Spiku Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 It's hardly bovid faecal in nature; it is specifically not aimed at local meta. It is aimed at the comparison of the masters themselves in achieving objectives and their capacity to play against each other in direct match ups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cunning Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 I think the dreamer player would have to be pretty unlucky to not beat Seamus even in claim jump. Lelus and Chompy should be able to tear though anything Seamus thows at them (including seamus himself) with little problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ukrocky Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Guys, stop right there. You're forgetting about the ultimate truth. There is only 2 tiers: Tier 1: Most of the masters Tier Marcus: Marcus *Facepalm* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucidicide Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Woah guys woah! All this "I think" talk! Objective, remember? It doesn't matter what you think. It matters what is. If you think that someone is not being objective, you are wrong because the second you think then you're not being Objective! Let's get a grip people. Learn to live in the Truth! OBJECTIVITY! Start achieving it by removing the "I think." Thinking is your first problem, because it is innately tethered to you, making it subjective. So stop the thinking and accept the Truth! Calmdown's list is accurate. If you do not agree, it's because you've been doing too much thinking! And that clouds judgment. So cut it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zephir Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Its amazing how epic a thread gets when people feel insulted by you putting 'their' master in a low tier. There is so much emotion in a lot of the replies that its easy to see why so much judgement is clouded. I actually find it very interesting that people are unable to detach themselves from their local players and their love of certain models and simply look at models on their own merits. And also interesting that people, feeling that they cannot be objective, believe that no one else can be either. In regards to Nicodem in particular, let's say that I'm no slouch with him either, but it doesn't mean that I think he's something he's not. Winning with Nicodem is more an exercise in playskill than him being any good. That wouldn't stop me 8-0'ing each and every one of you all day with The Dreamer, no matter how good a Nico player you are. Interesting thread! Well touche sir, I guess I didn't realize you had no emotion. Had I known you were Vulcan I never would have tried to dispute your supreme logic. Its darn unfortunate a friggin ocean seperates us so I don't have the chance to show you how wrong you are about your dreamer ideas. If you are ever near D.C or planning on making a Gen Con let me know, I'll pound you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dumb Luck Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Emotionally attached to their masters? I don't understand. I'm totally fine with Somer being rock bottom. *grin* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiku Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 How about I set up a gaming table, and you can play by mail =3 In the meantime, I shall agree with Dumb Luck only so people look worse when I win with him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cunning Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Its darn unfortunate a friggin ocean seperates us so I don't have the chance to show you how wrong you are about your dreamer ideas. If you are ever near D.C or planning on making a Gen Con let me know, I'll pound you. With who? Nico? Hahahahahahahahahahaha! That was a joke right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calmdown Posted March 1, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 If you are ever near D.C or planning on making a Gen Con let me know, I'll pound you. Sure. And if you honestly believe that Nicodem can beat the Dreamer when both are played by good players, I have a bridge to sell you too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fetid Strumpet Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Well technically he can beat you, I mean if the flips and hand just always go against the Dreamer and flips and hand just rock for Nicodem, and his hand every turn just happens to be the 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, & 8 of Crows every turn, he can win. However my money is still on Calmdown and the Dreamer, sorry Zephir. I would be happy to be proven my expectations are wrong, but I don't see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chucklemonkey Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Woah guys woah! All this "I think" talk! Objective, remember? It doesn't matter what you think. It matters what is. If you think that someone is not being objective, you are wrong because the second you think then you're not being Objective! Let's get a grip people. Learn to live in the Truth! OBJECTIVITY! Start achieving it by removing the "I think." Thinking is your first problem, because it is innately tethered to you, making it subjective. So stop the thinking and accept the Truth! Calmdown's list is accurate. If you do not agree, it's because you've been doing too much thinking! And that clouds judgment. So cut it out. Yes, but in order for calmdown to formulate the list he had to think about it. No matter the validity of it, it is still based on his admittedly considerable experience. As such it is inherently not objective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calmdown Posted March 1, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Well technically he can beat you, I mean if the flips and hand just always go against the Dreamer and flips and hand just rock for Nicodem, and his hand every turn just happens to be the 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, & 8 of Crows every turn, he can win. However my money is still on Calmdown and the Dreamer, sorry Zephir. I would be happy to be proven my expectations are wrong, but I don't see it. Precisely. And it would be no reflection on Zephir to lose, say, 9/10 games with Nico vs Dreamer, assuming terrible luck 1/10 games. In any case, this is the exact situation in which we would consider tier lists useful and so is a good example of what the point of a list like this is; two skilled players playing eachother. Chompy will win on average because he's better than Nicodem, not because of player skill level. ---------- Post added at 09:25 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:24 AM ---------- Yes, but in order for calmdown to formulate the list he had to think about it. No matter the validity of it, it is still based on his admittedly considerable experience. As such it is inherently not objective. He was being sarcastic I think you'll find Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msgfree Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Yes, but in order for calmdown to formulate the list he had to think about it. No matter the validity of it, it is still based on his admittedly considerable experience. As such it is inherently not objective. (psst...I'm pretty sure that is exactly what he is saying....it was sarcasm. At least that is how I understood it.