Dude, this doesn't help. It gives people reason to post 'lol salty' instead of dealing with issues honestly.
This has nothing to do with a grievance, this is just my exasperation with him being willfully dense for no other reason than well, he's got this urge to fanboy defense mode CB. When you collect data to do statistical analysis you don't pollute it with irrelevant junk because that impacts your ability to draw relevant conclusions from it. That's. just. so. basic. It's like trying to talk to a flat earther I swear to god.
Okay, first and foremost, please try and reign it in a bit. I do think you should be able to vent your frustration and that it is justified, but fanboi is an insulting word and the rest of us actually would like the forums to be readable and welcoming. Second of all, I do also hope you realise that Esquerda probably thinks these kinds of reactions are hilarious and not at all insulting?
Personally I prefer this rather accurate interpretation: fanboy - A person who is completely loyal to a game or company reguardless of if they suck or not. It's not primarilly an insult.
According to the data about half a dozen JSA profiles were consistently used on YJ. Even not considering facts with a massive impact on the statistics, like packaging (for example zuyong vs Karakuri) and sculpts (keisotsus). In an army which used to have over 55 profiles nobody with a little knowledge on statistic would consider a 9-15% an insignificant percentage. Surely if we could see other factions statistics then 1/2 of the profiles could be removed.
I certainly agree ITS reported lists should be top priority, as they are guaranteed use lists. But why are other saved lists data bad? Would not seeing what preople have considered and dismissed and what people never even entertained using be beneficial? I myself have uploaded dozens of lists I’ve never used, but all of then I have considered using.
because in the context of the discussion, according to what we're being told the data we were shown on stream was actually useless to us because it was polluted by all the junk lists. Essentially we were shown numbers just to try and get us to shut up, and I find that somewhat condescending on CB's behalf, and a little irritating. That immediately makes me ask two questions. Did they do that because they were too lazy or incompetent to give us the real numbers, or did they do it because they're trying to hide something. I don't really like the answer to either of those which is why I initially said I very much hope Storm is wrong in what he's saying and they actually gave us the useful data.
The stuff we were shown on stream apparently was just anything that's ever been saved in Army in the last two years. Like, anything.
‘Apparently’? Did they actually say that then? Again I’ve only seen bits here and there. If they’re saying the stats are what people have saved rather than used and that’s what they’ve based this split on then I can see that not being good. If that’s actually times a unit is taken stats then it’s different. I still see being able to filter out all lists so seeing what’s considered and what’s not even looked at can only be a good thing.
That's what storm's telling us. I said it sounds like a stupid idea but he's insisting and then we have the ensuing argument. He could be making it all up for all I know, but that's the direction the discussion has gone from.
They should a few slides of high level summary data at Adepticon, to allay concerns that it was simply fly by the seat of your pants, and folks are interpreting that to indicate that's all of the data used. Their primary data analysis tool gets more granular than that, showing (based off saved lists in Army) where and when a list was used, for what missions, at what events, what place it came in, etc.
I saw pics of the slides from the seminar, but haven’t seen what scale the data is from. I’m no statistician but amount of times actually used, only looked at and units not looked at at all would certainly be of interest if I was going to look at data on this kind of thing.
The sky is falling, how will we every be able to play or trust CB again!?!?! It's like the people here know how to hit me right in the funny bone every time. It's just hilarious. I'm sure they have a way to filter between everything saved in army and what's uploaded to the ITS page as tournament lists. If not, what would the point of uploading them be?
I really don't think we should focus too much on the data here, there are reasons to consider it suspect, consider it valid, interpret it in different ways, but the sanctity of it isn't key. Corvus Belli isnt taking that info and using it to decide what profiles are kept or removed, they looked it over after-the-fact, and then presented it publicly to try and counter dissent over the removal of JSA. If Oniwabans were running 40% or Raiden 30%, do you think this would've stopped Uprising? Preserved those profiles in Yu Jing? I don't. The reason Ninja is still in Yu Jing lists is because its packaged in Red Veil, and for all I'll critique their implementation of all this they arent so bad that they'd keep selling an intro product with a useless unit in it. If only 2% of Yu Jing vanilla lists used a Ninja, would the profile still be part of the faction? It absolutely would.
Yes, the data is such a red herring people are arguing about and it is driving me nuts. The issue is not how they got data, but that they took YJ minis and made them unusable in YJ, en-masse. That may just mean some players have a new faction they can play, some YJ players can now just do JSA no issue. Some of us just don't have the minis to make good lists in either faction now, and we prefer not to proxy our oniwaban as dao fei and so on - it's a financial hit to some of us and it is that sort of thing that seems to underlie the issue.
