file Sciencing V:tES

04 Mar 2016 11:26 #75729 by Brum
Replied by Brum on topic Sciencing V:tES

I greatly suggest that only EC day 2 games can be used as a basis for any meaningful analisis of real balance of deckbuilding components.


Gotta disagree here.
EC Day 2 is played by decks, players and environment that is completely different that any other type of VtES, imo.
In 2012 the top seed in the Final was 1GW6,5

I agree that it is a good way to see well balanced decks, but there are many types of staples that do not appear in Day 2 easily, like DEM OBF.
It is a totally different ball game.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Ashur

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
04 Mar 2016 11:39 - 04 Mar 2016 11:44 #75731 by elotar
Replied by elotar on topic Sciencing V:tES

I agree that it is a good way to see well balanced decks, but there are many types of staples that do not appear in Day 2 easily, like DEM OBF.
It is a totally different ball game.


Not really:
www.secretlibrary.info/index.php?deck=view&id=3191

But generally it's my whole point here - most of VtES tournaments got nothing to do with a competitive playing field of best decks piloted by equally skilled good players, so any conclusions about card balance from bulk TWDA results will be plain wrong.

:splat: NC Russia
:DEM::san::nec::cap4:
Last edit: 04 Mar 2016 11:44 by elotar.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
04 Mar 2016 11:42 #75733 by Brum
Replied by Brum on topic Sciencing V:tES
Key words "do not appear easily".
There are not many. :)

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
04 Mar 2016 11:46 - 04 Mar 2016 11:51 #75735 by 1muflon1
Replied by 1muflon1 on topic Sciencing V:tES

But you can control for many of these factors. For example, you can control for the skill of player by including vekn ranking or years of active play in your model.


Adding more meaningless data to the model will not make it better. Years of active play? Lol

Why you don't like to work with EC d2 data?


I don't mind working with EC d2 data, but I don't see a reason why to work with them exclusively.

However, your arguments about analyzing TWAD or local group plays are invalid.

Representation of disciplines can be measured very accurately by counting the number of vamps, with the given discipline and also distinguishing whether it is at superior on inferior. There is nothing arbitrary about that, same goes for the number of particular cards.

Also, adding controls like proxies for players competence such as years of play or vekn rating is not meaningless. Do you want to argue that there is absolutely no relationship between length of active play and how good is the person at playing vtes? (I am not saying its the sole determinant, but as long as it contributes to player's competence its not meaningless, and even other better proxies can be used like number of tournament plays or vekn rating ect.). Always when you add controls like this your model will only compare players who are similar conditional on their ranking or other proxies for being good player.

Moreover, you are completely right about conventions, that's why you cannot just mindlessly extrapolate results to whole vtes community, but are there really different conventions for deflections, or governs? And even if it is I can ask the playgroup providing me the data what conventions are they using for these cards and mention that explicitly so other people can draw their conclusions.

Also, true criterion such as that deck with more than 50% of crypt from one clan turns deck into clan deck is arbitrary. But you can still say how chances of winning vary with the arbitrary criterion of having such clan deck or archetype etc. as long as you apply these criterions consistently. Even age is just arbitrary measurement of time flow, or education arbitrary measurement of knowledge, and so on yet you see plenty of Nobel Prize winning research on questions involving these variables.

Also, vtes might be the most complex games there is (which is why I love it), but I seriously doubt that it is so complex that it cannot be properly analyzed given if data are collected properly, given that such analysis is in science routinely applied to far more complex issues than just balance of card game.
Last edit: 04 Mar 2016 11:51 by 1muflon1.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
04 Mar 2016 12:10 - 04 Mar 2016 12:11 #75739 by elotar
Replied by elotar on topic Sciencing V:tES

...


Wall of text attack!

1m1, you are making the key error of most econometritians - you are thinking that you can take into account all factors, influensing the object of analisis.

If the object is complex, like VtES, than you just can't.

We can forever discuss specifics, like that you can't just make a crypt with just DOM + OBF 5caps, so you'll got other disciplines, so you can add other cards which got nothing to do with "power level" but are just usefull or cyclable, or videspread fashion for old experienced players to play with bad decks or something.

But in will be totally pointles. Just go with this:

"most of VtES tournaments got nothing to do with a competitive playing field of best decks piloted by equally skilled good players, so any conclusions about card balance from bulk TWDA results will be plain wrong."

:splat: NC Russia
:DEM::san::nec::cap4:
Last edit: 04 Mar 2016 12:11 by elotar.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
04 Mar 2016 12:19 - 04 Mar 2016 12:25 #75740 by 1muflon1
Replied by 1muflon1 on topic Sciencing V:tES

...

1m1, you are making the key error of most econometritians - you are thinking that you can take into account all factors, influensing the object of analisis.
"


This is plain wrong, in fact this shows that when it comes to statistics or econometrics you have no idea what you are talking about because what you describe is never assumed or done.

You dont need to take control of all factors, just the main variables you are interested in and a bunch of important controls.

Also, I am not saying that the balance should be done exclusively only on such analysis. But I think that when we are talking about limiting/banning cards that are not broken, and very common and played such as govern or deflection or freak drive or eyes of argus, etc. (people are really now going wild with different proposals lately for better or worse), I think that we should first have bit more solid piece of information than just looking at crude statistics like that x% of tournament winning decks featured dominate.

Again your argument that vtes is too complex for such analysis is invalid, since such analysis is routinely used to shed light on far more complex questions.

PS: Or just as a thought experiment lets pretend for a second that there is something special about vtes that makes it more complex than all other issues that science routinely deals with. It is then better to do balancing analysis on basis ofanecdotes and hunches?
Last edit: 04 Mar 2016 12:25 by 1muflon1.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
Moderators: AnkhaKraus
Time to create page: 0.165 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum