And... I just realized I don't even have 4 gozantis to test that ISD Sloane list.

And I really really don't want to have 4 gozantis. I really don't want this to be the level of the game. Buying 3 of each flotilla was already a big compromise. Now its 4? and multiple squadron packs? Sheesh.

(I'm gonna proxy this one)

1 minute ago, Blail Blerg said:

And... I just realized I don't even have 4 gozantis to test that ISD Sloane list.

And I really really don't want to have 4 gozantis. I really don't want this to be the level of the game. Buying 3 of each flotilla was already a big compromise. Now its 4? and multiple squadron packs? Sheesh.

(I'm gonna proxy this one)

Vassal. It's why I have two Liberties.

56 minutes ago, GiledPallaeon said:

Vassal Yelling Hat Men. It's why I have two Liberties.

Fixed it for you.

1 hour ago, Blail Blerg said:

Now its 4?

No. He didn't say the 4-Gozanti list did well. @Tirion 9-2'd that guy. He broke into top 50%, but not by much.

22 minutes ago, The Jabbawookie said:

Fixed it for you.

No, it was definitely the second Battle Cruiser. Its win rate is only ok, and the standard deviation on tournament score is enormous, but watching people's faces as two Liberties lance across the table at them is priceless. Also needed another HCIT.

@Green Knight's list from the other thread is ISD 4 Gozanti i think.

14 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

@Green Knight's list from the other thread is ISD 4 Gozanti i think.

Good point. I happen to think 4 Goz is completely unnecessary for this to work, but GK has much more credibility than me in that department so I defer to him.

1 minute ago, Ardaedhel said:

Good point. I happen to think 4 Goz is completely unnecessary for this to work, but GK has much more credibility than me in that department so I defer to him.

Seconded. One plus a Quasar is plenty enough.

1 hour ago, Ardaedhel said:

Good point. I happen to think 4 Goz is completely unnecessary for this to work, but GK has much more credibility than me in that department so I defer to him.

I like this new 'Green Knight' knows best wind that's blowing these days

There is some discussion here as to how to compare different numbers of activations to determine how large of an advantage is provided through extra activations. Some are suggesting comparing the top finishers with the average finishers to see how many activations they have. Others suggest comparing the top with the bottom. Etc.

Story time (TL;DR: skip this and the next paragraph) — the first guy to try his hand at soccer analytics did something similar, and he got it wrong. His name was Charles Reep. He wanted to know if the number of passes on a possession had any influence on the likelihood of a goal. So he watched a lot of soccer and recorded the number of passes of each play. He found that the vast majority of goals were scored on 3 or fewer passes. He concluded that a soccer club should strive to shoot on goal after no more than 3 passes. Seems correct, right? Well, I already told you he got it wrong.

You see, the vast majority of all soccer possessions have 3 or fewer passes before either a goal is scored or a ball is turned over. So of course the majority of goals will also be scored after 3 or fewer passes. However, if you instead let the number of passes be the independent variable and the number of goals the dependent variable, then what you would find is that as your team achieves a greater number of successful passes, your probability of scoring a goal increases significantly — exactly the opposite of Mr. Reep's findings. Basically, the longer your team can control the ball, the greater the likelihood of scoring. Completely intuitive.

So what does this have to do with the discussion at hand?

I suggest that when looking at the data, we should look at how often a given number of activations performs well. For example, here are the data from the Vancouver regional:

Note that lower placement on the y-axis is better. Both 1st and 2nd place, for example, had 5 activations. For this extremely limited data set, we can see that 5 activations is superior to 4 activations, with all but one 5-ship fleet (mine, by the way) finishing in the top half of the field. Conversely, all but two 4-ship fleets finished in the bottom half of the field.

By the way, the average number of activations in the top 25% of the field is 4.5. The average number in the bottom 25% is ... also 4.5.

This is a much-too-small data set to draw wide conclusions, but it would be interesting to see the global regional data presented in this manner.

9 hours ago, Green Knight said:

[...]

Like it or hate it. Or somewhere in between. It matters not, bc FFG thinks this is a core feature of the game. I expect them to tweak it through options added through upgrades over the coming waves, but no way will they flat out institute a major rules change banning last/first. Just not happening.

GK, you played too often the empire during the last months. Otherwise you would know that rebellions are built on hope!

10 hours ago, Undeadguy said:

Anyway, I'm off. Currently waiting on my account to be deleted. Armada has died in my area for all the reasons I've expressed over the past months.

I'll be at the regionals in March for those of you coming.

It's been fun folks.

Nope, you really shouldn't do that. You are not only a person with a likes/posting ratio of bigger than 1.0 (which tells something about what an in fact appreciated community member you are), and it is also not everything said that you have such a ratio with more than 4000 posts - what you should really consider is that WE NEED YOU ALSO FOR THE VASSAL WORLD CUP in January. And this cannot be done without an account!

Seriously, just don't do it. Yes sometimes one gets frustrated by the snide comments of the community. But honestly the community is better with you. So, stay, PLEASE!

NOTE: There is a psychological phenomenon to stick with an decision after it is made. This is even enhanced by the fact that people consider it to be a partial loss of face, if they revoke decisions. Don't follow this urge and don't go down this path. It leads to the dark side!

I'm still trying to figure out what caused him to suddenly go this far.

