Patients at A&E should be seen within four hours of arrival. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland do not publish ambulance queue data. As this is fast-turnaround data, the NHS says only minimal validation can be carried out but it is considered fit for purpose. It comes from daily situation reports which are published weekly during the winter in England. This data shows the proportion of ambulance patients who waited 30 minutes or more, in the week shown. Though you seem to worship it as a God.When patients arrive at hospital by ambulance they should be handed over within 15 minutes. I am also not sure HS tracker is the best source of data to use as I said since I dont know where and how they pull their numbers. To be honest I this point I am not trusting anything numbers wise you say as you have proven you are incapable of doing basic assessments of common situations and fallacies. I will enjoy pointing this out to you later this week when Bliz hopefully announces the nerfs to mage and lock. Therefore the sample size discrepancy is leading to your erroneous interpretation.Īgain I know math is hard for you but once more you are incorrect. Warlocks are less popular because the lynchpin card needed is a newly released legendary and thus not a lot of people have it. The fact that the #3s can be “back loaded” is a type of statistical bias. Not necessarily, because if you let RNG #1 run 50 more times you might have gotten 40 more #3s and thus would have a 50% average in the end. You run RNG #1 50 times and you get the #3 10 out of 50 times (20% since math is hard for you). You run RNG #1 100 times and you get the #3 50 times. Lets say you have 2 RNGs that spit out the #3 50% of the time
People don’t really understand statistics that well. Mage has a 49% win rate, Warlock 53%, Paladin 55% and Hunter a ridiculous 59%. Read the mountains of stats proving you wrong there. You have an 8th grade education at best, as the high school I went to would’ve failed me for such ignorance behavior. You ignore evidence, claims others do, post nothing it refute, but claim the opposite. Like almost his entire post history is in that thread, and a good 10 people repeatedly posted evidence refuting his claims, and like you he just kept doubling down on his BS.Įventually he posted Cherry Picked “evidence,” that was then proven to be exactly that, cherry picked to (sortof but not really) support his claim while ignoring the mountains that refuted it. There’s another dude just like you named Deadsy that made similar BS claims. Go to the thread titled Robes of protection? Calling BS, just wait for nerfs. Your wild claims are not a refute of anything they are just that, your wild claims and personal annecdotal headcannon. Dude, what is with people with less then 50 post apparently unable to post basic High-School level proofs and yet somehow convince themselves they refuted something they didn’t even remotely refute. Note: I apparently can’t provide links anymore (probably spending to much time telling bads they are bad), so the links I tried to provided aren’t allowed, but Izizero and Killuminati have posted links in other threads backing my claims if you look for them on the forums Translation, you lose to Mage or Warlock as a Hunter, you are awful. Hunter has a 59% win rate against Mage, and a 61% winrate against Warlock. Sorry that some of us play at above a Bronze-league level and know what decks can actually do what. Warlock meanwhile is 53% and Mage is 49%. Hmm… what’s that at the top? Oh, yea, Hunter with 59% win rate.
Nope, just a legend player that happens to play all decks and understands basic statistics. Hilariously bad at playing very easy and broken decks.Like, I would have to either AFK for the first 3 rounds, or use my damage spells on my own face as Hunter to lose to either of those decks, that’s seriously how much stronger Hunter is then either Mage or Warlock right now.
0 kommentar(er)
