Troll post. Lock the thread. It is clearly just using forum space.
I find this is ridiculous. Just because you do not share my observation and conclusions you call this a troll thread. And if you really think this is a troll thread, why are you then writing in it instead of ignoring this topic. With that state of mind someone can call all threads troll threads.
Its an obvious troll thread because your spouting total nonsense that is not backed up by the facts.
Facts? Did you check the DPS records, I mentioned. I guess not. So dont talk to me about facts untill you have done that.
Yes...we did. And that is like 2k higher than the higest tact. And if we average out the top 10 tact, with the top 10 sci and the top 10 engineer...guess which one has the highest average? Yep...it's tact captains. So once again, you are a clueless idjet who has no idea what the hell you are spewing. Now that I have CLEARLY pointed out where your logic is flawed...please stop...or you are actually trolling now. Or so dumb that Sea is correct and your ability to post should be nerfed.
Your own logic is flawed. Taking average as leading measurement is flawed. As I already pointed out:
The average DPS of the TACs on the list is not the right measure. Maybe more TACs have done more runs. Maybe more TACs are better in min/maxing builds etc. In those cases average DPS of TACS will be higher. (And more TAC entries will be in the higher part of the list)
The list does show that SCI and ENG when proper min/maxed do more DPS then TACs. Their highscore is higher then the best TAC.
Troll post. Lock the thread. It is clearly just using forum space.
I find this is ridiculous. Just because you do not share my observation and conclusions you call this a troll thread. And if you really think this is a troll thread, why are you then writing in it instead of ignoring this topic. With that state of mind someone can call all threads troll threads.
Its an obvious troll thread because your spouting total nonsense that is not backed up by the facts.
Facts? Did you check the DPS records, I mentioned. I guess not. So dont talk to me about facts untill you have done that.
Yes...we did. And that is like 2k higher than the higest tact. And if we average out the top 10 tact, with the top 10 sci and the top 10 engineer...guess which one has the highest average? Yep...it's tact captains. So once again, you are a clueless idjet who has no idea what the hell you are spewing. Now that I have CLEARLY pointed out where your logic is flawed...please stop...or you are actually trolling now. Or so dumb that Sea is correct and your ability to post should be nerfed.
Your own logic is flawed. Taking average as leading measurement is flawed. As I already pointed out:
The average DPS of the TACs on the list is not the right measure. Maybe more TACs have done more runs. Maybe more TACs are better in min/maxing builds etc. In those cases average DPS of TACS will be higher. (And more TAC entries will be in the higher part of the list)
The list does show that SCI and ENG when proper min/maxed do more DPS then TACs. Their highscore is higher then the best TAC.
No you little piece of trash troll. Once you reach statistical viability numbers, you can no longer use the arguement that one set of data has more number than another when we are talking about averages. The DPS league has statistically viable numbers. So fine, we don't do 10...we do ALL tacts, ALL sci and ALL engineer from their charts and average it. Guess who still comes out on top. And don't tell me that there isn't enough results from the sci and engineer section to not have statistically viable sample size you lying sack of refuse. The highest of each category is ONE run each. ONE run which has a LOT of variance available in it. Like did floki get SUPER lucky and crit a lot? Or roll high on the RNG? This is why using a sample size of ONE to compare which class is doing better DPS wise does not work and we need to be looking at some sort of average. But you are a troll who knows this. So if you wanna continue, I will cease to be nice and we can hurry up and get this useless thread shut down.
Well i see some people are trying to call names now. Because they hope the mod will close this topic.
Sad if people come posting in topics without respect, and start calling names, because they disagree with the OP.
Would you like it, if others would talk to you, like you do to me, in your topics?
And again if you think I am trolling, why do you respond in the first place. Everyone knows that you should never feed the trolls. But calling me a troll is just because you do not have proper and decent argumentations. I will ignore your comments from now on because having a normal conversation with you seems not possible at this time.
PS: And again I already explained why taking the avarage of all TAC ENG and SCI's on the list is not a valid measure. Ask a math teacher if you don't understand what I say.
Then TAC wil score 8 avarage, SCI wil score 7,66 average
Does example 2 say TAC is better then SCI? NO In both examples the best SCI is better then the best TAC.
