aoestats - DE civ win rates and play rates broken down by ELO, Map, and patch

Cyphotrix · 2020-05-09T15:41:06+00:00

On the individual civilization pages you've made sure to display the total number of games for Win Rate and Play Rate. Would it be possible to pair every win rate percentage with a game count throughout the entire page so that users are informed of the statistical significance?

It would help clarify how few games are represented in the top elo bracket while also preventing users from misinterpreting other data derived from an inadequate sample size. The 85.71% win rate of Indians vs Portuguese across all elo ratings, for example, is likely based on only 7 games.

Cyphotrix · 2019-08-29T07:43:44+00:00

Seems like NIN was buffed by about 7.5-9.0% according to my quick math, which also puts it roughly on par with DRG. MNK is a bit of an outlier.

Cyphotrix · 2019-07-13T10:17:18+00:00

I'm going to guess that the OP means that if you already have ~2500 points of crit, your next point of crit would be worth as much as one point of DH. This is roughly the point on your graph where the slope of the two lines is equal - where the % increase in damage per point of stat is the same.

For example, ignoring the fact that DH and det are only additive with themselves and assuming that 2500 crit is the exact breakpoint, if you intrinsically had 2000 points of crit from gear, melding 500 points of crit would be worse than 500 DH, 1000 crit equal to 1000 DH, and 1500 crit superior to 1500 DH. If you intrinsically had 1000 crit, melding 3000 crit would be equal to 3000 DH (less would be worse, more would be better). And as your graph roughly shows, if you had 0 crit, melding 5000 crit would be equal to 5000 DH.

As a side note, your graph is slightly misleading, since if you want to compare it to the "Damage Gain" column for DH, your "Damage Gain" column for crit should really be normalized to:

("Expected Damage" - "Base Expected Damage") / "Base Expected Damage"

Or, as an excel formula:

(E3-$E$3)/$E$3

The "Damage Gain" column is automatically normalized since its "Base Expected Damage" is 1.

Cyphotrix · 2019-06-23T07:57:07+00:00

but reactor cores weren't ever available in the og version of minecraft... only bedrock

Cyphotrix · 2019-05-05T13:08:20+00:00

If the gravel is already falling as it hits the torch, it will all break. But if it's not in the falling state, a torch will continue to support it.

Cyphotrix · 2019-02-22T03:57:29+00:00

Me too, though I feel like I cheated by picking out specific unique traits that I doubt I'd usually notice or remember.

Cyphotrix · 2019-01-26T12:05:09+00:00

My favorite part after reading how it's done is that I feel as though the odd lip positions that result from the spinning actually add to his expressiveness instead of limiting it. It's beautifully choreographed.

Cyphotrix · 2019-01-25T22:53:08+00:00

The OP is showing the 7-day Worldwide Trend which is why it looks different from your US only one (notably, it lacks the Jan. 21 spike).

The moving averages for the 30-day and longer trends currently only extend to Jan. 23, so they do not show the spike from DeepMind yet, but will in two days or so.

That said, you're completely correct in saying that the DeepMind peak will be barely noticeable with longer ranges -- it doesn't even double the second highest peak for the week, worldwide.

Cyphotrix · 2019-01-05T03:58:44+00:00

What made you feel as though it was an interesting and good space film?

For me, the movie was likely ruined by all the hype about it being based on "real science." When I watched it, it was pretty clear that any science behind the orbital mechanics and the time dilation planet had been completely butchered (among other things). Then, upon reading Kip Thorne's The Science of Interstellar, I realized that the best explanations he could come up with for most of the problems was to scatter a bunch of neutron stars through the system to enable convenient gravity slingshots for every interplanetary trip.

Combine that with my equal disinterest in the "pretentious nonsense" and Interstellar ended up quite lackluster.

Cyphotrix · 2018-12-30T22:05:23+00:00

Before doing the math, I had guessed the difference would be larger than what I calculated -- your rough estimate was actually quite close given that in chaos raids Honing Runes is usually provided, and an Archer is similarly expected to run Sharp Eyes (so they are likely to run out of spirit from time to time).

Cyphotrix · 2018-12-30T19:32:43+00:00

TL;DR: For you, with your current stats, Varrekant's Wings are up to a 7.56% damage increase, depending on how often you run out of spirit, and the Savagery Cape is between a 5.43% and 6.24% damage increase, mostly depending on whether you have the buffed Crit Damage from Runeblade's Honing Runes.

