62 replies to this topic

[cleghorn6]

There is a lot of talk on the forum about how useless the matchmaker is, how all these "above average players" get matched up with total n00bs who always lose the match for them.

The number of "highly skilled" players on the forums put me in mind of some interesting research summarised in http://arstechnica.c...theyre-awesome/ . Which got me thinking about illusory superiority (the thing where people will tend to assess themselves as slightly above average at any skilled task, despite any and all evidence http://en.wikipedia....ory_superiority ).

Thus, this poll. I am aware that there is a selection bias by putting this on the forum but I'm not interested in serious socialogical research.

I'm going to rate myself as slightly below average. That might be partially wishful thinking, I'm certainly a resident of the Steering-wheel Underhive but I like to think I'm one of the better underhivers.

Discuss.

tl;dr I'm totally awesome at this game, it's you idiots who keep fscking it up and making me lose.

Edit: formatting

Edited by cleghorn6, 30 March 2013 - 06:00 AM.

[PoLaR]

I think most people aren't as good as they think they are lol.

[TwentyOne]

The question is Totally awesome in what?
I run a poptart/ac40 jager/atlas d-dc/ FOTM unfairly powerful build, yes I am awesome.
I run a FAIR mech, and Im About average

[Budor]

I think im awesome so i voted slightly above average

[Adridos]

Imho, you should really first define how one gets skillfull at MW:O.

Sure, you can have big winrate if you play with premades all day long...
You can also have big killrate if you get a fast mech and finish off all enemies...
You can get big average damage because you boat something like LRMs...

It is really hard to decide who's pro and who's not.

[Egomane]

I'm running a lot of different mechs, with a lot of different configurations.

I drive everything from light to assault, energy to missles to ballistics, short to long to mixed range, slow to fast, highly heat efficient to heat nightmare. Sometimes I do use an ECM, mostly I do not. I PUG and I run in two to four-man teams.

I'm almost always ranked above average or at the top of the scoring board.

From this experience I'd say I'm decent, but there is still room for improvement.

[Billygoat]

I reckon I'd be about average. I'm hardly amazing, but not completely useless either (I think/hope).

My stats tell me I'm good in fast mediums, but crappy in anything heavier than a Dragon.

[Lorcan Lladd]

Skill is relative; it be compared to different values and standards, but it can not be quantified or qualified...
Personally, I'm always annoyed if I can't place at the top of the scoreboard in a match - it means that someone played better than I did, which I find unacceptable, being a Leo with the ascendant in Aries...

Also, as someone whom pugs 9/10 of the time, most of my 'moments' are restricted to pure pug matches in which I don't have to compete against grouped players in my team for kills and assists or defend myself against a group of hunters on voice comms in the enemy team.

Edited by Lorcan Lladd, 30 March 2013 - 06:41 AM.

[Sgt Disciple]

I said avg I mostly pug. My win/loss is .87 but my kdr is 2.4. Avg damage a round over all mechs is 380 per round.

Edited by Sgt Disciple, 30 March 2013 - 07:46 AM.

[Alistair Winter]

For all the bitching about ELO, my KDR has been increasing steadily since I started playing, but has recently dropped a little bit (0.01 points). It's hard to say what my skill level is because of ELO, but at least I'm pretty sure I'm not amongst the best players in this game

PS: My point was that ELO is working, as far as I'm concerned.

Edited by Alistair Winter, 30 March 2013 - 08:05 AM.

[IIIuminaughty]

Everyone is inferior to me so I picked Totally Hopeless

[LiminalSpace]

Elo makes it almost impossible to tell your skill level if you are not at the margins.

[Byk]

I think my 2.56 win/loss ratio and 4.03 kill/death in my CTF-3D is a pretty good indicator that I'm at least slightly above average. I feel like I should clarify that it's not a poptart as well. I pride myself in that mech.

[Ilwrath]

I voted about average. To be honest I feel somewhat above that but how well you do depends about what mechs you drive. A lot. What skill level you have will also be affected by premading or only pubbing. I only pub. ofc.

This is the mech stats after they started tracking. Mostly m9 and stalkers but yesterday and today its been Jager time. Last weapon type for me to test and I must say ballistics is kinda fun. You can see that the jager is rather easy to drive:

[Walk]

cleghorn6, on 30 March 2013 - 05:58 AM, said:

There is a lot of talk on the forum about how useless the matchmaker is, how all these "above average players" get matched up with total n00bs who always lose the match for them.

The number of "highly skilled" players on the forums put me in mind of some interesting research summarised in http://arstechnica.c...theyre-awesome/ . Which got me thinking about illusory superiority (the thing where people will tend to assess themselves as slightly above average at any skilled task, despite any and all evidence http://en.wikipedia....ory_superiority ).

Thus, this poll. I am aware that there is a selection bias by putting this on the forum but I'm not interested in serious socialogical research.

I'm going to rate myself as slightly below average. That might be partially wishful thinking, I'm certainly a resident of the Steering-wheel Underhive but I like to think I'm one of the better underhivers.

Discuss.

tl;dr I'm totally awesome at this game, it's you idiots who keep fscking it up and making me lose.

Edit: formatting

Also include Dunning-Kruger effect in your post, it's relevant
http://en.wikipedia....93Kruger_effect

That being said, I rated myself above average since my KDR is 3.5 and my win % is over 60%(and over 80% using light mechs) as someone who primarily PUGS.

Also, realize that Average win rate is approx 50% and average KDR is close to 1:1. These numbers are thrown off by DCS/Suicides etc, but for every player that wins, one loses.. and every kill someone gets, someone else has to die.

Edited by Walk, 30 March 2013 - 09:14 AM.

[fastjetjockey]

I've been playing for a little over a week now, just finished fitting out my 2nd mech, and one that I love and am going to settle for - The Dragon. In this particular chassis, my willpower is what contributes most to my success in matches - Hold back and play your role! That is, playing a fire-support/cavalry/skirmisher. I struggle with light mechs still; my PC is a little chunky as I'm playing on a laptop from the top of a ski hill in Canada. So target tracking is something I wish was a little better at. But when I do die and get the opportunity to spectate other players... I'm surprised to find that a majority of them couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with a hand full of rice.

I'd like to think I'm an average player, with much still to learn about maneuvering the mech. My stats say I'm a terrible player, and I'm not going to argue.

[Goose]

Vote should be by weight class …

[Chavette]

Byk, on 30 March 2013 - 08:59 AM, said:

I think my 2.56 win/loss ratio and 4.03 kill/death in my CTF-3D is a pretty good indicator that I'm at least slightly above average. I feel like I should clarify that it's not a poptart as well. I pride myself in that mech.

Lost me at not a poptart...

[Revorn]

I guess, iam totaly hopeless. and need much more training. Getting an KdR about 1.0 would be great for me.

Edited by Revorn, 30 March 2013 - 11:06 AM.

[Werewolf486 ScorpS]

If I don't do 500 damage in any of my mechs I'm disappointed. Anything above 1000 is a great game and I have a few of them a night. I'm pretty good, but as with anything I can improve.