In the second example the average score of a TAC is better. Which could also be due to the fact that the SCIs on rank 6 and 7 did not min/max their builds properly. IF they would have properly min/maxed their build and runs, than they would have the potential to score equaly good as the SCI on position 1. Or in other words: being able to have a higher DPS then the best TAC.
Cant explain it more simple, so sorry if you dont understand.
Folks, would it be possible that you quote some of Felisean’s, Hellspawny’s and my earlier posts in this thread? Spawny is the talented player who set the current record with his engineering toon and Feli and I played supportive roles in that run.
I’m really afraid the OP can’t read us while you got him to respond to your posts. Perhaps it is not a matter of comprehension but only the ill ability to read some postsers due to vanilla.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
Folks, would it be possible that you quote some of Felisean’s, Hellspawny’s and my earlier posts in this thread? Spawny is the talented player who set the current record with his engineering toon and Feli and I played supportive roles in that run.
I’m really afraid he can’t read us while you got him to respond to your posts. Perhaps it is not a matter of comprehension but only the ill ability to read some postsers due to vanilla.
If a SCI is on rank 1 and an ENG is on rank 2 and a TAC is on rank 3, why is the TAC than still the best?
Troll post. Lock the thread. It is clearly just using forum space.
I find this is ridiculous. Just because you do not share my observation and conclusions you call this a troll thread. And if you really think this is a troll thread, why are you then writing in it instead of ignoring this topic. With that state of mind someone can call all threads troll threads.
Its an obvious troll thread because your spouting total nonsense that is not backed up by the facts.
Facts? Did you check the DPS records, I mentioned. I guess not. So dont talk to me about facts untill you have done that.
Yes...we did. And that is like 2k higher than the higest tact. And if we average out the top 10 tact, with the top 10 sci and the top 10 engineer...guess which one has the highest average? Yep...it's tact captains. So once again, you are a clueless idjet who has no idea what the hell you are spewing. Now that I have CLEARLY pointed out where your logic is flawed...please stop...or you are actually trolling now. Or so dumb that Sea is correct and your ability to post should be nerfed.
Your own logic is flawed. Taking average as leading measurement is flawed. As I already pointed out:
The average DPS of the TACs on the list is not the right measure. Maybe more TACs have done more runs. Maybe more TACs are better in min/maxing builds etc. In those cases average DPS of TACS will be higher. (And more TAC entries will be in the higher part of the list)
The list does show that SCI and ENG when proper min/maxed do more DPS then TACs. Their highscore is higher then the best TAC.
No you little piece of trash troll. Once you reach statistical viability numbers, you can no longer use the arguement that one set of data has more number than another when we are talking about averages. The DPS league has statistically viable numbers. So fine, we don't do 10...we do ALL tacts, ALL sci and ALL engineer from their charts and average it. Guess who still comes out on top. And don't tell me that there isn't enough results from the sci and engineer section to not have statistically viable sample size you lying sack of refuse. The highest of each category is ONE run each. ONE run which has a LOT of variance available in it. Like did floki get SUPER lucky and crit a lot? Or roll high on the RNG? This is why using a sample size of ONE to compare which class is doing better DPS wise does not work and we need to be looking at some sort of average. But you are a troll who knows this. So if you wanna continue, I will cease to be nice and we can hurry up and get this useless thread shut down.
Well i see some people are trying to call names now. Because they hope the mod will close this topic.
Sad if people come posting in topics without respect, and start calling names, because they disagree with the OP.
Would you like it, if others would talk to you, like you do to me, in your topics?
And again if you think I am trolling, why do you respond in the first place. Everyone knows that you should never feed the trolls. But calling me a troll is just because you do not have proper and decent argumentations. I will ignore your comments from now on because having a normal conversation with you seems not possible at this time.
Yes. I actually like it when people talk to me like I do to you. That means they are using logic and fact and actually discussing things instead of making **** up like you are. Yeah I am not nice...but that does not make me wrong. When what you feel trumps facts and logic, you are worthless in a discussion.
And I don't feed trolls...I kill them. So run away if you are scared. But if you don't and continue to spew this nonsense, prepare to get flamed you little troll.
Then we have a different opinion on social behavoir and how decent people communicate with each other. If you feel the need to use nasty words so be it. I just hope it makes you feel good, as It will not have further impact on me.
