Mets17 wrote: » So is it worth it 2 open my 5* crystals in Feb or wait later on?
Ja1970 wrote: » Very good changes, this will bring balance to the game, i am personally looking forward to this. And yes i have pulled god tier 5* champions, and recognize the difference it makes to a players progression in this game
Kabam Miike wrote: » bradshaw84 wrote: » Beast, Jane foster, Cyclops, Ronan, Loki, Phoenix, Venompool, civil warrior, ant man amongst the 18 best and most used in aq and aw? GTFOH! LMAO! Kabam Miike wrote: » Just talked to the team, and they are comfortable with sharing the list of Champions we plan to include in the first Featured Champion Crystal. It's important to note that this list could still potentially change a little before the release, but the selected Champions are based on empirical data showing their effectiveness as 5-Star Champions in both Alliance Quests and Alliance Wars. Beast Storm Cable Cyclops (New Xavier School)Thor (Ragnarok) Taskmaster Agent Venom HawkeyeModok Sentry Void Ant-Man Mordo Thor (Jane Foster) Loki JuggernautHela Phoenix Ronan Venompool Nebula Punisher (2099) Civil Warrior Doctor Octopus Bold Text denotes Featured Champions. I didn't say most used, but they are among the most effective. Cyclops actually scores very high on this list. There is a smaller group of players that use him, but they use him VERY effectively.
bradshaw84 wrote: » Beast, Jane foster, Cyclops, Ronan, Loki, Phoenix, Venompool, civil warrior, ant man amongst the 18 best and most used in aq and aw? GTFOH! LMAO! Kabam Miike wrote: » Just talked to the team, and they are comfortable with sharing the list of Champions we plan to include in the first Featured Champion Crystal. It's important to note that this list could still potentially change a little before the release, but the selected Champions are based on empirical data showing their effectiveness as 5-Star Champions in both Alliance Quests and Alliance Wars. Beast Storm Cable Cyclops (New Xavier School)Thor (Ragnarok) Taskmaster Agent Venom HawkeyeModok Sentry Void Ant-Man Mordo Thor (Jane Foster) Loki JuggernautHela Phoenix Ronan Venompool Nebula Punisher (2099) Civil Warrior Doctor Octopus Bold Text denotes Featured Champions.
Kabam Miike wrote: » Just talked to the team, and they are comfortable with sharing the list of Champions we plan to include in the first Featured Champion Crystal. It's important to note that this list could still potentially change a little before the release, but the selected Champions are based on empirical data showing their effectiveness as 5-Star Champions in both Alliance Quests and Alliance Wars. Beast Storm Cable Cyclops (New Xavier School)Thor (Ragnarok) Taskmaster Agent Venom HawkeyeModok Sentry Void Ant-Man Mordo Thor (Jane Foster) Loki JuggernautHela Phoenix Ronan Venompool Nebula Punisher (2099) Civil Warrior Doctor Octopus Bold Text denotes Featured Champions.
BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » It's not about the most effective at all. They're looking at the data and avoiding the least effective based on what they're finding. Which means anything else can be included. People might have an opinion one way or another, but the data shows what it shows. And data can be used to lie, meaning that it shows nothing significant
GroundedWisdom wrote: » It's not about the most effective at all. They're looking at the data and avoiding the least effective based on what they're finding. Which means anything else can be included. People might have an opinion one way or another, but the data shows what it shows.
GangsterSauce wrote: » Don't worry guys. Kabam is always looking out for the players just like how Donald Trump looks out for Americans.
BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » It's not about the most effective at all. They're looking at the data and avoiding the least effective based on what they're finding. Which means anything else can be included. People might have an opinion one way or another, but the data shows what it shows. And data can be used to lie, meaning that it shows nothing significant Data doesn't lie. It shows the actual usage of the Champs. When examining the effectiveness of Champs, that's about as significant and impartial as it gets. There is a difference between general concensus on who is good and who is not, and the actual performance data. TL:DR - Just because Top Tier Players think that half the Roster sucks doesn't mean that will reflect in the data. The efficiency of a Champ is more than just one area of the game. I didn’t say data doesn’t lie. But it can be used to lie, for example here And this is just one example, research how to lie with statistics and there’s a huge range of ways kabam could have (emphasis on could have) manipulated their data to conclude that cyclops is amongst the effective champs such as star Lord and gwenpool. They could have just taken easy level fights and because we don’t know the parameters of their data collection, they will conclude that cyclops is effective because he wins 100% of his fights! Isn’t that great?
GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » It's not about the most effective at all. They're looking at the data and avoiding the least effective based on what they're finding. Which means anything else can be included. People might have an opinion one way or another, but the data shows what it shows. And data can be used to lie, meaning that it shows nothing significant Data doesn't lie. It shows the actual usage of the Champs. When examining the effectiveness of Champs, that's about as significant and impartial as it gets. There is a difference between general concensus on who is good and who is not, and the actual performance data. TL:DR - Just because Top Tier Players think that half the Roster sucks doesn't mean that will reflect in the data. The efficiency of a Champ is more than just one area of the game.
BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » It's not about the most effective at all. They're looking at the data and avoiding the least effective based on what they're finding. Which means anything else can be included. People might have an opinion one way or another, but the data shows what it shows. And data can be used to lie, meaning that it shows nothing significant Data doesn't lie. It shows the actual usage of the Champs. When examining the effectiveness of Champs, that's about as significant and impartial as it gets. There is a difference between general concensus on who is good and who is not, and the actual performance data. TL:DR - Just because Top Tier Players think that half the Roster sucks doesn't mean that will reflect in the data. The efficiency of a Champ is more than just one area of the game. I didn’t say data doesn’t lie. But it can be used to lie, for example here And this is just one example, research how to lie with statistics and there’s a huge range of ways kabam could have (emphasis on could have) manipulated their data to conclude that cyclops is amongst the effective champs such as star Lord and gwenpool. They could have just taken easy level fights and because we don’t know the parameters of their data collection, they will conclude that cyclops is effective because he wins 100% of his fights! Isn’t that great? Why would they do that? Let's overlook the fact that it's conspiracy. If they wanted to include the Champs they wanted, they wouldn't go through the trouble of concocting an excuse to look at "easy data". We don't know the specifics. However, if they're looking at all Champs available as 5*s and identifying the lowest performing, that means they're looking at all Champs, regardless of what Tier they're in. That's the part people aren't getting. Just because we personally think a particular Champ sucks doesn't mean they are useless. Has nothing to do with being suited for any particular Tier, or easy Fights. The Crystal is going to have a range of Champs that alternate. We can form whatever opinions we want on the Champs in it, but those are the Champs available. The only thing we know is that they're making an effort not to include the ones that perform poorly. Which is reasonable. We can't expect a Crystal full of "God Tier Champs". It is a fact that if people don’t have as good champions, they won’t do as well. That’s not my opinion, if you have wolverine, star Lord and blade in aq you will do much better on average than if you had Khamalha Khan, spidergwen and Luke cage (excluding beta). If kabam wanted to make more money then they would put champions like that in the pool more than the better ones. You’re just assuming the data was collected that way, unless I missed something. The only thing we know is that Kabam “say” they are making an effort to not include ones that perform poorly. I know we can’t expect a crystal full of God tier champs, but I think we should expect at least a few. This crystal literally has no god tier champs, only trash and a couple of decent champs.
GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » It's not about the most effective at all. They're looking at the data and avoiding the least effective based on what they're finding. Which means anything else can be included. People might have an opinion one way or another, but the data shows what it shows. And data can be used to lie, meaning that it shows nothing significant Data doesn't lie. It shows the actual usage of the Champs. When examining the effectiveness of Champs, that's about as significant and impartial as it gets. There is a difference between general concensus on who is good and who is not, and the actual performance data. TL:DR - Just because Top Tier Players think that half the Roster sucks doesn't mean that will reflect in the data. The efficiency of a Champ is more than just one area of the game. I didn’t say data doesn’t lie. But it can be used to lie, for example here And this is just one example, research how to lie with statistics and there’s a huge range of ways kabam could have (emphasis on could have) manipulated their data to conclude that cyclops is amongst the effective champs such as star Lord and gwenpool. They could have just taken easy level fights and because we don’t know the parameters of their data collection, they will conclude that cyclops is effective because he wins 100% of his fights! Isn’t that great? Why would they do that? Let's overlook the fact that it's conspiracy. If they wanted to include the Champs they wanted, they wouldn't go through the trouble of concocting an excuse to look at "easy data". We don't know the specifics. However, if they're looking at all Champs available as 5*s and identifying the lowest performing, that means they're looking at all Champs, regardless of what Tier they're in. That's the part people aren't getting. Just because we personally think a particular Champ sucks doesn't mean they are useless. Has nothing to do with being suited for any particular Tier, or easy Fights. The Crystal is going to have a range of Champs that alternate. We can form whatever opinions we want on the Champs in it, but those are the Champs available. The only thing we know is that they're making an effort not to include the ones that perform poorly. Which is reasonable. We can't expect a Crystal full of "God Tier Champs".
