Higby on Magriders

[KaskaMatej]

Originally Posted by superseohyun

Higby confirmed on twitter that TR pull more prowlers because their average life span is the lowest of the 3 MBTs.
And he calls the prowler "glass cannon".

Let me quote the first part of my post:

Why did they pull more tanks? It might have been because they died more often. Then why have they died so often? Because they pulled more?

Was it because they were fixated on killing infantry instead of fighting tanks? Were the lone drivers trying to fight a fully crewed anti-tank built MBT?

Wouldn't the change of their tank-battling capabilities increase their average life span, decreasing the units spawned? The graph doesn't say so. The amount of Prowlers being pulled compared to Magriders is still higher even with the GU02 buffs.

Could we say Prowler drivers are less skilled than Magrider' when it comes to MBT vs MBT, or would that be wrong assumption?

Originally Posted by Twido

I think where do you get it that the prowler kills 30% more tanks than the other main battle tanks?

From both charts. TR pulls more tanks than NC/VS and have higher KDR compared to opposition, plus some estimations and math.

[Twido]

Originally Posted by KaskaMatej

From both charts. TR pulls more tanks than NC/VS and have higher KDR compared to opposition, plus some estimations and math.

Thats not how it works at all. Just use the first graph to compare tank on tank kills; it shows that the prowler kills more but, at a glance, it looks more like between 5 and 10%.

I have to admit it would be pretty funny if after all this debate that the VS were genuinely better players who set up their tanks to kill other tanks and no nerf was needed at all. But I really doubt it.

[bpostal]

Originally Posted by Twido

...I have to admit it would be pretty funny if after all this debate that the VS were genuinely better players who set up their tanks to kill other tanks and no nerf was needed at all. But I really doubt it.

I'd have to facepalm, that's for sure. I only know of one Maggie crew that, hands down, can mop the floor in a roughly equal tank fight with a majority of my guys. And I haven't seen them online for a couple weeks.
Not saying they're not out there, but I haven't heard of em.

[superseohyun]

Originally Posted by Rothnang

He does bring up a good point though, if the Prowler went from having a third as much K/D as the Magrider in Higby's first graph to actually having slightly better K/D than the Magrider how come there isn't any dent in the number of Prowlers pulled?

Shouldn't the number logically have gone down if it loses fewer fights?


I still really hope Higby will show us the Infantry-kill statistics. I think they will add a pretty important piece to the puzzle.

It means prowlers get killed more by sources other than MBTs. Which is to be expected, as deploy mode is a good way to get yourself killed by turret, infantry and ESFs.

[superseohyun]

Originally Posted by KaskaMatej

Let me quote the first part of my post:



Could we say Prowler drivers are less skilled than Magrider' when it comes to MBT vs MBT, or would that be wrong assumption?



From both charts. TR pulls more tanks than NC/VS and have higher KDR compared to opposition, plus some estimations and math.

It seems to me that SOE successfully buffed prowlers anti-armor capability, as the K/D shows. The lower life span is probably a side-effect of deploy mode aka glass cannon mode, which will make you an immobile target for all sorts of fire and often doesnt give you time to even become mobile again.

[KaskaMatej]

Originally Posted by Twido

Thats not how it works at all. Just use the first graph to compare tank on tank kills; it shows that the prowler kills more but, at a glance, it looks more like between 5 and 10%.

Sure it works like that. I'm not arguing the amount of discrepancy, but the discrepancy itself.

Prowlers have higher average anti-tank KDR amongst all three. Even in their "shorter" life span they are able to destroy, on average, more than one tank per life while other two tanks do not.

They also pull more tanks which, with the first part (above 1.0 KDR), means per day, worldwide, they are the most efficient killer with highest amount of tank kills AND highest amount of fielded tanks.

Unless Higby (or anyone else from SOE) post the average daily tank vs tank kills in numerals not percentages, my logic is correct.

[MrBloodworth]

Originally Posted by EnderVS

Good thing your HEAT rounds do better at killing infantry than the Mag's HE rounds too huh (ok realistically, maybe not better but they seem to kill me on the move quite frequently)? If Higby were to post the MBT vs. Infantry stats similar to these other stats he's posted, and they showed similar mag dominance or not skewed to the Prowler at all, i'd drop the mag issue forever.

Not sure if you noticed, but the conversation is about tank VS. tank play.


Also, reading some people comments, Percentages are hard. Apparently.

[Twido]

Originally Posted by KaskaMatej

Sure it works like that. I'm not arguing the amount of discrepancy, but the discrepancy itself.

Prowlers have higher average anti-tank KDR amongst all three. Even in their "shorter" life span they are able to destroy, on average, more than one tank per life while other two tanks do not.

