[quote who="pacov" reply="620" id="3498749"] What I'm generally talking about here is picking up on an individual champions strength, often by noting win rate spikes, and then figuring out why. I personally find value in that and have benefited in the past. [/quote] Yeah, and I've also watched you lose yourself a lot of games using this strategy. I think if you add up the negatives along with the positives, the negatives win. Early in the se
[quote who="pacov" reply="611" id="3498652"] Along those same lines, its a little crazy to assume that reduced ban rate = a big win rate spike, right? [/quote] I doubt that you can meaningfully correlate changes in one parameter with changes in the other on a consistent basis. The overall play rate, ban rate, and win rates on a given champion are insanely complicated (overall power of the champion, pool of players playing the champion, overall power of items the
[quote who="pacov" reply="608" id="3498637"] He's strong for that initiation/cc/dmg potential, but I believe overrated by the community at large. [/quote] I'm pretty sure that we have had this conversation about statistics and highly banned champions a couple of times in the past. Don't overinterpret stats in a simplistic way. Thats not how stats or data analysis works. Champions with very high ban rates, whether its Yasuo or pre nerf&
[quote who="Thundercles" reply="607" id="3498631"] And he's a champ that goes better with a team full of knock up champs and an AP top if possible. And he's still a 50% win rate with people playing him without being practiced in him, with forcing him onto non-ideal team comps all the time? [/quote] Well, one thing that has to be realized is that running all AD teams isn't a substantial disadvantage right now. Riot, in search of #lcstopplays, ha
Meh, I don't actually really care about ranked solo queue much or I'd play it more. Its frustrating when you lose 6 of 8 due to stuff like feeders and dc's, but whatever. I don't really care enough to play enough games to have the stats even out. I also don't really care enough to open support tickets on it, although I might have to if it keeps being goofy just to keep the weird stuff from happening. I did finally win a game. It had nothing
Well, I think I'm done with ranked solo in LoL. I just got demoted due to a bug again. So I've lost 8 in a row. 4 of them had disconnects that substantially affected my team losing, 2 had people on my team intentionally throwing (after stating they would intentionally throw), and 2 had just had ordinary really really bad play on my team. So thats fun - I don't know why I seem to get really really really bad luck in solo queue, but it seems to happen to
Yeah, I started 1-0 in promo series. Went 0-3 today. Game 1, every lane loses lanes without any help from their jungler. I manage to pull things back so we might have a chance to win even though we are still behind, but the other team is throwing. Then one of ours dc. They take baron and push down the middle for the win. Game 2, top and bot have bad matchups but manage to kind of keep it together. Mid feeds badly. But we might have a chance
Off the top of my head, Sunday nights might be best for a dedicated night. Dan said he was free on weekends, and we tend to have good numbers then anyway.
The Stardock folk are pretty good about responding to constructive feedback. This feedback is just not that constructive. It is abundantly clear that they aren't going to add features which completely redefine what the game is at this point in the development. It would take YEARS of development time to implement the stuff you want, which obviously isn't happening at this point. Your main complaint is basically that the vision for GCIII doesn
Whether or not you put commas between adjectives can be tricky. An article on it: http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/commas-with-adjectives I believe that there should be a comma in this case. If you were trying to say first (founding meeting) you wouldn't need one, but I don't think that's what you are going for. I think that founding is separa
[quote who="pacov" reply="474" id="3490246"] ooo - would have enjoyed swan shoutcasting. You are streaming things or crazy, though? Didn't get to play much on NA tonight. Had some weird issue on my side and then NA exploded (my desktop crashed a few times... was strange). Think its related to this new client overlay though... even tho that is also weird. I'm over on LAN putzing about in team builder atm. Hey cow
[quote who="pacov" reply="412" id="3486799"] Still would really like to hear anyone's thoughts specifically re: having the right attitude for our games and getting folks on the same page (eg I want to try hard when we are all try harding and goof off when we are goofing off). Nothing to do with people just having a bad game btw and I don't think this applies to ranked. [/quote] Just because people aren't complaining about other people nonstop doesn't me
[quote who="Daiwa" reply="2198" id="3483357"] If current AGW theory failed to predict the observed multidecadal isothermal 'trend' (especially with the fudged antecedent data) then it ain't much of a theory. [/quote] My links have shown 2 things: 1) Lengthy pauses in rising temperatures were predicted by climate change models despite steady increases in greenhouse gasses. See the posts immediately above. For example: <a href="http://on
[quote who="Daiwa" reply="2193" id="3483325"] Problem with your point is that the burden of proof is on those pushing the warming hypothesis. [/quote] Sure. There is a vast amount of literature that does this, as I'm sure you are aware. The problem is that the skeptics/deniers fixate on the few exceptions. So if you have 99 trials that are consistent with climate change and 1 that seems to be anomalous, guess which one gets discussed to no end.
