Interesting graph tweeted by Higby

Hear hear! I say we make a mass callout to SOE to release all this information. lol could you imagine the forums buzzing after that? there would be more theories than we could count and all of the evidence to prove everything.

TBH i would make the claim that even if all the infantry killing was taking place in the biodome, and tech plant ( i think amp station is pretty air friendly) it would still prove that infantry cannot complain about always being killed by vehicles. the complaint would then be the lack of defenses, or balance against vehicles, but not an outright "vehicles are killing infantry gameplay". thats the only thing i want people to understand. infantry gameplay is alive weather it be in a biodome, or in the small bases that are totally exposed. IMO it makes sense for vehicles to shut down infantry gameplay in areas that cater to vehicles, and i think that most of the forum complaints illude that the whole game is like this. this graph disproves that claim, in that you are much more likley to be killed from infantry, than from a vehicle, regardless of where it occurs. if your an infantry guy, you shouldnt have a hard time finding other infantry and killing them. noone else does.

it also puts to rest the idea that vehicles are cert farming. your obviously much better off on foot, finding the meatgrinder.

That's true enough, but without knowing where or when or how-it's a meaningless conclusion. I don't stand on a hill playing golf in a thunderstorm, even though I know I have a 1 in 140000000 chance of being struck this year. (50 people per year die, on 7 billion people approx...lol most of them probably playing golf on a hill ). If you want to draw that conclusion, hell, that's a good, sportsmanlike attitude. For what it's worth, I applaud you. I just refuse to draw conclusions from it without a bigger data set...just the kind of person I am. Too damn analytical for my own good.

right, which is why the notion of every clown sporting an HA outfit should not be a viable threat to vehicles. it should take many infantry to kill a single vehicle given the disproportionate number.

And where are your numbers? A simple fact is it? The reality is WE SIMPLY DO NOT KNOW. Gut feeling and observation depend on where you look.

But guys, the numbers are not right!

They need to show the graphs but AT NIGHT TIME, see? at night time all vehicles will show alot more kills.

You don't need a gut feeling to know that there are more infantry than there are vehicles in a place. Go to any major fight and take a look around. Or do you seriously think there are more vehicles than infantry?

This is simple BS. It would be true only if number of vehicles = number of infantries. If there are 3 times more infantries then you are even. If there are 6 times more infantries then he is getting opportunities to kill 2 times as much as you can. And so on.

I don't think the data is bogus, but I understand what you're saying. One stat needs to be compared to all stats to be really understood.

I do think this is proof that the infantry game is very strong- contrary to a lot that we hear on these forums.

Yes. Anti-whine, my brother.

I look for open battle.

And find it everytime.

I want to see all the people who ask for vehicle nerfs post in here, Yup, that is how much you know of this game, can we make a suggestion to have them squelched next time they make a post about it now?

Was about to say something like that myself. How about a graph of # of vehicles destroyed vs # of infantry deaths. Sure as hell wouldn't be a 1/2 and 3/4 graph that's for sure.

There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics

I just hope they keep listening to people like you guys, it is actually fun to see this game struggle to become better while a few try to destroy it completely, it just shows the true power of the word on the internet.

The question then becomes... Where is a graph displaying were those infantry kills originated. i'll put 10-1 down that 90% of them happend in a Bio Lab. The 1 and only safe refuge from liberators and A2G equipped SF's.

*edit*

but in fairness.... its not the Vehicles Killing infantry that is the problem... its the fact that the infantry cannot FIGHT anywhere, BUT in a bio-lab, without getting slaughtered by Libs/HE-quiped Tanks/A2G-equiped SF's. Either out in the open, or penned up inside the spawn out-houses.

There reason the numbers on that graph are down are twofold.

1. Infantry flat refuse to even 'try' to fight for outposts/bases anymore due to the spawn-outhouse problem, we simply leave the fight the instant the outhouse is encircled (whats the point in staying?.. you'll never get out of it when its being constantly shelled by vehicles that 1-shot kill you.. yet takes 3+ shots from the infantry to kill even 1 of the campers.)

2. Infantry have started to fight ONLY in bio-labs, because that is the 1 place vehicles cannot go.. and even though it too suffers from a spawn-outhouse.. at least you have a 'chance' of fighting 'out' of the outhouse against Infantry... were you have 0 against vehicles/aircraft.

You said facts. I asked for proof, you have none. Don't treat me like an idiot because you can't back your argument with anything other than your word. Without hard population figures, it's just a guess. Even with population figures, it'd be conjecture. All I'm questioning is the quality of evidence that you bring to the table. Witness testimony is considered some of the weakest proof in court...barely above hearsay. Your game experience is subjective, and only population figures can be truly objective.

Not proof as such, but it helps us to look at what questions we need to ask. A step in the right direction, perhaps?

The numbers are right. The question you're asking of the graph is wrong.

It doesn't disprove that vehicles are OP either. Personal bias, my friend. It'll getcha. The data simply is. It doesn't support either argument. You're more the fool for trying to make the data show things it doesn't. Might as well argue the graph shows empirical proof of the Higgs boson.

No, statistically speaking, he's right. He's drawn the only conclusion you can from that data. The problem is that it's also contextless. Without context, you can't appropriately apply probability. The fact that I'm incredibly unlikely to be attacked by a shark has no application should I swim into a feeding frenzy with raw meat stapled all over me.

I don't even know what this graph is supposed to show.

That he would even post this just goes to show that not only does he not understand his own game in the slightest, but that he's flat out trying to redirect people away from caring about the imbalance issues that it undeniably has.

It proves a vehicle, costing resources is working as intended, it proves a good player who knows how to use such vehicle will absolutely farm you all the way to your warpgate, it proves that 100% of people claiming they were dying too much to vehicles are just a minority of newbs who cannot counter vehicles correctly or use any common sense.

It also proves the path this game has chosen, biolab or no biolab, infantry kills happen alot more than vehicles, to call the game vehicleside is just wrong, it boils my blood to see such statistics, so many players just leaving because they felt it was right to appease the newbs and cries on the forums.

My bigger question, knowing of such numbers, why did they decide to start nerfing vehicles? specially air.

And you answer goes along the lines of:

It is because they were overpowered, so knowing how to play is overpowered now? because a new player will not pull those kill farms, not in at least a few months of having practiced.

Great to know you guys still have a face to come talk about numbers now.

I will never let this thread die, the URL should be tatooed in each and everyone of your foreheads.

This.