Stats stats stats and stats ! NC hardmode version 2

If you want anecdotal information there are plenty of places to find that on the forums. Also in bible school.

Pretty much this^^. They give us a trait as in the 200 damage ACX-11 then hit it with every negative trait they can until it cannot perform its role. It's like they gave us high damage weapons then got mad at us for using them.

What was anecdotal about that? The point was that the NC has a higher skill floor but equal skill ceiling, so good players, recognizing this, would choose the other factions rather than having to learn to play NC.

We can see pretty easily if this theory is supported by the statistics, weapon KPU has been divided up by BR quarters by Oracle / Maradine. If true, then low BRs on VS and TR should be higher than NC, correct?

First off my Source was in an earlier post.

Second, that is the entire point. KPU tells you absolutely nothing about how good a gun is. The spread ("variance") in identical weapons only further proves the point. Statistically identical guns NS-X and NS-X-P perform vastly different. If KPU was an valid metric on balance they would be almost identical, because the guns are functionally identical, only the skin is different.

To go math nerd, you can prove that KPU is not a function of the stats of a gun.

Because in Math If A=B, then Function(A) = Function(B). Given that we are dealing with people we would expect perhaps not be exact equality, but statistically insignificant differences. But we don't see that. We see differences up to 25+% off.

This means mathematically you can prove that KPU is not a function of the weapons stats. Therefore using KPU can tell you nothing about the "balance" of the guns.

Think about it logically for a second and it becomes obvious.

If I use 3 guns in an hour and get 15 kills with each I have 15 KPU for guns A, B and C. If I use one gun (D) for an hour, get 20 kills I have 20KPU for that gun. Yet I was doing much better with guns A, B and C.

KPU tells you usage, not even as a percentage of time, but as a percentage of kills.

Well, because there is no evidence to support it for one.

I'm not necessarily saying it is a bad theory, I'm just saying that it is anecdotal. Your previous post was claiming that argument was somehow more sound than actual evidence that shows a consistent pattern across ES weapons that does not exist in weapons that are carbon copies among the factions.

Suffice to say, this very thread actually contains contradictory evidence to that hypothesis in that weapons that are carbon copies across factions show that the NC is doing just fine (in terms of skill) in that they typically score just as high as the other factions (if not higher) and all the faction carbon copy weapons appear to be well within or very close to within-weapon variance over time.

What that means is that this is solid evidence that contradicts the "L2P" argument that NC under performs because they have worse players (or, to put it like the other post, NC has worst players because all the good players could tell that the weapons were under performing). There is no evidence of this effect- those who play NC do just as well as the other factions when it comes to weapons that are more or less equal across factions. The only places where the NC fall behind to any appreciable degree are those weapons that display the distinctive NC traits.

Hence, while it may seem logical that more good players would leave NC because NC weapons suck- there is no evidence that this is happening. Moreover, if you think a little more deeply, you will realize that the argument being made in that thread is just another L2P argument- only it is placed in a cute little wrapper that says "well, you only need to learn to play because people who learned to play learned that NC weapons are terrible and moved on". Well, 1) there is sound evidence to the contrary and 2) this is still trying to conclude that NC is doing poorly because the NC player base is composed of worse players. Whether the players are worse because they like banjo music or worse because all the good ones left because the weapons are terrible is irrelevant if your argument is that NC have worse players. Again, this is irrelevant because we have perfectly valid evidence to the contrary.

This is why I said if you prefer that other kind of argument- the one based purely upon anecdote and speculation- then this thread is not for you.

One weapon performs differently by a smaller margin than within-weapon variance across days so the metric must be completely worthless.

Now you have to explain why all the other weapons that are carbon copies perform so damn similar if the metric is random.

Moreover, as I said before, the users of the -P variant are not the users of the other variant almost by definition and those who use the -P variant went out of their way to get a special version of the gun.

I would bet the people who use the -P variant (just like all the other variants like the FB variants that out do their counterparts as well) spend more time in game than the comparison group. I would bet, in fact, that every "special" version gun (i.e. the gold versions, the FB versions, etc) all tend to out perform the regular version counterparts precise for this reason.

If ths s still relevant. Can remake this, if you need all the info, sure. Just in levels of reason, I'm only using this, cause it has average vehicle kph (vkph) in stats counted.
All these are AP guns P2-120 AP, Supernova FPC and Titan-150 AP

Assuming 20,000 players a sample of 721 gives a < 4% Margin of Error.

Assuming ~2500 Players (NS15 users) gives a < 3% Margin of Error.

The difference was 24%.

24%- (3% *2) = 18%.
24%+(3% *2) = 33%

Identical guns show between an 18% and 33% difference using KPU.

You are interpreting KPU as a balance metric because it backs up your view point. Despite me proving to you that it is completely useless as a balance metric. Multiple times now.

It is borderline trolling to come into new threads and hijack them with old ideas that have been repeatedly debunked.

These are fascinating statistics.

They show the opposite of what is traditionally believed.

The Variance (StdDev??) is greatest for TR, and least for NC. With VS being in the middle.

You can interpret this as TR either having a larger skill range, or in the case of AP weapons TR having the highest skill floor/cap.

Dude, you haven't 'debunked' jack or even shown that others have proven otherwise, where's the link to someone who clearly has the chops to read that the number of uniques in the table for the weapon on Oracle is the total number of people, its not a freakin sample of the total in any other case than the -P NS variants because those are just the same exact stats with a different coat of paint as NS weapon in the same category. There is no frakin assuming going on.

Still these stats ain't that good. You cannot search weapon performance in certain period of time. But it's only thing after Cupboy, that offers vkph stats.
However, something is amiss, if Titan-150 AP needs it's best averages to compare with normal averages of P2-120 AP. Difference of Titan and Supernova looks more in line.


