NP aphyer, I didn’t ask for any more time, though I was happy to get some extra due to you extending for yonge. I hadn’t been particularly focused on it for a while, until trying to get things figured out at the last minute, largely I think due to me having spent a greatly disproportionate-to-value effort on figuring out how to do similarity clustering on a highly reduced (and thus much more random) version of the dataset, and then not knowing what to do with the results once I got them. (though I did learn stuff about finding the similarity clustering, so that was good).
Looks like the clusters I found in the reduced dataset more or less corresponded to:
either an aggressive 2-ranged character or everything fairly tanky (FLR cluster)
tending towards tankier 2-ranged and aggressive 1-ranged (melee) character (HSM cluster, note I had excluded B and D from this dataset)
tending towards more aggression to the back (JGP cluster)
So now I’m trying to figure out why the observed FLR>HSM>JGP>FLR rock-paper scissors effect occurred...
edit: a just-so story (don’t know if real reason):
JGP vs FLR: FLR loses the melee first, then likely loses the 2-range since very squishy, then doomed.
FLR vs HSM: HSM loses the melee first. Then FLR might well lose the 2-range first, depending on initiative. FLR would then be splitting damage, but since HSM’s 2-range is already damaged and FLR’s tank typically isn’t that tanky, HSM’s 2 range might well die before FLR’s backline? dunno, seems weak explanation
HSM vs JGP: HSM loses the melee first. But then, the tanky 2-range of HSM tends to last a while, and the tanky melee of JGP doesn’t contribute much. Once JGP loses its 2-range, it splits damage between HSM’s remaining characters, while HSM focuses and defeats JGP’s squishy backline?
NP aphyer, I didn’t ask for any more time, though I was happy to get some extra due to you extending for yonge. I hadn’t been particularly focused on it for a while, until trying to get things figured out at the last minute, largely I think due to me having spent a greatly disproportionate-to-value effort on figuring out how to do similarity clustering on a highly reduced (and thus much more random) version of the dataset, and then not knowing what to do with the results once I got them. (though I did learn stuff about finding the similarity clustering, so that was good).
Looks like the clusters I found in the reduced dataset more or less corresponded to:
either an aggressive 2-ranged character or everything fairly tanky (FLR cluster)
tending towards tankier 2-ranged and aggressive 1-ranged (melee) character (HSM cluster, note I had excluded B and D from this dataset)
tending towards more aggression to the back (JGP cluster)
So now I’m trying to figure out why the observed FLR>HSM>JGP>FLR rock-paper scissors effect occurred...
edit: a just-so story (don’t know if real reason):
JGP vs FLR: FLR loses the melee first, then likely loses the 2-range since very squishy, then doomed.
FLR vs HSM: HSM loses the melee first. Then FLR might well lose the 2-range first, depending on initiative. FLR would then be splitting damage, but since HSM’s 2-range is already damaged and FLR’s tank typically isn’t that tanky, HSM’s 2 range might well die before FLR’s backline? dunno, seems weak explanation
HSM vs JGP: HSM loses the melee first. But then, the tanky 2-range of HSM tends to last a while, and the tanky melee of JGP doesn’t contribute much. Once JGP loses its 2-range, it splits damage between HSM’s remaining characters, while HSM focuses and defeats JGP’s squishy backline?