Folks, would it be possible that you quote some of Felisean’s, Hellspawny’s and my earlier posts in this thread? Spawny is the talented player who set the current record with his engineering toon and Feli and I played supportive roles in that run.
I’m really afraid he can’t read us while you got him to respond to your posts. Perhaps it is not a matter of comprehension but only the ill ability to read some postsers due to vanilla.
If a SCI is on rank 1 and an ENG is on rank 2 and a TAC is on rank 3, why is the TAC than still the best?
On record runs countless things have to work right; both for the pilot who sets the record as well for the team that offers the support. Flocki, Spawny and Marcus are all outstanding players, the best PvEer you will find this game.
Nevertheless, on the few runs we/they did, the sum of the action of all participants simply worked out better for the engineer and the sci. Trust me, it is only a matter of time until we see a perfect tac record and your faith in this class will be restored.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
Folks, would it be possible that you quote some of Felisean’s, Hellspawny’s and my earlier posts in this thread? Spawny is the talented player who set the current record with his engineering toon and Feli and I played supportive roles in that run.
I’m really afraid he can’t read us while you got him to respond to your posts. Perhaps it is not a matter of comprehension but only the ill ability to read some postsers due to vanilla.
If a SCI is on rank 1 and an ENG is on rank 2 and a TAC is on rank 3, why is the TAC than still the best?
On record runs countless things have to work right; both for the pilot who sets the record as well for the team that offers the support. Flocki, Spawny and Marcus are all outstanding players, the best PvEer you will find this game.
Nevertheless, on the few runs we/they did, the sum of the action of all participants simply worked out better for the engineer and the sci. Trust me, it is only a matter of time until we see a perfect tac record and your faith in this class will be restored.
Folks, would it be possible that you quote some of Felisean’s, Hellspawny’s and my earlier posts in this thread? Spawny is the talented player who set the current record with his engineering toon and Feli and I played supportive roles in that run.
I’m really afraid he can’t read us while you got him to respond to your posts. Perhaps it is not a matter of comprehension but only the ill ability to read some postsers due to vanilla.
If a SCI is on rank 1 and an ENG is on rank 2 and a TAC is on rank 3, why is the TAC than still the best?
On record runs countless things have to work right; both for the pilot who sets the record as well for the team that offers the support. Flocki, Spawny and Marcus are all outstanding players, the best PvEer you will find this game.
Nevertheless, on the few runs we/they did, the sum of the action of all participants simply worked out better for the engineer and the sci. Trust me, it is only a matter of time until we see a perfect tac record and your faith in this class will be restored.
I am looking forward to it. Succes with the runs.
Thank you very much.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
Over the time that I've played this game, I've played all 3 career tracks on all 4 races so to speak that you can without paying. I do rather prefer engi to tac because for me it's easier to get up to higher dps, they are a little more along my method of thought. I can't stand sci, never could figure them out, and tac is meh at best for me. If you're looking at nerfs, I for one say that if you're looking at people that specialize in a particular setup that does what they want, then you're looking at the wrong point. Looking at a specialist to say that a dps eng/sci can do more than the average tac is like saying you're looking at a spec ops soldier and saying see he's better than the regular guy so lets get rid of spec ops. They're supposed to be better. When I look at a 5 page statistics table, I throw out the first 2 and last 2 pages and look at the middle then decide something. I do that building computers, did that in the military fixing trucks, and do the same thing everytime I go to build a race car now. You're never going to convince anyone looking at the first page who has a modicum of common sense.
Yes I'm a computer nerd gamer, no I don't modify games.
Then TAC wil score 8 avarage, SCI wil score 7,66 average
Does example 2 say TAC is better then SCI? NO In both examples the best SCI is better then the best TAC.
In the second example the average score of a TAC is better. Which could also be due to the fact that the SCIs on rank 6 and 7 did not min/max their builds properly. IF they would have properly min/maxed their build and runs, than they would have the potential to score equaly good as the SCI on position 1. Or in other words: being able to have a higher DPS then the best TAC.
Cant explain it more simple, so sorry if you dont understand.
THAT IS NOT HOW YOU GET THE AVERAGE FOR EACH CLASS. Like seriously, you just literally just made some **** up right now to try and "prove" that you are right. And I do mean actually literally not figuratively.
