597 replies to this topic

[Ralgas]

PEEFsmash, on 06 June 2013 - 05:32 PM, said:

They do not go through each and every poster among the mess that is these forums to judge the relevance of the player input. Not to mention, they are not reaching out whatsoever to the competitive community to get feedback, and the game is suffering. It is unfortunate that I am very uncharismatic and tend to tick everyone off. I wish someone else in the competitive community had the patience to put up with having these kinds of debates and discussions with the trolls and grognards in these forums.

Only the "cheese to stay relevant" and stat chaser crowd is suffering, not the game. Shame there's too many of both, and that they are too impaient to wait for the meanigful changes to come through

[Livewyr]

wispsy, public stats wouldn't hurt you or I, but I think a lot of perfectly legitimate points made that disagree with the seperelitists wouldn't be given due thought as the Elo would become the default defense against challenge.

World of tanks forums is a pretty good example. (at least it was when I left, I assume it hasn't changed much.)

I would love to know my own Elo. (right now I base it off of who I end up with in fights) but I don't want to know others' unless I know them and it's a friendly comparison.

[Sam Slade]

Svalfangr, on 06 June 2013 - 11:59 AM, said:

No the last thing this forum needs is more elitism.

Add to this the fact that many 'Leet ELO' players will have earned their digital kudos in PUG stomp 4 man teams, by running FOTM easy mode builds, by simply having a better computer and the like.

Public stats usually end up making spoiled children(ever those aged over 40) with top notch gear, a gaggle of 'leet friends' and plenty of spare time the most 'respectable' fonts of wisdom on any given game forum. This is a very bad idea.

InRev, on 06 June 2013 - 12:01 PM, said:

Look at the WoT forums. Unicum this, W/L ratio that.

The horrible community is the reason I don't play WoT

[El Bandito]

No thanks, I don't want this game and its balance to revolve around the extreme minority of players (and 4-8 mans when most players are PUGs) and I don't want people showing off their e-peen more than what we already have.

Edited by El Bandito, 07 June 2013 - 04:13 AM.

[Le Goat]

there is no reason to see the ELO scroes right now as it is totally skewed by only being half finished.

IMO we shouldn't even see stats right now because of lopsided gameplay.

[Spades Kincaid]

StalaggtIKE, on 06 June 2013 - 05:49 PM, said:

You are correct. However your suggestion is unnecessary. PGI has access to our ELO scores, as well as our input. In which, if they want, they can act upon those requests based on the different skill sets.

Peef, I'm not going to presume to judge your motivations. You may genuinely have the best interests of the game at heart. But your reasoning for this request is misguided.

The quote above really sums it up in a nutshell. While you may be entirely right that there are differing 'games within the game' at different skill levels (and I believe you are); the simple fact is the public doesn't make the decisions. The Devs do. And they have that information.

It's in the hands of the people who need it. If they want to value input by 'tiers' of skill via ELO, they can.

That's where your reasoning for making it public falls apart. The public doesn't call the shots (much as some of us may wish to at times).

Edited by Spades Kincaid, 06 June 2013 - 06:19 PM.

[JSparrowist]

ABSOLUTELY NOT!

The level of elitism on these forums is staggering and making ELO public would compound that problem!

H E L L N O!

[Deathlike]

Valore, on 06 June 2013 - 06:11 PM, said:

As the old quip goes, why bother with community warfare, we've got plenty here as it stands

As it has been said once before... "working as intended".

[Ralgas]

Valore, on 06 June 2013 - 06:11 PM, said:

LMAO, this thread's an embarrassment to both sides.

On the one hand, basing opinions on a number in a system that is currently dubious at best, and completely shot at worst, is an idea that's completely laughable, and the OP should be ashamed at even suggesting it.

On the other hand we've got people cringingly trying to imply that players that perform better than them are somehow all elitist aristocrats who want to belittle them, making them look as bad, if not worse than those same elitists they despise.

As the old quip goes, why bother with community warfare, we've got plenty here as it stands

Does WoW still use gearscore? Step in there for a few balance threads and tell me that second paragragh of yours isn't the truth of the matter.

[Divine Decoy]

Don't make Elo public, make it private. I want to know where i rank in the system and if I am getting better (or in my case) dropped a lot from bad teaming/pugging.... Don't need public display, just some form of assureance I got better, or if my bad streak has got me stuck with the low-level sorry people that you JUST CAN'T escape cuz they don't know how to play and win games......

[HiplyRustic]

Divine Decoy, on 06 June 2013 - 06:29 PM, said:

Don't make Elo public, make it private. I want to know where i rank in the system and if I am getting better (or in my case) dropped a lot from bad teaming/pugging.... Don't need public display, just some form of assureance I got better, or if my bad streak has got me stuck with the low-level sorry people that you JUST CAN'T escape cuz they don't know how to play and win games......

