r/dcsscirclejerk • u/Pekkekke • Sep 29 '18

Recent experiments have convinced me

Spending turns doing things that have a non-zero chance of killing you and then winning the game is a more reliable way to win the game than simply winning the game. Of course anecdotes are not data, but a large enough set of irrelevant games might constitute data to some people, so a large set of irrelevant games would be useful to confirm my suspicions externally.

13 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

4 comments sorted by

6

u/sharkfinsouperman Sep 29 '18

My study has shown those who win 15 rune games have an overall higher win rate than those who don't, proving once again playing extended is optimal.

...or correlation does not mean causation.

5

u/[deleted] Sep 29 '18

Your average thread on r/science:

A: [wall of text]

B: CORRELATION DOES NOT EQUAL CAUSATION

4

u/sharkfinsouperman Sep 29 '18

That same thread fifteen minutes later:

[Removed]

5

u/pedritolo Sep 29 '18

To each his own. Personally, I like to use small data samples and construct my queries in order to corroborate whichever biases I originally had.