This is how it works
Top 5 sci is 10, 6, 6, 5, 3 = 6 on avergae
Top 5 eng is 9, 6, 6, 5, 3 = 5.8 on average
Top 5 tac is 9, 9, 8, 8, 7 = 8.2 on average
Which class when averaged out is the best again? Now do that with the DPS chart.
Top 5 sci is 261k, 179k, 177, 176, 130k = 184.6k
Top 5 eng is 259k, 188k, 148k, 146k, 127k = 179.4k
Top 5 tac is 259k, 253k, 234k, 227k, 219k = 238.4k
And in a game that has RNG, using top runs only...that is less than 1% apart as the ONLY data point is shear folly for what is OP or not. In fact, one would say that shows that we finally have some parity in the classes. They would be wrong once you actually look at the data...but hey, the LOGICAL conclusion to get from the top of each class data point from a REASONABLE person on seeing that the variance is less than 1% would be that there is class parity...but not from a troll like you of course.
And again you still don't see the flaw in your own logic. And still don't understand what i wrote.
Avarage is the wrong parameter to determine who is best. SCI is better then ENG and TAC bevcause SCI is number one on the ranking. ALL OTHER SCI RUNS/BUILDS DONT MATTER. Why? Because all those runs were not optimal/not using the best build, hence their lower scores then the number 1 SCI build/run.
Only comparing the best of each class matters, because those were the best runs and builds of those class. What your numbers could show is that TACs on average have better min/maxed their builds and runs on avarage. That it is maybe more easy to get good runs and decent builds with a TAC. But currently if some one uses an optimal SCI build/run then that score currently will be higher then the best TAC.
Over the time that I've played this game, I've played all 3 career tracks on all 4 races so to speak that you can without paying. I do rather prefer engi to tac because for me it's easier to get up to higher dps, they are a little more along my method of thought. I can't stand sci, never could figure them out, and tac is meh at best for me. If you're looking at nerfs, I for one say that if you're looking at people that specialize in a particular setup that does what they want, then you're looking at the wrong point. Looking at a specialist to say that a dps eng/sci can do more than the average tac is like saying you're looking at a spec ops soldier and saying see he's better than the regular guy so lets get rid of spec ops. They're supposed to be better. When I look at a 5 page statistics table, I throw out the first 2 and last 2 pages and look at the middle then decide something. I do that building computers, did that in the military fixing trucks, and do the same thing everytime I go to build a race car now. You're never going to convince anyone looking at the first page who has a modicum of common sense.
SCI's and ENG's were substantialy worse before the revamp then TAC. This has been changed now. SCI and ENG have gotten more new things. The revamp/nerfing had the highest impact on TACs. Hence the best TAC build/run score now ends up below ENG en SCI on the ranking. Also ENG end SCI are less fragile then TAC builds.
Based on those facts I conclude more players will start to play ENG and SCI then before now. Which means more people will invest in those ENG/SCI builds then before. Which means at the end more cashflow towards Cryptic. Which means more profit for Cryptic and hopefully more game development which we all can enjoy.
Who said I was decent? I sure as hell didn't. I freely admit that I am a jerk. Once again, that does not make me wrong or you right. You are still a lying troll who just literally made up math to lie. Doesn't matter how decent you think you are (and FYI, you really ain't). So...yeah.
I dont mind so much if you understand. If even very simplyfied examples dont ring a bell so be it. Other people read here as well. And people who understand what I wrote and understand math read here too. I can live with the fact that there will always be people who won't or cant onderstand what I wrote.
I don't think you are a jerk. Jerkish behaviour is mostly used to cover up other flaws.
I'm sorry...but are you floki? Or fel? Or hellspawny? With all the people who helped get those numbers? With the exact same RNG seed? Because otherwise, those numbers really does not mean as much as you think. You are mistaking best situationally...i.e. whatever the situation it was to get those numbers with best...as in a general overall best. When you are talking about nerfing other classes, we don't look at situational bests...we look at on AVERAGE and in GENERAL to determine that. You are the one who doesn't understand...or I would like to say...but I think you do. It's just that your little wee wee can't handle it and you just HAVE to live through the accomplishments of your betters. And how dare floki and hellspawny do better than your precious tact record. Nevermind that tact captains overall still do the best in this game. Or are you one of those terrible players that can't even make that work...so you have to bring others down to your level? I mean I though you were pretty dispicable already, but you seem to want to keep digging that hole of yours. That is pretty low of you there...wanting to bring others down to your level of suck so you can feel better...for shame.