BTW Magriders bottom side is totally immune to damage (I guess is goes to all other tanks too.). I had 3 shells into vertically standing Mag yesterday, that I flipped with my Van dropping on it, and wasted 4 shells for no damage.

That's not what I mean, I mean it is very unreliable way of determining game balance, as you could very well be the exception rather than the rule(or maybe I am, or that person over there). That's what I mean when saying personal experience isn't a good way of talking about game balance.

I also think my experience is good enough, the question is, do others who does not share the same impression of the game consider this to be true? That, in a nutshell, is my point when I'm saying personal experience is just that, personal, and thereby subjective, rather than objectively true in terms of the game as a whole. So I am not questioning your experience, because I doubt you're being insincere, it is just that other players might not share your view and experience.

NC MAX is not that bad guys... You gotta stop saying this ! I started playing it 2 weeks ago (2x Grinder, ext mag, Aegis + Kinetik) and I quite easily manage to get 20 kills in a row.

Yes it is VERY situational
Yes above 10m AI weapons are very hard to use (no, slugs are not the solution... any conventional infantry class performs much better than NC MAX Grinder + slugs)
Yes the weapons in general are not versatile at all
Yes the AV weapons are a joke
Yes it is way inferior to VS ZOE (TR MAXes are not that OP beside fractures)

But no, it is not "totally useless" as some of you suggest here... It is still a very powerful asset at defending or enforcing in CQB

I have been playing since launch, and have nearly every NC infantry weapon, most of them fully certed (flashlights and all).

The oracle of death numbers are pretty interesting but with or without data this is just one big hot button topic.

Infantry Guns:

Until the flinch nerf, you were best off using GD-7F on LA and Engi, and a Carnage or GD22 on the medic, and either a certed EM6 or SAW on a heavy.

Then they decided to nerf the foregrips, which I feel have unfairly hurt the NC weapons the most. We were benefitting the most but it was keeping things more balanced for us, and we have lost that.

I used to use the Reaper quite a bit on my medic. However, the current version of the Reaper and ACX-11 are nearly useless, any target at range requires single shot firing, before you could pull of reasonably 2 and 3 shot bursts with it at range with respectable results.

Foregrips are nearly useless for NC guns now, and you are because we are pushed into using ADS to fire, the equip time penalty makes our weapons even more inferior to use. You are better off slapping the best laser you can on all your guns instead, and that goes even for the SAW.

MAX:

Not worth pulling for any reason whatsoever. I have max kinetic, maxed regen, nearly maxed shield. Also all the shotguns , magazine upgrades for most of them, slugs for mattocks, bursters, even have auraxium medal with both falcons (mostly before the silly nerf).

For AI (in situations you would want to play a MAX) you are better as playing anything other than an infiltrator.
For AV work you should have pulled a vanguard, or deployed an AV turret somewhere.
For AA work you should just pull a skyguard or load up a Hawk or Annihilator on a heavy.

The shield coverage is way too small, and has a pretty serious backbreaking bug which is pretty common: switching to the shield too fast after starting a reload cycle can get you desynced and the server will refuse your ability to fire until you reload a second time.


Tanks:

This is one area the oracle of death is useless. The spineless TR and VS bail on their vehicles so much, I can't even begin to imagine how much XP I would be getting on the nights I crack 60k/hr if they sat in their tanks and fought to the end. Also the number of 1/2 prowlers is just mind boggling.

Vanguard HE is a joke, it needs a buff. You will get more infantry kills with the AP cannon, and not to mention you would have more actual combat effectiveness spawning TWO HE or HEAT lightnings instead. This is just broken. Which leads to the next point: As NC there is only one correct build for a vanguard, which is pretty lame if you want all the other guns or upgrades to be useful:

• TitanAP, Lots of Ammo (tier 7 is enough), Max Reload Speed (DPS)
• Enforcer, Lots of Ammo (tier 7 is enough), Max Reload Speed (DPS)
• Max Shield
• Max Stealth (the average player situational awareness is only slightly better than that of a rock)
• Max Rival (for dealing with Vulcan harrassers and magriders that burn over you, and you get to do powerslides)

Walker? Ranger? Kobalt? Basilisk? Enforcer Modified? None of these are good on a Tank, and none of them are good on a Harraser.

The only other contender is the halberd but the reticle is rather poor, and the enforcer has the best dps and kills infantry well enough its hard to recommend it over the enforcer.

I run with a consistent gunner and we drive around a lot as a 2 man wrecking crew. I would prefer to be flying a liberator since FLYING IS ACTUALLY FUN (*) but that part of the game has also become extremely lame i.e. not much reward for the effort and risk. (*dealing with annihilator/striker and other dalton libs is just ridiculous).

Yep and the longer it goes on the worse it will get.

Certainly if a faction gets mullered day after day for months on one server it's going to lose cohesion and morale......... but when the same faction gets mullered (and/or underperforms) on every server....... it's game balance (which then leads to losing which leads to all that).

No one says it is "totally useless", just that it is equal with TR and VS AI MAXs at 0-5m and much worse at 5m and beyond.

People basing any argument of Maradine's numbers are bad and should feel bad. Doubly so if you're ignoring KPU, the one valid metric Maradine brings to the table.

You are free to provide better numbers, these are still better than overidealised equations based on theoretical stats.
Of course everybody here just twists the numbers to confirm his personal bias, this is forumside after all

My point was that we are to have more damage but only as a close range fighter. But we have zero advantages to be able to get in close or to stay close to the enemy to utilize that ability. Which is why i was curious why it was never brought up that NC needs to have a higher HP to be able to get in close and to stay in close to be able to have the greater damage be useful.