Anonymous wrote: » We're not asking for a crystal full of "God tier champs." We're asking for a crystal worth 15k shards. If I go to the grocery store and I want milk, I could spend about half the price more for organic milk. I wouldn't want to spend more on the same milk I could get for less.
BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » It's not about the most effective at all. They're looking at the data and avoiding the least effective based on what they're finding. Which means anything else can be included. People might have an opinion one way or another, but the data shows what it shows. And data can be used to lie, meaning that it shows nothing significant Data doesn't lie. It shows the actual usage of the Champs. When examining the effectiveness of Champs, that's about as significant and impartial as it gets. There is a difference between general concensus on who is good and who is not, and the actual performance data. TL:DR - Just because Top Tier Players think that half the Roster sucks doesn't mean that will reflect in the data. The efficiency of a Champ is more than just one area of the game. I didn’t say data doesn’t lie. But it can be used to lie, for example here And this is just one example, research how to lie with statistics and there’s a huge range of ways kabam could have (emphasis on could have) manipulated their data to conclude that cyclops is amongst the effective champs such as star Lord and gwenpool. They could have just taken easy level fights and because we don’t know the parameters of their data collection, they will conclude that cyclops is effective because he wins 100% of his fights! Isn’t that great? Why would they do that? Let's overlook the fact that it's conspiracy. If they wanted to include the Champs they wanted, they wouldn't go through the trouble of concocting an excuse to look at "easy data". We don't know the specifics. However, if they're looking at all Champs available as 5*s and identifying the lowest performing, that means they're looking at all Champs, regardless of what Tier they're in. That's the part people aren't getting. Just because we personally think a particular Champ sucks doesn't mean they are useless. Has nothing to do with being suited for any particular Tier, or easy Fights. The Crystal is going to have a range of Champs that alternate. We can form whatever opinions we want on the Champs in it, but those are the Champs available. The only thing we know is that they're making an effort not to include the ones that perform poorly. Which is reasonable. We can't expect a Crystal full of "God Tier Champs". It is a fact that if people don’t have as good champions, they won’t do as well. That’s not my opinion, if you have wolverine, star Lord and blade in aq you will do much better on average than if you had Khamalha Khan, spidergwen and Luke cage (excluding beta). If kabam wanted to make more money then they would put champions like that in the pool more than the better ones. You’re just assuming the data was collected that way, unless I missed something. The only thing we know is that Kabam “say” they are making an effort to not include ones that perform poorly. I know we can’t expect a crystal full of God tier champs, but I think we should expect at least a few. This crystal literally has no god tier champs, only trash and a couple of decent champs. It's not that hard to understand. You have 6 Champs that are Featuted, and 18 others that are already in the Basic Crystal. They're not picking and choosing anything, save for the Champs that are found to be performing poorly. Performing poorly means overall. They wouldn't use the Top Tier perspective alone to determine that because you'll find the list of Champs at that level very specific. I'm not assuming anything. You're eluding to the idea that it's possible they're not including any "good" Champs. I'm going on the information provided. We've had one pool revealed. Hardly cause for suspicion. Well you are assuming it. Kabam never said which area they collect data from. Just that they collected data. For all we know it could be two fights, 5* cyclops vs 1* juggernaut, (I’m not saying it is, but that is collecting data) “We are using empirical data based on Champion performance in Alliance Quests and Alliance Wars to decide which Champions will be added to the Crystal.... we are trying to avoid poor performing Champions in these Crystals.” If they only looked at low level war and quest. They can conclude that not very good champions are