Morat Aggression Force Survey

[Stiopa]

Hello all. Since HSN3 arrival there's a discussion going on on the official forums about Morat sectorial balance and ability to play competetively in new enviroment. Emotions are running wild, everybody has their own vision for Morats, and consensus is nowhere to be seen. In order to gather some data that would help us to agree on the future direction we would like MAF to take I created a small survey. I invite all MAF players, as well as those that play regularly against Morats, to spend a few minutes to help us draw a clearer picture about it. I'd like to thank all current and future EI subjects for their cooperation!

link to the survey: http://goo.gl/forms/LuLFcJ4HlAlae3qh2

[Claudius Sol]

Just my own thoughts, but Morats simply suffer from slightly less flexibility than other factions, but I think they're perfectly find, as far as competitiveness goes.

I've seen them do very well in tournaments. I've seen them do very poorly in tournaments. Just like every other faction.

[Stiopa]

I have similar opinion about them, I thought them to be just a bit behind the power curve before I started playing them, and for now my playtesting seems to confirm it. What they need is some little tweaks here and there, not an overhaul some people are calling for. But there are 2-3 units that are clearly less useful than the rest, and that could be changed. Both internal and external balance would profit from that. Getting data on whether something falls behind, what is it and how much is the main reason for the whole survey.

[Icchan]

Will you ever post the results of the survey?

[Stiopa]

Oh, sure. I already posted them on official forums a long time ago, but completely forgot about this thread. Since there's a lot new answers I'll compile the data again and post them here.

[Stiopa]

Sorry, I had no time to compile the results earlier. Here they go. 97 people participated, 2/3 of them MAF players.

[schoon]

Great data set - well done!

[Section9]

Sorry, I had no time to compile the results earlier. Here they go. 97 people participated, 2/3 of them MAF players.

OK, so even if you just went with the non-MAF players, that's enough to be statistically significant. (You need at least 30 respondents before you get usable data, and 30 respondents gives you something like a +-15% accuracy. You need to step up to a thousand to get +-4%, and greater accuracy from there requires exponentially more respondents)

Great survey turnout!