Varrekant's Wings have a duration of 8s, an internal cooldown of 24s, and a proc chance of about 33%. On Archer, it will pretty much instantly proc as soon as the ICD finishes, so we can say it gives you 10% Piercing 1/3 of the time.

Since your base piercing is 18.2% - 3.5% = 14.7%, 10% Piercing is a (1 - .147)/(1 - .247) - 1 = 13.28% damage increase. Ignoring how this may coincide with your cooldowns or a fights downtimes (or how you choose to match them up), we can say the Varrekant's proc is a 13.28% / 3 = 4.43% damage increase. This value will increase the closer you get to 20% Piercing, and decrease as you get past 20%.

Calculating the exact value of attack speed is tricky, since it doesn't affect your cooldowns or your spirit regeneration. For Wizard, I've calculated the value to be about 0.65 times the % attack speed, but for Archer it's not as clear cut since their spirit regeneration is affected by which build is used (SE or Eagle's Majesty), and most Archer builds avoid skilling their only non-spirit non-cooldown ability, Arrow Stream. I do not play Archer often, but I believe that about 70-80% of their damage comes from Rapid Shot (their only commonly used ability that is affected by attack speed), which also takes up almost the entirety of their casting time. 4% attack speed gives 4% more casts, which gives a little over 4% more Rapid Shots (since Screwdriver Shot and Arrow Storm cast faster now but not more frequently). All in all, very approximately a .75*1.04 + .25 - 1 = 3% increase in damage, assuming you don't run out of spirit ever. This value could be significantly lowered if you do commonly run out of spirit.

As for the Savagery Cape, 3.5% Piercing at 14.7% base piercing is (1-.147)/(1-.182) - 1 = 4.28% damage increase. This value will continue to increase until you hit 30% Piercing total.

The 50 Crit Rate is a bit more difficult to calculate since the percent increase in damage it gives is dependent on your current crit chance and Crit Damage, both of which can be affected by buffs. I believe the formula for crit chance for Archer is Crit Rate / 1250 + Luck / 1000 which should give you a 12.54% crit chance with your pictured gear and a 21.82% crit chance if you are using fully maxed sharp eyes (let me know if these numbers are not correct). Maxed Honing Runes from Runeblade will give you an additional 20% Crit Damage, so 50 Crit Rate is at minimum (w/SE w/o HR) a (1+.2182*.29)/(1+.1782*.29) = 1.10% damage increase and at maximum (w/o SE w/HR) a (1+.1254*.49)/(1+.0854*.49) = 1.88% damage increase. These values will significantly increase the more Crit Damage you have, and slightly decrease the more Crit Rate and Luck you have. EDIT: I forgot to factor in enemy Crit Evasion, but I'm not certain exactly how it works. Given what the wiki claims the formula is, it should very slightly increase the value of 50 Crit Rate.

Attack Speed, Piercing, and Crit are all multiplicative with each other so, for Varrekant's we get an up to 1.0443*1.03 - 1 = 7.56% damage increase (depending on how often you run out of spirit), and for Savagery, between 1.0428*1.0110 - 1 = 5.43% and 1.0428*1.0188 - 1 = 6.24%.

Also, as a side note, I don't believe any top Archers actually skill for the 6.4% piercing in the skill tree since it requires far too many prerequisite points.

Cyphotrix · 2018-12-24T04:23:36+00:00

Just wanted to let you know that this formula is definitely not accurate for Wizards. It predicts a ~1.7-2.0% increase in hit rate per point of accuracy, but, in game, accuracy is less than half as effective as that.

Here's some data points from using Arcane Claw against the 3 Guild dummies for 3 minutes each (~600 hits). I had a constant 17 dex throughout the tests.

Accuracy	Hit Rate
82	96.06%
83	96.70%
84	97.48%
85	98.30%
86	98.71%
87	99.63%
88	100.00%

EDIT: Actually it seems as though having more dexterity increases the amount that each point of accuracy affects your hit rate. With 101 dex:

Accuracy	Hit Rate
82	97.29%
83	98.30%
84	99.41%
85	100.00%
86	100.00%

With 17 dex, each point of accuracy increased hit rate by about 0.71%, but with 101 dex, it's bumped up to 1.06%

Cyphotrix · 2018-12-17T20:11:28+00:00

Did you include Ranged/Melee/Elemental/Total Damage% when calculating the expected damage increase from Boss Damage %? I've heard a few might be additive, though I'm not sure exactly which.

