Your criticism of statshark doesnt support the conclusion youre making.
No one has claimed it captures every aspect of a players performance but it captures enough to make meaningful comparisons, assists, objective play and similar actions are reflected indirectly through score, leaderboard placement and, over a sufficiently large sample, win rate.
Simply listing things statshark doesnt measure directly does not invalidate the things it does measure, by your standard, no statistic, even university ones, would ever be usable because every metric omits some context.
Youre wording it as if my conclusion is based on highlight videos, but thats not true.
Im basing my opinion on ULQs long-term performance recorder on statshark, that includes including individual vehicle statistics and session history.
That means this dataset includes both good and bad games.
and were talking about sample size of 75 000 lifetime battles / some 7 500 battles since statshark became a thing.
If you believe 75 000 individual cases is not large enough sample size, im calling you out to explain why.
That explanation might account for an individual case, it is implausible when applied to the aforementioned 75 000 lifetime battles / some 7 500 battles since statshark became a thing.
Over such larhe sample size, it is statistically improbable to be running only into bad SPAA players.
ULQs performance in CAS planes remains across the dataset.
Claim that “ULQ only faces bad SPAA players” stops being convincing and becomes pure speculation without any support in evidence.
If you believe ULQ ran only into bad SPAA players 75 000 battles, YOU need to present evidence that is the case.
I already stated above that im basing my argument on his actual stats, including 75 000 lifetime games. Whatever clips and higlights ULQ posted, they merely illustrate what the long-term statistics already show.
Again, statistics do not care whenevr ULQ is showing only his good games or not. Statistics include both good and bad games.
The issue here is not whether I personally like or dislike your arguments.
The issue is that every time objective data is brought into the discussion, your response is to explain why you think it is incomplete rather than address what it actually shows.
And thats what I dislike you.
Youre putting your annecdotal experience on the same, if not higher, pedastal as 75 000 recorded games.
The issue is not whether data can be manipulated, everyone understands that statistics can be misrepresented or interpreted incorrectly.
Issue is whether the specific data being discussed has actually been manipulated or whether there is a specific methodological flaw that invalidates them.
You simply claim that “statshark data can be manipulated” is not an argument against the data presented.
My criticism of you is not that you have an opinion, you are entitled to one.
My criticism of you is because you are treating your personal experience and interpretation as inherently more reliable than objective measurements without demonstrating why those measurements are invalid.
EDIT: Should this be false flagged second time, this isnt offtopic, topic is called “how player skill with SPAA affects CAS”, im merely describing what statistics show in relation to SPAA/CAS.