I would like to see that as well...along with some graphing of my historical ELO. But I mean I would like to see it. In the end, we can use k/d...sort of...and w/l...sort of. But both are skewed. The guy who lays down 800 damage, nearly cores several mechs only to watch as the AC40 wanders by and finish the job and get kill credits, while he finishes with 6-7 assists, 8-10 components destroyed, and still nets 0 kills gets left out in that scenario...but right now it's all we've got until assists/component destruction somehow get factored in.

Edited by HiplyRustic, 06 June 2013 - 06:37 PM.

[Livewyr]

Valore, on 06 June 2013 - 06:51 PM, said:

[DELETED CONTENT]

(I think he's more referring to the idea that the 'elitist' will dismiss the 'agenda' of the 'tryhard' based on personal score- and whereas the 'elitist' can point to his own numbers and validate his legitimacy to himself based on the numbers, to the end of invalidating the 'tryhard's argument- never giving it its due...the 'tryhard' cannot compete in that category.)


More concisely:
the 'elitist' would create a numbers requirement to even give an idea appropriate consideration...the 'tryhard' by definition, would not meet the requirement, and therefore would be dismissed even if his argument was sound.

Edited by Destined, 10 June 2013 - 03:45 PM.
Quote Clean Up

[Livewyr]

OneEyed Jack, on 06 June 2013 - 07:04 PM, said:

Every problem mentioned in this thread would be exactly the same with a private score. It would all be "screenshots or ****," with people expected to prove, by making their Elo public, that they were "worthy" of having an opinion.

I would agree, except they could already do that now with stats. (A couple groups require screenies of your stats on application.)
They just don't, because it's too much work, and too easily photoshopped.

(That's not making an argument to do it, I'd like to know my Elo, but I don't need it.)

[OneEyed Jack]

Livewyr, on 06 June 2013 - 07:06 PM, said:

I would agree, except they could already do that now with stats. (A couple groups require screenies of your stats on application.)
They just don't, because it's too much work, and too easily photoshopped.

(That's not making an argument to do it, I'd like to know my Elo, but I don't need it.)

True, but the stats in place now have little meaning.

[Banditman]

There is really no need for ELO rankings to be made public. None.

Here's the thing: If we accept what PGI tells us, which is, "ELO is successfully matching like skilled players" and we're still seeing problems in pub matches (which we are), then something else is to blame. Let's find the actual problem.

Here's a hint: It's tonnage.

I am not speaking of the eight man queue, it has demons all it's own, but in the four man queue, the vast majority of matches that I play in wind up swinging, in the end, in favor of the team with the higher tonnage. It's not foolproof, sometimes the lighter team does win. However, the majority of pub queue matches swing on tonnage.

That needs to be fixed. In fact, we were told that mechanics were in place to make that happen, but I certainly haven't seen *any* evidence of it.

[Livewyr]

Valore, on 06 June 2013 - 07:12 PM, said:

Therefore it is stupid to use baseless/arbitrary numbers to decide who should have what say.

On the other hand, this doesn't make tryhards any more correct or worth listening to either.

Correct: Whether someone is worth listening to shouldbe based on the argument itself. (Accuracy of facts, objectiveness of assertion, willingness to address opposing arguments with substance.)
The elitists, the tryhards, and everyone in between are capable of that. (Clarification: Being good at the game doesn't make you an elitist. Thinking you're better than other people in general, because you think you're better than them in game, makes you an elitist.)

Public numbers can only hurt that. (Cue WoT Forums)

OneEyed Jack, on 06 June 2013 - 07:14 PM, said:

True, but the stats in place now have little meaning.

As will Elo, always. (unless they seperate Elo scores between solo-dropping, 4mans, and 8mans.. which is far too much crap.)

[The Strange]

Public ELO is a bad idea. Letting us each see our own, as another stat along with our accuracy, mech stats, win ratios etc. would be nice though.

[Praehotec8]

PEEFsmash, on 06 June 2013 - 12:14 PM, said:

If someone is genuinely an elite player, then their opinion on issues regarding the top level of play should absolutely be relevant.

When reading the forums I take every player's words with a grain of salt but also with respect to the idea's merit, not based on who posted. Even a poor player can have a good idea or grasp on certain mechanics. The only people who NEED to know your ELO to evaluate the merit of suggestions are the developers, and they do know.

All a public ELO will do is give people a chance to be elitist in various forms which have already been posted above my post. It won't help solve issues as WE aren't (for better or worse) the ones making the design decisions. The forums are, and should remain neutral ground where each player's voice has an equal weight. Besides, it's usually obvious enough which players know what they speak of, and which don't.

I DO admit to slight curiosity to know where I fall on the ranking, but I can probably guess it's low-mid ELO, and I bet most people have a rough idea. That's good enough for me.

TL;DR - Forum ideas ought to be evaluated based on merit rather than the poster's game ranking.

[Sephlock]

No.

[DeadlyNerd]

lol, making Elo ratings public would be like making k/d ratio public. Many epeens would be hurt and many would start construction.
WORST idea ever.

edit: no, no, sorry, 2nd WORST idea ever, consumables are the first one and PGI already took the first place.

Edited by DeadlyNerd, 06 June 2013 - 09:51 PM.