Official Item Survey Result Data & More (OISRDM)

[Gristle]

Basing skill level on generation would make sense if we were forced to retire.

[Banok]

Yes Banok, this is RETARDED and could have been done differently. Thanks.

If you have some real suggestions, make a request. I can make another run with different matching if you provide a sensible pseudo algorithm to calculate your desired data set and convince me that it might be useful.

Current data is matched to yesterday's character data and in general data runs must use current database. Taking into account anything over a longer time is not possible.

One thing that I thought about is class detection based on all player characters, but it turned out that many people had so many alts that a relatively large amount of votes matched all classes. This obviously made the comparison kinda useless.

Also nice job on the results so far Kafein, keep it coming!

ok sorry that was a harsh post, I just really disliked the idea of you handing out rewards based on flawed assumptions.

but I trust you chaps will figure out a better way to analyse it.

[POOPHAMMER]

I voted to buff things I use, and do not use, and nerf nothing. What is my reward?

[Espu]

Cause it apparently was not obvious, we're not going to hand out rewards to anyone because they voted "well". The xbow guy wanting to buff throwing will not get rewarded.

The analysis reward part was no joke though.

[Kafein]

I've been a part of a lot of competitive games and communities, point 4 is never an issue and point 2 is just untrue.

First, for point 2, you can easily just look at a character's gen to see how long they've been playing/how experienced they are. Sure, this doesn't mean the player is good just because they're gen 15+, but it puts them in a much better place to make balance suggestions than someone who is gen 1-3. They've played more, they've seen more, they've interacted with the community more, they've likely thought about items/builds much more simply because they've had to retire more. Second, everyone knows who the "elites" are that that play on their server. Granted pub stompers != competitive players exactly, warband and especially crpg, doesn't have much of a competitive scene so you can't be extremely picky. Finally you can easily see which clans and members participate in warband's tiny competitive scene as well as who enters in tournaments on crpg, as well as how well they do.

Easy in theory, just time consuming. You could of course, just have people who think they're qualified, post in a thread showing their qualifications. Also, extra points for anyone that's an INTJ.

I think the last part of your post is the most realistic. Basing the difference on the gen number isn't correct since some elite players never retired. What I meant was that, even a super complicated number crunching formula to know who's elite and who's not is not going to work. Even people that play one hour per week could be worth being considered as elites and given a voice in the balance discussion.

The best way to choose people could be electing new ones on a regular basis. For example, members of the "balance assembly" choose 8 people to vote for, and other players choose who of these 8 people becomes the next member.

[Kryser]

Line 64 or 65 is mine, 1h/pole/shield voted for buff to throwing, because its always a rare site to see one on the servers now.

[TomFoolery]

If I was you developers I would throw this data in the bin. There is no way in hell you can balance this game through this poll. You can't get around the bias no matter what you do. By trying to remove the bias you will also remove objective data. Best to stick with what you have been doing and tweak until you are happy.

I'm a 1hander/shielder and guess what; I voted to buff 1hander/shielder, that makes me human and wanting to gain an advantage. I did this believing that 1handers especially are pretty much balanced.

In fact I think you have done a good job balancing this game except for throwing. You killed throwing. Logically if you buff throwing, then horses should get a buff also.

Maybe what others have suggested. Look at the individual weapons in a class instead of the class. Some weapons are just OP. Others just crap.


So fuck this data, no good can come from it.

[okiN]

I'm a 1hander/shielder and guess what; I voted to buff 1hander/shielder, that makes me human and wanting to gain an advantage. I did this believing that 1handers especially are pretty much balanced.

You are part of the reason the data isn't as good as it could have been. Okay, congratulations, you're a jerk. But that's your basis for saying the data is totally worthless? "I voted like an asshole, obviously this means everyone else will have done the same." I mean, really? Come on, now.

[TomFoolery]

I did what most people would do, it just shows how pointless this data is. Oh and try and be civil if possible.

[Tydeus]

I think the last part of your post is the most realistic. Basing the difference on the gen number isn't correct since some elite players never retired. What I meant was that, even a super complicated number crunching formula to know who's elite and who's not is not going to work. Even people that play one hour per week could be worth being considered as elites and given a voice in the balance discussion.

The best way to choose people could be electing new ones on a regular basis. For example, members of the "balance assembly" choose 8 people to vote for, and other players choose who of these 8 people becomes the next member.

If they actually are "elites" then they've put in a significant amount of time in warband, in the past. You don't become "elite" overnight, in anything.

For the second part, I'd hope there were requirements for who could become a part of this, so it's not just a popularity contest. Not that any of this would actually happen(neither the elite suggestion nor yours), I do actually like the idea.

[okiN]

I did what most people would do, it just shows how pointless this data is. Oh and try and be civil if possible.

Baseless assumption -- generalization based on your own actions. Dime store cynicism. As for civility, I call 'em like I see 'em.

