123 replies to this topic

[Mystere]

Verilligo, on 01 May 2019 - 10:59 AM, said:

This would be an excellent argument except for the fact that ordinary mortals (https://leaderboard....rch?u=verilligo) can still pull good stats even when they play bad builds for the entertainment of others (https://leaderboard....earch?u=Baradul) or just have fun with memes (https://leaderboard....REAL+BIG+SALAMI). See, the trouble is that people are considered to play well because they play well on average, not just sporadically. It's not a matter of only being serious 30% of the time, it's a matter of only being competent 30% of the time. That's not an insult, that's just the facts and sometimes you're limited by reasons beyond your control.

The actual insult is when you tell yourself you can't learn from your own mistakes and then proceed to repeat them until you can't tell that they're mistakes anymore.

That is still not a convincing argument that the leaderboard is a good indicator of *abilities* (as McGoat has put it) for everyone.

Edited by Mystere, 01 May 2019 - 12:35 PM.

[Verilligo]

Mystere, on 01 May 2019 - 12:04 PM, said:

That is still not a convincing argument that the leaderboard is a good indicator of *abilities* (as McGoat has put it) for eveyrone.

And yet that's exactly what it seems to indicate. Good players return good numbers on average. Bad players return bad numbers on average. I'm sure there may be sporadic cases of someone that plays poorly managing to end up relatively high on the list, but how thin does that margin of error need to be for you to start tossing out the baby with the bathwater? I'm not sure what there is to argue here, other than that the very definition of "good player" might not be agreed upon, in which case you would need to specify the quantifiable metric you want to judge by.

[MisterSomaru]

Mystere, on 01 May 2019 - 12:04 PM, said:

That is still not a convincing argument that the leaderboard is a good indicator of *abilities* (as McGoat has put it) for everyone.

Okay, how about this? did any of the people with low percentiles make it to worlds? Just let me know. Lets use last years worlds for example, where, you know, all the builds were the same, and mostly terrible. list the number of people below the 90th percentile that made it to finals.

[Mystere]

Verilligo, on 01 May 2019 - 12:18 PM, said:

I'm not sure what there is to argue here, other than that the very definition of "good player" might not be agreed upon, in which case you would need to specify the quantifiable metric you want to judge by.

That is precisely the point I am driving at. How do you really measure a "good player" or, better yet, "skill" -- especially in a team-based game? Does the leaderboard measure success/competence in the following areas that go beyond mere kills and match score, but do drive wins:

• command abilities
  
• playing vanguard
  
• distraction
  
• baiting
  
• enemy suppression

I posit that the only reliable measure we currently have is the "ability to win" (i.e. W/L). But then again there's that "slight" issue with playing solo vs. playing in a group vs. playing mainly CW.


But we're getting way off topic ...

MrSomaru, on 01 May 2019 - 01:07 PM, said:

Okay, how about this? did any of the people with low percentiles make it to worlds? Just let me know. Lets use last years worlds for example, where, you know, all the builds were the same, and mostly terrible. list the number of people below the 90th percentile that made it to finals.

Sigh!

I'm torn between:



or:



Maybe it's both?

I am talking about the leaderboard as a reliable means of measuring *ability*. <smh>

Edited by Mystere, 01 May 2019 - 01:19 PM.

[MisterSomaru]

Mystere, on 01 May 2019 - 01:07 PM, said:

That is precisely the point I am driving at. How do you really measure a "good player" or, better yet, "skill" -- especially in a team-based game? Does the leaderboard measure success/competence in the following areas that go beyond mere kills and match score, but do drive wins:

• command abilities
  
• playing vanguard
  
• distraction
  
• baiting
  
• enemy suppression

I posit that the only reliable measure we currently have is the "ability to win" (i.e. W/L). But then again there's that "slight" issue with playing solo vs. playing in a group vs. playing mainly CW.



But we're getting way off topic ...




Sigh!

I'm torn between:



or:



Maybe it's both?

I am talking about the leaderboard as a reliable means of measuring *ability*. <smh>

it's not bait. I'm genuinely asking. Facts and statistics are existing concrete numbers. JL shows consistency.

[r4plez]

OP just play Quickdraw IV-4 and stop spreading heresy

[Xeno Phalcon]

All jarl's has taught me is I am a red shirt.

[VonBruinwald]

MrSomaru, on 01 May 2019 - 01:07 PM, said:

Okay, how about this? did any of the people with low percentiles make it to worlds? Just let me know. Lets use last years worlds for example, where, you know, all the builds were the same, and mostly terrible. list the number of people below the 90th percentile that made it to finals.

