Curse

Darth The Xx · Apr 06, 2009, 04:27 AM // 04:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oleg

It's going to be virtually impossible to limit the variables to one thing when you are participating in the AB (so I'm actually happy that you did most of them at the same time). But there are a huge number of variables here that seem to have changed. Internal validity problems aside it is interesting.

Did you make any observation on how they won? Did they stay in separate groups or mass and do a clockwise cap? Do Kurzicks and Luxons behave differently? Do they alter strategies per map? Did you see a higher drop out rate on either side when losing? If so, at what point?

Just wondered.

I thought of doing this however it is tough to record as you don't know the position of every kurzick on the other team all the time, it is also subject to your personal opinion. Although I can tell you from experience the tactics used by both sides are the same, both mob, both cap, both fight and what not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trinity Fire Angel

i have a few points. the outliers should be recorded. you are biasing the results by removing the scores. by participating you are influencing the results. one good team is enough to win most matches. i always seem to win more AB when i have a decent team and mostly when my guild and alliance play as a team with vent. you also should be playing when you are on the kurzick side as well as playing for luxon side. with 50% random pugs on each map and 50% with your guild.

finally, you need to collect data from a range of peolpe doing exactly the same tests at different times and you need to do it from both american disctrict, english, international, german and french, russian... etc. so you get a wide mix of nationalities that influence the scores.

I believed the outliers shouldn't be recorded as they were primarily caused by ridiculous circumstances. ie. you missing 4+ people from a team. you have bip suiciders on your team (had one of these) or even instances where one side lags, there was one where the entire luxon side couldn't move and we lost 500-0.

Quote:

Originally Posted by glacialphoenix

Out of curiosity. Does that actually affect who you really meet in the battle itself? I mean, I know American districts don't allow you to use things like Chinese characters in team chat. But I've definitely met Japanese, Chinese guild teams etc in the battle itself - and no, they're not talking in English.

I dont believe it does, I have done many syncs to test this, we had the same success rate at syncing 3 teams in French, Korean and Int as we did as all 3 in Int or American. also the vast majority of those other districts are totally empty, they all come to America.

Alleji · Apr 06, 2009, 03:55 PM // 15:55

Ohai, I can't believe I haven't seen this thread earlier.

The numbers don't surprise me... I'd expect it to be something like that.

I actually considered recording my win-loss ratio along with my map observations when I started doing them. I would post the win/loss for each time slot, such as "2-5PM: Saltspray 4/1" but then realized that I actively avoided playing on Grenz because I hate the map (I play Lux 90% of the time), and on Ancestral I usually play with a prebuilt team designed to take and hold the fort and we get about 75% wins, which is clearly not representative of pug teams. So my statistics in that respect wouldn't be worth much >.>

Swift Thief · Apr 12, 2009, 04:00 AM // 04:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by elypta

well, first of all gj, I can see your point but got a few things to say about it :P
1. I think most Kurzick players that want the faction are doing JQ so maybe less experienced people in AB.
2. You said you would be running some guild teams so that may differ the scores too. only 12 people and with ~4 organised it goes better then without them

but still a remarkeble result, didnt expected it :P *I am a Kurz*

Kurzicks have been kicking our asses recently in JQ and we have been owning in AB.

FoxBat · Apr 12, 2009, 04:11 AM // 04:11

Kurzicks sucked at AB since before there was a real JQ, and FA was weighted heavily in luxon favor too.

count_hamstein · May 11, 2009, 09:31 AM // 09:31

wow, im surprised

I'm a Luxon player and seem to lose quite often though i usually just do random teams.Though occasionally i will get a good team that will actually cap and the kurzicks wont actually mob (i hate games were we dominate/get owned).

In my experience it seems more new players to ab join Luxons thus Luxons get more noobs

Lux Aeterna · May 11, 2009, 01:22 PM // 13:22

For some reason Luxon has been mega annoying fail lately. This may be a real effect or just an illusion.

That said, it's still been just hanging on Grenz for days on end like it always does.

As for big mobs: just cap directly behind them.