Are you now saying those beautiful records don't mean much. And no matter what, TACs are the best, regardless if SCI en ENG are higher on the ranking.
How many studies re you using to get your conclusion? Every single "DPS Record" is managed by a different group of players, using different weights of data, on different groups of player characters. YOUR community might be showing Engineering or sci toons dominating, but most of the other groups aren't showing that or you'd have more support for your thesis.
Also;
differences in content also apply. for six years, as an example, Sci was viewed as the weaker sister in DPS racing to Tac, but in the (dying.shrinking.) PvP community, Sci has been dominant practically since we were first allowed maps to shoot at each other.
Even after the "great big science nerf" in 2011.
Consistently, the only profession that's shown low averages in both PvE and PvP has been...Engineering.
(AND EVEN THERE, you've got players that routinely break the averages thanks to build quality, keybinds, keyboard macros, connection speeds, etc. etc.)
Before you start a thread like this, gather some information from DIFFERENT sources-there are at least 3 different parsers in common use, and something like four or five major groups that track DPS, and post standings. Otherwise, you're only observing a tiny portion of the playerbase and only looking at data from a narrow, possibly specialized community, possibly one where the best and most experienced members happen to run Sci or Engi toons specifically BECAUSE they're weaker than the DPS toons at the same level of gear and play.
IOW, your thesis lacks supporting evidence.
You seem to be knowlegable. If so, why didn't you add the top 3 results of those "5 major groups that track DPS" inclucing the screenshots as supporting evidence?
Who said I was decent? I sure as hell didn't. I freely admit that I am a jerk. Once again, that does not make me wrong or you right. You are still a lying troll who just literally made up math to lie. Doesn't matter how decent you think you are (and FYI, you really ain't). So...yeah.
I dont mind so much if you understand. If even very simplyfied examples dont ring a bell so be it. Other people read here as well. And people who understand what I wrote and understand math read here too. I can live with the fact that there will always be people who won't or cant onderstand what I wrote.
I don't think you are a jerk. Jerkish behaviour is mostly used to cover up other flaws.
.
I ain't covering up jack. I know what I am. Don't think everyone is as deluded as you are. I accept who I am and have no problems with it. If you do...well that's really on you...not me. As for others "understanding" your math...well...that would be currently zero people who posted...and one can only hope that there isn't anyone else so stupid as to think what you did is how you average out the DPS of the different classes. I say hope instead of I know because the school system seems to have failed pretty hard and I can't be sure anymore. We are so doomed....
I'm sorry...but are you floki? Or fel? Or hellspawny? With all the people who helped get those numbers? With the exact same RNG seed? Because otherwise, those numbers really does not mean as much as you think. You are mistaking best situationally...i.e. whatever the situation it was to get those numbers with best...as in a general overall best. When you are talking about nerfing other classes, we don't look at situational bests...we look at on AVERAGE and in GENERAL to determine that. You are the one who doesn't understand...or I would like to say...but I think you do. It's just that your little wee wee can't handle it and you just HAVE to live through the accomplishments of your betters. And how dare floki and hellspawny do better than your precious tact record. Nevermind that tact captains overall still do the best in this game. Or are you one of those terrible players that can't even make that work...so you have to bring others down to your level? I mean I though you were pretty dispicable already, but you seem to want to keep digging that hole of yours. That is pretty low of you there...wanting to bring others down to your level of suck so you can feel better...for shame.
Are you now saying those beautiful records don't mean much. And no matter what, TACs are the best, regardless if SCI en ENG are higher on the ranking.
ON AVERAGE. What part of that word do you not understand?!? You are talking about balanced with the entire class of sci and eng...not nerfing hellspawny and floki ONLY you blooming idjet. Not only that, but you are rather clueless how those runs generate those numbers. Yes, those numbers are kinda useless. I can triple my DPS in an ISA run by parking myself in front of the gate while my team tosses de-buffs on it while one person wipes out the map alone. We wouldn't use a number generated that way in the DPS league as that is pretty much faking the number...but you really have no idea what goes into these record runs. They really don't mean much...and EVERYONE else including people who helped generate those numbers is telling you so. Those top numbers are goal posts...that is all really.
