Last 15 kills, all APs and all opponents, in randomized order:

Victim is worth 3.80 charges; AP gains 4
Victim is worth 0.34 charges; AP gains 0
Victim is worth 0.51 charges; AP gains 1
Victim is worth 0.33 charges; AP gains 0
Victim is worth 1.52 charges; AP gains 1
Victim is worth 0.72 charges; AP gains 1
Victim is worth 0.33 charges; AP gains 0
Victim is worth 1.20 charges; AP gains 1
Victim is worth 0.64 charges; AP gains 1
Victim is worth 0.50 charges; AP gains 1
Victim is worth 0.49 charges; AP gains 0
Victim is worth 0.69 charges; AP gains 1
Victim is worth 0.41 charges; AP gains 1
Victim is worth 4.21 charges; AP gains 4
Victim is worth 1.26 charges; AP gains 1

Mean expected: 16.95.
Observed charges: 17
Charges/kill: 1.13 (*gasp* Bigger than 1 as usual!)

Now, you might ask: "But Ancruh sure had a bad streak!" This is data selection at work, conscious or unconscious. If he had an average streak (like above), he wouldn't be posting to complain, and no one would have heard about it. Likewise, I don't think anyone would start a big forum debate if they were getting more charges than normal, especially because it's often hard to judge how tough someone you just pummeled really is against the field. But of course the one guy with bad luck is often going to be the one guy who complains the loudest about the system.

I'd be willing to bet I could find a string of Ancruh's kills where he did much better than suspected if I dug as well.

Quoth Richard Feynman:
"I was coming here, on the way to the lecture, and I came in through the parking lot. And you won't believe what happened. I saw a car with the license plate ARW 357. Can you imagine? Of all the millions of license plates in the state, what was the chance that I would see that particular one tonight? Amazing!"

In other words, you can't verify an idea by using the same data that suggested the idea in the first place.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com