Yet you dismiss mountains of statistical evidence, and refuse to accept evidence from anyone but me.
You could literally just look up recent replays of Deathwing on Youtube and draw conclusions from that. It wouldn’t be any more or less valid than a replay from me.
Like this replay right here, a Grandmaster playing their first match with post-nerf Deathwing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeTZj7q4dig
Also Ayeziza. They even made a thread asking for DW replays from anyone. I posted one there. And I don’t see why is it important how many ppl asked for it when the reason I want it to be public is that everyone has the same tools as me to compare our opinions regarding the replay.
I think I can find a quote which says you dislike me before this whole thread happened. You even accused me of being a troll multiple times.
But if you don’t dislike me, good I guess. Sorry it’s not mutual.
Answering those to you would be rejoining the debate with you, which I don’t want to.
I let Monylth to use a backdoor so I answer those to him, but only for one of his DW replays where he wins. A deal is a deal. That’s on him if he really wants the answers or not.
Because of the deal we made. There’s maybe a misunderstanding. I accept replays from everyone to watch, but if you want those answers, I want the replays from you.
I also explained multiple times why HeroesProfile is not trustable. Just because it has games and statistics it doesn’t mean it’s scientifically irreffutable for what you’re using it.
You guys claim that me saying you two don’t understand what I clearly say is not true, but I need to say for the fourth time that I won’t use this replay to draw DW conclusions nor I consider it as part of any kind of debate. I’m. Just. Curious. And we. Have. A deal.
If you don’t want to live with it, I can respect that, but don’t spam those silly questions then.
(Btw based on the games I saw from Fan and Grubby, DW is fine, just ppl played horribly, but I won’t judge the Hero based on a few replays, even if those are from really skilled players.)
And I’ve explained multiple times why Heroesprofile is quite trustable, because it has gathered more than enough data to make conclusions about a highly-used hero like Deathwing.
No, we don’t. I never agreed to any deal. You’re the one who just moved the goalposts and refused to argue any further or refute any of my points unless I do something for you. The level of arrogance and disrespect you display is astounding.
Even if HeroesProfile is as trustable as Hotslogs was, the stats for the individual Heroes can differ up to ±5%. Since that’s a margin wich can change how ppl see certain Heroes (like dropping down to 55% from 60%), it cannot be used for balance discussions as facts, just as some kind of interesting addition, like someone’s own statistics.
Also, DW is not highly used, he’s highly banned. 9% playrate is not high. That’s on of my concenrs.
You also always ignored my concern that why should we trust a site which use calculations which can make a Hero look like as if it was banned/played in almost twice as much games as there is (having 180%+ popularity).
You want something what I don’t want to provide, I do it for an exchange.
If you don’t want this simple deal, so be it.
I don’t know how deals are disrespectful. Or why should any of you actually deserve respect based on how you two speak.
Currently, Deathwing has around 4.25k games on heroesprofile, and he has 59% winrate. Comparing that to something like one’s personal statistics is quite ridiculous, as this is from a variety of players over a much larger number of games. Its not a perfect sample, but it is far from meaningless or anecdotal.
You may argue back that people might only upload wins to heroesprofile, but that would take a great deal of effort (Have to manually select wins from a folder, and cannot see easily whether its a win or not. You’d have to be cross-referencing with your in game win/loss information and the whole thing is a pain to accomplish.)
There are other arguments against the idea of people only uploading their wins artificially boosting winrates as well. If you only upload the games you win, you won’t upload the games where you lost to deathwing, which would theoretically increase his winrate. If they are playing other heroes, they would likely do the exact same thing, so we would also be seeing a “loss” on the enemy team’s side. You could have a fairly accurate stat board even if people only uploaded the games they won, so long as there is an appropriate number of games. Additionally, if there’s a player who uploads to heroesprofile on both teams, then the replay gets uploaded regardless of the outcome. Overall, this kind of thing mostly evens itself out, or at least provides similarly skewed data across the board. Not ONLY for deathwing. Most of the other stats seem to be fairly in line with what we might expect to have seen from HOTSlogs just based on past data from there.
You could argue that multiple people are colluding to boost deathwings winrate by only uploading games where deathwing wins, but this is very much “tinfoil hat” levels of paranoia, and takes us back to earlier in this thread where someone brought up occam’s razor. It’s not reasonable for us to jump to this convoluted conclusion without some kind of evidence supporting it.
There were Heroes with 20(?)k games on hotslogs but all we know that hotslogs could still be off with ±5%.
And doesn’t matter how many games he has when his playrate is 9%, which is kinda niche lvl.
