xxomegafaustxx
Member
|
Glad someone brought this up and not to further derail from the topic, Correlation implies an association between two variables. If these variables are very closely associated, the "r" value or correlation coefficient is closer to negative or positive one implying a proportional and linear relationship between the two. Of course we can't assume that because these two variables are closely associated that these variables cause the other one to occur. This is where the Correlation vs. Causation takes into theory because we are not sure if one is responsible for causing the observable pattern of another variable. We need much more context to understand this relationship if it does so exists. But here, what I'm trying to argue is that the correlation is an associative one not a causation. Usual with more varium, one is associated to be a stronger player while those who don't have it tend to be not as strong. Similarly winning can/may imply (notice the qualifiers) a player to be associated with skill however that being said, the opposite may hold true. For those mathematicians who enjoy number crunching here's a timbit: 40+ stat difference between the average stat varium user and nonvarium user, enhanced weaponry including the bots (one that does massive damage while the other heals massive nerfs), 2-3+ difference resis and stat different, 2-3 strength points invested in better weaponry and equipment, 10% on weapon specials, and this list could go one forever. Note we haven't factored in enhancement slots, booster packs, xp, etc. Any problems with this? As far as I see it, the only problem I'm having with this statistic is the 40+ stat difference created by enhancements. The ability for varium users to circumvent the traditional payment system of credits in a much easier fashion and effort has resulted into more oped builds to develop over time. This has discouraged new users to come and thus has a detrimental effect to the community as many adopt these Oped builds resulting in many scenarios of imbalance as we are currently experiencing. Furthermore for those who ask, the reason as to why I employ anecdotes as my prose of writing and conveying my ideas and thoughts is because these numbers don't mean anything without context. There's a story behind each number as well as a stemming history as to why these numbers such as these have evolved over time. A number only does not have any meaning; rather it's meaning must be invoked in the context of inspection, evaluation and assessment of the situation. As humans, we have learned through evolution to learn things both empirically and emotionally. As quoted by a famous Japanese poet: quote:
"the only number is 1. Any number larger than 1 is illusion." -Shuntaro Tanikawa (trans. William Elliot) For those who say my posts are far too long, you don't need to read all of it; as long as you get the point and my message I'm completely fine with that. Additionally, we must also look into not only numbers but also the cultural and social premises and parameters to which have greatly amplified issues such as these (like the GAP). If I gave you a number, 100,000,000 without providing you any context of it, what would it mean to you? Understanding and also appreciating the background and skeleton provides us greater rationale and knowledge of the numbers involved in our context We're discussing an issue involving imbalance on many different angles, not just mathematical. The imbalance is not only a statistical anomaly but something that must be consider on a much more deeper level of thinking and rationale.
|