Alot of the problem, in my opinion, comes from people not knowing how to disengage. A fight for one node turns into us chasing around a group of adders or mael for the duration of three nodes. If you join the horde, youre part of the problem, if you dont, youre sitting with like three other people. Ive said it in game, imo, its better to do stupid things together, than do smart things by yourself, but sometimes this back and fourth for 10 minutes costs us the game.
To all the flames on primal datacenter...
Printable View
-
10-09-2015, 06:31 PMGillBates
-
10-10-2015, 01:09 AMBlubbersYou can get some useful, although slightly biased, information out of the standings if you analyze it properly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Februs
See my analysis here for Aether a few months ago for my methodology: http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...=1#post3215327
You have to sort by number of matches, not wins or win rate which will be strongly biased toward pre-made groups. You also need to calc the total number of wins & losses so that you weight players with more games more heavily. Last time I did this analysis it only required a small adjustment and gave reasonable looking win-rates. -
10-10-2015, 02:31 AMKurogaea45-50 in one week. Flames do get in there matches fast. btw, 10% win ratio. :/Quote:
Originally Posted by Farrell
Correction: week and a half. -
10-10-2015, 03:18 AMKurogaeaI never said anything about what GC is worst exactly by those standings. The standings themselves can give you a clear idea of what is going on with the GCs in the PvP servers. Btw your example is pretty much what I typed a while ago (more matches and victories), so instead of saying, "This doesn't prove anything", then come with a better solution. It was just to give others something to look at to have a better understandng of what I meant, not an answer to whats the best GC. In fact, premades aren't even a factor. Any GC can have a premade and even then players can still lose, strategies be damned. You can be the best commander out there, but your likely to be wrong, or right. 50-50. Same for the other 2 teams against you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Februs
-
10-10-2015, 03:20 AMKurogaea
So as I said before, Maelstrom wins more, but plays less matches. Adders win less than Maelstrom, but plays more than them Maelstom. Flames have a less win ratio overall, but have more matches than both GCs. (Primal Server)
And I'm not doing a table for this, if I need to make one just so you can acknowledge my point then do it yourself. Shutting ideas down and calling them pointless, got anything better? -
10-10-2015, 04:59 AMFebrusWhy, hey there Bates.Quote:
Originally Posted by GillBates
I agree. Most of the most horrific losses I've seen caused by our own actions have been because of the Flames inability to break from combat when they need to. Actually, an extension of that is the overall slow response time. I've seen some teams respond very snappily to commands and call outs, get to the target asap, and have the upper hand, but teams that are slower to respond, or hesitate before moving, tend to cost the team.
It kind of follows what you said about doing stupid things together rather than smart things alone. The same thing goes for having a responsive team. It's important to make good calls, obviously, but it is almost more important to have the entire team commit to those calls and move as a team in a quick manner. If half the team is fast and the other half slow, you get divided and destroyed. -
10-10-2015, 05:09 AMFebrusThat's true, but I think people underestimate how skewed the results are. To the best of my knowledge, there is no way whatsoever to account for overlapping matches between players in the match tab. So, for all we know, the actual number of matches played are substantially lower than the calculated number. That by itself has a HUGE effect on the outcome of the average.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blubbers
You're numbers are by far the closest I've seen to being accurate, partially because you at least tried to account for the margin of error, but there's still no way to completely tell with certainty the actual GC standings. The only thing we can be 100% certain about is our personal standings/performance, and people are dramatically underestimating the value of that information.
The fact is that there are some players who consistently score a certain win rate (which is why I singled out that tab in my example). I, myself, usually score around 40% almost every week, regardless of the number of matches I play (usually around 40-50 a week). Yet there are other players who are consistently scoring lower and pointing the finger at their GC or being ganked by other GC's as the reason. I don't think that's the right way of looking at it. If someone has a lower win rate than the top players in the standings, they should be asking themselves what they're doing differently, not instantly blaming their GC with biased data that somehow explains it away as being typical of their performance. -
10-10-2015, 05:43 AMFebrusFirst off, you seem to be still following SE's imposed stupidity of the 1000 character count for typed Forum messages. So, to help you out, I advise using the "Edit" function to get around this. It seems a shame to have you type two messages to finish off such a small bit of text when you could just Edit your first message to add in the stuff SE wouldn't let you type the first time. It's a dumb system, but until SE gets their heads out of their butts, we're stuck with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurogaea
Secondly, Pre-mades actually do make a huge difference both to personal performance as well as GC performance. In fact, Pre-made parties are one of the reasons that GC comparison results get so skewed. Large groups that que together share the same win rates and match counters, but it's impossible to distinguish which matches they played solo and which matches they ran together. So, they contribute to data in the standings that account for a huge margin of error. I didn't mention Pre-mades in my comment, so I'm not really sure where you were going with this, but I can assure you that Pre-made parties are a huge factor in that they make an actual comparison between the 3 Gc's all that much harder to accurately qualify.
Also, I didn't lay out the numbers to say that you were wrong. You're actually right in regards to your que assessment: Mael has the most players congesting their ques, so, in total, they have the lowest match rate but the highest win rate (due to a bigger sample pool). Flames have the highest number of matches but lowest win rate (given they have the least players and are most easily swayed by early week casual ques), and Adders fall somewhere in the middle. The thing is, and my point, was that none of this really matters in regards to personal performance, and personal performance is what these values are supposed to be reflecting.
If you want a solution to a poor win rate than you have to look at your own performance rather than laying the blame at the feet of your GC. This may, perhaps, not refer to you personally, but it happens a lot on the forums. We constantly hear "oh, my win rate is crap because I'm in such and such GC." That's BS. Your GC has nothing to do with it. The quality of match, and the quality you bring to the match, is what makes the difference.
This is where we're gonna have to agree to disagree, because your seem to discount effort in regards to rewards. You state that "you might be the best commander out there, but you're likely to be wrong, or right. 50-50." You're half right. Any decision a commander makes is either right or wrong. There's only two outcomes. However, you are dead wrong to assume that the outcome is 50-50. A good commander does not guess. They calculate. There is a reason that, in the standings, some players are consistently scoring a high win % and why some players are consistently scoring lower, and it has a lot to do with the level of skill brought to the match.The three Adders players who were in the sample pool can probably attest to this first hand. Considering the majority of the Adders player base were not even represented in the above 50% win rate pool, those 3 players have to be doing something differently than the rest. Seeing as how winning is a team effort is seize, its a safe bet that the leadership they, or someone else, is bringing to the matches they are participating in is above the average.
The point is that the only data that standings can accurately give us is how we personally stack up compared to other members in our own GC. You ask if I have anything better than skewed data? I do. I have 100% accurate data that tells me that I have room to improve, and should buckle down and make better in-match decisions to improve my win rate, because there are other Flames out there who are better than me. I can make that assessment because I have the stones to admit I'm not perfect, the GC standings show it clear as day, and that my failures are my own and not my GC's fault. -
10-10-2015, 07:11 AMKurogaeaWondered how these comments looked so darn long. Thnx for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Februs
I suppose premades would effect the standings win/ratio wise as the players in the party would receive the same rewards and win rates most likely leaving the premade players all together in one standing page. Along with that, solo players as well as the premade parties will be with them as well. Thats why I ignore premades in the standings or frontlines. I'm a healer mostly (get tired of it so I blm dps), and I have my reasons for thinking Flames have it bad. Since we have less Flames queuing I often see the same players. When this happens it makes it easier for planning later strategies.
Now the problem is if your not in a premade party, just about no one cares about your strategy. Your one alliance can have no healers or just one and 3 to 2 summoners who refuse use or didn't even bother to get Scholar. Another group often chases random strays getting lured and killed by waiting enemies. Not saying other GCs don't have that, I'm sure they do. Though with the little numbers we get Its mostly the little care of winning and strategy. Btw I'm a PS4 player, healing my fellow alliances is a pain with the dpad scrolling and often its too late (I try anyway though :/ ). I used to give little orders and even won a few, very few. Asking to disengage a fight is a hassle, as some wouldn't care, or cant hear(s.e.)/see the text prompts.