The last time I checked that was 60% (before that it was 60%+). So so far from what I’ve seen, his wr is constantly falling on its own, without nerfs.
Do we know how many players and who provided how much games?
Agree to being far from meaningless, disagree about it being more than anecdotal.
I won’t. Therefore I think I don’t need to address the latter parts (I still read them if someone would like to misinterpret what I said).
HeroesProfile/Hotslogs is not inaccurate because ppl misusing it.
He wont because none actually exist.
Despite the fact that many replays literally do not exist because of patch missmatch, Karabars outright admitted that the request for information has nothing to do with the discussion at hand and is only for his own personal curiosity.
It’s odd to see someone actually admit to using a red herring but -shrug- whatever.
On the flip side, you’re much worse than he his. You conveniently ignore any particular that is damaging to your case whilst bulldozing ahead pushing your opponents with irrelevant red herring and strawman fallacies to distract from your own ineptitude at formulating reasonable hypotheses.
Speaking of which…till waiting for an explanation of this gem of a quote btw:
Would have been more defensible to just stick with “Deathwing is not OP” but I’ll assume you’ll ignore this too because “not muh science!”
the fact you disregard a FACT
to supplement your own opinion is just plain idiotic
and then the article you wrote to justify it? i feel truly sorry for you for the rage is overwhelming within you not intelligence
good luck in life chump
and like i said before, you are boring me
This thread is a mess.
Both parties arguing are acting like clowns, seriously.
but uh yeah DAE 
There is no tale no head in this topic anymore.
You sound bothered by it. Maybe you should return to threads where you feel more comfortable and don’t have to actually use your brain/use deductive reasoning (or lack thereof) to stand up to people you disagree with?
I hear this one is pretty popular:
Most statisticians agree that the minimum sample size to get any kind of meaningful result is 100. If your population is less than 100 then you really need to survey all of them.
### A good maximum sample size is usually 10% as long as it does not exceed 1000
A good maximum sample size is usually around 10% of the population, as long as this does not exceed 1000. For example, in a population of 5000, 10% would be 500. In a population of 200,000, 10% would be 20,000. This exceeds 1000, so in this case the maximum would be 1000.
Even in a population of 200,000, sampling 1000 people will normally give a fairly accurate result. Sampling more than 1000 people won’t add much to the accuracy given the extra time and money it would cost.
http://www.tools4dev.org/resources/how-to-choose-a-sample-size/
Significant results issued from larger studies usually are given more credit than those from smaller studies because of the risk of reporting exaggerating treatment effects with studies with smaller samples or of lower quality [[23](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2493004/#CR23), [27](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2493004/#CR27)], and small trials are believed to be more biased than others. However, there is no statistical reason a significant result in a trial including 2000 patients should be given more belief than a trial including 20 patients, given the significance level chosen is the same in both trials. Small but well-conducted trials may yield a reliable estimation of treatment effect. Kjaergard et al. [[18](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2493004/#CR18)], in a study of 14 meta-analyses involving 190 randomized trials, reported small trials (fewer than 1000 patients) reported exaggerated treatment effects when compared with large trials. However, when considering only small trials with adequate randomization, allocation concealment (allocation concealment is the process that keeps clinicians and participants unaware of upcoming assignments. Without it, even properly developed random allocation sequences can be subverted), and blinding, this difference became negligible.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2493004/
I’m sure this will get ignored but why not.
No, I just find both parties arguing like clowns, you people are hilarious either way with how ridiculous you all sound.
Werid flex but ok.
People like doing this type of thing on the internet idk why…….
On another note im just going to laugh when DW gets hit with more nerfs…all we need to do is say that DW is “unfun” and that alone will be enough to justify a nerf for the dev team lol.
I mean… It is a forum, the purpose of said forum is to debate. This particular debate has devolved because of poor argumentation skills by forum contrarians karabars and zenasprime, but a discussion can always return to a productive one.
You cared enough to post so you obviously must be disturbed/bothered by it enough to input your opinion.
Reading is hard
Look buddy, you can consistently imply they are poor skill but its not like you, Orangejuice and all those who consistently think DW is Overtuned ATM are also falling in that poor argumentation skill.
I literally just told you I found this thread hilarious, there’s nothing bothering me for a bunch of people smack talking then using some absolute sound ridiculous, both sides, it gave me chuckles, a lot.
So yeah,
for you it seems. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Seems like poor argumentation to me. One side uses data, the other side says the data is irrelevant and their person experiences with deathwing are more important.
Not quite sure how it can get worse than that.
Meh whatever, water is wet, New Hero are no logically are always leaned to side of overtuned mainly for obvious reasons meant for the player to actually feel their presence, either way nerf heat wave so dumb.