56 replies to this topic

[Bhael Fire]

HiplyRustic, on 07 June 2013 - 05:20 AM, said:

Clearer?

I understood what you meant the first time; I just disagree with you.

In my opinion, not all good players are good leaders, but.... all good leaders are good players. I never seen it otherwise in any game I've played.

The real argument is "Does Elo measure a player's overall skill"? Not sure...but probably better than someone's opinion of their own skills.

[Lord of All]

Bhael Fire, on 07 June 2013 - 02:26 PM, said:

I understood what you meant the first time; I just disagree with you.

In my opinion, not all good players are good leaders, but.... all good leaders are good players. I never seen it otherwise in any game I've played.

The real argument is "Does Elo measure a player's overall skill"? Not sure...but probably better than someone's opinion of their own skills.

No, You just said it yourself. "not all good players are good leaders". THAT is it in a nutshell. Putting someone in command because they can make a shot is moronic.

I'd love to hear you argue otherwise any military person. Actually I'd rather not as it is inane.

[Bhael Fire]

Lord of All, on 07 June 2013 - 03:20 PM, said:

No, You just said it yourself. "not all good players are good leaders". THAT is it in a nutshell. Putting someone in command because they can make a shot is moronic.

I didn't say anyone that "can make a shot." There's much more to being a good player than simply being a good shot. This was the important part of what I said; "...but...all good leaders are good players."

As mentioned, I've never played a game where that wasn't true.

So, that brings us back to this argument; IS Elo a good measure of a player skill? In my opinion, it's a pretty good start.

Edited by Bhael Fire, 07 June 2013 - 04:22 PM.

[MuKen]

Bhael Fire, on 07 June 2013 - 04:19 PM, said:

So, that brings us back to this argument; IS Elo a good measure of a player skill? In my opinion, it's a pretty good start.

So when you drop into a game using a weight class you use less often, are you suddenly a worse leader?

If two guys play together every weekend in the same regular 4man team, but 1 only plays weekends with the team while the other does that plus also plays with PUGs when they are not playing as a team, is the second one a worse leader? If anything you should WANT the second guy, seeing as he has more total experience AND he knows how to deal with PUGs, which isn't the same. But I guarantee you he has a worse ELO.

And this is just from the very very limited amount we know about ELO. For all you know it incorporates all sorts of other b/s useless stats. It's quite odd to put so much weight onto a number we know so little about. I question how you formed this opinion given we don't know how it works and we don't know our own ELOs so we can't even tell if it's doing a good job by observing whether it is giving high ELOs to good players.

Edited by MuKen, 07 June 2013 - 05:12 PM.

[Bhael Fire]

MuKen, on 07 June 2013 - 05:05 PM, said:

So when you drop into a game using a weight class you use less often, are you suddenly a worse leader?

I understand what you mean...and I agree that Elo isn't a pitch perfect method of assigning command. I just think it's a good starting place, since very rarely does anyone take command in the matches I've played.

Using it as a starting point, can not do any more harm than simply allowing anyone to take command.

[MuKen]

Bhael Fire, on 07 June 2013 - 05:33 PM, said:

Using it as a starting point, can not do any more harm than simply allowing anyone to take command.

Actually you can. You put this system in, there will be many games where a good leader WOULD have stepped up under the old system, but under the new one a guy who doesn't even feel like leading and doesn't bother relinquishing command has it by default.

And what of my second example? People who play in 4mans 99% of the time will have higher ELOS than other people who are better than them but play both 4mans and pugs.

Edited by MuKen, 07 June 2013 - 06:01 PM.

[Dirk Le Daring]

xDeityx, on 06 June 2013 - 10:05 AM, said:

The actual answer to the problem you're trying to solve is a quality in-game VOIP system.

This. Quoted for truth and justice.

[Bhael Fire]

MuKen, on 07 June 2013 - 05:51 PM, said:

You put this system in, there will be many games where a good leader WOULD have stepped up under the old system, but under the new one a guy who doesn't even feel like leading and doesn't bother relinquishing command has it by default.

Nothing prevents a player from requesting that the player relinquish command. Then at that point, anyone could take command as per usual. The majority of players, especially those that don't want command, will comply.

Seems like it would be good compromise to the chaos of the current system. I just think it's important for a team to have a baseline starting point just to get an idea if the person in charge is at least a decent player first before they start taking orders from them. If a better leader steps up to the plate, sobeit. At that point, the players can hash it out just like they do now when somebody wants to take command.

[HiplyRustic]

Bhael Fire, on 07 June 2013 - 02:26 PM, said:

I understood what you meant the first time; I just disagree with you.

