YOU aren’t evaluating anything. You’re starting with a conclusion and are trying to find data that supports it. That’s your issue.
1 Like
I’m evaluating MMR disparities. I’ve provided evidence multiple times. You and the PPP girls took 2 years to come back with “if you split us by MMR, the MMR is closer,” then celebrated like that’s some kind of victory? I seriously can’t even think of a stupider argument.
Then maybe start evaluate something? So far we dont see anything besides mmr and seniority.
Again: you actually come up empty handed to a gunfight. You dont even have a baseline. You dont have any evidence to stand on. YOU need to somehow explain and proof why the data should be good for anything. We pointed out multiple ciritcal flaws, yet you completly ignore them…well sometimes you actually agree that you cant know things for certain, yet you still stand there and try to tell us that the data is somehow legit 
Why should anyone conclude something out of the data, if the data is not controlled at all? Please show me any study where we have a similiar starting point (3 options given, 1 option is heavily biased and taken so much more frequently due to many obvious reasons (familiarity, tutorial, campaign, design like any other faction in any other rts, and other factions are unique)) and THEN come back to us and make a point.
I’m confused as to what you’re trying to argue here.
Also note, we weren’t arguing about performance? We were arguing about skill. About difficulty. About how that causes Average Terran MMR to be lower, such that For players below M2, 3300 Terran MMR is equal to 3700 other race MMR but somehow also does not mean Switch race and boom climb.
If not, then I’ll just go, because that’s what I’m arguing against. That’s what this - and the other three threads wheasy started - actually said. I’m here because that’s my stake:
Terran is not harder than the other races on the whole, Terran rank does not inherently demonstrate more skill than other rank, the three races are well balanced with each other at most skill levels.
Secondarily, as an alternative, suppose I accuse you of goalposting because of this quote:
Because that’s what you kept doing. That’s why this is getting ridiculous. Do you understand how stupid the theoretical world where I mean that accusation is?
For future debates - and if this continues - please just skip accusing people of fallacies.
In other words, we don’t draw conclusions based only on a mean average.
We use that as a lead point of an investigation and then control away things that we suspect make that data be dirty or flawed, removing any apples that look like oranges.
No, you have not. I’m going over your two-hundred posts in this topic:
Posts ~10 to ~42 demonstrate not understanding why dividing by the variable you’re measuring isn’t inherently stupid
Posts 8 and ~30 to ~38 and 48 are getting the definition of the word goalposting wrong
Misrepresenting arguments as strawmans
More of the first bullet, asking for a proof via a study
Then you resume the “I’ve already made good points” rhetoric, and we’re a third through the posts.
We come to, at post 84, the continuation of failing to understand “tutorial race” != “inherently bad player race”
Ah, post 86, when you decided sexism was a good argument.
Post 100? is a good one:
Cool. You made a claim. Now define a metric that proves it and post that. For instance, maybe games played doesn’t prove it, but time played (if Terran games were significantly shorter).
This is something you have not done by this current point (Nov 27); despite making claims yourself.
111 continues the first bullet, calling something as a circular definition when it’s just a one-way street but you missed the right turn.
Nov 29, post 298 in thread, post 127/202
I never once made assumptions like the 3 of your accuse me of. I make a claim, I back it up, WITH PROOF.
Terran players have less MMR, that’s not necessarily indicative of higher skill requirements, so then we eliminate other variables
Variable 1: player longevity, Terran favor
Variable 2: player activity
This is the only time I have so far managed to find you posting evidence and it’s even the one with trying to control for other variables.
These are good facts.
Aside, this doesn’t ‘remove’ things, it’s still ‘all the data’.
Of course, does not make these points of less value. What does make these points of less value is not accounting for another variable:
Namely, population and composition.
Which is the entire thing that Sentry has been trying to say with the division by rank, is why Sentry has said that the data could be flawed, and is why I say you’re falling victim to what you’re saying other people are doing.
If you were actually trying to remove variables, you would have taken the time to look at in what way the average Terran MMR is being dragged down; and very quickly notice that there’s such a gigantic glut of bronze-to-gold Terrans, they actually bog down the master/grandmaster influence on the average - an effect that doesn’t happen for Zerg or Protoss.
But you’re not, you are instead assuming your conclusion and fitting any data to match to it.
~152, putting words in my mouth to the tune of “this is the same as ‘terrans are inferior’”, yep
~163, not parsing that casualness is not relevant
~175, “[familiarity] would make it popular amongst ALL players” yes my genius, that is in fact true; but GOOD players will be more likely to switch to other races
177, “You literally said you didn’t have to prove your claims” the most straw of man, since it isn’t even RELATED to what got said
180, continuing the same bull
191, can’t read data just like you can’t read words
And then I got to the bottom of the thread without having anything more to say about these posts. That was the only post with data I found, and I find the rebuttal given in this post to be fairly conclusive as to how it demonstrates why that analysis is incomplete or biased.
2 Likes
So interestingly, while this definitely used to be the case (and obviously WoL is still free), The tutorial these days actually teaches you the very basics of all three races - a friend of mine just started playing recently and I watched him go through it. Further slightly more in-depth tutorials with the “training” section of the Versus tab allows you to select any of the 3 races at your whim.
This was introduced WAAAAYYYY back in patch 3.0, as it turns out.
There is also an argument to be made for not playing terran - many people I know who I introduced to the game don’t want to play Terran because they’re the human race, rather than the opposite. To quote my friend from earlier “I want to play the space bugs, not the boring humans.”
However, this still leaves the free campaign, and the similarity to other RTS games as other good reasons that Terran is currently the most played race in low leagues.