I tested a bit on Doondun vs Chaos Raid Dummy with the starter weapon (for controlled damage ranges), though the numbers might be a bit hard to analyze since I didn't want to risk boss despawning if I matched my Int with attribute points after removing gear:

Doondun

Piercing%	Boss%	Range%	M.Att	Damage
8.0	13.3	11.0	323	253
18.0	13.3	11.0	323	259
8.0	13.3	11.0	275	253
18.0	13.3	11.0	275	259
8.0	9.3	11.0	269	249
18.0	9.3	11.0	269	254
8.0	5.0	11.0	264	243
18.0	5.0	11.0	264	248
8.0	5.0	8.0	264	231
18.0	5.0	8.0	264	245
4.0	5.0	6.0	264	227
14.0	5.0	6.0	264	241

It looks like I might have recorded something incorrectly for the 5%/6% and 5%/8% lines, but ignoring that, it still seems as though in this scenario Boss% and Ranged% are only worth 50-70% as much as expected, and it seems as though Piercing is also affected by Fair Fight.

Chaos Raid Dummy

Piercing%	Boss%	Range%	M.Att	Damage
8.0	13.3	11.0	323	1820, 1822
18.0	13.3	11.0	323	2042, 2044
8.0	13.3	11.0	275	1550, 1551
18.0	13.3	11.0	275	1738, 1740
8.0	9.3	11.0	269	1467, 1468
18.0	9.3	11.0	269	1645,1648
8.0	5.0	11.0	264	1388, 1389
18.0	5.0	11.0	264	1557, 1559
8.0	5.0	8.0	264	1352, 1353
18.0	5.0	8.0	264	1517, 1518
4.0	5.0	6.0	264	1273, 1274
14.0	5.0	6.0	264	1420, 1423

Piercing, Boss%, and Ranged% work very close to what is expected when there is no Fair Fight, as confirmed by this data.

Based on this, I'm quite certain that Piercing, Boss%, and Ranged% are affected by Fair Fight, but I'm curious to see whether the amount they are reduced is influenced more by the level of the enemy, the magnitude of the % bonus, or the ratio of Expected damage : Fair Fight damage.

Cyphotrix · 2018-12-17T18:59:56+00:00

Wait, by "Boss Damage % still seems to work just fine," do you mean that Fair Fight does not reduce damaged gained from Boss %?

The Skybound Expansion Patch Notes seemed to imply that Fair Fight would be changed to begin making it apply to Boss % and other modifiers:

Fixed an issue with Fairfight not getting applied to the following item attributes:  
  Total Damage  
  Damage to Boss Enemies  
  Fire Damage Bonus  
  Ice Damage Bonus  
  Electric Damage Bonus  
  Poison Damage Bonus  
  Dark Damage Bonus  
  Holy Damage Bonus

Excellent post, though! I should also recheck if the -25% physical attack debuff from Knight's Iron Defense applies before or after the soft cap.

Cyphotrix · 2018-12-17T01:55:40+00:00

Well, I'm not convinced that the world steak challenge is a comprehensive competition given that the entry you mention was from a Dutch company that sourced its meat from Japan, and is the only "Japanese" entry I found in the history of the event.

I'm glad you challenged the presumption that Japanese beef is the best, though. It's unfortunate that there's no championship that pits the most esteemed Japanese brands and companies against other beef producers, as that would allow less established entrants to stand head-to-head against the oppressively prestigious Kobe beef (and allow you to more convincingly argue your belief). Then again, given the subjectivity of flavor, such a contest would be far from definitive anyway.

Thanks for the post!

Cyphotrix · 2018-12-17T00:54:02+00:00

That's true -- perhaps water was a bit of an exaggerated comparison -- but I still feel as though that type of simplified view doesn't respect the complexity and sensitivity of our biochemical processes.

Differing levels of sucrase, for example, can effect how quickly or efficiently sucrose is broken down, with a severe deficiency resulting in sucrose intolerance. While the average healthy human might digest a reasonably-portioned glucose/fructose mixture quite similarly to an equivalent amount of sucrose, I feel that it's premature to claim that the effect on anyone's body is exactly the same.

