koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
 Posted:
Jul 26, 2011 - 12:50 |
 
|
|
Retro21
Joined: Jun 17, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jul 26, 2011 - 13:11 |
|
cheers, that's quite interesting. |
_________________
There are only 10 types of people in the world: those who understand binary, and those who don't. |
|
freak_in_a_frock
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jul 26, 2011 - 13:35 |
|
So let me get this right, Chaos played 801 games at TV180+ but only 661 of those weren't mirror matches, meaning that 140 chaos matches were against other chaos teams at TV180. Then take into account that in each of these games both chaos teams play a mirror match means that at TV 180+ a chaos tream can expect to play a mirror match 17% or 30% (2 x mirror games (for both chaos teams playing) divided b 801 games plus the 140 mirror matches for the other chaos team)
Not sure the second maths is right, but even at 17% I think we can finally debunk the mirror matches don't happen myth.
edit: didn't actually wat t be the one that starts the claw pomb debate afterall |
Last edited by freak_in_a_frock on %b %26, %2011 - %13:%Jul; edited 1 time in total |
|
Shraaaag
Joined: Feb 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jul 26, 2011 - 13:38 |
|
Are mirror matches counted twice (once for both teams) or once? |
_________________
 |
|
Garion
Joined: Aug 19, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jul 26, 2011 - 13:50 |
|
once for each team i think. As freak explains. Though I may very well be wrong :S |
_________________
 |
|
Tarabaralla
Joined: Jul 24, 2010
|
| Posted:
Jul 26, 2011 - 14:15 |
|
What i'm pleased to see is that Wood Elf, High Elf, Dark Elf, Vampire, Amazon, Human and Khemri teams are in the 180+ TV top10, with Elf ones running up (11th position)
Not to mention that there's only a 3% efficiency difference between 1st and 6th place... seems there's more balance than expected (!) |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jul 26, 2011 - 14:30 |
|
|
MadTias
Joined: Jun 19, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jul 26, 2011 - 16:38 |
|
Interesting that Amazons actually have a higher win % at 180+. People aren't taking enough tackle. |
|
|
Fela
Joined: Dec 27, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jul 26, 2011 - 16:44 |
|
| MadTias wrote: | | Interesting that Amazons actually have a higher win % at 180+. People aren't taking enough tackle. |
Of course they are not. You need all the guard/MB you can get against the predominant chaos tribes. |
|
|
Overhamsteren
Joined: May 27, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jul 26, 2011 - 17:15 |
|
Although with the uprise of chaos dwarfs, amazons should be destroyed on a regular basis. |
_________________
Like a Tiger Defying the Laws of Gravity
Thanks to the BBRC for all the great work you did. |
|
h0lydiver
Joined: May 16, 2010
|
| Posted:
Jul 26, 2011 - 20:17 |
|
Amazon has a very small sample. 42 games, and I guess the majority of them have been played by Niebling´s ones. |
|
|
Niebling
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jul 26, 2011 - 21:02 |
|
| h0lydiver wrote: | | Amazon has a very small sample. 42 games, and I guess the majority of them have been played by Niebling´s ones. |
True 
But my zones has started to lose agaisnt the CPOMB teams so... not sure for how much longer ill play em |
_________________
Someone is wrong on the Internet and it is my sworn duty to correct them. |
|
f_alk
Joined: Sep 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jul 26, 2011 - 22:22 |
|
| freak_in_a_frock wrote: | So let me get this right, Chaos played 801 games at TV180+ but only 661 of those weren't mirror matches, ....
Not sure the second maths is right, but even at 17% I think we can finally debunk the mirror matches don't happen myth. |
Your analysis started well, but you got sidetracked. The issue never was "Mirror matches never happen", but it always was "discouraging mirror matches leads to a skewed distribution, which in turn will help bashing teams as they are less likely to face other bashing teams"
So, mirror matches always happened, just not enough:
Of all races only 5 races (Ogre, Nurgle, WE, CDs and Chaos) had a ratio of more than 5% mirror matches, lead by Chaos with your 17%. Ogre has a too small sample size to be significant - two mirror matches were enough to shove them up there.
10 races had no mirror matches at all, 6 of those had 50 matches or more (up to 188) without meeting its same race.
Now to Chaos:
Of all matches, 22.4% were played with Chaos somewhere in there. 19,8% of all matches without mirror matches had a chaos in there. No other team had a change from "with mirrors" to "without mirrors" by more than 0.5% absolute.
This is because Chaos is dominant in the amount of matches anyway. One in Five matches has a Chaos in there. But the chance for a Chaos to meet another chaos is less than One in Five (as you said, 17%).
So, mirror matches are discouraged. Chaos should meet more Chaos, and everyone else should meet less Chaos. |
|
|
licker
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jul 26, 2011 - 22:29 |
|
Shhh...
You'll just confuse him, he doesn't want to know. |
|
|
Sutherlands
Joined: Aug 01, 2009
|
| Posted:
Jul 27, 2011 - 00:22 |
|
| f_alk wrote: |
Your analysis started well, but you got sidetracked. The issue never was "Mirror matches never happen", but it always was "discouraging mirror matches leads to a skewed distribution, which in turn will help bashing teams as they are less likely to face other bashing teams"
So, mirror matches always happened, just not enough:
Of all races only 5 races (Ogre, Nurgle, WE, CDs and Chaos) had a ratio of more than 5% mirror matches, lead by Chaos with your 17%. Ogre has a too small sample size to be significant - two mirror matches were enough to shove them up there.
10 races had no mirror matches at all, 6 of those had 50 matches or more (up to 188) without meeting its same race.
Now to Chaos:
Of all matches, 22.4% were played with Chaos somewhere in there. 19,8% of all matches without mirror matches had a chaos in there. No other team had a change from "with mirrors" to "without mirrors" by more than 0.5% absolute.
This is because Chaos is dominant in the amount of matches anyway. One in Five matches has a Chaos in there. But the chance for a Chaos to meet another chaos is less than One in Five (as you said, 17%).
So, mirror matches are discouraged. Chaos should meet more Chaos, and everyone else should meet less Chaos. |
Your analysis started well, but you got sidetracked. The real answer is "discouraging mirror matches leads to skewing the distribution toward the norm."
"22.4% were played with Chaos somewhere in there."
1785 total games, 731 (661+70 MM) games played that had Chaos = 41.0% of all games had chaos somewhere in there.
Not including mirrors, the number is 39.7%
"No other team had a change from "with mirrors" to "without mirrors" by more than 0.5% absolute."
CDorf had 384+16MM=400 games, giving a 22.4% chance to see them in a game. Not including mirrors, the number is 23.0%. There are 6 teams where the number is over .5% higher discounting MM. Chaos are the only ones who played a higher percentage if you keep MM in the stats.
Of course, I'm not even sure how you were using "chaos play the most matches and the most mirror matches" to show that "mirror matches are discouraged"
Also, you're not taking into account the number of games played by a given team. Chaos averaged 10.4 games/team while dark elf averaged 2.91 games/team. Consider the example of 200 matches, with 50 of them being chaos, but it's 1 team playing all 50 of the chaos matches. The other 150 are all separate dark elf teams. By your logic, we would say "they played 50 matches, but never had to play another chaos team! While dark elves almost exclusively played each other!" Obviously that's not valid. |
|
|
|
|
| |
NBFL Season 32: The ...
Search
