Are Multimasters broken? Tournament statistics.

[NoisyAssassin]

7 hours ago, thatlatinspeakingguy said:

McMourning had second lowest winrate at your tournament. He doesn't seem like someone to tech against.

It's possible that he had such a low win rate precisely because people tech against him 

[thatlatinspeakingguy]

11 minutes ago, NoisyAssassin said:

It's possible that he had such a low win rate precisely because people tech against him 

what's the reliable tech against McMourning except Pandora who can end any condition on anyone? genuine question, just can't think of anything else except Lady J and her unresisted removal.

[Ogid]

]

[Scoffer]

10 minutes ago, thatlatinspeakingguy said:

what's the reliable tech against McMourning except Pandora who can end any condition on anyone? genuine question, just can't think of anything else except Lady J and her unresisted removal.

Brewmaster, Von Schtook, Hamelin - that's what comes to mind first.

[thatlatinspeakingguy]

3 minutes ago, Scoffer said:

Brewmaster, Von Schtook, Hamelin - that's what comes to mind first.

so you're hiring Hamelin as a second master if your opponent declares McMourning?

[Daniel Walker]

4 minutes ago, thatlatinspeakingguy said:

so you're hiring Hamelin as a second master if your opponent declares McMourning?

He is playing Bayou, but why not?) Brewmaster is solid pick against Mourning

[Daniel Walker]

35 minutes ago, NoisyAssassin said:

It's possible that he had such a low win rate precisely because people tech against him 

May be people just don't like Douglas. Because you don't need to pick Mourning if you are having Yan Lo

[thatlatinspeakingguy]

@Scoffer if you are going to do a similar thing after the next major event, I have a proposal: make a separate analysis or simply narrow your analysis to players with at least three wins (in case of 5 round event). It will give better impression of what is competetively viable in your meta.

[Scoffer]

5 minutes ago, thatlatinspeakingguy said:

@Scoffer if you are going to do a similar thing after the next major event, I have a proposal: make a separate analysis or simply narrow your analysis to players with at least three wins (in case of 5 round event). It will give better impression of what is competetively viable in your meta.

There is enough data to do it right now, but I don't see how it helps.

[Maniacal_cackle]

One thing to note as well is that how good double masters are depends enormously on the pool.

For the last round, Corrupted Idols with Hold Up Their Forces, Vendetta, Harness the Leyline, Detonate Charges, and Power Ritual doesn't seem like the most friendly pool to double masters, so this could be skewing the results for the top 10.

However, it brings out an important point: double masters are only important for SOME pools. So they can hardly be said to be dominating if some pools actually make them weak choices.

Thanks for providing the link to the data, super useful to go look at the detail.

[ReynardMiri]

What I am reading from the initial post is that multi beats single about twice as often as single beats multi.

[Adran]

5 hours ago, ReynardMiri said:

What I am reading from the initial post is that multi beats single about twice as often as single beats multi.

I assume you have little statistical experience (which is fairly common). 

Certainly over the entire tournament, when solo master met a multi master list, the multi master list won just under 55% of those games.

But that doesn't hold true if you look at the results of the top placed players, where they  had 70% win of single vs multi,  and Multi vs single across the whole event, and when compared against each other there was a 60% win rate for solo vs multi compared to a 20% win rate for multi vs Solo.

So multi master lists seems better to beat newer players rather than beat better players. Which doesn't surprise me, as Masters are powerful, and it takes some thought and/or experience to be able to counter them with weaker models. And the learning curve to use multiple masters is probably better than using a solo master (typically its fewer working parts, and more forgiving I expect).

Of course, this is a very small snap shot, so about the only conclusive thing you can get from this data is its better to play players worse than you if you want to win

 

[RisingPhoenix]

One important thing to note is that a higher percentage of players who own only one master are newer players.  If there's a skill component to Malifaux that grows over time, we'd expect new players to be less skilled than experienced players.  Thus it'll always skew double master if you look at the overall data, because owning two masters is an obvious prerequisite for double master, and some proportion of the players playing single master are simply playing what they own.  

[ReynardMiri]

On 1/29/2020 at 4:27 AM, Adran said:

Certainly over the entire tournament, when solo master met a multi master list, the multi master list won just under 55% of those games.

And the single master list won just over 30%, yes. 55 is about twice 30.

I do see your point about Top10 vs Top10. I missed that initially.