Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts
|
|
|
||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
| Frequently Asked Forum Questions | |
|||
|
||||
|
|
|||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts | ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Re: DMR Study Update #2 (aka for uberfoop) | |
| Posted By: RC Master | Date: 1/20/12 2:29 p.m. |
In Response To: DMR Study Update #2 (aka for uberfoop) (Hoovaloov) : I have updated the study with a spreadsheet where I implemented your idea. : Check it out to see the new results. So a 7% increase in spamming wins at long range won't be noticed, but a 4% decrease at mid-range will? WUT? At short range, the decrease is basically due to the fact that in 85% there is less physical difference between your pacing and full-rate spamming. Of course this is going to happen. And anyway, if you're waiting for a full reset every time you fire you don't understand how to use the DMR anyway. There are also other questions left unanswered like: what if you miss? In your example of 'pacing' they have to be very accurate (since their reticle is at it's smallest) which will necessarily be easier to miss without the assistance of any bullet magnetism, especially when trying to always aim at the head (lulwut?). In this instance, someone spamming can fire again in 12 frames (min with the ROF), increasing their chance to win with each shot, while a pacer (in your example) will need to wait longer than that for the reticle to reset on top of that (I'm not actually sure what it is). Look at mid-range. in 100% bloom, a pacer can miss 1 shot, and 12 frames later the spammer is only getting close to their 50% success rate (assuming they're not missing on top of their reticle-bloom induced misses). Now look at mid-range in 85% - 12 frames after the pacer's median, you're 1 frame away from the spammers' 75% success rate. Similar increase in long range. So sure that 85% is amazing still? Sure you could go all Master Chief and reply 'I won't [miss]' but the reality is that you will. Modelling it as a Normal distribution is a nice idea, but I don't think its a good approximation at all. The distribution is heavily skewed low (especially in 85% spam), with a hard lower limit of 49 frames (for the 'added to score' as in your method - the target player actually dies the frame before) I put the time in to crunch the extra numbers because I couldn't stand conclusions being drawn on such a limited view, but that of course still does nothing to address the systemic methodological flaws in the data and the (in my opinion) biased analysis. Dya know what? Can you put the maps up? When I get time I'll do my own analysis and see what I come up with (but I'll probably look at a different question, like 'what weapon and firing cadence should you use at each range in both 100% and 85% bloom').
| |
|
| Replies: |
The HBO Forum Archive is maintained with WebBBS 4.33. |