Battlegrounds on Horde side.

[Damuzid]

^ lmao sure mate.

I take that as a compliment. Thank you.

[siliconsue]

I blame graveyard camping. It seems to be mainly an Alliance game-play trait. I don't like winning that way.

[cheinii]

Hah yesterday we trolled the Allies, by doing this trick as well.. We were leading by one flag, and ofc everyone was there to farm honor.. The prob was that we didnt see when the enemy fc got away from our deff and captured as well.. however, some of us simply went in their spawn (jump from base, right in) and trolled them till 3rd flag was secured xD

Ps. : Shift+M -.-

[BuGisH4]

They need to fix report player away.. and problem solved.

[Styrak]

premades are for pussies that are too afraid to que solo

[cujo]

i do que solo time to time and then i met you, disastrous, getting camp.

[Onewayticket]

Fix RDF and raid finder so pve players can gear up in a different way and problem solved, no more naked chars in bg-s.

[krzyt]

^ lmao sure mate.

me:
played 465
won 408

I only solo queue.

[Styrak]

you smell that smelly smell?
yep...its the smell of bull****

statistically speaking from a server point of view thats impossible son...im sorry to call bull**** on you, but since i have a degree in economics, my "job" is to shout out these wannabes that people post around the world xD
have fun tho

[LordSerphroth]

you smell that smelly smell?
yep...its the smell of bull****

statistically speaking from a server point of view thats impossible son...im sorry to call bull**** on you, but since i have a degree in economics, my "job" is to shout out these wannabes that people post around the world xD
have fun tho

Even tho i agree thats bull****, since when did Statistics start validating or rejecting a given claim without any data behind it? Oh wait :D its not your "economics" degree speaking, its your personal opinion (which is similar to mine) :P

[Styrak]

actually son...at the average 50-50 win/lose ratio the server has (which is legit after playing both factions for a ton of time)
by playing 465 overall games you have a 100% chance of losing 93 games (in solo mode)

and in ^ this data...i excluded bgs like wsg or tp...due to the fact that a single man can carry a team if he is skilled enough
if i were to include those its common sense that the amount of lost games would be higher

[Dylsexic]

premades are for pussies that are too afraid to que solo

I bet you have a lot of friends. #sarcasm

[AntyeePencow]

actually son...at the average 50-50 win/lose ratio the server has (which is legit after playing both factions for a ton of time)
by playing 465 overall games you have a 100% chance of losing 93 games (in solo mode)

and in ^ this data...i excluded bgs like wsg or tp...due to the fact that a single man can carry a team if he is skilled enough
if i were to include those its common sense that the amount of lost games would be higher

statistically speaking from a server point of view thats impossible son...im sorry to call bull**** on you, but since i have a degree in economics, my "job" is to shout out these wannabes that people post around the world xD

May God have mercy on your soul.
That's not how numbers work.

[LordSerphroth]

actually son...at the average 50-50 win/lose ratio the server has (which is legit after playing both factions for a ton of time)
by playing 465 overall games you have a 100% chance of losing 93 games (in solo mode)

and in ^ this data...i excluded bgs like wsg or tp...due to the fact that a single man can carry a team if he is skilled enough
if i were to include those its common sense that the amount of lost games would be higher

You what!?

By that logic if u get 900 heads on coin tosses one after the other , the next one has 100% chance of being tails???? Lol don't know which college gives such ****ty economics degrees. Read gamblers fallacy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy . And your calling others "son" actually makes sense considering the amount of ego u injected into ur first comment about ur economics degree :D

[-Notorious-]

K so let's do some math real quick...

What we are looking at here is a binomial distribution, with the probability of success = 50% (also the probability of loss)

As such, P(losses=93) = (465 C 93)*(0.5)^(465)

Plugging into my handy dandy calculator (which I left at work fml, gonna use google real quick) results in P(losses=93) = 5.5017677e-41 which is basically 0.

But let's take it a bit further because there is nothing to do in game and I'm bored of fallout. Let's now assume you were getting the P(losses>93). Now this problem is MUCH more difficult,. So instead, lets make use of the approximation to the binomial distribution for large n, namely the good old normal distribution. (For those curious, this is because to get P(losses>93) we have to calculate (465 C 1), (465 C 2) and so on, all the way up to 93. There's a very good algebraic way to do this, but I'm lazy and doing what any sane person would... less work :D)

Ok so how does this work you ask, let's quickly recap how to approximate the binomial distribution with a normal one.

Well, the mean of a binomial distribution is of course n*p which is 465*.5=232.5
The standard deviation is given by sqrt(np(1-p)) = (465*.5*.5)^(1/2) ~ 10.78

Now we need to calculate our z value where z = (k-n)/st. dev = (93-232.5)/10.78 = -12.94

Ok now what!

Well, now that we know our z-value, we can get the P(losses>93)=1 - P(losses<=93) which means, we just use the normal cumulative function!

And now we can positively claim this to be close to zero. (ie: P(losses<=93) ~ 0) (check the normal distribution table peepz)

So to conclude, while the P(losses=93) = 0, P(losses>93) ~=1

With all that said, the statistics page is bugged and all of this was because I'm bored.

See below for my win/loss record:


I know I've lost more than 10 BGs, so I'm pretty sure this thing is bugged.


tl;dr: Probability of exactly 93 losses is 0, probability of more than 93 losses is 100%, its all irrelevant because the statistics page is bugged, and because the chance of winning any game is never 50% because maps aren't even symmetric.

That was fun :)