This hasn't been run since the Days of Sokolov. If I remember correctly, he would have to jump through SOE hoops to get the data and they just kinda faded away. There were a lot of caveats with the report but they were great to look through and nicely displayed.
This is highly subjective when viewed singly. Sok gave them to us and had a rolling record of the previous ones. This data is about the same as going out side, feeling the temperature and saying, well, guess it's going to be 72 degrees this year. People inevitably abuse this data in their observations and draw false conclusions. It's not that I'm against it being shown, rather warning against making it gospel. Of course, people will anyways, and I'll ridicule them as I always do. It would be helpful, however, with a larger playerbase and a systematic array.
it would be nice if a section of the website showed this sort of data. What CCG nut doesn't like these types of statistics?
The numbers were not difficult to acquire. The issue was that they were not accurate. The report took the last played deck for each player so for example if I played a random common deck last or a different faction entirely then the report is already skewed. Across 200 people it's likely that many of them may not have used their meta deck last,
Analyzing such info on a regular basis has merit. Presenting once in awhile to the community at large... not so much. Interesting for sure, but case of baskets makes a valid argument.
i'd support taking these quite frequently (to try to balance out the possible quirks that can occur, like what marko pointed out). i don't like the snapshots done every 3 months, they're not much more than misleading. also, if there was a way to figure out what decks were used more often by a person in the last week. like let's say you play 5 different decks in a week, but you play one of them for 40 games, one for 20, one for 10, one for 5, and one for 1, but that one is the last game and would normally be put as your contribution to the meta deck- realistically your 40game deck should be the most drawn from, not that 1 game deck. you could take it one step further and figure out what runes each player used the most that week, which would pretty much eliminate the "fraud" cases
They provided was data against "no one plays ___" or "___ is shoebox". Someone tried saying this with righteous deflection shortly before the meta reports came out. I think if done well, these reports could give useful information. However, one issue owls will have to face is whether they want such information public. For example, meta 200 reports were notable for showing the rarity creep in the game -- at the end, exotics, legendary, and limited (150k) runes made up about half of top 200. Some factions were a bit higher or lower, but no factions were exempt.
Loved them, should come back, maybe even expanded. Info about what is played is a big balance opportunity.
It would be best if there were an automated mechanic that just logged all of the decks and games for top 200, then averaged it per player and kept track in an SQL database. That way the day would not have to be "gathered" and would better represent regular use by the top 200 instead of the last 200 games by the top 200. It would make it much easier to report as well.
I remember playing off this and putting in something like a Bok Guardian and going, oh hey that one's mine. I also remember the frustration at playing a ton of games with a Bok Guardian.
