597 replies to this topic

[Divine Decoy]

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

One side of me agrees with you. I'd love to know my score for my own benefit. But the other side sees the reason why they don't release it privately, and it's not because of "gaming" the system. 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.

True, if they made it private ppl wiill screenshot and "brag" but just like in WoTs you can ignore it. Public ELO would be like the XVM mod in WoT were people give up and don't try becasue "you suck in your noob tank" not accounting that it is ONLY your 3rd or 4th game.... not your fault your med tank only won 1 of its first 4 or 5 battles, no reason to rage quite or sucide due to LOW public ELO.. i mean XVM points...

If people "brag" you can ignore it as it is only on the forms that you see screenies. Ingame chat is bogus and easy to ignore. DO NOT copy public XVM/ELO style info system. Give us info but not to hurt the game play. PGI should understand this by their OWN rules of not MODDING the game files (which XVM and hit-models do in WoT to give players unfair advantages).

[Livewyr]

Soy, on 07 June 2013 - 07:33 AM, said:

I never said anything about narrow minded people should have more say, I simply said their opinions have a bit more merit when considering something

Look at the above quote and tell me what you see...

xDeityx, on 07 June 2013 - 07:34 AM, said:

Competitive players say things like what you quoted because they are unfortunately true in this horribly unbalanced game. That is the problem we would like to be solved. Competition thrives on balance. When the entire metagame is poptarting HGN-732s running 3 PPCs and a Gauss that is horrible for competition.

But it was true a couple patches ago that if you weren't running that sniper HGN-732 then you were giving up an advantage for no good reason, which is a garbage thing to do in the competitive scene. This is not the fault of the players, it's the fault of poor development. Competitive players are just calling a spade a spade, but that doesn't mean they want the balance to be in such a bad state...they are just recognizing that it is and doing the best they can to win in an unbalanced game. But it would be much more fun if PGI could get the balance to the point where all of the weapons were of equal usefulness and customizing your 'mech was more about suiting it to your own personal playstyle rather than conforming to a rigid metagame.

When skill metrics are made public, the discourse about the game becomes more informed. If you take a step back and look at almost any analogy you can see that this is obvious. If we are having a discussion about how to improve traffic, the truckers who drive on the roads constantly are going to have better insights than the grandmother who drives 5 minutes to church once a week every Sunday.

if someone particularly excels at using a current (broken) meta game, even if they DON'T like it.. why should they have any more right to say it's broken.


"When skill metrics are made public, the discourse about the game becomes more informed."

This statement is face value at best. It is true, that I will be more informed about the scores of that player. Could I derive whether I'm statistically better or worse than that player at this game? Yes. Does that make my argument, or his/her argument any less valid? ABSOLUTELY NOT.


I simply don't know how I could make this any ********* clearer so I'll go with the time honored internet tradition of blowing up the text to put it in your face:

THE VALIDITY OF AN ARGUMENT OR POINT FROM A PLAYER IS BASED IN THE MERITS OF THE ARGUMENT ALONE. NOT IN THE PLAYER POSING THE ARGUMENT.


At the very best, public stats might help people understand WHY a player is making a flawed or decent argument.. but that 'why' doesn't do anyone any actual good.

The last thing any community needs is airing someone's laundry so people can use the laundry to discredit a player rather than their argument.

(That's the basis of current politics- not actually challenging the policy.. but trying to discredit the person raising the issue... it's scumbag tactics of: POLITICIANS.)


PGI has the numbers, they can use them.


If that doesn't get through to you, I don't know what will.

Edited by Destined, 10 June 2013 - 03:51 PM.
Holy giant text batman

[FrDrake]

Livewyr, on 07 June 2013 - 08:22 AM, said:

PGI has the numbers, they can use them.

But they don't, and that's the problem, let the players use them instead. There's more passion in the playerbase for this game than in the entire dev team who are working their "jobs".

[Bilbo]

FrDrake, on 07 June 2013 - 08:27 AM, said:

But they don't, and that's the problem, let the players use them instead. There's more passion in the playerbase for this game than in the entire dev team who are working their "jobs".

So many assumptions. It's truly staggering.

[FrDrake]

Bilbo, on 07 June 2013 - 08:32 AM, said:

So many assumptions. It's truly staggering.

You've been here longer than I have, and I've been here a year now. How many issues would never have seen the light of day had dedicated players not done the legwork and made the necessary posts in the forums. These aren't assumptions, you and I both have seen them. I just don't have as much faith as you do about the best course forward.

[Soy]

I mean, I don't disagree, but then again I don't really care, that's not a concern for me but what I do know, and what is pretty much accepted facts of life, is that people who are more experienced with stuff usually have wisdom in between their ears.

