88 replies to this topic

[1453 R]

Vellron2005, on 23 December 2016 - 02:39 AM, said:

...
With this in mind, I think showing number of played matches would only serve to drive prejudice against new players and alienate them from the game even more.
...

And now you have identified why these guys want this sort of system in-game.

They're not looking for 'quality opinions from quality people'. It's just another lever they can use to dismiss people they can't otherwise defeat in proper debate, like still-prevalent tier shaming.

Even simply the way the Op phrased his ideas:

MadIrish, on 21 December 2016 - 04:14 PM, said:

...
Because frankly when I look at the people arguing against things it seems like each person against good ideas show far fewer matches played then those saying yes these are good suggestions. I mean often these nay sayers have less then 200 matches in the past to Seasons when the average is over 1000 and the most prolific players have over 2000 matches.
...

shows a specific agenda and bias. The OP doesn't want to have to actually defend his 'Good Ideas' in the court of public opinion, he wants to simply be able to say "STFU skrub, play 2k gamz & Git T1 Gud b4 u p0st" whenever someone points out that a given "Good Idea" might not, in fact, actually be all that good, or whether another idea might be a better use of resources, or whatever the argument at hand is.

Good ideas stand simply because they're good ideas. Everything else? Doesn't matter how Gud or Spud you are - bad ideas are bad ideas are bad ideas.

And this thread here is a bad idea.

[Ghogiel]

Jman5, on 23 December 2016 - 10:31 AM, said:

Man, I wish it separated Solo and Group Queue stats..

Yeah me too. All these stats need a finer grain to them.

When I was looking at that data collection that made a list of the top players with over 100 games, I suspect I would be much higher in the solo bracket. It was also crap in that it listed totals across all mech classes too, so where you and I would playing lights and meds a lot, we have to be ranked against players mainly in heavies and assaults, not to mention group queue players.

Hard is relative. imo top 5% relative to potatoes is not a big deal tho.

[Jman5]

1453 R, on 23 December 2016 - 11:10 AM, said:

And now you have identified why these guys want this sort of system in-game.

They're not looking for 'quality opinions from quality people'. It's just another lever they can use to dismiss people they can't otherwise defeat in proper debate, like still-prevalent tier shaming.

I'm sorry, but in all things you have to have some sort of built-in-filter or else you would spend all your time arguing with every crackpots on the internet who thinks the Earth is flat. For example when you have someone denouncing your opinion with their own opinion (key word: opinion) about the latest balance changes from the patch when they haven't even played a game in the last 2-3 months.

It's honestly the height of arrogance for these people to barge into discussions they have next to no knowledge of and act like their opinion should carry the same weight as a guy who's been in the game actually experiencing this stuff first hand.

Now as I said earlier, I don't really care how many total games a person has played. I just want to know that they have played a handful of games in the current patch. That way I know their opinion has been shaped by their recent experience.

If people don't want their opinion "dismissed" they should play a handful of games. If they can't be bothered to load up the game and play, I usually wont bother debating them.

[Davegt27]

no matter what you say its the nature of forums for someone to say the exact opposite

Edited by Davegt27, 27 December 2016 - 11:58 AM.

[MadIrish]

It's about perspective, how much time has this person actually spent playing the game (very relevant), how much do they win is relative to the comment and depends on the situation ( if they are making a balance recommendation and they play alot and use to win slightly more than the lost but are now suddenly losing a lot more often probably good to know). This is why I say "matches played" and not KDR...I don't care about your KDR there are lots of ways to game that but you can't game how many matches you play. W/L is also more relevant than KDR since this is primarily a team vs team game not one vs one. So while "matches played" is not the only factor its the most relevant in most cases, and more than that is recently played i.e. the current season. For me if they say, "Well I play on my alt account that's why it looks like i don't play that much..." blaa, blaa, blaa, Sorry then use your alt account to make the post if you want people to take you serious. I would rather take advice from someone with a lot of recent play time experience than listen to how many miles you used to walk to school in the snow. At the very least make it easy, if I click on your Avatar take me to your stat summary.

[1453 R]

MadIrish, on 27 December 2016 - 11:18 AM, said:

It's about perspective, how much time has this person actually spent playing the game (very relevant), how much do they win is relative to the comment and depends on the situation ( if they are making a balance recommendation and they play alot and use to win slightly more than the lost but are now suddenly losing a lot more often probably good to know). This is why I say "matches played" and not KDR...I don't care about your KDR there are lots of ways to game that but you can't game how many matches you play. W/L is also more relevant than KDR since this is primarily a team vs team game not one vs one. So while "matches played" is not the only factor its the most relevant in most cases, and more than that is recently played i.e. the current season. For me if they say, "Well I play on my alt account that's why it looks like i don't play that much..." blaa, blaa, blaa, Sorry then use your alt account to make the post if you want people to take you serious. I would rather take advice from someone with a lot of recent play time experience than listen to how many miles you used to walk to school in the snow. At the very least make it easy, if I click on your Avatar take me to your stat summary.

Or you could, y'know...read what they wrote and decide based on what they said whether or not it's worth discussing.

I mean, I know you're just crazy attached to the notion of excluding the vast majority of players from all game discussions because they're not World Tournament veterans/you seem to really hate reading, but people've spent five pages now telling you why that's a bad idea.

Do they need to spend five more?

[Lupis Volk]

Having a metric that people can use to alienate others is stupid. I've seen how it works, On World of Tanks if you have under several thousand battles your considered sub human on the forum and anything you say is rejected instantly based on your stats. Don't even dare look at the toxicity borne from the mod XVM that adds even more metrics.

So no i don't think we need a E-peen enhancer.

Edited by Lupis Volk, 28 December 2016 - 02:47 AM.

[ztac]

So someone that has had it pretty much all their way and thus have always played the game and totally agree with what PGI has done with the game is more knowledgeable than others?

I really don't think so , as those very people are incapable of being objective , often people also can not even think about all the angles to balance issues or game mechanics. PGI certainly have great difficulty in this region.

Mindlessly playing a game does not make you knowledgeable of that game. Often people play a certain way and build mechs a certain because a resource site tells them to , or their clan does.

Statistics don't really mean a whole lot as they can be misinterpreted very easily or have underlying issues that totally escape people. As a rule of thumb you have to take into account that this is a multiplayer game and that players customise their mechs. It is not a 1 vs1 with identical mechs.. only then would stats begin to mean anything! (limitation of possibilities tightens up the statistical data). Fail to understand these basis and you fail to understand why statistics should not really be used to show anything!

It is possible to be a bad player but be right on the money with balance issues. I could easily use as an example the PSR that PGI has 'invented' , If you actually think for a second about how they do it you would realise that it is highly inaccurate , and certainly relies on a lot of time input into the game and a certain amount of luck to move up.

[Bilbo]

Disregarding the fact that the information is no real indication of whether someone knows what they are talking about, if you are that worried about how many matches a person has played, it is easy enough to get the relevant information. Wouldn't do you any good to know that I've played over 18K matches when I played 99.9% of them well over a year ago.