In my opinion, not all good players are good leaders, but.... all good leaders are good players. I never seen it otherwise in any game I've played.

The real argument is "Does Elo measure a player's overall skill"? Not sure...but probably better than someone's opinion of their own skills.

That's like saying the best battlefield commanders are the best warriors...and I assure you that is not the case.

Edited by HiplyRustic, 07 June 2013 - 06:48 PM.

[Bhael Fire]

HiplyRustic, on 07 June 2013 - 06:35 PM, said:

That's like saying the best battlefield commanders are the best warriors...and I assure you that is not the case.

It's not like saying that at all. It's like saying, "all good leaders are good players" — which is 100% true for this game.

[Belorion]

Good aim =/= good piloting =/= good brawling =/= good commanding.

They can, but its not a given. Especially the commanding part which takes a completely different skill set than playing well.

[Bhael Fire]

Belorion, on 07 June 2013 - 08:49 PM, said:

Especially the commanding part which takes a completely different skill set than playing well.

Yep. Exactly. But before you can command well, you need to know how to play well. At least as far MWO goes.

[EGG]

Some of the rather testy replies seem to be over-estimating the level of command ability that's actually needed here. We're not after Norman Schwarzkopf back from the grave, we're looking for someone to give basic tactical commands to something the size of a section/squad. Anyone with a good grasp of how internet robot games work can do that.

The tactics I'd expect to be implemented by someone in the Commander position would be nowhere near as complex as those in organised tourneys, or even in the 8-man queue. We're talking about basic stuff on the level of "telling people which flank to advance down", or "asking the pair of DRG's to back up the HGN".

What we're after is two things:
- A Player who by some measurable metric understands MWO game mechanics.
- A degree of acceptance by the other pugs, that yes this player knows a bit more than them. Perhaps not a lot more, but still more.

For the second part, if the other players suspect that the person giving them instructions;
- is a 12 year old who cannot hit awesomes with ML's at 200m
- but does have SACEUR aspirations;
they will not listen to this person. If however that player can shoot straight and is more than likely going to be doing the most butt-kicking in the match, then yes, some of them will listen.

[Lord of All]

Make a poll and then it may sink in your thick skull.

[MuKen]

Bhael Fire, on 07 June 2013 - 06:24 PM, said:

Nothing prevents a player from requesting that the player relinquish command. Then at that point, anyone could take command as per usual. The majority of players, especially those that don't want command, will comply.

Seems like it would be good compromise to the chaos of the current system. I just think it's important for a team to have a baseline starting point just to get an idea if the person in charge is at least a decent player first before they start taking orders from them. If a better leader steps up to the plate, sobeit. At that point, the players can hash it out just like they do now when somebody wants to take command.

What you're saying isn't consistent with your own complaint. Your acting like the world is full of people battling over the command position. But the reality is 99% of people don't feel like taking command, and in the majority of games nobody does. And a player isn't going to suddenly start commanding because the game said to him "hey, all these people are lower ELO than you, here's a new chat color."

But what WILL happen is somebody who has command experience who might have noted "hey, nobody's in command, ok I guess I'll step up" will just not bother because some other person has been assigned command. Regardless of whether that person is actually doing any leading

You're exacerbating a major problem (lack of people who want to lead) in order to do something which is a dubious fix on a problem that rarely occurs (two people are fighting over who gets to lead). And yes, it IS a dubious fix, ELO whatever you say continues to be a poor measure of who can lead pugs, if for no other reason than it favors people who rarely play in pugs.

Edited by MuKen, 08 June 2013 - 08:25 AM.

[HiplyRustic]

Bhael Fire, on 07 June 2013 - 06:40 PM, said:

It's not like saying that at all. It's like saying, "all good leaders are good players" — which is 100% true for this game.

Of course it's not true, you just eliminated every good tactician who isn't twitch-skilled or whose reflexes aren't as sharp as the high ELO or killfarmers from your list.

Edited by HiplyRustic, 08 June 2013 - 09:25 AM.

[Applecrow]

This is like forcing the person with the highest gearscore in an mmo to be the healer or the tank. They might have nice gear and be good at what they do, but it doesn't make them the best player on the board.

I don't know if this is accurate, but this immediately made me think of the argument about making ELO public: it would immediately descend into: I have the highest ELO here so your all newbs and should listen to me.

Ironically, the person in Firepower who leads most of the dropsis the person with the highest probable ELO. But that's because he's a natural leader, not because he's a good pilot.

Let the people who WANT to lead take command. Its not like there is anything that forces players to follow those orders.