"Nauros;c-2275951" wrote:
"Kyno;c-2275941" wrote:
"Nauros;c-2275940" wrote:
"Kyno;c-2275937" wrote:
"Nauros;c-2275923" wrote:
"MasterSeedy;c-2275920" wrote:
there was no change in the win rate last round.
While that's good to know, without knowing how many people completed the mission before downloading the change we can't be sure how good that data is.
They will monitor the data this go also.
Good. I don't know how many people might fail b/c of the bug, and maybe the number will be very small, but I'm glad they're going to be paying attention.
Surprisingly our guild actually increased our win count last round.
Not that surprising. Except at the very top end guilds should be getting better prepared on average each month. Some won't, and even when you're better prepared RNG can hand you a bad run, but better toons is a positive, the change to SYG was a negative, and RNG over a small sample size (35 to 50 attempts) can easily be larger than the net effect of improved toons minus new SYG mechanic.
I'd be interested in comparing the rate of increase in wins over the months before to end of last month + this month. If it's not increasing at the same rate, then that could easily be the effect of the SYG change even if successes don't actually go down.
Note that I'm not complaining, I'm just noting that a single guild getting a few more shards last month isn't high quality evidence for the lack of an effect (or for quantifying the specific effect size).
This. Arguing that there was no change in win rate and thus all is fine is simply playing us for fools. There should be more wins each month, due to player development. The win rate staying the same means there definitely is some adverse effect.
I'm sure there is a variance each month (some +/_) that needs to be accounted for, that mission is difficult and can vary, so saying it should always increase is not accurate.
Not sure if it actually is the case here, only CG has the numbers and the requirements to even try are pretty tough, but if the sample is big enough, that variation should cancel out. Just like it does for drop rates...
But as we have seen and is always the case in mathematics of this nature, even at large sample size you never reach "perfection". There will always be an acceptable margin of "error".
You can collect a huge sample size of flipping a coin and are not going to actually get 50%. It never truly cancels out. This is the same for drop rates, we dont actually have data saying its 33%, we have massive data tables that get really close and we make the logical next step.
Sure. And as far as KAM mission completion is concerned, there should be a clear upwards trend. If thousands of players have him unlocked, then the attempts should easily be in tens of thousands, so the variation shouldn't matter much. If nothing else, the numbers staying the same is a cause for concern, not for dismissing it.
If the rate of change varies, and that rate is within the norm, why should be cause for concern?
Why should there always be a clear upward trend? Do people who beat it always beat it? I dont think that is the case, do you?
Anyway, they dont give out data and that simple statement doesnt explain what they are looking at, but there are many ways to look at this and they are unlikely to react to anything other than a change outside of the norm.
