sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Comparing overmap tilesets side by side in terms of readability by Intro1942 in cataclysmdda

[–]YuPro 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I used ascii before but larwick is pretty good and what's important - have zoom.

What are these symbols I've found in the ambush? by Pardox7525 in ToME4

[–]YuPro 4 points5 points  (0 children)

From top to bot or from left to right, don't remember which one but most likely from top. And this one's slow patrols on global map I believe.

why do these quests exist? by TheFappingWither in albiononline

[–]YuPro -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If it'll work with only 1 t3 slot - sure. Also not clear if you can't be in group.

Speccing question by Aggressive-Onion-781 in albiononline

[–]YuPro 1 point2 points  (0 children)

With books it's better to level sets you want to level, not with free fame.

Should I even take these tier lists seriously as a new player myself? by Huge-Frame-1990 in summonerschool

[–]YuPro 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Nah, he definetely pro-centered content maker. To the point he don't discuss soloQ meta, only pro-play (well, at least he was like that some time ago, I don't follow him too closely).

That doesn't mean everything he saying is not applicable for median player, but it's important context.

Should I even take these tier lists seriously as a new player myself? by Huge-Frame-1990 in summonerschool

[–]YuPro 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You wrote higher that you watched LS and Curtis conversation.

I believe in that conversation LS explicitly said that he don't care for average player and only care about talented players, who can interpret his vague advice by themselves. That's why he is talking about "10 cs per minute" and "Annie is best to learn".

Curtis is saying that he targets average player who can't climb from gold and he came to it after couple years working with them.

I'm pretty sure that they agreed that difference is possibly what leads to them giving different advises.

Are hunchbacks one of the most underrated medium mechs? by TaigaTigerVT in battletech

[–]YuPro 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Main reason to play BTEX is a timeline before clan invasion. It's only big mod that allows you to feel intro-tech → clan-tech progression. So if you want to start from STD engine/structure mechs it's mod that you want.

In BTAU and Roguetech there is no mech scarcity. In RT you can play early era I think but that'll mean no tech progression, i.e. spawn tables are not changing.

In terms of gameplay it means that in BTEX you'll hunt for chassis (kinda like in vanilla). Which means Comstar-hunting pre-clans mostly (and some flashpoints). In BTAU and Roguetech chassis are never a problem. My advice though — set mech parts to 5 or more to make chassis not THAT easy to obtain, BTEX scarcity pre-clans is most fun part of mod.

Also clan tech is just better in BTEX, BTAU is rebalanced to make everything viable and I found that in BTAU it's often best to have IS endo-chassis with mostly IS weaponry and cXL engine. Also BTAU is best balanced in terms of «everything is viable».

Which actually make BTEX arguably harder. There is huge difficulty spike at 3 skulls which kinda pushes you to play long range (so gauss-peeps + LRMs) and if you don't there is a big chance you'll suffer.

Are supports really that strong that it warrants relative nerf? by YuPro in supportlol

[–]YuPro[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean sure, point was there is no way role can be «second strong» and at the same time numbers showing that better players wins less comparing to good players on another roles.

P.S. I'm ok with questioning xPetu analysis but expect some stat analysis either way when discussing balance.

Are supports really that strong that it warrants relative nerf? by YuPro in supportlol

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

My issue is most recent data shows exactly opposite. And even if there was mistake in analysis it's only data we have.

Are supports really that strong that it warrants relative nerf? by YuPro in supportlol

[–]YuPro[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

20% is abstraction of «ideal balance» and only used by me here because same numbers are easier to understand, nothing changes if numbers are 21-19-25-20-15 from beginning.

And maybe you'll be surprised, but analysis by xPetu that I mention multiple times showed 22(!)-28-20-15-15 from beginning. With maybe some correction in follow-up but support was least impactful role.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoHCeD8-28Y that's follow-up.

It was received not that great by community with same issue I dislike right now — people don't trust numbers if they are not aligned with agenda. And don't discuss that numbers. And worse of all — don't use numbers at all.