2 Likes
I have by your own admission.
It’s not inherently stupid to stratify data, it’s stupid to stratify data, point out that statistics contain clusters (they literally almost always do), then draw conclusions that are hasty generalizations.
I’m okay with “the data could be flawed.” (It’s not that it’s flawed, it’s incomplete). He’s not stating that. He’s stating that he can actually draw conclusions from the stratification of the data. In other words “I split players by MMR, then, shockingly, they were the same MMR.”
No
Not reality
You can
1 Like
Now, as funny as a 21 character response is; it obviously is not a very useful thing.
The data contains a particularly interesting point when divided - one that demonstrates why a mean average is not a good metric to use with this data - and because of that, why what your argument stood on is a hasty generalization!
The argument about the divided data was never to make a point on its own, it’s part of a refutation!
Contextually, these are highly correlated. The data are flawed because the information contained within is insufficient to do that which we would like to do with them.
However, in this case, it’s that the data are flawed from the population axis needing to be controlled for. We can control that variable, and it was controlled using MMR.
The reason it needed to be controlled for is because the population’s MMR distribution is hysterically lopsided. The important word here is hysterically. The sheer degree to which it is this way is absurd.
edit: And it’s because of this insane delta that the population needs to be subdivided in order to actually use an average on the data meaningfully.
Stop.
Never say this again.
If you have the urge to say this again, just leave. Because this isn’t accurate, you know this isn’t accurate, and it has been repeatedly explained by not just me that this is a strawman of the point being made and that at no point you have refuted the soundness of the ground that the point stands atop of. You have simply asserted that it doesn’t and asked for onerous proofs as the only way you’d be willing to acquiesce that it is valid.
1 Like
Yeah this is pretty much true. I also decided that going for terrans is the boring Option in an Alien vs Predator themed Game. But yeah its dividing the Playerbase it seems and for me its also pretty much about If you Care about the Game and its mechanics you rather choose Something Else than terran and advance (because about the willingness to learn Something new). Ofc we are talking about rather small differences in statistics meaning its obviously Not true for everyone. Anectodically i know some Guys in silver Up to d2 who Play terran and still dont have a clue at all about the Other races. Like literally 0. 13 years into a Game and they dont know how someone Units are called or what they do.
And yet you’ve been unable to find a single study whereby any researcher has ever done so? #credible.
There is no obligation for me to prove that it is possible to draw useful information from looking at a component of a set of data.
2 Likes
Cool. I’ll just draw random conclusions out of the air like magical fairy dust and say they’re relevant, too.
You say this like it isn’t what you had been doing.
2 Likes
You literally stated that it was evidence to my point lol. You’re just upset that you haven’t been able to present one piece of evidence to the contrary.
Meanwhile, you and the PPP just desperately grasp at reeds no matter how flimsy to try and keep you above water. You even linked me to a statistical principle detailing that multi variable analyses are valid… Like, duh?
Your “evidence” isn’t a separate variable, it’s the SAME variable lol.
It’s absolutely mind boggling that you keep trying to argue this. Your arguments are like feminism levels of delusional.
Yet you didnt provide any evidence at all.
1 Like
I’m genuinely confused as to what you mean when you say this.
But, yes, you have some evidence! It indicates, very obviously, that something is suspicious. And that’s a good thing.
You looked at the numbers a bit, saw Terran MMR averages low and went to saying Terran is the hardest race! … and just kind of stopped? Instead of continuing to look at it and break down the data, and the only reason I can see to do that is because it’s what you wanted them to say?
I agree the conclusion is a logical one from that data. I said pretty similarly in my first long post of a previous rendition of this thread –
And I’ll polish up an incomplete reply I composed there -
The thing is - and the reason I care so much - is that that actually is a good basis of an argument.
We have a game with three races. A naive prediction says we should see vague thirds as the representation for each race. This ends up not being the case, by a significant margin.
Given that, from my understanding of player profiles, we should then see one of two things:
First, that despite the odd global representation, the number of experts of each race is closer to a third, so the most populated race thins out as you climb the ladder percentage-wise;
or second, that the distribution of player skill is even, that the number of players of a race at a rank is roughly equal to the population percentages.
And neither of these are true at all. The number of Terran players cramped into the leagues below Diamond is tremendously out of line with either of these naive expectations; nor are they a ‘fair’ percentage of masters+ given how much of the population they are.
And that’s wacky! That’s indicative of something strange. But you then didn’t do any further leg work, because you had a conclusion in mind and not a hypothesis.
You wanted the data you acquired to affirm your pre-existing belief and the moment that you saw that it did, you stopped.
Now, I will not pretend for a moment, that once I found the data said what I wanted I didn’t lose significant motivation to continue - but I didn’t stop. I kept looking at those numbers and doing math on them to see if anything didn’t line up further. Nothing I came up in the next hour or two of looking at it was maligned with that conclusion.
And you didn’t pay attention to it, because this is not the thing that I pointed out that it says. Arguably, the most important part of what it says in relation to this.
The whole of the stats can indicate one thing and then the subsets can indicate something directly contradictory.
Data can indicate multiple things and those things can even be contradictory. What matters is how you use those indications and control for variance, making sure that the way you control it isn’t just a way to reconfirm your bias.
2 Likes
I then went on to remove other variables such as average player veterancy and activity…
Are there other variables still we haven’t covered? Absolutely. But the evidence we do have suggests what?
Which evidence? Im curious. So far we havent seen any evidence.
1 Like
You know it was evidence because you presented it.
You just discredited it as irrelevant once that went sideways. It’s called “goal posting.”
Most bad players are Terran.
1 Like