You should specifically be mentioning the poster who started with the insults i.e. @1337Bolshevik . Creating situations where multiple people get banned for one troll escalating things just encourages them.
I don't think the "limited evidence" you describe is worth much at all, honestly, given historical trends in the data (i.e. faction power when piloted by top 25% of players sometimes entirely out of wack with power of all ITS players.) Also pick rate, which is more relevant to the claims I actually made in this thread rather than other people's strawmans i.e. I haven't played against a Corregidor player who wasn't using Jazz in years. She's probably too good.
With my primary factions it wouldn't be a huge concern. This is more of an issue in that it affects lists, not factions. If you show up loaded with HI/REM/TAG and complain that the Nomads got you I think we can all see the problem. I'd rather deal with that than a couple of Impersonators tbh. I think you have an incorrect conclusion. It could be that she's just better than the other options for linkable hackers. None of that points to Jazz being too good, it could also mean that the others just aren't good comparatively. I would also suggest that if CJC had more options for pure links mixing Wildcats or MB with Alguaciles you would see less Jazz.
Of course you don’t, it goes against what you think and you don't have any counter evidence so your only options are admit you might be wrong or pick holes in the data which can't be countered because they are essentially "I feel like it's wrong based on my arbitrary assessment of 'historic trends'" which you also don't have any data as relates to the current game. You are welcome to present it if you've got any actual hard evidence?
Is the answer, then, to not bring HI/REM/TAGs in your list at all because you might run into Nomads? Because that's a bad answer. Also, the setup described discourages you to bring hacking *at all*, because you'll never beat it, and allows for spotlighting even if you don't bring anything hackable. It's zero-risk for oftentimes a high reward. Considering the degree you see her in Vanilla Nomads, as well, even after the points hike, it points to her being too good in general. It's not like she's only good in fireteams.
There's plenty of counter evidence. I'm just not going to waste a bunch of effort bringing it up to people like you who aren't interested in what's actually going on.
"I have loads of evidence I'm just not going to tell you what it is, you should already know" look come on, this is silly, you know this is silly
What's silly is how people came into this thread with insults and misrepresentations of what I was saying. Nah, I'm good. Why would I do work for people who don't like me, and don't take what I say seriously? Figure it out yourself.
Hey look, let's take a step back here. It's just a game. Perhaps we got too snappy with each other and that doesn't help. I certainly have no negative view of you as another fellow human being, I don't agree with your position but we are talking about toy soldiers at the end of the day.
Am alternate view on this, particularly as Nomads are not dominating every event is that she is an appropriate power level in a faction where most profiles are under powered.
That's definitely a valid viewpoint, but I'll put forth the idea that Nomads don't have to be dominating every event for her to be overpowered. That said, you may be right, I just doubt it.
As I said on another post recently, I think another 24-25 points on the profile of just her, and somewhere around 30 for the pair and she'd still get used regularly. At these costs it would make her an alternative to an Interventor rather than just better option.
"The data from our servers clearly shows that the anarchist hacker faction is not a concern" PS: not to be taken seriously
Now that the thread has already gotten out of hand, I think it's way past time to remind people involved with that that Infinity statistics tend to be quite close. Only the top one or two factions tend to have a clear lead over any of the others and only the bottom 3 or 4 factions tend to be clearly behind when it comes to win rates. When it comes to popularity, well... that only shows if you're a connoisseur, hipster, trend follower or band wagoneer. The bottom performing factions have historically had a lot fewer players, but that's about it for correlation there I think, as it turns out people want to cheer for the underdog but they don't really want to be the underdog.
Yes...close statistically.... Almost as bad as 40k in some cases. I think in N3 the lowest win rate for ITS season was 32.5% and the highest was 60+%.
Not that i don't believe you, but do you know where you saw that? I remember seeing some stats but it was only a 10% difference between the two.
I found it! Druze were at 38%. https://forum.corvusbelli.com/threads/2019-in-numbers-its-data-analysis.36359/ It's a great analysis and I wish we had one for N4.
It's worth noting that in N3 Druze's performance jumped dramatically, like to top 5 levels, in the hands of players in the top 25% of ITS. I think the difference was in players who understood how to use their drone/hacking setup.
Did we ever get numbers of how many top 33% players took Druze to ITS, and how many games they played? Because otherwise the data is sadly useless. If it was one top player at one event for instance....
True, but there was also a large variance for factions with substantial playerbases, like Vanilla Yu Jing, so the point remains - some factions have tougher learning curves or unevenly distributed player skill, so the actual optimized power level of a sectorial can differ from its overall win rate.