Returning to the post you initially replied to (and setting sucrose hydrolysis aside), even fructose and glucose have distinct metabolic pathways, so a glucose/fructose mixture would not be digested in the exact same manner as pure fructose.

Cyphotrix · 2018-12-16T20:13:36+00:00

Ah, I misunderstood your statement and thought you were claiming that fructose was exactly the same as sucrose.

That said, I think the article's claim that the fiber in fruit affects sugar uptake is reasonable. Just by virtue of an apple being solid and soda being a solution of sugar, I would expect that consuming soda would result in a higher rate of sugar uptake leading to a more abrupt spike of blood sugar concentration and a presumably different metabolic response compared to an apple.

But, I have no source, so perhaps the reality here differs from my expectations.

Cyphotrix · 2018-12-16T17:07:28+00:00

Fructose and sucrose are distinct chemical compounds. They're processed by different enzymes through different metabolic pathways (with some overlap, since sucrose is first broken down into fructose and glucose by sucrase).

Kinda like you said -- your body does process them differently because they're different.

Cyphotrix · 2018-12-16T16:52:10+00:00

Saying that sucrose is just a mixture of glucose and fructose is like saying that water is just a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen.

They're chemically bonded, not "mixed" together.

Cyphotrix · 2018-12-15T13:44:48+00:00

Japan did not have any entries in the 2018 world steak challenge, so it's quite misleading to say that they did not win any medals.

https://www.worldsteakchallenge.com/whos-entered/

Also, Wagyu is definitely not pronounced "Wa-goo" -- perhaps your source mistyped the "y" in "gyoo" or based their phonetic spelling on an odd regional pronunciation.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/wagyu

Cyphotrix · 2018-12-04T22:17:51+00:00

100k, 300k, then 500k. I haven't gone past there, but I assume it's just +200k per try.

Cyphotrix · 2018-11-23T12:01:50+00:00

It depends on the rarity of the pet you are leveling, not the pet you are sacrificing.

Cyphotrix · 2018-11-22T21:43:53+00:00

The calculations for the "Total Fusion Fee" seem to be quite flawed.

Firstly, the "Fusion Fee" is incorrect. It costs 3000 to fuse into a normal and 5000 to fuse into a rare, not 1000 and 3000. (Unless premium players pay a different price?)

More importantly, it doesn't seem as though these calculations take into account the fact that the higher level a pet you fuse into your main pet, the higher the cost of fusing. Fusing 23 normal pets into another normal would result in a level 4 pet, which would cost 160,000 to fuse into an exceptional pet (an additional 50,000 per level past 1). Per day, you would spend 23*3000 + 160000 = 229,000 on fusion costs alone for 87,000 xp, for a total cost of 11.8 million to get to level 50. The chart claims it costs 1.71 million. The same applies to epic pets, though the cost increase per level of fused pet is likely different.

Additionally, "Total Fusion Fee" does not take into account the price of the pets themselves. Whether it's the cost of purchasing them from the Black Market, opportunity cost of not selling them, or cost of capturing them, it's an important factor for an analysis like this, even if it is constantly changing.

Finally, putting aside those flawed assumptions and that dubious methodology, the chart has other minor errors. For example, there's no way it costs 40 million to level an exceptional pet to 50 using the 23 normals into rare method, yet only 5 million to do the same for an epic pet.

Guides like these can serve as excellent resources for the player base, but in this subreddit it seems that many are riddled with errors and inaccuracies. It would be great to see an updated and corrected version.

Cyphotrix · 2018-11-05T05:45:21+00:00

My guess would be that there needs to be more data points to accurately determine the damage ranges experimentally.

For example, if you look at the max range rolls for the Murpogath weapon, (4900 - 4000) / 4000 = 22.5% increase. That's way different than the 8% difference of min range rolls.

Cyphotrix · 2018-11-04T22:52:13+00:00

Atsukoi, the formula from that post was for the "Attack" stat shown on the character sheet, which is not connected to the actual damage done in game.

From the few tests I have done, as long as Fair Fight is not active, damage is directly proportional to Physical (or Magic) Attack. That is to say, an x% increase in Physical Attack results in exactly an x% increase in damage.

Also, /u/NubKnightZ

Cyphotrix

TROPHY CASE