Forums-->General game forum-->
1|2|3|4
| Author | Is anything going to be done about dwarves??? |
|---|
red demon
What?
Never thought red demons could kill that tanky ogre :p | Beating shadow barbs as a BW is all about a genie hit on DoF ogres, miss that for some reason (bad play, morale proc, good play by them) and it is all over.
For example this is me losing as BW against a shadow barb. One bad decision, and one morale proc and game over. I have since decided that trying to kill cyclops quicker should never be at the expense of ogres, they must always have DoF even if it is only as a preventative measure with them potentially then staying out of the way of genies.
https://www.lordswm.com/war.php?lt=-1&warid=897435744 | Way to divert attention to barbs.
...
Now look at dwarf, clearly OP. Its so easy to kill everything. And this is coming from a player who recently built dwarf castle, had no experience with it in pvp, and is deficient in stats/guilds. I don't think there are too many of you in reality who would be happy to fight dwarf instead of barb.
Yet on lvls 14-19, only on lvl18 dwarf has a clearly better win rate than shadow barb, while on lvls 14,16,17 and 19 shadow barb is better (at your lvl it's shadow barb 70%, dwarf 55%). Doesn't that suggest that shadow barb is stronger at the moment? | And i guess you don't care that your 82% stat is coming from a grand total of 23 battles? And are did all these people who picked bwiz playing with DoF build? Because it is possible to not be in DoF especially if you are playing 1x1 and that won't counter shadow barb.
I know you cant help it that the sample is too small, but your statistics don't disprove anything unless you can get more information.
Alright, so:
- on the one hand we have valid statistics that show that some shadow barb utterly dominates some BW. So yes, builds and stuff mean that perhaps BW could have won more or that the sample is biased in one way or another but the same goes for all statistics. Either way we're talking 82%, not 55% win rate.
- on the other hand we have the word of one player saying that (decent) BW >> shadow and does not back it up by anything
So, sorry, but I gave you objective data while you only offered subjective data, it is you who need more information to back up your theoretical case. | | Besides if you fancy arguments on scientifical ground, then with your background you should know that 20 sample size is fine and used in scientifical papers, you can't always afford hundred sized samples. |
This topic is long since last update and considered obsolete for further discussions.
1|2|3|4Back to topics list
|