You seem to like talking to me a lot. Go ahead. I am listening :-)
BTW: "ON AVERAGE. What part of that word do you not understand?!? " The RAGE part (of the word average), from your side I dont understand.
"If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross. But it's not for the timid." - Q
Strathkin said it perfectly. The tacs on the table, on average, were more successful than any science or engineering builds, aside from extreme fringe cases.
I'd like to point out on my own that they are records. They keep track of the absolute highest anyone has ever gotten ever, regardless of any random external variables, which means that, on the off chance an engineer or science captain happened to get 100% crits for an entire game, it would still be counted.
This is why it's important to get a large sample size. The averages for the top scores on STO-league clearly show that tacticals are still miles ahead of everyone else.
And one more thing. I'd like to see these tables that OP is pointing to, because I haven't seen a single source aside from one that proves him wrong.
The average DPS of the TACs on the list is not the right measure. Maybe more TACs have done more runs. Maybe more TACs are better in min/maxing builds etc. In those cases average DPS of TACS will be higher. (And more TAC entries will be in the higher part of the list)
The list does show that SCI and ENG when proper min/maxed do more DPS then TACs. Their highscore is higher then the best TAC.
No. The list shows that one SCI and one ENG managed to do better than the best TAC at the moment. If you had it your way, there should always be a TAC at the top, and that's what I would call unbalanced.
Space - the final frontier. These are the adventures of Tovan Khev - told by his loyal servant ... err... Commanding Officer.
The variables in all the top runs were so extreme that one would need to run hundreds of tests to see if any one build was actually viable. The records that are shown at the top are the very peaks of any given run, which is not an accurate way to measure general build strength.
For instance, 2 builds are exactly the same except for one captain being tactical and the other engineering. They both use the same powers and never do anything differently, but the tactical captain had better RNG and as such, better DPS. Do tacticals need a nerf? No, obviously not. It was simply randomness that split the two runs from each other.
Applying this to the top of the league is simple as well. It is not mathematically viable to measure only one run, as that accounts for none of the variables within the measurement. The top runs were simply flukes, and would need hundreds more tests before any conclusive, concrete proof of a powerful build was found.
You cannot make a serious observation from a single run with thousands upon thousands of variable numbers. That's not how you make any sort of measurement ever.
No, he sees the posts. He isn't replying to those because he can't actually refute what they said. He mistakenly thought because I had some name calling in my post that I would be easy picking or have less actualy content in my post. He is is one of those people with a small wee wee that can't handle that his favorite class isn't the best at EVERYTHING anymore and is now just only still the best class to use on average. I mean how low does your ego have to be to resort to something like this? If it wasn't so funny, I might actually feel sorry for him. But as requested...and I think these are the ones you wanted...
You were right, thanks for trying though.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
Comments
Your own logic is flawed. Taking average as leading measurement is flawed. As I already pointed out:
Well i see some people are trying to call names now. Because they hope the mod will close this topic.
Sad if people come posting in topics without respect, and start calling names, because they disagree with the OP.
Would you like it, if others would talk to you, like you do to me, in your topics?
And again if you think I am trolling, why do you respond in the first place. Everyone knows that you should never feed the trolls. But calling me a troll is just because you do not have proper and decent argumentations. I will ignore your comments from now on because having a normal conversation with you seems not possible at this time.
PS: And again I already explained why taking the avarage of all TAC ENG and SCI's on the list is not a valid measure. Ask a math teacher if you don't understand what I say.
Example 1:
Take following top 5 list as example
1 SCI scores 10
2 ENG scores 9
3 TAC scores 8
4 TAC scores 7
5 TAC scores 6
Then TAC wil score 7 average, SCI wil score 10 avarage
Example 2:
1 SCI scores 10
2 ENG scores 9
3 TAC scores 8
4 SCI scores 7
5 SCI scores 6
Then TAC wil score 8 avarage, SCI wil score 7,66 average
Does example 2 say TAC is better then SCI? NO In both examples the best SCI is better then the best TAC.