I'm going to try and clarify something that I haven't been clear on here. Its really confusing because statistics can be confusing: The phrase "no statistically significant warming" DOES NOT IMPLY that there has been no warming. Yes, this is really confusing and counterintuitive. Its a result of (frequentist) hypothesis testing, and is one reason why people butcher science so badly. Essentially, science works around falsifying a null hypothesis, wh
I think that Riot might have been drunk with this whole Gnar thing. I mean, you can read their description of Gnar's weaknesses. Supposedly Mega Gnar is weak against ganks when in lane. Um, Mega Gnar is supposedly really tanky, has a ranged AoE slow on his Q, a stun on his W, an untargeted dash/slow on his E, and a knockback combo'd with a slow/stun on his R. In what world is that a "considerable vulnerability" to ganks? Then there is j
Also, to address earlier points, the first response to this issue on the Skeptics StackExchange site is excellent: http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/19291/have-global-surface-temperatures-not-shown-significant-warming-since-the-late-19
[quote who="psychoak" reply="2164" id="3481992"] The Cook survey? Checked if they agreed with 50%, then threw out all the non-committals. Got caught with their pants down on the article classification side, miss classifying works, some entirely unrelated, some from noted skeptics, as explicitly or implicitly endorsing. [/quote] Except you don't have evidence for any of this other than the word of a hack opinion piece. The BEST cases to support the For
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="2152" id="3481527"] Ok. So how would you separate the "skeptics" from the true believers? [/quote] But this isn't the point. We ultimately don't care what individual scientists think. I mean, who cares what the scientists actually think - if you go there, its really just opening things up to ad hominem attacks. What matters is what can be shown from data/models. So I don't care what the individual thinks - I
[quote who="psychoak" reply="2154" id="3481545"] The "reputable surveys" done on "articles published in scientific journals" were exactly the same as those worthless example survey questions he listed. [/quote] There are a lot of reasonable discussions about the methodologies binning of papers into "support" and "don't support" categories. Your article that begins with "Global warming alarmists and their allies in the liberal media..." is clearly not one of them.</
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="2149" id="3481501"] Has anyone ever looked at the wording of the surveys they give to scientists to determine what % of them believe in climate change? I got to see one recently and it was basically 4 questions that went roughly like: [/quote] The reputable surveys about scientific consensus generally aren't from polling random scientists. They are usually done by doing a survey of articles published in scientific journals and seeing wha
Yeah, I had the same lag in the next game that pacov had, so I don't know what was going on last night. I didn't notice it while playing Vi, but when I played Cait the next game, some of my shots would hit on time, but a huge number of my shots would hit ~300ms late. It made last hitting really hard, and trying to poke anything was also really tough. My ping was perfectly fine, but something was up.
[quote who="Thundercles" reply="260" id="3480075"] If someone wants the best chance to win while playing Jungle, they should get good at the big three and J4 or whomever they think will be part of the next big three when the current ones get the nerfs that are already in the pipeline for them. [/quote] Most of the big 3 aren't even that good of solo queue junglers. Elise is actually extremely mediocre. She isn't terrible or anything, but very blah is solo
