Quote:
Originally Posted by hi19hi19
Please actually read my post before you say something stupid.
|
First of all, you didn't actually present data to demonstrate your claims. I didn't necessarily not believe you, but until I'm sufficiently convinced, I choose not to assume it.
Secondly, a lot of what I'm saying is addressing the way you're presenting your points, not the point itself. See:
Quote:
Originally Posted by hi19hi19
So no net change to strategic depth, but an increase to competitive balance.
|
I was replying to "There is no meaningful strategic depth created by putting the UI in the way." If strategic depth is not relevant, what was the point of that statement?
Quote:
Originally Posted by hi19hi19
That's why we take one for all mirror mode on howling abyss as an experimental case...leaving only camera angle as a remaining variable between the teams. Lo and behold blue side still wins significantly more, so we now have causation.
|
What about matchmaking?
Champions aren't symmetrical left to right either (Blitz hooks with right hand, Diana's Q, possibly certain bounce/directional patterns, etc.), and neither is the map (brush is left on blue, right on purple).
Does this phenomenon happen only at particular levels of play? Particular regions?
What is the actual margin between the two sides? 51/49? 70/30? Is it possible it's just an accident?
Did social stigma influence one side to have an advantage? If we had this mode before anyone brought up the issue, would this still happen?
Could your data be biased in the first place?
There are different degrees to which I think each of these factors play a part, as well as their influence on win rate relative to the issue of camera angle. I'm not saying that I know I'm right, but I'm still not convinced camera angle significantly influences competitive balance.