Your list is way too long for most ppl to care about it and has many small, unimportant complaints. Cut it down to the stuff that people actually care about.
I would argue more, but some people (*cough* *cough* he is on this topic) get annoyed when I say 249 is the best build ever, 250 destroyed the game, and the new build still isn't good enough (though it was good enough to get me playing again).
He wasted time writing this post after being angry because he lost several games as alien.
Besides, isn't the ns2stats showing that win rate is still alien-friendly?
Currently NS2 stats shows a 57% winrate for the aliens.
anywhere between 41-59 percent win rate isn't all that horrible and is good enough (i assume that's what you were saying). Perfect balance would be between 45-55 but lets not overwork the devs.
He wasted time writing this post after being angry because he lost several games as alien.
Besides, isn't the ns2stats showing that win rate is still alien-friendly?
Currently NS2 stats shows a 57% winrate for the aliens.
anywhere between 41-59 percent win rate isn't all that horrible and is good enough (i assume that's what you were saying). Perfect balance would be between 45-55 but lets not overwork the devs.
Yep, I'm more than happy with 57% considering it has been much, much worse. And of course, a 50/50 winrate isn't always ideal. The closest we've ever gotten to 50/50 was build 240, which I think most who were playing at the time would agree featured the absolute worst gameplay since at least the official release.
Also, it probably is closer to 55-45 if you remove the games that end in <5 minutes, which are heavily alien-favored
Ok, let's get a few things straight here so I have a better understanding. If you play competetively, let me know if something is wrong.
This is a game here where 1-2 people who are significantly better than everyone else in a pub server can and will carry a team to victory.
This game was originally balanced for playing in 6v6.
There has been a large increase of new players since build 255.
With all of these being true, why the hell are people quoting the stats off a site that takes into account all the servers with 16+ people? Even with filters set for competetive to include only 256 and 255 I'm only seeing 4 rounds that were played. This seems totally insane to use these stats like they are some tell all know all form of knowledge when it really seems like they're totally useless.
Looking further at the number of rounds in pub play the sample size is very small. Less than 1500? Pathetic at best and with the factors of the above 3 points the sample size needs to be much larger to be able to better identify outliers.
You only need about 30 points of data to reduce the margin of error below 5%, obviously more would be better but at 1500 data points you can absolutely draw conclusions.
As for comp play and win rate in general again we need to look at what the goal is. If the goal is 50% win rate so far the data supports this is the most balanced build ever over all. However there are some internal imbalances within that, in pubs (pretty much all pubs from unskilled 20+ man servers all the way up to 16 or less player pseudo comp pubs) the marines definitely have the upper hand early game, skulks are really weak right now and base skulk v base marine is pretty imbalanced. The lerks hit early and that shifts, and through early-mid game aliens have the upper hand. Then from that point it's more about res than mechanic balance.
Plus we barely ever even have more than once comp season before a ton of the game is changed again, so comp play can't even weigh in on the discussion really, that's an area where we really don't have the data to make a conclusion.
You only need about 30 points of data to reduce the margin of error below 5%, obviously more would be better but at 1500 data points you can absolutely draw conclusions.
When half of the data on the site is for rounds lasting 15 minutes or quicker (401 for 10-15, 243 for < 10, and 137 for 0-5) there seems to be a lot of outliers and therfore needs a much larger sample. 30 points of data for comp play would definately be plenty, but as I said earlier, it only shows 4 with 3 of them being in the <10 min bracket. Rounds that last 15 minutes or less is a strong indicator that a team was just simply stomped and had much better players on the other team. Not very useful in my opinion.
Using the site to get a general feel isn't a bad idea, but using it as proof of balance or unbalance as it stands now is just plain wrong.
Comments
I would argue more, but some people (*cough* *cough* he is on this topic) get annoyed when I say 249 is the best build ever, 250 destroyed the game, and the new build still isn't good enough (though it was good enough to get me playing again).
anywhere between 41-59 percent win rate isn't all that horrible and is good enough (i assume that's what you were saying). Perfect balance would be between 45-55 but lets not overwork the devs.
Also, it probably is closer to 55-45 if you remove the games that end in <5 minutes, which are heavily alien-favored
This is a game here where 1-2 people who are significantly better than everyone else in a pub server can and will carry a team to victory.
This game was originally balanced for playing in 6v6.
There has been a large increase of new players since build 255.
With all of these being true, why the hell are people quoting the stats off a site that takes into account all the servers with 16+ people? Even with filters set for competetive to include only 256 and 255 I'm only seeing 4 rounds that were played. This seems totally insane to use these stats like they are some tell all know all form of knowledge when it really seems like they're totally useless.
Looking further at the number of rounds in pub play the sample size is very small. Less than 1500? Pathetic at best and with the factors of the above 3 points the sample size needs to be much larger to be able to better identify outliers.
As for comp play and win rate in general again we need to look at what the goal is. If the goal is 50% win rate so far the data supports this is the most balanced build ever over all. However there are some internal imbalances within that, in pubs (pretty much all pubs from unskilled 20+ man servers all the way up to 16 or less player pseudo comp pubs) the marines definitely have the upper hand early game, skulks are really weak right now and base skulk v base marine is pretty imbalanced. The lerks hit early and that shifts, and through early-mid game aliens have the upper hand. Then from that point it's more about res than mechanic balance.
Plus we barely ever even have more than once comp season before a ton of the game is changed again, so comp play can't even weigh in on the discussion really, that's an area where we really don't have the data to make a conclusion.
When half of the data on the site is for rounds lasting 15 minutes or quicker (401 for 10-15, 243 for < 10, and 137 for 0-5) there seems to be a lot of outliers and therfore needs a much larger sample. 30 points of data for comp play would definately be plenty, but as I said earlier, it only shows 4 with 3 of them being in the <10 min bracket. Rounds that last 15 minutes or less is a strong indicator that a team was just simply stomped and had much better players on the other team. Not very useful in my opinion.
Using the site to get a general feel isn't a bad idea, but using it as proof of balance or unbalance as it stands now is just plain wrong.