In the second example the average score of a TAC is better. Which could also be due to the fact that the SCIs on rank 6 and 7 did not min/max their builds properly. IF they would have properly min/maxed their build and runs, than they would have the potential to score equaly good as the SCI on position 1. Or in other words: being able to have a higher DPS then the best TAC.
Cant explain it more simple, so sorry if you dont understand.
Folks, would it be possible that you quote some of Felisean’s, Hellspawny’s and my earlier posts in this thread? Spawny is the talented player who set the current record with his engineering toon and Feli and I played supportive roles in that run.
I’m really afraid the OP can’t read us while you got him to respond to your posts. Perhaps it is not a matter of comprehension but only the ill ability to read some postsers due to vanilla.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
If a SCI is on rank 1 and an ENG is on rank 2 and a TAC is on rank 3, why is the TAC than still the best?
The way is see it the SCI is the best.
Then we have a different opinion on social behavoir and how decent people communicate with each other. If you feel the need to use nasty words so be it. I just hope it makes you feel good, as It will not have further impact on me.
On record runs countless things have to work right; both for the pilot who sets the record as well for the team that offers the support. Flocki, Spawny and Marcus are all outstanding players, the best PvEer you will find this game.
Nevertheless, on the few runs we/they did, the sum of the action of all participants simply worked out better for the engineer and the sci. Trust me, it is only a matter of time until we see a perfect tac record and your faith in this class will be restored.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
I am looking forward to it. Succes with the runs.
Thank you very much.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
And again you still don't see the flaw in your own logic. And still don't understand what i wrote.
Avarage is the wrong parameter to determine who is best. SCI is better then ENG and TAC bevcause SCI is number one on the ranking. ALL OTHER SCI RUNS/BUILDS DONT MATTER. Why? Because all those runs were not optimal/not using the best build, hence their lower scores then the number 1 SCI build/run.
Only comparing the best of each class matters, because those were the best runs and builds of those class. What your numbers could show is that TACs on average have better min/maxed their builds and runs on avarage. That it is maybe more easy to get good runs and decent builds with a TAC. But currently if some one uses an optimal SCI build/run then that score currently will be higher then the best TAC.
SCI's and ENG's were substantialy worse before the revamp then TAC. This has been changed now. SCI and ENG have gotten more new things. The revamp/nerfing had the highest impact on TACs. Hence the best TAC build/run score now ends up below ENG en SCI on the ranking. Also ENG end SCI are less fragile then TAC builds.
Based on those facts I conclude more players will start to play ENG and SCI then before now. Which means more people will invest in those ENG/SCI builds then before. Which means at the end more cashflow towards Cryptic. Which means more profit for Cryptic and hopefully more game development which we all can enjoy.
I dont mind so much if you understand. If even very simplyfied examples dont ring a bell so be it. Other people read here as well. And people who understand what I wrote and understand math read here too. I can live with the fact that there will always be people who won't or cant onderstand what I wrote.
I don't think you are a jerk. Jerkish behaviour is mostly used to cover up other flaws.
Are you now saying those beautiful records don't mean much. And no matter what, TACs are the best, regardless if SCI en ENG are higher on the ranking.
You seem to be knowlegable. If so, why didn't you add the top 3 results of those "5 major groups that track DPS" inclucing the screenshots as supporting evidence?
You seem to like talking to me a lot. Go ahead. I am listening :-)
BTW: "ON AVERAGE. What part of that word do you not understand?!? " The RAGE part (of the word average), from your side I dont understand.
Space - the final frontier. These are the adventures of Tovan Khev - told by his loyal servant ... err... Commanding Officer.
For instance, 2 builds are exactly the same except for one captain being tactical and the other engineering. They both use the same powers and never do anything differently, but the tactical captain had better RNG and as such, better DPS. Do tacticals need a nerf? No, obviously not. It was simply randomness that split the two runs from each other.
Applying this to the top of the league is simple as well. It is not mathematically viable to measure only one run, as that accounts for none of the variables within the measurement. The top runs were simply flukes, and would need hundreds more tests before any conclusive, concrete proof of a powerful build was found.
You cannot make a serious observation from a single run with thousands upon thousands of variable numbers. That's not how you make any sort of measurement ever.
You were right, thanks for trying though.
Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.