believe that it’s common knowledge, but it should be. Tempostorm and HSReplay are trash.
Well I guess that the Sphinx in Egypt doesn’t exist, because I’ve never personally seen it. All those photos must be AI generated. It’s all one big psyop, man.
Poe’s Law disclaimer: sarcasm is not lying.
Can confirm 
. I have seen it and it’s just as impressive in person. Most of Egypt was impressive when i visited it nearly 30 years ago
1 Like
Obviously you’re a paid shill dispatched by Big Egypt as part of a global disinformation campaign. I will not let you gaslight me into lies.
I am kidding. I’d totally let you. <3
1 Like
This is report system abuse, since it’s a direct call for everyone to report a user. Reported.
It is only true mathematically, in every other discipline or context it’s just wrong.
There can be many more decks with less than 50% winrate than 50%+ (and there are, in fact), so this is statistically and contextually portraying a completely different picture/table.
So this is another…falsehood.
Yeah, after all the falsehoods you posted in the same thread, you expect me to believe this? Now I’m the one offended.
Besides, it’s not about intention. It’s about behavior.
“The path to hell is paved with good intentions” - old saying.
Your behaviour is that you lied, misquoted and manipulated. Your intentions don’t matter, and even if they did, how do you prove they were good if all you did was bad?
1 Like
Your logic on this is broken.
I’m put you on ignore until Monday. Anything you post can wait until then. I can’t make you do anything, but I once again suggest that you calm down, then reread.
Nicely done. A natural politician. You should have tried for presidency, you know.
After getting caught in all sorts of machinations, ignore, deflect and leave the conversation - people will forget it all soon anyway.
Bravo. Masterful.
1 Like