I wasn't saying that. I mentioned in the first sentence that i knew that my post was slightly off topic, but thought i would bring up that assessment anyways. Endgame generally requires a higher skill cap (in terms of knowledge required) than twinks do anyways, so i thought it would be a more accurate assessment of skill than looking up some data about twink bg HK counts, which don't necessarily determine skill, since those data also have the factor that many people at the top of those ladders may have played longer, which doesn't make them better. Length of time played doesn't mean you are by default better than an individual, so using that type of twink data is useless. Unless there is other data that can be compared similarly to max level arenas for twinks, that a majority of twinks participate in and are recorded with, using arenamate is a better means of measurement.
[doublepost=1523629052,1523628371][/doublepost]
this was march of 2017 my first time playing boomy in 19s
View attachment 7217 View attachment 7218 View attachment 7219
[doublepost=1523594748,1523594643][/doublepost]what my boomy debut looked like
Ok. Once again off topic but alright. The data is skewed (if you are actually comparing EU vs US, instead of yourself again which you seem to do alot), since there are only 10 players depicted per statistic. Data is also taken from a year ago, which doesn't show current placements. There would have to be a tally of EU and US players within a top percentile of the population, to show that the data shows players who are either good or at least competent in the bracket. Then, you'd tally up the number of EU players compared to the number of US players at the top of whatever means of measurement we're using (Kill
eath ratio, Flag cap amounts, etc etc), since there are different factors that determine an individual's level of skill. You'd have to do this for numerous amounts of data and then somehow find a way to assess the value of an individual based on an average of these components. Not entirely sure how you'd do that, since im not a statistics major or smart or anything, but yea. The point is the data isn't nearly broad enough, in terms that very few players are depicted, not allowing us to assess EU vs US but only the top 10 players depicted and make an assumption with a very small sample size, the data is old, and there isn't a data set that averages different components of skill. Displaying K
and shit isn't the epitome of skill, since there are situational factors that sometimes require you to put yourself in a bad situation in order to put your team at an advantage (ie : if fc is about to cap, and you're right next to their flag, you kill him before he caps, then their entire team kills you, because they were just trailing behind the fc. You prevented them from capping, but died, which i think is a huge trade off for you. So, KD would decrease, even though you made the better play, therefore making KD not the definite measurement of skill.
TLDR : Needs a larger sample size, to compare EU and US, and needs specific measurements and a way to average them.