So what?
Why do birds fly, Umdeuter? What is the meaning of life and why is it 42?
So what?
They try to be Superman, I think, but I am not a scientist
This never happened, @HongeyKong tried to calculate the Standard Deviation of different pro's by how often a civ was played. In that image he posted the only person for which the civs lined up with how often they were played is for Hera, all the other pro's didn't have Inca's as their most played civ. Then there were a couple of pages of trying to let you understand, but for some reason you still don't.Ironically Professor HongeyKong introduced some weird data that said there was elevated utilization of Inca's over other civs. There was a lengthy discussion about that data set provided, where four instances showing 4 pro's significantly picking inca's over civs w/ a significance of over 2 std deviations.
Out of all games that were analyzed, Hera had 2 or 3 games where he picked Inca's. This would've boosted the winrate of Inca's by 0.11-0.16%After folks laughed that off, turns out here were at least 4 separate data sets someone came up with that indicated regardless of reason, that this was indeed happening post nerf.
This never happened, @HongeyKong tried to calculate the Standard Deviation of different pro's by how often a civ was played. In that image he posted the only person for which the civs lined up with how often they were played is for Hera, all the other pro's didn't have Inca's as their most played civ. Then there were a couple of pages of trying to let you understand, but for some reason you still don't.
Out of all games that were analyzed, Hera had 2 or 3 games where he picked Inca's. This would've boosted the winrate of Inca's by 0.11-0.16%
If you think that validates your "theory" that pro's are picking Inca's on purpose to prove they're fine then go ahead, but the winrate is still way higher compared to the other elo groups.
Btw: It's pretty ironic that you call HongeyKong a professor, when you're acting like a student that's unwilling to accept facts or learn anything.
So you looked for this post from Hongeykong but didn't read this? :View attachment 194304
We must be looking at different data sets.
I realize this refutes your point earlier that this wasn't happening at all, but there are four examples where there is a 2 std dev significance or greater of picking Inca's for these four players, unless the data is wrong. It's not mine, so entirely possible.
Stop conflating your argument that the impact is minimal vs. it isn't happening. They are different arguments entirely.
EDIT2: The numbers dont match the civs but that doesnt matter.
In that image he posted the only person for which the civs lined up with how often they were played is for Hera, all the other pro's didn't have Inca's as their most played civ. Then there were a couple of pages of trying to let you understand, but for some reason you still don't.
but there are four examples where there is a 2 std dev significance or greater of picking Inca's for these four players
Not for your theory, as the data suggests that Inca's was right around the middle of the pack for JorDan, TheViper and Tatoh and we've already showed that Hera only picked Inca's 2 or 3 times, making the impact on the Inca's winrate minimal.I probably missed the second edit.
So the data's borked. Great?
Not for your theory, as the data suggests that Inca's was right around the middle of the pack for JorDan, TheViper and Tatoh and we've already showed that Hera only picked Inca's 2 or 3 times, making the impact on the Inca's winrate minimal.
Isn't it pointless aswell because top 10 players with >60% winrate overall inflate every civ's winrate, simply as they are so much better than their regular opponent? (Given that they mostly don't pick civs)
True, but it's quite hard to do, as we can't check if someone picked a civ or if they randomed it. However, given that we've already seen the stats for four of the biggest pro players/streamers, I'd be curious which player you think has picked Inca's a lot. If you name some, we could analyze their stats and see if they've played Inca's more than one would expect, at least giving some validity to your claim.Not necessarily disproven then either without analyzing a significant portion of that upper echelon of ELO. Great!
ThisJust look at the sources and you'll understand you're wrong.
Hera played Inca's 22 times in his last 445 games: https://aoe2.club/playerprofile/199325
Viper played Inca's 10 times in his last 396 games: https://aoe2.club/playerprofile/196240
JorDan played Inca's 15 times in his last 501 games: https://aoe2.club/playerprofile/2858362
TaToH played Inca's 3 times in his last 158 games: https://aoe2.club/playerprofile/197388
Burden of proof 11True, but it's quite hard to do, as we can't check if someone picked a civ or if they randomed it. However, given that we've already seen the stats for four of the biggest pro players/streamers, I'd be curious which player you think has picked Inca's a lot. If you name some, we could analyze their stats and see if they've played Inca's more than one would expect, at least giving some validity to your claim.
Honest question:
Could that low pick rate be due to higher elos preferring random civ?
You keep going back to the fact that they're very low in utilization, but some civ has got to take that spot right? Why do you keep focussing on this so much? It's obvious that not all civs can be middle of the pack and some civs will just naturally be more disliked than others. Why are you so extremely insistent that the inca's shouldn't have this place but another civ instead? Just because you like to play their trush doesn't mean everyone should like the civ like you do (which people obviously don't or didn't)?Or -- it could remain a comment suggesting that the anomaly of the 1650 range win rate could very well be explained by such a factor that is at least evident in one pro player's civ utilization. In context with an overarching thread direction about the Incan nerfs great success in both dumbing down the game, and making it the third least utilized civ in the game in the 1650+ range.
Honest question:
Could that low pick rate be due to higher elos preferring random civ?
There are a lot of smart people in the community for sure.there must be plenty scientists on aoezone
I'm happy to take a more formal look at some data if given a matching data set + question to answer, maybe I will when I get back to my comp. I'm much more fluent on the analysis side than using APIs to pull the data so I'll try to check it out.Just look at the sources and you'll understand you're wrong.
Hera played Inca's 22 times in his last 445 games: https://aoe2.club/playerprofile/199325
Viper played Inca's 10 times in his last 396 games: https://aoe2.club/playerprofile/196240
JorDan played Inca's 15 times in his last 501 games: https://aoe2.club/playerprofile/2858362
TaToH played Inca's 3 times in his last 158 games: https://aoe2.club/playerprofile/197388