Wow, so you repeat the same biases you made before, and then tried to call it a ‘scientific’ approach. Kinda hard to declare you’ve done something, when you don’t actually know what that would entail, or rather, why biases are usually something ‘science’ tries to account for, and then remove from analysis. Also, you don’t actually define the means of your analysis (e.g. power ratings,) so you pretty much talk about how great you are, how bad blizzard is, and assert that that has more meaning than self-satisfaction for yourself
- Your link on PPUS does not actually pull up whatever grievance you’re trying to voice.
You’ve been told about that before and some even demonstrated a better way to link to those. So far, it seems like your ability to utilize information that doesn’t agree with your initial premiss is in the negative.
- The basis of how you’re trying to convey ‘balance’ has false equivalence. Complaining that probius isn’t banned as much as johanna would be like declaring starcraft can’t be balanced because players will make more drones than ultralisks.
A “balanced” game isn’t not going to have equal distribution of bans because player-meta influences the perception of gameplay beyond just statistical numbers; not all heroes post the same numbers, contribute the same thing, or have the same opportunity in their function. Drones don’t do the same things as Ultrlisks, pawns don’t do the same thing as queens. Chess – a thing you use for examples – does not have equal-reporting on openers, midgame tactics, or closers (for people that know the names for those things,) but rather has shifts in what is played despite few changes to the ‘balance’ of the game. Favoring an opener advised by GothicChess is going to skew the moves players make than the ‘balance’ of the game would indicate at divergent ELO.
- Conflating cause and effect.
Part of the issue of actual statistical analysis is determining the difference between cause and effect. What you are doing is trying to find "statistically significant’ information which is what psuedoscience does for clickbait. Those sorts also have issues posting reliable links, applying the scientific method, and doing more than looping confirmation bias for declaring they have results without actually doing the work. But they have a bottom line, and there isn’t much place for much else, and that seems to be about the same for you.
- You process is influenced by disdain and assumptions, rather than actual information.
For instance, you go on about the harassment (way to keep updated on that btw) and assume ‘interns’ did maps, but you don’t actually convey all the ‘victory’ conditions for the maps in question. ToD core isn’t just damaged by claiming an active shrine: it is damaged by mercenaries, the boss, and controlling all towers on the map. You aren’t informed, you’re just angry and trying to act otherwise.
- You power rating puts Mal’ganis at the top.
Mal’ganis is not the top tank, he’s not even the tank your comparisons can use to show how ‘unbalanced’ the game can be. Instead, you drop LoL references on an audience that probably knows less about LoL than you do about HotS and you go around to a number of other characters instead of Mal’ganis. Your metrics are flawed, unexplained, and those things were pointed out to you before you even posted this.
What you report on a ‘balance’ change does not convey a process for useful information. The regen rate on a hero is based on the max HP, so when one value is adjusted, so is the other, and you neglect that information. That was pointed out to you when you complained about it here, and it looks like that’s just more stuff you’re ignoring. You are reveling in misinformation, and then trying to fault something else for that. That isn’t ‘science’.
Your methods are flawed, they’re just the same excuse to flaunt the same grievances you keep voicing from one game to another. You have a hate-induced-hard-on for cc, and can point at healing numbers, so mal’ganis has a high power rating, but little other explanation than an analogy compared to nova.
Cool, maybe you have 10,000 replays of HotS WTF replays of mal’ganis using his HP swap, but your methods don’t actually align with the grievances you raise, so you go off on tangents instead and don’t see an issue in the contradiction of claim and conduct presented.
Were you hoping someone wouldn’t actually read this, or are you going to run off and edit another wiki to lambast me and then act like I’m the one who doesn’t know how a ‘wiki’ works?