For that solution thing...you just basically told me to "Get Good" without sounding like a troll, so I liked your comment for that. lol jking (kinda). I can see improvements done, maybe investing in a separate mouse for targeting alliances better for multi healing. Although saying its just that one person who makes all the difference makes me laugh a little. I can basically say its that tanks fault for not being godlike and getting us more points. Or it is my fault for not playing dps when we had 2 more healers than we already needed. Also there's a trick that most don't take advantage, in the morning there's less queues, so its mostly 24 man matches. Flames premade, done. Alot of the 24 man matches were sweet for Flames as we cooperated more and less reliance on multiple players, just your team. 72 man matches, well if your not in teamspeak with a buttload of PvP players, you better hope they listen or miraculously developed a Hive Mind all working together to win. I could be Rambo from Hell killing everything without dying, and giving orders, while everyone else acts like (someone famously clueless) gives out orders and they follow them instead. That one person makes a win thing is debatable. Unless you mean others should'nt blame the GC for losing then your right, that is BS. My win is mine, my loss is mine, my reason for losing is mine, my GC belongs to those players who are also apart of that GC, so we share our wins and losses, so if several players decide to say "Duuuuuurr (runs into enemy lines not giving 2 cents)" then that obvious loss is mine as well.
Appreciate your advice though, that word limit is bs. Also the other stuff was good too. (Premade advice) -
10-10-2015, 08:03 AMFebrusAnytime! I used to be in the same boat a while back and had to google it XD. I still haven't figure out how to put multiple quotes in a single post though. Not something I've needed to do often, so I never looked it up, but I suppose I should try to figure that one out...Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurogaea
And I think you're starting to pick up what I'm putting down. In regards to the Pre-mades, it's also an issue of not knowing how many of them are actually quing together. For example, say the top two Mael players in "matches played' tab have 410 and 415 matches played, respectively. It's easy to just add the two and say, "okay, Mael has 825 matches played in total," but the problem is that, for all we know, those two players know each other and que together frequently. If they qued for every match together except the last 5, than the actual total of matches played is only 415. Worse yet, if they only played half the matches together it's actually 600 matches. Since we don't know who's queing together it's difficult to say, and the number discrepancy really throws off our averages when we do the calculations.
I sympathize for your healing. I also play on Ps4, and the single reason I have not finished leveling a healer is because it seems to be the only job class in the game that has a dramatic disadvantage in targeting, especially when there is an Alliance. I know there's a "digital mouse" (L1+R3) but it locks your hotbar and camera in place, so I don't find it nearly as useful or as efficient as an actual mouse and keyboard. I can't say for sure without actually trying it myself, but I know I'd feel bad only being able to heal my immediate party members if there was an alliance member dying right next to me and I just couldn't target them fast enough to pop off a heal...
As for the commander thing. You're totally right about the fact that one person cannot win the match single handed. That being said, I do believe that good calls do make the difference. Players who just sit back and "go with the flow" often just end up following the herd of superderps and get squashed. Good leadership and map awareness is key. It's basically a two way street. Good leadership needs a team that is willing to work as a team, and a team that is willing to work as a team needs a solid direction, which requires good leadership. The problem that I find is that players frequently assume that a certain win % is the signature of certain GC's and use it as an excuse to explain their own poor win record. They never put two and two together and see that all the matches they've lost have a direct tie to either not working together as a team or not having or following good shout outs. It's true that there's not always a leader available, but that just means that someone has to step up. There's a lot of negative voices to outshout and the responsibility is high, but if you want to win you have to expand than people gotta improve their own skill set and step out of the comfort box of silent mindless derp'ing.
When it comes to the Flames, I find the early week is the most difficult time to deal with it. The VAST number of casual que'ers they get after each reset is brutal and extremely difficult to deal with. The quality of matches and players improves dramatically closer to the end of the week.