performing well. For example, a bad champion like Antman will have good data, because he isn’t used in hard fights, because players know he will lose. But he’s used in easy fights. To put that in more understandable terms for you, on my account. Ant man probably has one of the best win rates for my champions. Because I use him to get my streak in arena against 3-30 champions. In aq, I used him for a couple of months on map 2 when I wasn’t as strong. I used him against easy champions. Someone like ghost rider, yeah he’s a much better champion. But I lose much more often with him, because I use him to tackle the hard fights, like act 5, map 6, Aw tier 1-2. Again you are assuming that kabam mean overall when they say performing poorly, you don’t know exactly what they mean therefore it is an assumption. One that mike has chosen to not answer
GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » It's not about the most effective at all. They're looking at the data and avoiding the least effective based on what they're finding. Which means anything else can be included. People might have an opinion one way or another, but the data shows what it shows. And data can be used to lie, meaning that it shows nothing significant Data doesn't lie. It shows the actual usage of the Champs. When examining the effectiveness of Champs, that's about as significant and impartial as it gets. There is a difference between general concensus on who is good and who is not, and the actual performance data. TL:DR - Just because Top Tier Players think that half the Roster sucks doesn't mean that will reflect in the data. The efficiency of a Champ is more than just one area of the game. I didn’t say data doesn’t lie. But it can be used to lie, for example here And this is just one example, research how to lie with statistics and there’s a huge range of ways kabam could have (emphasis on could have) manipulated their data to conclude that cyclops is amongst the effective champs such as star Lord and gwenpool. They could have just taken easy level fights and because we don’t know the parameters of their data collection, they will conclude that cyclops is effective because he wins 100% of his fights! Isn’t that great? Why would they do that? Let's overlook the fact that it's conspiracy. If they wanted to include the Champs they wanted, they wouldn't go through the trouble of concocting an excuse to look at "easy data". We don't know the specifics. However, if they're looking at all Champs available as 5*s and identifying the lowest performing, that means they're looking at all Champs, regardless of what Tier they're in. That's the part people aren't getting. Just because we personally think a particular Champ sucks doesn't mean they are useless. Has nothing to do with being suited for any particular Tier, or easy Fights. The Crystal is going to have a range of Champs that alternate. We can form whatever opinions we want on the Champs in it, but those are the Champs available. The only thing we know is that they're making an effort not to include the ones that perform poorly. Which is reasonable. We can't expect a Crystal full of "God Tier Champs". It is a fact that if people don’t have as good champions, they won’t do as well. That’s not my opinion, if you have wolverine, star Lord and blade in aq you will do much better on average than if you had Khamalha Khan, spidergwen and Luke cage (excluding beta). If kabam wanted to make more money then they would put champions like that in the pool more than the better ones. You’re just assuming the data was collected that way, unless I missed something. The only thing we know is that Kabam “say” they are making an effort to not include ones that perform poorly. I know we can’t expect a crystal full of God tier champs, but I think we should expect at least a few. This crystal literally has no god tier champs, only trash and a couple of decent champs. It's not that hard to understand. You have 6 Champs that are Featuted, and 18 others that are already in the Basic Crystal. They're not picking and choosing anything, save for the Champs that are found to be performing poorly. Performing poorly means overall. They wouldn't use the Top Tier perspective alone to determine that because you'll find the list of Champs at that level very specific. I'm not assuming anything. You're eluding to the idea that it's possible they're not including any "good" Champs. I'm going on the information provided. We've had one pool revealed. Hardly cause for suspicion.
BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » It's not about the most effective at all. They're looking at the data and avoiding the least effective based on what they're finding. Which means anything else can be included. People might have an opinion one way or another, but the data shows what it shows. And data can be used to lie, meaning that it shows nothing significant Data doesn't lie. It shows the actual usage of the Champs. When examining the effectiveness of Champs, that's about as significant and impartial as it gets. There is a difference between general concensus on who is good and who is not, and the actual performance data. TL:DR - Just because Top Tier Players think that half the Roster sucks doesn't mean that will reflect in the data. The efficiency of a Champ is more than just one area of the game. I didn’t say data doesn’t lie. But it can be used to lie, for example here And this is just one example, research how to lie with statistics and there’s a huge range of ways kabam could have (emphasis on could have) manipulated their data to conclude that cyclops is amongst the effective champs such as star Lord and gwenpool. They could have just taken easy level fights and because we don’t know the parameters of their data collection, they will conclude that cyclops is effective because he wins 100% of his fights! Isn’t that great? Why would they do that? Let's overlook the fact that it's conspiracy. If they wanted to include the Champs they wanted, they wouldn't go through the trouble of concocting an excuse to look at "easy data". We don't know the specifics. However, if they're looking at all Champs available as 5*s and identifying the lowest performing, that means they're looking at all Champs, regardless of what Tier they're in. That's the part people aren't getting. Just because we personally think a particular Champ sucks doesn't mean they are useless. Has nothing to do with being suited for any particular Tier, or easy Fights. The Crystal is going to have a range of Champs that alternate. We can form whatever opinions we want on the Champs in it, but those are the Champs available. The only thing we know is that they're making an effort not to include the ones that perform poorly. Which is reasonable. We can't expect a Crystal full of "God Tier Champs". It is a fact that if people don’t have as good champions, they won’t do as well. That’s not my opinion, if you have wolverine, star Lord and blade in aq you will do much better on average than if you had Khamalha Khan, spidergwen and Luke cage (excluding beta). If kabam wanted to make more money then they would put champions like that in the pool more than the better ones. You’re just assuming the data was collected that way, unless I missed something. The only thing we know is that Kabam “say” they are making an effort to not include ones that perform poorly. I know we can’t expect a crystal full of God tier champs, but I think we should expect at least a few. This crystal literally has no god tier champs, only trash and a couple of decent champs. It's not that hard to understand. You have 6 Champs that are Featuted, and 18 others that are already in the Basic Crystal. They're not picking and choosing anything, save for the Champs that are found to be performing poorly. Performing poorly means overall. They wouldn't use the Top Tier perspective alone to determine that because you'll find the list of Champs at that level very specific. I'm not assuming anything. You're eluding to the idea that it's possible they're not including any "good" Champs. I'm going on the information provided. We've had one pool revealed. Hardly cause for suspicion. Well you are assuming it. Kabam never said which area they collect data from. Just that they collected data. For all we know it could be two fights, 5* cyclops vs 1* juggernaut, (I’m not saying it is, but that is collecting data) “We are using empirical data based on Champion performance in Alliance Quests and Alliance Wars to decide which Champions will be added to the Crystal.... we are trying to avoid poor performing Champions in these Crystals.” If they only looked at low level war and quest. They can conclude that not very good champions are performing well. For example, a bad champion like Antman will have good data, because he isn’t used in hard fights, because players know he will lose. But he’s used in easy fights. To put that in more understandable terms for you, on my account. Ant man probably has one of the best win rates for my champions. Because I use him to get my streak in arena against 3-30 champions. In aq, I used him for a couple of months on map 2 when I wasn’t as strong. I used him against easy champions. Someone like ghost rider, yeah he’s a much better champion. But I lose much more often with him, because I use him to tackle the hard fights, like act 5, map 6, Aw tier 1-2. Again you are assuming that kabam mean overall when they say performing poorly, you don’t know exactly what they mean therefore it is an assumption. One that mike has chosen to not answer Empirical, or observational, data. It's not so much of an assumption when you consider that they have to look at all the data to determine which are performing the poorest. If you want to entertain the idea that they examined a couple Fights and isolated those as effective, without examining all others, be my guest. A Champ that isn't used at the Top Tier isn't by default ineffective. That's my bottom line. Wow you used so many words to say absolutely nothing.
GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » It's not about the most effective at all. They're looking at the data and avoiding the least effective based on what they're finding. Which means anything else can be included. People might have an opinion one way or another, but the data shows what it shows. And data can be used to lie, meaning that it shows nothing significant Data doesn't lie. It shows the actual usage of the Champs. When examining the effectiveness of Champs, that's about as significant and impartial as it gets. There is a difference between general concensus on who is good and who is not, and the actual performance data. TL:DR - Just because Top Tier Players think that half the Roster sucks doesn't mean that will reflect in the data. The efficiency of a Champ is more than just one area of the game. I didn’t say data doesn’t lie. But it can be used to lie, for example here And this is just one example, research how to lie with statistics and there’s a huge range of ways kabam could have (emphasis on could have) manipulated their data to conclude that cyclops is amongst the effective champs such as star Lord and gwenpool. They could have just taken easy level fights and because we don’t know the parameters of their data collection, they will conclude that cyclops is effective because he wins 100% of his fights! Isn’t that great? Why would they do that? Let's overlook the fact that it's conspiracy. If they wanted to include the Champs they wanted, they wouldn't go through the trouble of concocting an excuse to look at "easy data". We don't know the specifics. However, if they're looking at all Champs available as 5*s and identifying the lowest performing, that means they're looking at all Champs, regardless of what Tier they're in. That's the part people aren't getting. Just because we personally think a particular Champ sucks doesn't mean they are useless. Has nothing to do with being suited for any particular Tier, or easy Fights. The Crystal is going to have a range of Champs that alternate. We can form whatever opinions we want on the Champs in it, but those are the Champs available. The only thing we know is that they're making an effort not to include the ones that perform poorly. Which is reasonable. We can't expect a Crystal full of "God Tier Champs". It is a fact that if people don’t have as good champions, they won’t do as well. That’s not my opinion, if you have wolverine, star Lord and blade in aq you will do much better on average than if you had Khamalha Khan, spidergwen and Luke cage (excluding beta). If kabam wanted to make more money then they would put champions like that in the pool more than the better ones. You’re just assuming the data was collected that way, unless I missed something. The only thing we know is that Kabam “say” they are making an effort to not include ones that perform poorly. I know we can’t expect a crystal full of God tier champs, but I think we should expect at least a few. This crystal literally has no god tier champs, only trash and a couple of decent champs. It's not that hard to understand. You have 6 Champs that are Featuted, and 18 others that are already in the Basic Crystal. They're not picking and choosing anything, save for the Champs that are found to be performing poorly. Performing poorly means overall. They wouldn't use the Top Tier perspective alone to determine that because you'll find the list of Champs at that level very specific. I'm not assuming anything. You're eluding to the idea that it's possible they're not including any "good" Champs. I'm going on the information provided. We've had one pool revealed. Hardly cause for suspicion. Well you are assuming it. Kabam never said which area they collect data from. Just that they collected data. For all we know it could be two fights, 5* cyclops vs 1* juggernaut, (I’m not saying it is, but that is collecting data) “We are using empirical data based on Champion performance in Alliance Quests and Alliance Wars to decide which Champions will be added to the Crystal.... we are trying to avoid poor performing Champions in these Crystals.” If they only looked at low level war and quest. They can conclude that not very good champions are performing well. For example, a bad champion like Antman will have good data, because he isn’t used in hard fights, because players know he will lose. But he’s used in easy fights. To put that in more understandable terms for you, on my account. Ant man probably has one of the best win rates for my champions. Because I use him to get my streak in arena against 3-30 champions. In aq, I used him for a couple of months on map 2 when I wasn’t as strong. I used him against easy champions. Someone like ghost rider, yeah he’s a much better champion. But I lose much more often with him, because I use him to tackle the hard fights, like act 5, map 6, Aw tier 1-2. Again you are assuming that kabam mean overall when they say performing poorly, you don’t know exactly what they mean therefore it is an assumption. One that mike has chosen to not answer Empirical, or observational, data. It's not so much of an assumption when you consider that they have to look at all the data to determine which are performing the poorest. If you want to entertain the idea that they examined a couple Fights and isolated those as effective, without examining all others, be my guest. A Champ that isn't used at the Top Tier isn't by default ineffective. That's my bottom line.
BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » It's not about the most effective at all. They're looking at the data and avoiding the least effective based on what they're finding. Which means anything else can be included. People might have an opinion one way or another, but the data shows what it shows. And data can be used to lie, meaning that it shows nothing significant Data doesn't lie. It shows the actual usage of the Champs. When examining the effectiveness of Champs, that's about as significant and impartial as it gets. There is a difference between general concensus on who is good and who is not, and the actual performance data. TL:DR - Just because Top Tier Players think that half the Roster sucks doesn't mean that will reflect in the data. The efficiency of a Champ is more than just one area of the game. I didn’t say data doesn’t lie. But it can be used to lie, for example here And this is just one example, research how to lie with statistics and there’s a huge range of ways kabam could have (emphasis on could have) manipulated their data to conclude that cyclops is amongst the effective champs such as star Lord and gwenpool. They could have just taken easy level fights and because we don’t know the parameters of their data collection, they will conclude that cyclops is effective because he wins 100% of his fights! Isn’t that great? Why would they do that? Let's overlook the fact that it's conspiracy. If they wanted to include the Champs they wanted, they wouldn't go through the trouble of concocting an excuse to look at "easy data". We don't know the specifics. However, if they're looking at all Champs available as 5*s and identifying the lowest performing, that means they're looking at all Champs, regardless of what Tier they're in. That's the part people aren't getting. Just because we personally think a particular Champ sucks doesn't mean they are useless. Has nothing to do with being suited for any particular Tier, or easy Fights. The Crystal is going to have a range of Champs that alternate. We can form whatever opinions we want on the Champs in it, but those are the Champs available. The only thing we know is that they're making an effort not to include the ones that perform poorly. Which is reasonable. We can't expect a Crystal full of "God Tier Champs". It is a fact that if people don’t have as good champions, they won’t do as well. That’s not my opinion, if you have wolverine, star Lord and blade in aq you will do much better on average than if you had Khamalha Khan, spidergwen and Luke cage (excluding beta). If kabam wanted to make more money then they would put champions like that in the pool more than the better ones. You’re just assuming the data was collected that way, unless I missed something. The only thing we know is that Kabam “say” they are making an effort to not include ones that perform poorly. I know we can’t expect a crystal full of God tier champs, but I think we should expect at least a few. This crystal literally has no god tier champs, only trash and a couple of decent champs. It's not that hard to understand. You have 6 Champs that are Featuted, and 18 others that are already in the Basic Crystal. They're not picking and choosing anything, save for the Champs that are found to be performing poorly. Performing poorly means overall. They wouldn't use the Top Tier perspective alone to determine that because you'll find the list of Champs at that level very specific. I'm not assuming anything. You're eluding to the idea that it's possible they're not including any "good" Champs. I'm going on the information provided. We've had one pool revealed. Hardly cause for suspicion. Well you are assuming it. Kabam never said which area they collect data from. Just that they collected data. For all we know it could be two fights, 5* cyclops vs 1* juggernaut, (I’m not saying it is, but that is collecting data) “We are using empirical data based on Champion performance in Alliance Quests and Alliance Wars to decide which Champions will be added to the Crystal.... we are trying to avoid poor performing Champions in these Crystals.” If they only looked at low level war and quest. They can conclude that not very good champions are performing well. For example, a bad champion like Antman will have good data, because he isn’t used in hard fights, because players know he will lose. But he’s used in easy fights. To put that in more understandable terms for you, on my account. Ant man probably has one of the best win rates for my champions. Because I use him to get my streak in arena against 3-30 champions. In aq, I used him for a couple of months on map 2 when I wasn’t as strong. I used him against easy champions. Someone like ghost rider, yeah he’s a much better champion. But I lose much more often with him, because I use him to tackle the hard fights, like act 5, map 6, Aw tier 1-2. Again you are assuming that kabam mean overall when they say performing poorly, you don’t know exactly what they mean therefore it is an assumption. One that mike has chosen to not answer Empirical, or observational, data. It's not so much of an assumption when you consider that they have to look at all the data to determine which are performing the poorest. If you want to entertain the idea that they examined a couple Fights and isolated those as effective, without examining all others, be my guest. A Champ that isn't used at the Top Tier isn't by default ineffective. That's my bottom line. Wow you used so many words to say absolutely nothing. So when you present something and I respond with my points, that's saying nothing? Interesting way to have a discussion. Seems selective, if you ask me. I recognise your (misguided) points. But you are a broken record repeating the same viewpoints over and over and over.
GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » BitterSteel wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » It's not about the most effective at all. They're looking at the data and avoiding the least effective based on what they're finding. Which means anything else can be included. People might have an opinion one way or another, but the data shows what it shows. And data can be used to lie, meaning that it shows nothing significant Data doesn't lie. It shows the actual usage of the Champs. When examining the effectiveness of Champs, that's about as significant and impartial as it gets. There is a difference between general concensus on who is good and who is not, and the actual performance data. TL:DR - Just because Top Tier Players think that half the Roster sucks doesn't mean that will reflect in the data. The efficiency of a Champ is more than just one area of the game. I didn’t say data doesn’t lie. But it can be used to lie, for example here And this is just one example, research how to lie with statistics and there’s a huge range of ways kabam could have (emphasis on could have) manipulated their data to conclude that cyclops is amongst the effective champs such as star Lord and gwenpool. They could have just taken easy level fights and because we don’t know the parameters of their data collection, they will conclude that cyclops is effective because he wins 100% of his fights! Isn’t that great? Why would they do that? Let's overlook the fact that it's conspiracy. If they wanted to include the Champs they wanted, they wouldn't go through the trouble of concocting an excuse to look at "easy data". We don't know the specifics. However, if they're looking at all Champs available as 5*s and identifying the lowest performing, that means they're looking at all Champs, regardless of what Tier they're in. That's the part people aren't getting. Just because we personally think a particular Champ sucks doesn't mean they are useless. Has nothing to do with being suited for any particular Tier, or easy Fights. The Crystal is going to have a range of Champs that alternate. We can form whatever opinions we want on the Champs in it, but those are the Champs available. The only thing we know is that they're making an effort not to include the ones that perform poorly. Which is reasonable. We can't expect a Crystal full of "God Tier Champs". It is a fact that if people don’t have as good champions, they won’t do as well. That’s not my opinion, if you have wolverine, star Lord and blade in aq you will do much better on average than if you had Khamalha Khan, spidergwen and Luke cage (excluding beta). If kabam wanted to make more money then they would put champions like that in the pool more than the better ones. You’re just assuming the data was collected that way, unless I missed something. The only thing we know is that Kabam “say” they are making an effort to not include ones that perform poorly. I know we can’t expect a crystal full of God tier champs, but I think we should expect at least a few. This crystal literally has no god tier champs, only trash and a couple of decent champs. It's not that hard to understand. You have 6 Champs that are Featuted, and 18 others that are already in the Basic Crystal. They're not picking and choosing anything, save for the Champs that are found to be performing poorly. Performing poorly means overall. They wouldn't use the Top Tier perspective alone to determine that because you'll find the list of Champs at that level very specific. I'm not assuming anything. You're eluding to the idea that it's possible they're not including any "good" Champs. I'm going on the information provided. We've had one pool revealed. Hardly cause for suspicion. Well you are assuming it. Kabam never said which area they collect data from. Just that they collected data. For all we know it could be two fights, 5* cyclops vs 1* juggernaut, (I’m not saying it is, but that is collecting data) “We are using empirical data based on Champion performance in Alliance Quests and Alliance Wars to decide which Champions will be added to the Crystal.... we are trying to avoid poor performing Champions in these Crystals.” If they only looked at low level war and quest. They can conclude that not very good champions are performing well. For example, a bad champion like Antman will have good data, because he isn’t used in hard fights, because players know he will lose. But he’s used in easy fights. To put that in more understandable terms for you, on my account. Ant man probably has one of the best win rates for my champions. Because I use him to get my streak in arena against 3-30 champions. In aq, I used him for a couple of months on map 2 when I wasn’t as strong. I used him against easy champions. Someone like ghost rider, yeah he’s a much better champion. But I lose much more often with him, because I use him to tackle the hard fights, like act 5, map 6, Aw tier 1-2. Again you are assuming that kabam mean overall when they say performing poorly, you don’t know exactly what they mean therefore it is an assumption. One that mike has chosen to not answer Empirical, or observational, data. It's not so much of an assumption when you consider that they have to look at all the data to determine which are performing the poorest. If you want to entertain the idea that they examined a couple Fights and isolated those as effective, without examining all others, be my guest. A Champ that isn't used at the Top Tier isn't by default ineffective. That's my bottom line. Wow you used so many words to say absolutely nothing. So when you present something and I respond with my points, that's saying nothing? Interesting way to have a discussion. Seems selective, if you ask me.
Kabam Miike wrote: » Notvasq wrote: » How will those 18 champions be chosed? Will you choose, according to y'all standard, few *bad* pull, like a lottery ticket where it is a *better chance next time*. Because let's be honest, you can't really put in that crystal the top 18 you can think of everytime. But you guys can decide to put a few of those *bad* champs in it. Or along with that new crystal, are you guys planning to try to balance the tier list overall? We are using empirical data based on Champion performance in Alliance Quests and Alliance Wars to decide which Champions will be added to the Crystal. This means that while Player perception of the Champions may not always align, we are trying to avoid poor performing Champions in these Crystals.
Notvasq wrote: » How will those 18 champions be chosed? Will you choose, according to y'all standard, few *bad* pull, like a lottery ticket where it is a *better chance next time*. Because let's be honest, you can't really put in that crystal the top 18 you can think of everytime. But you guys can decide to put a few of those *bad* champs in it. Or along with that new crystal, are you guys planning to try to balance the tier list overall?
