37 minutes ago, Thormind said:

I planned to answer to all of this, but realized that it is entirely pointless. You keep arguing on semantics, misinterpreting my words, talking about irrelevant things.

Meanwhile you failed to address my only point: The weighting with the list occurance distorts the ranking. If you can argue with that, I will be happy to continue the discussion, but I will ignore everything else you write to me.

1 hour ago, Ubul said:

I planned to answer to all of this, but realized that it is entirely pointless. You keep arguing on semantics, misinterpreting my words, talking about irrelevant things.

Meanwhile you failed to address my only point: The weighting with the list occurance distorts the ranking. If you can argue with that, I will be happy to continue the discussion, but I will ignore everything else you write to me.

Representation does not "distort" the ranking, it has to be taken into account. It is a META ranking. List juggler ranking is not based on representation alone. That was my first statement and its entirery true. Somehow this got distorted into "List juggler doesnt take representation into account".

Now if you are saying that a list occurance should not affect it's ranking in the meta, you do not understand what a meta is or how it works in wargames or TCG. ALL widely used meta analyser that i know, for every single game i've played (including MTG, the biggest one) take into account representation in their ranking. Because they have to. When you are trying to counter the meta, the most important factor to take into account is "what good (win %) lists am i most likely to face (representation)?" Then the next step is "how can i raise my chance to win against those lists".

Between wave 6 and 7, you were much more likely to face Brobots than Fat Han. They were both good lists but if your built was geared toward winning vs Brobots and weaker to Han, you were much more likely to get good results than if it was strong vs Han and weak vs bots. Hence why it's totally normal for the bots to get a higher meta rank.

15 minutes ago, Thormind said:

Between wave 6 and 7, you were much more likely to face Brobots than Fat Han. They were both good lists but if your built was geared toward winning vs Brobots and weaker to Han, you were much more likely to get good results than if it was strong vs Han and weak vs bots. Hence why it's totally normal for the bots to get a higher meta rank.

You start making sense. OK, I get that we should correct the ranking to represent the meta effect. How do you quantify that "builds gear toward winning vs Brobots more than Fat Han"? Multiplying with log(#of squads) is simple, but looks arbitrary and I am not convinced that it accurately addresses the problem.

4 hours ago, Ubul said:

You start making sense. OK, I get that we should correct the ranking to represent the meta effect. How do you quantify that "builds gear toward winning vs Brobots more than Fat Han"? Multiplying with log(#of squads) is simple, but looks arbitrary and I am not convinced that it accurately addresses the problem.

IMO nothing is wrong with the data as presented by default. They give a pretty good and accurate picture of the meta.

54 minutes ago, Thormind said:

IMO nothing is wrong with the data as presented by default. They give a pretty good and accurate picture of the meta.

It maybe a good picture in general, but I am pretty sure that it's not true in the case of Brobots. Without the filter, it is almost at the bottom of the ranking, and it jumps up to 2nd place if you turn it on. No way, that the meta has that big effect. It is more likely that the method cannot handle outliers, and overestimates the performance of lists with exceptionally high occurrence.

I do think the developers are all about the"Scum" for several reasons.

The Mechanic Creep for scum is significant. Dials. EPT generics. Abilities. Costs.

It is not only what you can do today but what you can do tomorrow. With broken large based chassis with little to no negative impact, Future capabilities will continue to be a problem.

I see it in the game store, I see it in the Leagues, I see it in the casual tournaments. The worst part, it is damaging the casual games.

5 hours ago, Ubul said:

It maybe a good picture in general, but I am pretty sure that it's not true in the case of Brobots. Without the filter, it is almost at the bottom of the ranking, and it jumps up to 2nd place if you turn it on. No way, that the meta has that big effect. It is more likely that the method cannot handle outliers, and overestimates the performance of lists with exceptionally high occurrence.

Here is why representation matters: If everyone plays Brobots, the list has a 50% winrate. Perfect balance? They were extremely strong and only not dominant because of their weakness to the also extremely strong Palp-Aces. Their fall from top 3 to the bottom is one of the more shocking power creep stories in X-Wing along with the TIE Fighter and B-Wing.

11 hours ago, Ubul said:

No way, that the meta has that big effect.

The purpose of List Juggler's meta analyzer is to give a picture of the meta. It does not just have an effect on the ranking, it is the ranking. Admiral sums up the bots perfectly:

5 hours ago, Admiral Deathrain said:

Here is why representation matters: If everyone plays Brobots, the list has a 50% winrate. Perfect balance? They were extremely strong and only not dominant because of their weakness to the also extremely strong Palp-Aces. Their fall from top 3 to the bottom is one of the more shocking power creep stories in X-Wing along with the TIE Fighter and B-Wing.

We have "no meta" nights in our local area. Every time they happen the bots shine. On top of being balanced they are also extremely fun to play with or against. If the leaked faq turns out to be true, with palp aces out of the picture we might see the bro make a come back. Im sure many players would like that.

7 minutes ago, Thormind said:

We have "no meta" nights in our local area. Every time they happen the bots shine. On top of being balanced they are also extremely fun to play with or against. If the leaked faq turns out to be true, with palp aces out of the picture we might see the bro make a come back. Im sure many players would like that.

I would not mind that at all. Flying arced large bases is not trivial. They also show remarkable variety in viable builds between symmertical FCS builds, asymmtrical ones that sprinkle Adv. Sensors etc.

1 hour ago, Thormind said:

The purpose of List Juggler's meta analyzer is to give a picture of the meta. It does not just have an effect on the ranking, it is the ranking.

I accept that the List Juggler gives a good general picture of the meta. But since the model it uses is a simple ad-hoc method (without any mathematical proof), it is only a picture, and has limitations. It is definitely not the ranking, it is just a possible ranking. As long as you use list juggler to validate your opinion, I have no problem with that, and will accept it as a perfectly valid one. But if you present the result as a fact, I will respectfully disagree.