NU Stats: June 2012

[Ewil]

I was thinking that maybe some math genius can do a proper algorithm to solve this situation.
I believe that making an average of the whole people playing NU (or of all the battles played in NU) and the whole people playing RU (or of all the battles played in RU), and compared them with our standard 3,41% breaking point, we can have a new breaking point for NU/RU (and if someone really put that algorithm out, it can apply on every tier), every (three) month(s). It sounds intricate, that is why i want some math genius :P

P.S. Sorry for some (probably) english errors, but i don't know very well the english math language :P Hope you understand my idea.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

I'm no programmer and I guess this would be pretty complicated, but could it be possible to take in consideration how many people actualy use the given pokemon in addition to it's total use ? In RU's case it would probably not change that much anyway (imagine how much battles there would have been without molk and friends) though I think this month was particularly inactive for the tier. But in other tiers I think it could partially fix the problem.

 

[No Luck Involved]

I was thinking that maybe some math genius can do a proper algorithm to solve this situation.
I believe that making an average of the whole people playing NU (or of all the battles played in NU) and the whole people playing RU (or of all the battles played in RU), and compared them with our standard 3,41% breaking point, we can have a new breaking point for NU/RU (and if someone really put that algorithm out, it can apply on every tier), every (three) month(s). It sounds intricate, that is why i want some math genius :P

P.S. Sorry for some (probably) english errors, but i don't know very well the english math language :P Hope you understand my idea.

That's what the current system does - gathers all the data from all the battles and averages them by the number of battles to get a usage %.

Unless you're advocating pooling the RU and NU data together? That wouldn't really serve any purpose. Changing the 3.41% cutoff point wouldn't achieve anything too. There is no way to manipulate the stats until you start to give more or less weight to certain players, and that isn't really possible without changing the way PO gathers data - not to mention that it will worsen the situation considerably since the data would be taken from an even smaller pool of players.

 

[Swamp-Rocket]

When I said that Metang was staying RU for 1 more month, I meant in terms of "being above 3.41% usage." Sorry about the wording :/

@Ewil - I don't think having a different breaking point is a good idea, mainly due to how much confusion it would cause.

It was like 5 of us that spammed metang for at least 20 battles, most of the battles were Molk's and only like 100 were mine.I must say I was impressed by Molk's dedication to my silly idea as much as everyone else today/yesterday depending on your timezone. And manipulating usage in OU is not that hard actually, in a good day you can get about 1000 easily if someone has that dedication, UU is slightly tricker but at least 100 a day can be achieved easily with proper spam team building.

1000 Battles a Day? Assuming you don't sleep, eat, etc., you we need to have a constant stream of about 90 Second Battles for the entire 24 hour day to make it to 1000 (to be exact, 86.4 seconds). 90 seconds is an incredibly short battle, and usually (hopefully), the entire 24 hour period isn't just battling over and over. I'd say about 200 real battles is the most someone is getting in a day, even if it is OU. This takes a lot of dedication from several people as well, if you are referring to that 1000 as from several people. You may not even be on every single day. Essentially, it takes a ton of battles to get an OU Pokemon up to OU, and the amount of dedication it would take is crazy, since it would take over 9000 battles in a month with that Pokemon while the other 5 Pokemon on your team are getting usage at the same time (pushing that goal Pokemon down even further, which means even more battles have to be done).

I could be wrong, but 1000 battles in a day just seems a bit unbelievable. I agree with UU though, since usually someone can get a battle there.

 

[Ewil]

That's what the current system does - gathers all the data from all the battles and averages them by the number of battles to get a usage %.

Unless you're advocating pooling the RU and NU data together? That wouldn't really serve any purpose. Changing the 3.41% cutoff point wouldn't achieve anything too. There is no way to manipulate the stats until you start to give more or less weight to certain players, and that isn't really possible without changing the way PO gathers data - not to mention that it will worsen the situation considerably since the data would be taken from an even smaller pool of players.

I think i'm explained wrong, sorry.

Yes, the problem is in a smaller pool of players and that cannot be fixed, but only arginated in some way.

I'm referring to the fact that, in some way, we can have a personal breaking point every three months based on the numbers of players and/or battles played in that part of times in both tiers. So we can compare the data and draw up a new breaking point (in some way, i dunno what calcs are involved or the way the admin chooses the famous 3,41%). Once someone do a proper algorythm that should partially obviate to out problem.

I'm only theorizing, so this fact can be pointless, idk, just says my idea.
I'm only think that every tier can probably his personal breaking point based on the numbers of battles/players with the down tier.

 

[rh2012]

I think I understand what Ewil is saying.

Instead of only a total battle percentage, taking a look at the USER percentage could help alleviate the problem. Say if, 300 different accounts battled in NU this month, but only 8 used Metang, you could somehow factor that into the stats along with the total usage. It'd take a lot of tinkering to find appropriate values, and i doubt that it would ever be put into place, but i may give this a try. I'm not bad with numbers if i do say so myself :P

EDIT: Just kidding, i dont have the stats one who used what..

 

[Ewil]

I'm not referring to the single players but to the total numbers.
If a tier like RU have less players (or less battles) then NU, we have maybe to take in consideration another breaking point for the drop down and risers.

Example:

OU has 1000 players and UU has 500, so OU has 50% more players then UU and the breaking point is 3,41% for drop down/risers.

RU has 500 players and NU has 1000 players, so NU has 50% more players then RU that is an upper tier and that's our problem. I think that the breaking point should not be 3,41% if the difference between tiers is this, but it should be for example 2,82% (random number). So i want to know if is possible to calc another breaking point based on the number or players (i made an example with players but i believe that even the battles can counts)

Hope this explain my idea. If not, never mind and don't listen to me, my english is bad or simply i'm bad at explanations xD

 

[Freshke]

metang switching came out of the blue, i could expect magmortar and quag, cryo maybe. But how is golem still NU? It deserves to be moved up over the others, but with the intro of golurk i believe golem is gonna have a tougher time if the trainer doesn't use sucker punch right. But man I'm happy about golurk, it can finally shine.

 

[CrashinBoomBang]

Golem didn't move up because it's terrible in RU. Remember, Pokemon moving up or down is dependant on the tiers above, so Golem's viability in NU doesn't matter one bit.

Anyway, I believe that Golem is current outclassed by differently typed Stealth Rockers (thanks to factors such as Cinccino, Golurk, Magmortar leaving, etc.) such as Probopass, Bastiodon, Lairon and Torterra, so the next usage stats will probably be drastically different from these ones.

 

[watashi]

One of the major selling points of Golem, at least for me, was that it could switch easily into Rotom-S and other Scarfed Electric-types to stop them from gaining momentum while still being able to check Swellow and friends. Sturdy, Sucker Punch, and a Fire-type resistance only made it better. However, I do agree with cbb in that it's not as effective as it was last round.