Originally Posted by beees (Post 500580)

Why aren't you summing an estimated average*C into the numerator
Isn't the formula bavg= (values + approxavg*C)/(C+numval)?

Originally Posted by Bayesian man (Post 500584)

White men have been using the name of our people for centuries in their mathematics without regard to the heritage, culture, or attainments of that which they steal from.

My Great-great-great Grandfather was one of the most respected men of our tribe in SouthEast Bayesia, he united the Ssengubar, Lutgeinkt, and Qw'sayloo clans in an effort to what led up to the last assualt of our race on the invading white man in the battle of Isandlwana.

That was the pinnacle of our battle with the white race and soon ended, because of succumbing in the later skirmishes to superior technology. The naming system your race often chooses to use is an unfortunate tactic in history, as the reason the Bayesians were defeated was the use of "white man's magic" or hence "his mathematic" of which the Bayesian forumulas were used in the artillery bombardments of 1882.

My people were honorable warriors, please respect them and their memory when using our name.

Originally Posted by squeek. (Post 500591)

Yeah, that's the next step. I thought it wouldn't matter since all I care about is the relative values of the Bayesian average (all due respect to the Bayesian people and their culture), not the Bayesian average itself (on Wikipedia it says: "In cases where the averages' relative values are the only result of importance, m can be replaced with zero."), but I'll fix the formula and see what happens.

Originally Posted by beees (Post 500594)

Hmm, relatively speaking, I don't think it'll matter then. Simple analysis would dictate that each average would just have a constant factor added, which means the order is the same. That is, for A/f > B/f > C/f implies A/f+c/f > B/f+c/f > C/f+c/f. By the way, I don't understand how you can get 100%. It shouldn't even be possible if you're using bayes...

Originally Posted by beees (Post 500598)

Instead of an arbitrary c, why not use a percentage of the total (ie. 1% of all players)?

Originally Posted by Lynus (Post 500684)

these stats are stupid, we want to see who has the best conc aim, the longest button hold on %map while %class, the amount of damage done as %class, the most airshots w/ rockets/grenades/pipes, the quickest cap on %map, the time spent in enemy respawns, most jumppads destroyed in yard on phantom, most kills while flag is in the yard, etc.