Almost like you didn’t actually read the whole post.
Here, let me help you.
They are clearly saying that they measure performance by winrate (like any sane and logical person), and that high pickrate and banrate heroes are often underperforming.
Which is exactly the opposite of what you’re implying they’re saying.
Idk about “not meta,” but he hasn’t been a “strong pick” for almost half a year now.
And as the devs clearly stated in the AMA, Diablo one of the worst 3 Tanks in the game, while ETC and Arthas are up in the top 3 with Anub’arak. So clearly your perception of which Tank is better, ETC or Diablo, is incorrect.
I dont think you understood my post. Regardless you responded with the same asinine “pro players l2p” garbage as usual so I wont bother explaining further as it would clearly be lost on you.
First, I said nothing about pro players, so you still need to work on covering up your strawman attempts.
Second, if the entirety of your argument is, “But the pros do/did this!” there really isn’t any explaining you could do. That’s where your, ah… thought process (I hesitate to call it “logic” because it isn’t) stops.
Third, I know neither I nor the devs pointing out the problems in this “my feelings determine balance” mindset you have will cause you to change your mind (as you’ve just demonstrated here), but just know that I will continue to call you and others out for it whenever I see it.
That’s kind of funny because the post isn’t about misusing statistics as it is about people don’t actually know the real statistics and conform to a meta. What you’re saying is probably true for a different topic, but not this one.
I actually did that and he was one of the reasons why I was able to climb back into masters after my break. But Probius has a much different play style from other heroes, so he’s not a hero that is easily picked up. However, if you CAN adapt to it, he most definitely will get you a better win rate.
You’re trying to sound smart, but you don’t actually understand what you’re saying. “Knowing” something is a different thing from “Understanding” something.
Richard Feyman has a good lecture based on the difference between the two, I suggest you listen to it:
You aren’t sounding smart at all. I used to wear baggy pants in the 90s because it was the meta. It didn’t matter that they were uncomfortable and I had to waddle around like a duck, but that’s what it was. That’s sort of what the meta is.
The meta can certainly be influenced by what is effective, but that’s not what people care about. It’s just what people use because of perceived effectiveness and popularity.
A long time ago, I would always get reamed for picking Iron Fists Kharazim, even though it had the higher win rates. People didn’t KNOW the statistics, by constantly berating me and saying it was a noob talent. It wasn’t until pro players brought those talents to the front of consciousness, and people then emulated it, so much so that Blizzard eventually have to nerf Iron Fists because everyone was using it and it was also effective, thus the meta then somewhat matched the statistics. People didn’t know the statistics to begin with or they wouldn’t have complained about me picking Iron Fists in the first place.
You’re the one trying to sound smart, and I’m the only one making sense. Just because you know what the statistics are at, has nothing to do with your ability to understand why they are there.
This is simple. We don’t have to go through your long-winded analogy about baggy jeans.
Now instead of mindlessly posting a response, listen to the video, try to understand what is being said.
In your scenario, if Kharazim had a higher win rate than Ana, and people chose Ana still, is that because they don’t understand Kharazim is better or they don’t know that Kharazim is actually better. They just don’t know, you’re trying to make it seem like people are using statistics incorrectly, no they just don’t know them lol.
Your scenario is that people are misusing statistics, but that’s different from not knowing the statistics.
If the stats clearly show these heroes at a higher win rate, and then you chose Ana anyways, is that because you misused or misunderstood the statistics, or you didn’t know that there might be other heroes that might be more effective if you chose them? Which is more likely?
The likely case is that people didn’t know the stats in the first place, and are just going along with the meta, and following it without looking at the stats.
The meta is the meta regardless of statistics. People just don’t know a lot of them in the first place.
If you read the original Blizzard post, you can clearly see that Blizzard doesn’t actually mention anything about players mis/using statistics (which makes sense because there’s no way you could measure that), they can only talk about what is being chosen.
Ocek’s post was responding to Shoddysketch, which was responding to me and I did post on how people misuse statistics. The discussion at that time turned to how people will find stats regardless (complete or no) to try to use, therefore blizz should release the numbers themselves, and I posted to the effect that people having the ‘real numbers’ isn’t going to do much to fix the misconceptions they have regarding statistical analysis – which would be on the grounds for a misuse of stats and is found in this topic itself.
Feels like you missed some of the context here in favor of disagreeing with people for the sake of disagrement there
Hmm…perhaps I did. If they, refers to you and other people in this thread, and not Blizzard, that makes sense. And I reference Blizzard multiple times, he certainly didn’t chime in to correct the context if that were the case, and still argue with my response rather than clarifying.
I just think the premise of people misusing statistics is off topic as it pertains to the quote. The stats right now are pretty much in line with what is on hotslogs, my main point still stands, the main problem isn’t misusing statistics, its ignorance of them and not knowing them.
Seriously man, how many more times am I going to have to explain 10th grade level math to you fools?
Banrate is completely irrelevant.
Pickrate is sample size, which allows you to judge the accuracy of a winrate.
Winrate is the defining measure by which we (“we” being literally anyone who knows what they’re talking about) judge performance.
From pickrate, you cannot determine anything but how reliable a winrate is. The higher the pickrate, the larger the sample size, and therefore more accurate your winrate. The lower the pickrate, the lower the sample size, therefore the more doubt is cast on the winrate.
Probius’ low pickrate means that his winrate is unreliable. Therefore, we cannot accurately judge his performance.
Diablo and Hanzo, the two heroes you guys keep whining about, have rather high pickrates, which means their winrates are reliable and we can accurately judge how well they are peforming, and the answer is “poorly.”
Not like me explaining this again will matter, you’ll just ignore like the last umphteen times so you can continue justifying in your own minds your whining for more nerfs for Diablo or Hanzo or KT or whoever the next flavor-of-the-month will be.