[Livewyr]

Soy, on 07 June 2013 - 08:39 AM, said:

I mean, I don't disagree, but then again I don't really care, that's not a concern for me but what I do know, and what is pretty much accepted facts of life, is that people who are more experienced with stuff usually have wisdom in between their ears.

Agreed, more experienced players have a better picture with which to judge an argument.

Public Elo will not demonstrate who is more experienced.
Experienced arguments from experienced players will demonstrate who is more experienced.

[Soy]

I agree but then you get into the issue of actually giving a ****. Which a lot of players don't, particularly those who put all the ***** they can give into actually playing at a high level or with a serious attitude. Becomes issue of rhetorical prowess ala forumwarrioring at some point, I mean, just look @ this thread...

Edited by Soy, 07 June 2013 - 08:54 AM.

[Odins Fist]

DISAGREE, and you are out of your cotton picking mind, if you really think it will "Help This Community"..

I do not care if they do make ELO public, it doesn't bother me, but it will create something unintended.

So saying it's a good idea is a friggin joke... If people can't see the forest for the trees, then there is no reason even explaining it to them..

[Bilbo]

Soy, on 07 June 2013 - 08:53 AM, said:

I agree but then you get into the issue of actually giving a ****. Which a lot of players don't, particularly those who put all the ***** they can give into actually playing at a high level or with a serious attitude. Becomes issue of rhetorical prowess ala forumwarrioring at some point, I mean, just look @ this thread...

Because people who surf the forums during some free time at work never actually play the game when they get home, right?

[xDeityx]

Bilbo, on 07 June 2013 - 07:47 AM, said:

The trucker has a different perspective, not better insight. The trucker may well be a raving lunatic, the fact that he can still drive his truck doesn't mean he has a valid argument. Make your arguments and they'll stand or fall on their merits. They don't need to be given more or less weight based on an abstract number.

The different perspectives are exactly what we are driving at here! Without public Elo, neither the trucker, the grandmom, nor the audience knows whether the speaker's perspective is that of the trucker's or the grandmom's. Because of the Dunning-Kruger Effect, all of the grandmom's think that they are truckers and put forth their arguments as if they are from the trucker's perspective. This creates a confusing discourse because of the reasons PEEFsmash put forth in his OP about different skill levels essentially playing different games.

[Soy]

Bilbo, the ***** that got to do with the simple notion that some of the best players aren't necessarily the best speakers.

[Bilbo]

Soy, on 07 June 2013 - 09:00 AM, said:

Bilbo, the ***** that got to do with the simple notion that some of the best players aren't necessarily the best speakers.

About as much as their Elo would.

[Soy]

I don't really care about the issue, I'm just simply stating a fact that if you are more experienced and knowledgable about something your opinion is usually worth more merit than someone whos less experienced or is ignorant to certain things.

It's a fact of life.

I'm only stating this cuz I think it's worth stating; principle and whatnot. I'm not advocating a damn thing in this thread, either way.

I think a new players opinion is worth more than an experienced players when discussing the issue of player retention. See how this works? It's relative.

Obvsly in diff areas of discussion, differing segments of the playerbase have a right and a reason to express themselves and be heard, PEEF is excercizing that right regardless of whether or not I agree with him, his opinion regarding competitive play is worth noting since he does, in fact, play more competitive than 99% of the community in game.

Edited by Soy, 07 June 2013 - 09:10 AM.

[Lugh]

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

At least it's a legitimate and informed complaint though. Right now we have players complaining that they are the only good player on the team anyway, but the reality is that they are probably just as average as the people they are complaining about.

Also having a public Elo rating would give people something to work on. I know I would enjoy the challenge of raising my Elo every night, it would get me in game a lot more.

This is often subjectively true. As I will have 500(insert XX number here) damage and two kills with most of the rest of the team <150 dmg and some at 10s of damage numbers.

And in that game I was the best player. The one who paid attention to the minimap and did the most to maximize damage and contribute.

I would consider myself to be in the Very Good category just below the elite tier folks as a result of tournament ranks.

[Bilbo]

Soy, on 07 June 2013 - 09:09 AM, said:

I don't really care about the issue, I'm just simply stating a fact that if you are more experienced and knowledgable about something your opinion is usually worth more merit than someone whos less experienced or is ignorant to certain things.

It's a fact of life.

I'm only stating this cuz I think it's worth stating; principle and whatnot. I'm not advocating a damn thing in this thread, either way.

I think a new players opinion is worth more than an experienced players when discussing the issue of player retention. See how this works? It's relative.

And I'm saying that if you are more experienced or knowledgeable about something your arguments will show that better than a number by your name. The arguments are good, bad, or maybe somewhere in between. They strength of those arguments doesn't change with ELO.