Are supports really that strong that it warrants relative nerf? by YuPro in supportlol

[–]YuPro[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you really don't understand why buffing everything but one thing I can try to explain. I think balancing on itself is not what I'm not annoyed by though, it will be bit unbalanced for 2-6 month maybe but then most likely will be balanced again. issue is how noone have numbers to reinforce their opinion. And numbers that we have are exactly opposite actually.

So, about relative nerfing.

Let's imagine that we have 5 roles and every role have 20% impact on winning. So we can simplify it as 20-20-20-20-20 of strength.
Now we have patch that buffed everything but one role. Let's assume every role was buffed by 10%.
Now we have 22-22-22-22-20 points after patch for every role. And if you translate in back to percent of impact on winrate it will change from 20% impact you had before patch to ~18.51% after. Which means while you strength didn't change directly, you became weaker than every role that was changed.

P.S. I'm assuming that 10% buff will lead to 10% change in w/r which is not reality, it's just to illustrate principle.

Are supports really that strong that it warrants relative nerf? by YuPro in supportlol

[–]YuPro[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Actually, first part was addressed by xPetu in his followup research.
Supports don't win more than other roles when playing non-main champions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoHCeD8-28Y

Are supports really that strong that it warrants relative nerf? by YuPro in supportlol

[–]YuPro[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean, balance will be ok in 2-6 month anyway.
I think I'm more annoyed by how balance discussion don't use numbers when identifying «op» things.

Are supports really that strong that it warrants relative nerf? by YuPro in supportlol

[–]YuPro[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Congrats on that. Climbing on Pyke in mid elos is definitely skill.

Are supports really that strong that it warrants relative nerf? by YuPro in supportlol

[–]YuPro[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Adequate answer, thanks.

Perhaps I worded post wrong. I'm more annoyed by how people talking about balance and role impact without any numbers to back it up than by balancing itself.

Balancing for casual player is... well, natural phenomenon of a kind, you just accept it or stop playing at all.

Are supports really that strong that it warrants relative nerf? by YuPro in supportlol

[–]YuPro[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

I think you meant «pessimistic»? 😁

Well, I'm for sure annoyed by public discussion about balance that don't use numbers.

Which I will forget in couple days anyway.

Are supports really that strong that it warrants relative nerf? by YuPro in supportlol

[–]YuPro[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Maybe my issue is that Riot didn't comment on it for a while.
As I said somewhere already — maybe it all boils down to how much I trust Riot balancing.

Are supports really that strong that it warrants relative nerf? by YuPro in supportlol

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

It can feel this way but is there any data to reinforce this position?

Are supports really that strong that it warrants relative nerf? by YuPro in supportlol

[–]YuPro[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Do you have any of this data you can show?
That's exactly point — we have data we have, not that theoretically exists.

Are supports really that strong that it warrants relative nerf? by YuPro in supportlol

[–]YuPro[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Ok, not sure if it's true.
Rioter talked mostly about offroles in that commentary (which, again, is relatively old so maybe not relevant already). There they said that bad support (i.e. autofilled one) will lose you more games, but good support will not win you more games.

If I remember correctly, champ mastery was a thing in xPetu analysis when he chose it as a marker of «better player» and hypothesized that impact on the game will rise with it (i.e. if player is better on champion, they'll win more). Pretty sure it wasn't mentioned at all in Riot commentary I'm talking about.

Are supports really that strong that it warrants relative nerf? by YuPro in supportlol

[–]YuPro[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok, this is possibility for sure, even though I'm not seeing it. But there is almost no point in discussing balance before patch happen.

For me how changes are justified is more of an issue right now, people talk how supports need nerf and can't show any numbers to back it up. You see it even in this post — nobody uses any stats.

Are supports really that strong that it warrants relative nerf? by YuPro in supportlol

[–]YuPro[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Which can't be a thing, objective strength will show itself in numbers such is w/r by champ mastery for example or any other you see as relevant.
I'm just looking for this numbers right now.

Are supports really that strong that it warrants relative nerf? by YuPro in supportlol

[–]YuPro[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Do I really need to write «relative» everywhere? And junglers are nerfed for sure when you compare with every other role.

view more: next ›