The wonders of the American schooling system.

[StormriderX]

"That was possibly the stupidest comment ever. Having less population has nothing to do with the AVERAGE since you devide out the total by the players...more players = more total rps."

http://vnboards.ign.com/message.asp?topic=56675744&start=56885406

 

[nalistah]

another VN-thread... please

 

[adari]

ugh fo with the vn shit, stormrider

 

[vintervargen]

tbh i dont get it, isnt he right?

with the mathematics that is

 

[vindicat0r]

/sigh ............ The fact that he was so sure and thought you were a complete Fool was funnier than the fact he was wrong etc.

another american ... back into the pack ^^

 

[Driwen]

Originally posted by vintervargen
tbh i dont get it, isnt he right?

with the mathematics that is

mathematically storm is wrong . However storm point is right, as if a group is small the chance exist that there will be a rather small percentage of dead weight, which appears to be the case for bm's. Now wish people would stop looking at things like amount of people playing the class and rps to definatly proof some class is overpowered as those numbers can never do that. Only thing that can do that is to see how much damage a savage actually does on average and how good his defence is on average and compare that to other melee classes.

 

[old.Lethul]

i have to agree with the VN mong, i dont see your point storm?

 

[schinkaar]

the VN guy is right in practice but not in theory.

 

[old.TeaSpoon]

Originally posted by schinkaar
the VN guy is right in practice but not in theory.

boing!

 

[Belomar]

Um, Stormrider, the American is right. Mathematically (and that's what we're debating, right?), the population size has no bearing on the average RPs of a class -- the whole idea of an average is to get rid of the size factor. Kind of embarrassing, really, especially that you yourself are so convinced you're right.

 

[rure_]

Yepp, belo is right but I think stormriders point is a bit unclear, correct me if I am wrong. in a game-point of view - a naive view - the population does matter 'cause _usually_ means you are getting easier rps and gain more rps if you outnumber your enemy. which leads to the fact that zerg = more rps in average.

I may have gotten your point wrong?

 

[zelur]

well.. Im not good on maths but I agree with the vn dude.

could be wrong tho but i think u pwned urself now storm ;/

 

[shuko]

lol, I think you should be the one going back to study maths

 

[panos_gr]

lol the american guy is completely right storm if u have a point it sure cant be proven by maths;/

 

[StormriderX]

Hmm lets say excalibur for example.

Class/total rps/population.
27 Blademaster 49,126,261 684 = 71,822 rp per char.

22 Savage 59,114,200 1,329 = 44,480 rp per char.

Population size does matter?

 

[rure_]

Originally posted by StormriderX
Hmm lets say excalibur for example.

Class/total rps/population.
27 Blademaster 49,126,261 684 = 71,822 rp per char.

22 Savage 59,114,200 1,329 = 44,480 rp per char.

Population size does matter?

savages havent been in the game as long as BMs... you need to compare how long a class has been viable in rvr before you can draw any conclusions between those numbers.

 

[StormriderX]

nm he was on about lvl50 figures only