[xDeityx]

Livewyr, on 07 June 2013 - 08:22 AM, said:

if someone particularly excels at using a current (broken) meta game, even if they DON'T like it.. why should they have any more right to say it's broken.

Because if they excel at it, they have insights as to why it is broken.

Livewyr, on 07 June 2013 - 08:22 AM, said:

"When skill metrics are made public, the discourse about the game becomes more informed."

This statement is face value at best. It is true, that I will be more informed about the scores of that player. Could I derive whether I'm statistically better or worse than that player at this game? Yes. Does that make my argument, or his/her argument any less valid? ABSOLUTELY NOT.

Yes, an argument from a less informed person is less valid by its very nature. Balancing games is hard. What you're saying would be ridiculous if applied to any other genre. For example if an engineer and a layperson are talking about how to fix an engine, it would be ridiculous to take the statements of the layperson at the same value as the engineer. Yes, it's possible that the layperson could get completely lucky and make a suggestion from ignorance that happened to be as valid as something the engineer said, but it is extremely unlikely.

Livewyr, on 07 June 2013 - 08:22 AM, said:

I simply don't know how I could make this any ********* clearer so I'll go with the time honored internet tradition of blowing up the text to put it in your face:

THE VALIDITY OF AN ARGUMENT OR POINT FROM A PLAYER IS BASED IN THE MERITS OF THE ARGUMENT ALONE. NOT IN THE PLAYER POSING THE ARGUMENT.

At the very best, public stats might help people understand WHY a player is making a flawed or decent argument.. but that 'why' doesn't do anyone any actual good.

The last thing any community needs is airing someone's laundry so people can use the laundry to discredit a player rather than their argument.

(That's the basis of current politics- not actually challenging the policy.. but trying to discredit the person raising the issue... it's scumbag tactics of: POLITICIANS.)


PGI has the numbers, they can use them.


If that doesn't get through to you, I don't know what will.

I understand you are emotional about this topic but there's no need for the theatrics. Let's stick to discussing this like adults with unobnoxious font sizes. I'm not disrespecting you by cussing at you and suggesting that you are too stupid to see my point unless the font is huge, please return that same respect to me.

I think that knowing why a player is saying what he is saying is actually very useful. It helps guide informed discussion and separate fallacies that low-tier players have (for example LRMs are thought to be OP because they have poor awareness of cover) from the reality of the game that the top players are playing.

[FrDrake]

Bilbo, on 07 June 2013 - 09:13 AM, said:

And I'm saying that if you are more experienced or knowledgeable about something your arguments will show that better than a number by your name. The arguments are good, bad, or maybe somewhere in between. They strength of those arguments doesn't change with ELO.

It's not about the credibility of the argument itself, it's about the credibility of the argument for a particular Elo tier. LRMs OP in the sub 1200 bracket may be true, while in the 1800+ bracket LRMs may be fine. That's the distinction, not to dismiss the sub 1200 guy, because his argument is fine, FOR his bracket.

[Soy]

Bilbo, again, the best players or more experienced ones aren't always the best ones to communicate their knowledge or opinions on stuff. There are careers based on this simple fact.

Hell, some sports stars have gag orders on them cuz the moment they touch a live mic, dumb **** flies out of their mouth like clockwork. Or, what about the opposite. Layman's terms? How many scientists could say some super smart **** but you wouldn't get the gist of most of it cuz it's too technical or highbrow? Even art.

Edited by Soy, 07 June 2013 - 09:19 AM.

[Livewyr]

Soy, on 07 June 2013 - 09:09 AM, said:

I don't really care about the issue, I'm just simply stating a fact that if you are more experienced and knowledgable about something your opinion is usually worth more merit than someone whos less experienced or is ignorant to certain things.

It's a fact of life.

I'm only stating this cuz I think it's worth stating; principle and whatnot. I'm not advocating a damn thing in this thread, either way.

I think a new players opinion is worth more than an experienced players when discussing the issue of player retention. See how this works? It's relative.

I see what you're saying- and I agree, somewhat. (I still stand by taking the argument as seriously as it, itself, merits.)

I think you chose a poor place to say it when not advocating either way, since this is a thread about using someones Elo to determine whether they're experienced and knowledgeable or not.


Moving on.
-----------------------------
Diety, don't try and convince me that public Elo would be used strictly for understanding a person's perspective. (That is the best case scenario, and at best, it does nothing.) I've called out the BS that was at least once before.

And again, I will cite WoT forums, WoW forums, and just about any forums including public stats and competition.

--------------------------------
Actually: Better yet, I pose this question to you in an attempt to understand.

What would you do when confronted with a player who thinks that PPCs are too powerful and has a lower (public) Elo score?
or
One who thinks that Gauss Rifles are too powerful, but also has a lower (public) Elo score?

What exactly would you do?