They also pull more tanks which, with the first part (above 1.0 KDR), means per day, worldwide, they are the most efficient killer with highest amount of tank kills AND highest amount of fielded tanks.

Unless Higby (or anyone else from SOE) post the average daily tank vs tank kills in numerals not percentages, my logic is correct.

But the current K/D ratio remains at 1.1 for the prowler against other tanks regardless. You can't just multiply that by the number of extra prowlers pulled to make a meaningful statistic.

[KaskaMatej]

Originally Posted by Twido

But the current K/D ratio remains at 1.1 for the prowler against other tanks regardless. You can't just multiply that by the number of extra prowlers pulled to make a meaningful statistic.

I think you don't understand. The ratio stays the same if you increase the number of both deaths and kills. More Prowlers means more deaths meaning there need to be more kills for KDR to stay the same.

In other words:
- 11 kills / 10 deaths = 1.1 KDR
- 110 kills / 100 deaths = 1.1 KDR
- 550 kills / 500 deaths = 1.1 KDR

Simple equation. The bigger the number of fielded Prowlers means even higher number of killed NC/VS tanks, because science.

[Twido]

Originally Posted by KaskaMatej

I think you don't understand. The ratio stays the same if you increase the number of both deaths and kills. More Prowlers means more deaths meaning there need to be more kills for KDR to stay the same.

In other words:
- 11 kills / 10 deaths = 1.1 KDR
- 110 kills / 100 deaths = 1.1 KDR
- 550 kills / 500 deaths = 1.1 KDR

Simple equation. The bigger the number of fielded Prowlers means even higher number of killed NC/VS tanks, because science.

I see your point, but that is still a ratio of 1.1 isn't it? Maybe I am confused, I still don't see how having a K/D of 1.1 and a greater number of pulls translates as 30% better. At the risk of sounding nerdy, could you show your calculation?

[KaskaMatej]

Originally Posted by Twido

At the risk of sounding nerdy, could you show your calculation?

very rough estimate:
- 100 Prowlers will kill 110 Vanguards+Magriders (KDR of 1.1)
- 90 Vanguards will kill 80 Prowlers+Magriders (KDR of 0.89)
- 80 Magriders will kill 80 Vanguards+Prowlers (KDR of 1.0)

110/270 ≈ 0.40
80/270 ≈ 0.30 //(times two, of course)

0.40/0.30 ≈ 1.33 ≈ 130%

Because we don't have actual numbers we can only estimate, or worse, guesstimate, and unless we actually get actual numbers that is the best we can do.

[superseohyun]

Originally Posted by KaskaMatej

very rough estimate:
- 100 Prowlers will kill 110 Vanguards+Magriders (KDR of 1.1)
- 90 Vanguards will kill 80 Prowlers+Magriders (KDR of 0.89)
- 80 Magriders will kill 80 Vanguards+Prowlers (KDR of 1.0)

110/270 ≈ 0.40
80/270 ≈ 0.30 //(times two, of course)

0.40/0.30 ≈ 1.33 ≈ 130%

Because we don't have actual numbers we can only estimate, or worse, guesstimate, and unless we actually get actual numbers that is the best we can do.

correct me if i am wrong but isnt the data about MBT vs MBT? i mean, a prowler which got blown up near a tech plant by HA before he even lays eyes on an enemy MBT surely wont count in the K/D ratio right?

[Bear]

It's really amusing the track this discussion has taken. In the span of a few day we have:

1. The Mag isn't OP, their drivers are just better. Proven wrong by data.
2. The Mag is the most pulled tank in the game. Proven wrong by data.

Now the rationalization is that Prowlers lag in TvT kills because they're all pulling HE tanks? The endless rationalization of this data is amazing.

Originally Posted by superseohyun

It seems to me that SOE successfully buffed prowlers anti-armor capability, as the K/D shows. The lower life span is probably a side-effect of deploy mode aka glass cannon mode, which will make you an immobile target for all sorts of fire and often doesnt give you time to even become mobile again.

There's a bit of insanity in the entire deploy mechanic that the Prowlers use. In order to be able to go toe to toe with the other tanks in the game you have to make yourself more vulnerable. As far as I know, the TR are the only faction with that limitation. The equivalent would be to increase the Mags strafing ability while introducing a mass damage degredation over range. I'm not sure how you'd even begin to address it with the Vanguard.

If there is an abundance of Prowler drivers running HE I'd argue that it's because the Prowlers best ability is running as a mobile artillery platform..

[MrBloodworth]

iknowright?

[ChipMHazard]

Methinks this might fit.