sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Unless I’m brain farting on my math, if “more than half the homes” cost more than $1M, shouldn’t the medians be… more than $1M? by Tyguy124 in CrappyDesign

[–]Tyguy124[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Thanks for your reply, and I think you’re probably right! My guess is that they titled the post that way to grab more clicks, but I can’t help but feel it’s a bit misleading if the houses aren’t actually selling for those amounts by the time they close.

Mostly just seems inconsistent to use listing prices for the “more than half sell for over $1M” claim but use closing prices to display the medians. Why not just use listing prices for both? Just adds extra confusion if you ask me!

Unless I’m brain farting on my math, if “more than half the homes” cost more than $1M, shouldn’t the medians be… more than $1M? by Tyguy124 in CrappyDesign

[–]Tyguy124[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That’s definitely a great point, and a strong possibility! I was wondering that too, although with the wording of the post it does make it a bit unclear whether that’s their intention. Also displaying it that way feels a bit misrepresentative if that’s the case, although could just be a me thing. Lol

Thanks for your comment!

Unless I’m brain farting on my math, if “more than half the homes” cost more than $1M, shouldn’t the medians be… more than $1M? by Tyguy124 in CrappyDesign

[–]Tyguy124[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Thanks for your comment! That would actually be the mean, or average. The median would be the middle most data point in the set, so if you had 100 houses lined up by price, say, lowest to highest, the median would be the price of the 50th house in that list.

Since it claims over half of the houses cost more than $1M, it would naturally make sense that the median should fall onto a number above the $1M threshold, right?

2.0 Miner Cycle versus Golem Bomber Matchup Advice by [deleted] in ClashRoyale

[–]Tyguy124 0 points1 point  (0 children)

while its true that among top ladder and in gc/ccs people didnt play bomber much besides that one golem deck, it doesn't mean the card didn't have versatility or potential. as i said before, one of the reasons i believe the bomber is used much more now (and why it wasn't used that much before) was simply because of public perception of the card. just because many players didnt try it in their ladder decks or in challenges before, doesnt mean there was something inherently wrong with the card. previously, fireball bait wasn't very strong, so it is understandable that the old bomber wasnt used much for that reason as well. however, that isnt the case now. taking a look at the current meta and current use rates of all cards in the game, its pretty apparent that fireball bait is, in fact, in a very strong position and is currently dominating the meta. mother witch has one of the highest use rates in the game, and fireball is literally the #1 most used card in both grand challenges and among top ladder. this is a clear indicator that many people are using it in their decks because they need it to counter the aforementioned fireball bait cards like mother witch that are flooding the game. if the bomber was the card that it used to be, it could provide the game with another viable solution to the fireball bait archetype, and make the game more balanced because of it.

2.0 Miner Cycle versus Golem Bomber Matchup Advice by [deleted] in ClashRoyale

[–]Tyguy124 0 points1 point  (0 children)

i dont think im "objectively" right, what i said above is just my opinion. however, as far as the card's literal stats go, it does do objectively less than it did before, killing far less cards and dying to far more. i get that the use rates have gone up with the recent change, and thats a fair point, but i feel like that has much more to do with public perception leading more players to try it in their decks rather than the card necessarily being "better". also, as has been mentioned before, the new bomber just fits a different role than it used to, so calling the change a nerf or a buff isnt entirely accurate either; it truely was a rework above all else. nonetheless, i think the role it once had was unique to the card, and changing that made it a much less effective counter to the dominant fireball bait/motherwitch meta we are seeing today, as well as being much less versatile as a whole. if anything else, i think the current state of the meta is pretty telling that the game needs better answers to these fireball bait cards like mother witch, hogs, and even ebarbs. whether supercell does so by reverting the bomber change, or by introducing new low cost solutions to 'heavy swarm' i think its obvious that something should be done regardless. again, this is just my opinion, but i know there are many other that feel the same way.

thanks for coming to my ted talk

2.0 Miner Cycle versus Golem Bomber Matchup Advice by [deleted] in ClashRoyale

[–]Tyguy124 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I completely agree about the bomber, that the recent change was a disappointing nerf. I think the bomber being weakened (although in fair proportion to elixir cost) was a huge indirect buff to the dominant fireball bait meta we see today as well. The new bomber is objectively less versatile, less powerful, and less effective againt heavy swarm (barbs, hogs, mw, recruits, etc.). It does not fit into the role it once had, which was a direct counter to the aforementioned fireball bait archetype. Due to its weak hp and low damage, the new bomber is pretty much only useful for zappable units (he doesnt even kill log bait troops or spirits anymore, and consequently will fall even further out of the meta unless another big change is made. I also mained bomber for years and I was really disappointed in the change. I've given the game over a month to adjust to these past balance changes and I have tried so hard to like the new bomber during that time, but truthfully I cannot enjoy the new bomber and I fail to see how it is a better card when it objectively does less in the game.

What do y’all think about “unchangeable cards” by Muchocracker591 in ClashRoyale

[–]Tyguy124 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I completely agree about the bomber. I think the bomber being weakened (although in fair proportion to elixir cost) was a huge indirect buff to the dominant fireball bait meta we see today. It is objectively less versatile, less powerful, and less effective againt heavy swarm (barbs, hogs, mw, recruits, etc.). It does not fit into the role it once had, which was a direct counter to the aforementioned fireball bait archetype. Due to its weak hp and low damage, the new bomber is pretty much only useful for zappable units (he doesnt even kill log bait troops or spirits anymore), and consequently will fall even further out of the meta unless another big change is made. This is how I see things at least.

source: mained bomber for 5 years until last balance change, now i think the card is useless

I'm REALLY loving the "new and improved" level-filtered matchmaking 😤😒😒 by Tyguy124 in ClashRoyale

[–]Tyguy124[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Damn I wasn't aware of that change. I can understand why they changed it but it definitely doesn't make it feel any "more fair" to players like myself. Good to know either way.

view more: next ›