11 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

I'm still trying to figure out what caused him to suddenly go this far.

On a more serious note, it’s a real shame, and I hope you can persuade him to reconsider deleting his account. It’d just sit there when he’s gone anyway...

On 12/6/2017 at 1:56 AM, svelok said:

Removing first/lasting would hurt some tactics too, keep in mind.

Only the bad ones

23 hours ago, The Jabbawookie said:

On a more serious note, it’s a real shame, and I hope you can persuade him to reconsider deleting his account. It’d just sit there when he’s gone anyway...

I honestly dont know what to say.

If you want to know, I really considered walking away from this forum many many times for good. And I think a few people here would still be happy if I did that.

Just now, Blail Blerg said:

I honestly dont know what to say.

If you want to know, I really considered walking away from this forum many many times for good. And I think a few people here would still be happy if I did that.

The number of people who'd miss you would vastly outnumber anyone who wanted to see you go. You contribute regularly, your content is well worth reading, and few people can claim to have predicted and protested Rieekan Aces "before it was cool." The forums can be unpleasant and stressful at times, for sure. However, it's important to remember that we all have a common interest in a delightful little plastic Star Wars game, and we're here because we enjoy interacting. When I stop enjoying my time here, I'll just take a break. I can't imagine permanently quitting. It would distance a person from so much of the community... But in the end, it's obviously best for UndeadGuy to do what makes him happy.

I hate seeing anybody quit. I know I've butted heads with a few people on here from time to time but generally I go on to agree with those same posters in other threads. I would hate for those more confrontational incidents to lead to someone walking away with hurt feelings. I've also formed quite a few actual friendships on here, some of which have carried over into the real world. Most of us come here because we're passionate about the game and that's inevitably going to lead to some disagreements. I can see getting frustrated and needing to take a break but I wouldn't delete my account. That would seem too much like driving a nail in Armada's coffin for me and I want this game to live forever.

1 hour ago, Megatronrex said:

I hate seeing anybody quit. I know I've butted heads with a few people on here from time to time but generally I go on to agree with those same posters in other threads. I would hate for those more confrontational incidents to lead to someone walking away with hurt feelings. I've also formed quite a few actual friendships on here, some of which have carried over into the real world. Most of us come here because we're passionate about the game and that's inevitably going to lead to some disagreements. I can see getting frustrated and needing to take a break but I wouldn't delete my account. That would seem too much like driving a nail in Armada's coffin for me and I want this game to live forever.

Also who will make math jokes with me while I'm bored at work? Nobody that's who! For you to quit would just be obtuse.

20 minutes ago, Noosh said:

Also who will make math jokes with me while I'm bored at work? Nobody that's who! For you to quit would just be obtuse.

No worries. I'm enjoying the game more than ever. FFG would have to seriously screw Armada up to get me to even think about quitting. I also enjoy confrontation so it's highly doubtful that any posters on here could motivate me to leave.

On 12/6/2017 at 3:43 PM, Green Knight said:

...I like there part where I'm in a completely different class of player

Me and Veggie have talked about this many times. Last/first doesn't break the game. Absolutely not.

But it's a HUGE factor in determining what fleets can hope to do well. If your fleet can't handle something basic like facing a last/first Demo or Admo, then just scrap it and move on.

There are plenty of OTHER things that also help shape whats a viable build/strategy, but none of them hit me like a 7.62 NATO between the eyes every time I contemplate a build.

Like it or hate it. Or somewhere in between. It matters not, bc FFG thinks this is a core feature of the game. I expect them to tweak it through options added through upgrades over the coming waves, but no way will they flat out institute a major rules change banning last/first. Just not happening.

I think this is the key. Well said.

On 12/7/2017 at 0:26 AM, stonestokes said:

Note that lower placement on the y-axis is better. Both 1st and 2nd place, for example, had 5 activations. For this extremely limited data set, we can see that 5 activations is superior to 4 activations, with all but one 5-ship fleet (mine, by the way) finishing in the top half of the field. Conversely, all but two 4-ship fleets finished in the bottom half of the field.

By the way, the average number of activations in the top 25% of the field is 4.5. The average number in the bottom 25% is ... also 4.5.

This is a much-too-small data set to draw wide conclusions, but it would be interesting to see the global regional data presented in this manner.

I was hoping this thread would die down (there's that vain hope again), but I didn't think a 'like' was enough for this post. That chart is a top notch work, and I wanted you to know that I appreciated that level of detail.

Thanks. Here is the same graph of data from last season's regionals. Note that I've changed the axes. The y-axis is the number of activations, and the x-axis is the performance, with left being better.

It looks like for last season, 6 ships was the sweet spot for number of activations.

Edit: though this might be misleading, because some of those data points are actually stacks of data points, instead of just a single entry. I'll have to figure out how to represent that.

Edit 2: I replaced the graph to have stacks where multiple people are on a single data point.

4 minutes ago, stonestokes said:

Thanks. Here is the same graph of data from last season's regionals. Note that I've changed the axes. The y-axis is the number of activations, and the x-axis is the performance, with left being better.

It looks like for last season, 6 ships was the sweet spot for number of activations.

How is the x-axis overlapping for placement? Am I misreading this?

Because this applies to ALL regional tournaments for last season. So there were many 1st-place winners, etc.