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucidicide Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 I once saw Zephir beat a man flipping nothing but Black Jokers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chucklemonkey Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 (psst...I'm pretty sure that is exactly what he is saying....it was sarcasm. At least that is how I understood it.) Hmmmn, you may have a point there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucidicide Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Hmmmn, you may have a point there. Haha. I was, it's true. I take issue with objective truth in general (who does it think it is, being right all the time?), and thus must defend subjectivity from it. It's the existentialist inside of me crying out for freedom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Bigglesworth Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Woah guys woah! All this "I think" talk! Objective, remember? It doesn't matter what you think. It matters what is. If you think that someone is not being objective, you are wrong because the second you think then you're not being Objective! Let's get a grip people. Learn to live in the Truth! OBJECTIVITY! Start achieving it by removing the "I think." Thinking is your first problem, because it is innately tethered to you, making it subjective. So stop the thinking and accept the Truth! Calmdown's list is accurate. If you do not agree, it's because you've been doing too much thinking! And that clouds judgment. So cut it out. Really? is this a joke? Objectivity exist yes if you have hard data. Where is the hard data? None provided therefore objectivity is unobtainable. You some form of measurable equation that each person could use to get the same results would prove an objective response. Again looking at calmdowns list withoit play experience I can agree with almost all but I couldn't give you a measurable reason why other than gut feel. He has also provided no other measurable standards, I dont play him, i don't think it would be easy. But it is insulting to say if don't agree your not being objective. Mere fact looking at the opposing point of views that have posted already, that should be enough proof there is error in taking his post a face value. His creditials are well known, so are nix, and some others here. Someone suggested trying to calculating the creation values, the assigned numbers that is q noble effort. Point is don't claim something with such boldness and not expect to be criticized. Im sorry if I posted something to upset enough to post something this flawed: If you think that someone isnotbeingobjective,youare wrong because the second you think then you're notbeingObjective! ***Format got list in copy. No one who has offered feedback has claimed objectivity that I noticed, and no one who flags something as "UN"-objective is assumed to being objective. Last one can be objective when they think as an individual. I'm not implying to be objective nor that my list is, I stated the flaws openly. At this point i am bowing out to become an observer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msgfree Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Really? is this a joke? Objectivity exist yes if you have hard data. Where is the hard data? None provided therefore objectivity is unobtainable. You some form of measurable equation that each person could use to get the same results would prove an objective response. Again looking at calmdowns list withoit play experience I can agree with almost all but I couldn't give you a measurable reason why other than gut feel. He has also provided no other measurable standards, I dont play him, i don't think it would be easy. But it is insulting to say if don't agree your not being objective. Mere fact looking at the opposing point of views that have posted already, that should be enough proof there is error in taking his post a face value. His creditials are well known, so are nix, and some others here. Someone suggested trying to calculating the creation values, the assigned numbers that is q noble effort. Point is don't claim something with such boldness and not expect to be criticized. Im sorry if I posted something to upset enough to post something this flawed: If you think that someone isnotbeingobjective,youare wrong because the second you think then you're notbeingObjective! ***Format got list in copy. No one who has offered feedback has claimed objectivity that I noticed, and no one who flags something as "UN"-objective is assumed to being objective. Last one can be objective when they think as an individual. I'm not implying to be objective nor that my list is, I stated the flaws openly. At this point i am bowing out to become an observer. You are 100% correct sir, there has been 0 objectivity so far in this thread. However, see the previous post; it was a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiku Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Mr Bigglesworth flipped a black joker for his Wp > Humour Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucidicide Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Mr Bigglesworth flipped a black joker for his Wp > Humour Congratulations, sir, you just won one internet. I loled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nix Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 I once saw Zephir beat a man flipping nothing but Black Jokers. Yeah, but than man was me and we all know I suck at Malifaux.... come on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fetid Strumpet Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Well,... you were probably playing the Guild... Just saying. *wink* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karn987 Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Old Spice Odder Blocking Body Wash is to POWERFUL for this argument to be Objective! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calmdown Posted March 1, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Yeah, but than man was me and we all know I suck at Malifaux.... come on. So now you want to play vs my Dreamer, Zephir does too... anymore of your gaming group want to get in on this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msgfree Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 (edited) While I do not doubt anyone's ability to remain objective when discussing these "master tiers", I do doubt whether anyone here has played enough games to be able to legitimately claim objectivity. As has been stated previous in the forums, there are 325 possible master matchups. Formula is: 26!/(2!*(26-2)!)=325 Standard practice in statistical analysis calls for a minimum of 25 data points per matchup to be statistically valid. So: 325*25 = 8125 games needed Of course to be valid you would have to assume that you played someone of the exact same skill every time with the exact same terrain. Of course this would also assume no schemes and this data would only be valid if you played the same strategy every time. My point is this: I don't care how experienced you are, there is no way you could have possibly played enough games to claim objectivity. The only way we will ever be able to create an objective tier list is if someone creates a Malifaux computer simulation. Edited March 1, 2012 by msgfree fixed a typo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts