I’m going to get ahead of myself and start linking all the contradictions here:
Person: speaks truth. BatZ:
“WRONG WRONG WRONG!”
Give any sane person a reason why they should keep talking to you when you keep putting out false and delusional information. Whenever someone confronts you, you immediately react with deflection and hostility. When someone finds a contradiction, you just keep screeching the same line over and over again. Like this one:
To make things worse, you know you don’t have any intelligent people to defend you, so you have to make multiple accounts to…
Here’s my translation of all this
This first half means absolutely nothing
This section means very little. I think I’ve seen this in some past post, the methodology is unclear, the data set is obscure, and how the model works looks like nonsense put together. It also has absolutely nothing to do with what’s going on in the first half.
The real conclusion is that even if we drop all biases about how we feel about the state of balance in the game, this is a very poorly written “paper.” The fa…
So painfully low effort that once again, it’s not even worth responding fully to. Once again, the forum clown strikes again. This time, he picks up a random article that mentions SC2 and APM, mentions a couple of statistical analysis, and automatically assumes he has found the answer to life.
At a quick glance, the point you highlighted is talking about a significant relationship between stop signal data and APM. Nowhere in the article does it reach anywhere close to the conclusion you mentione…
Before I take your argument apart piece by piece let me start by saying you have chosen a terrible visualization to represent a polynomial regression. You should be using scatter plots with a line of best fit.
Now let me ask, where exactly did you get some of those numbers from? They don’t exactly relate to the single source link you posted.
Now going back to the point on your terrible visualization - I bet you chose this because you don’t have a proper scatter plot of data points. Once agai…
Just imagine, one race gets consecutive buffs over 2 years, another finally gets nerfed after 2 years, and the last one that’s been getting consecutive nerfs over 2 years finally gets buffs and suddenly that race is the one that breaks the game for good. Get out of here with your nonsense and stick to your fighting games.
I could go on with how many times I and others have taken down all your points. We have a huge history that you keep denying for obvious reasons.
lllIlIlIlIl:
Please explain to me how Protoss can win more in GM by a 15% margin and yet you can call this “balanced”. Balance has a very definite definition: “arranged in good proportions”. A proportion is “a part, share, or number considered in comparative relation to a whole.”
I seriously don’t get how you keep saying this, and then say this:
lllIlIlIlIl:
There are rules in statistics and you either follow those or you’re considered a clown. There are no “opinions”. The sampling of data must be effectively random, there are ways to collect data to accomplish that and test the data to make sure you accomplished it, and if there is enough data then the correlations in the data are valid. It’s literally that simple. Now if you are working with biased data, and want to clean the data up, then that gets extremely complicated really fast. But the moment you start saying “I am going to exclude this and keep this” without even having shown the relevant tests/measures means you’re a total clown and have no flipping clue how data analysis works. The only thing you are doing, at best, is introducing bias and, at worst, catering data to your conclusion.
As for this:
As far as I know, 100% of the replays that go into that website are submitted by players. I want to ask the rhetorical question: “need I say more?” But you will take that as a challenge and say something even crazier than before. If you can contradict the very description they put in their website, I am all ears.