Bring [dash] and don't get within snare range.

Cap behind mob = they don't get points. Game winning strategy.

I'VE NOTICED TWO PATTERNS ON GRENZ/ETNARAN:

1) When Kurzicks mob Luxon base, they stay at the ranger shrine and often are killed if they come too close to Luxon base.
When Luxons mob Kurzick base, they sit right on the doorstep without any fear and just meteor shower the respawning Kurzicks.

2) Kurzick strategy is much worse on Etnaran than Luxon strategy on Grenz. Kurzicks almost always rush the res shrine on Etnaran and lose the fight there, while Luxons usually avoid combat and cap by the Kurzick base on Grenz.

House Silvermoon · May 11, 2009, 02:16 PM // 14:16

in my experience for JQ, AB, and FA it comes down to which side has less retards and useless players. that and a little bit of build wars.

Lux Aeterna · May 12, 2009, 11:08 AM // 11:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by House Silvermoon

it comes down to which side has less retards and useless players.

Interestingly, there is an observable distinction between the two.

paK0 · May 12, 2009, 11:36 AM // 11:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by House Silvermoon

in my experience for JQ, AB, and FA it comes down to which side has less retards and useless players. that and a little bit of build wars.

i think that is true for FA and JQ but not AB

you have to draw the line between bad and useless

bad players can be quite handy actually if you tell them what to do

obviously they suck when they get into random teams but if you let them play a nobrainer and have them follow you its actually quite ok to play with them

just organizing teams makes a huge impact on winning i always make a team of myself and discuss the builds with the players, some are just stupid -> kick

but if they are listening to you now there is a chance they will listen to you in the fight as well, so they can perform a good job even without having a certain skill level

at the data:
i think the idea is quite nice, but if you want something representative you will have to do it with decent players from both sides

im not that much of a frequent ab player but still i think its really interesting, thunps up

Lux Aeterna · May 12, 2009, 01:13 PM // 13:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by paK0

you have to draw the line between bad and useless

The distinction here is "retarded" and "useless", not bad and useless.

Useless player = follows team, may talk, may have a decent build. Does not use build to effectiveness, doesn't know how to play, is easily killed without a responsible party leader. Example: female curses necro, casts few spells on the wrong people, gets ganked by a palm sin. The famous "backfire on hammer war, empathy on monk" mesmer also qualifies as useless.

Retarded player = naruto wastrel's collapse sin, jumps a lone helpless elementalist who just happens to be in a 10 person mob. Respawns. Does it again. Attempts to solocap elite elementalist shrine. This category includes anyone who you never ever see after round start.

All of these examples have perfectly workable builds, but simply fail to use them due to lack of understanding of the game.

Both qualify as bad players, but the "retarded" class is much less likely to follow a group.

Generally I'll tolerate useless players as long as they're agreeable and / or cute, but carefully avoid retarded players.

paK0 · May 12, 2009, 02:12 PM // 14:12

thats just the same with other words

your "useless" is my "bad"

after one game with these they can stay in the party if they listen, lets take your mesmer, make him take out empathy and put in diversion and tell him to camp the opponent monk, if he listens he will still do an acceptable job without screwing everything

you call them useless, but if you push them in the right direction they have a use, so i think your definition is wrong =)

Lux Aeterna · May 12, 2009, 06:08 PM // 18:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by paK0

thats just the same with other words

your "useless" is my "bad"

after one game with these they can stay in the party if they listen, lets take your mesmer, make him take out empathy and put in diversion and tell him to camp the opponent monk, if he listens he will still do an acceptable job without screwing everything

you call them useless, but if you push them in the right direction they have a use, so i think your definition is wrong =)

No, then they wouldn't be "useless players".

For example I had a girl in another game, who was interesting to talk to but only played a low level mage who was a one-hit kill. She was fun but a bit of a liability, I had to have a 10 foot paralysis rule around certain people (which I found amusing).

Average / bad players can be helped - for example today I met a ranger who had 11 scythe master and all pet skills. After talking for a bit I convinced him to start using [Melandru's shot] and explained proper target switching.