[TomFoolery]

What I've seen from the data, bias is a big factor in the results.

A quote from the great Oscar Wilde;

"One can give a really unbiased opinion only about things that do not interest one"

Can you dispute that?


Also I was not uncivil to anyone, you responded with base name calling.

[okiN]

Big factor? Sure, there are plenty of guys like you out there. However, that doesn't mean the data is worthless just because you say it is.

Also I was not uncivil to anyone, you responded with base name calling.

For all your fancy book learnin', you don't seem to read so good. I figure that's just about all I've got to say on the subject.

[TomFoolery]

If you want to enter a literacy comprehension competition then lets go baby.

I'll start;

For all your fancy book learnin', you don't seem to read so good. I figure that's just about all I've got to say on the subject.

You don't seem to read very well.

so what does that make you, unable to write so good. 

[Cosmos_Shielder]

It's also funny to find the higher values of the columns in the nerfing matrix. People seem to vote on an emotional basis (what they lost and now want back).

For example, throwers want to nerf cav the most. Before the latest patches throwing was the best anticav class.
Same for 2h that want to see polearms nerfed. Probably because 2h and swing polearms are extremely close weapon types and the domination changed from 2h to polearms in that category.

Here are the other matrix :

First the class-class matrix :

Code: [Select]

           1h           2h           pole         shield       archer       xbow         throwing     cav          ha           
        1h 1.0000000000 0.0866141732 0.2913385827 0.8661417323 0.0748031496 0.1338582677 0.0551181102 0.3976377953 0.0433070866
        2h 0.0735785953 1.0000000000 0.0869565217 0.1304347826 0.0568561873 0.1170568562 0.0668896321 0.1906354515 0.0167224080
      pole 0.2720588235 0.0955882353 1.0000000000 0.4191176471 0.0330882353 0.0404411765 0.0404411765 0.5919117647 0.0257352941
    shield 0.7913669065 0.1402877698 0.4100719424 1.0000000000 0.0251798561 0.1043165468 0.0503597122 0.4280575540 0.0251798561
    archer 0.1397058824 0.1250000000 0.0661764706 0.0514705882 1.0000000000 0.0220588235 0.0000000000 0.2720588235 0.2426470588
      xbow 0.4047619048 0.4166666667 0.1309523810 0.3452380952 0.0357142857 1.0000000000 0.0000000000 0.2142857143 0.0833333333
  throwing 0.3043478261 0.4347826087 0.2391304348 0.3043478261 0.0000000000 0.0000000000 1.0000000000 0.1521739130 0.0652173913
       cav 0.3811320755 0.2150943396 0.6075471698 0.4490566038 0.1396226415 0.0679245283 0.0264150943 1.0000000000 0.1622641509
        ha 0.2558139535 0.1162790698 0.1627906977 0.1627906977 0.7674418605 0.1627906977 0.0697674419 1.0000000000 1.0000000000

That should be read as "x% of people that are in that class on the left also are in that class on the top"

And the buff-buff matrix :

Code: [Select]

             horseschange   armorchange    1hchange       2hchange       polechange     shieldchange   thrownchange   bowchange      xbowchange     
horseschange 1.000000000000 0.260869565217 0.329192546584 0.186335403727 0.173913043478 0.186335403727 0.186335403727 0.198757763975 0.149068322981
 armorchange 0.306569343066 1.000000000000 0.189781021898 0.218978102190 0.160583941606 0.204379562044 0.255474452555 0.175182481752 0.145985401460
    1hchange 0.321212121212 0.157575757576 1.000000000000 0.066666666667 0.084848484848 0.381818181818 0.284848484848 0.181818181818 0.145454545455
    2hchange 0.256410256410 0.256410256410 0.094017094017 1.000000000000 0.179487179487 0.094017094017 0.170940170940 0.119658119658 0.128205128205
  polechange 0.400000000000 0.314285714286 0.200000000000 0.300000000000 1.000000000000 0.157142857143 0.157142857143 0.128571428571 0.128571428571
shieldchange 0.294117647059 0.274509803922 0.617647058824 0.107843137255 0.107843137255 1.000000000000 0.245098039216 0.166666666667 0.127450980392
thrownchange 0.137614678899 0.160550458716 0.215596330275 0.091743119266 0.050458715596 0.114678899083 1.000000000000 0.155963302752 0.119266055046
   bowchange 0.275862068966 0.206896551724 0.258620689655 0.120689655172 0.077586206897 0.146551724138 0.293103448276 1.000000000000 0.137931034483
  xbowchange 0.333333333333 0.277777777778 0.333333333333 0.208333333333 0.125000000000 0.180555555556 0.361111111111 0.222222222222 1.000000000000
That should be read as "x% of people that wanted to buff that thing on the left also wanted to buff that thing on the top"

I don't understand why your matrix isn't symetric. To me 1H AND 2H = 2H AND 1H
It seems to be something wrong if the the boolean Operator AND is no more commutative