Pick one:

[MisterSomaru]

VonBruinwald, on 01 May 2019 - 01:41 PM, said:

Pick one:

Hm, y'all think I'm just baiting? Well then. Here's where I'm coming from: People say JL means nothing when talking about skills. That advice from someone sub 40th percentile should carry as much weight as someone in the top 3%, when in fact, those top 3% (usually top 1%) are the ones that win the most, get the most damage, and make it really far in competitions. JL shows how consistent players are, and if someone is consistently below 40th percentile, then what they say is OPINION, and not fact. So when ASH comes in and claims something, or other top players, they have a much higher chance of being correct. And they can back up whatever they say, and will do so. With facts, figures, demonstrations, and possible 1v1s to prove a point. Calling someone out for trying to figure out where their twisted logic is coming from is bait? Nice.

edit: The people in those higher percentiles can consistently prove things too, and will.

Edited by MrSomaru, 01 May 2019 - 01:55 PM.

[Mystere]

MrSomaru, on 01 May 2019 - 01:25 PM, said:

it's not bait. I'm genuinely asking. Facts and statistics are existing concrete numbers. JL shows consistency.

Again, how does Jarl measure these?

Mystere, on 01 May 2019 - 01:07 PM, said:

• command abilities
  
• playing vanguard
  
• distraction
  
• baiting
  
• enemy suppression

Or for that matter, can Jarl tell when someone is using a stick and when that same someone is using a G13? How about a steering wheel?

Edited by Mystere, 01 May 2019 - 02:26 PM.

[MisterSomaru]

Mystere, on 01 May 2019 - 02:23 PM, said:

Again, how does Jarl measure these?





Or for that matter, can Jarl tell when someone is using a stick and when that same someone is using a G13? How about a steering wheel?

All of those are reflected in top skill players, as they tend to win and do well, and stick and mouse? really? yes, it's obvious.

[Mystere]

MrSomaru, on 01 May 2019 - 02:39 PM, said:

All of those are reflected in top skill players, as they tend to win and do well ...

Where is this unhealthy obsession of yours with top players coming from? I was not even referring to them.

MrSomaru, on 01 May 2019 - 02:39 PM, said:

... and stick and mouse? really? yes, it's obvious.

Read my post again. But do so very carefully this time. Here's a hint: "someone" and "same someone".

You're really missing my point.


And we're wayyyyy off track now.

Edited by Mystere, 01 May 2019 - 02:51 PM.

[HenryFA]

Oh boy, here we go again...

"Im 30% on Jarl's yet I am good" nonsense all over again LMAO...

Edited by HenryFA, 01 May 2019 - 02:52 PM.

[Mystere]

HenryFA, on 01 May 2019 - 02:51 PM, said:

Oh boy, here we go again...

"Im 30% on Jarl's yet I am good" nonsense all over again LMAO...

Is there anyone actually claiming that?

[HenryFA]

Mystere, on 01 May 2019 - 02:53 PM, said:

Is there anyone actually claiming that?

Identical, yes? Don't wanna name and shame tho, it is against the CoC

[justcallme A S H]

GuardDogg, on 01 May 2019 - 08:59 AM, said:

One game, and you think a player does the same thing over and over. One game a mouse dies during a play your able to see it differently (happen to be in same round I was in), and your making huge consumption that I do this all the time. Also you never catch the rounds where I do 400+. Only taking it from a stat chart and assume we (Or GuardDogg) is all that. With your attitude on internet, you have a lot of growing up to do. And I mean a lot. You need to be have respect how people play. We are not you.

One game?

Dude I've seen you in the past week I believe 4-5 times. Each time you've been horribly out of position and failed to do more than 250dmg each time. The most recent game you did a whopping 20 damage. So if you do that 5/5 games, guess what, you're doing it ALL the timr. There is no way you're gonna tell me that was a "random 5 games".

Your issue is you issue alone - you have no map awareness at all.

Lol growing up to do? I'm not the one in denial champ. Time to go look in the mirror and you'll find your issue

[justcallme A S H]

VonBruinwald, on 01 May 2019 - 11:02 AM, said:

That aside, his match score places him safely within the standard deviation of an average player. If anything you're the outlier and less representative of the &quot;average level&quot; than him.

If you're below, sub 180, you're well outside any "standard deviation" given the volume of players between 185-220.

It's WELL below the average.

[justcallme A S H]

Mystere, on 01 May 2019 - 01:07 PM, said:

That is precisely the point I am driving at. How do you really measure a "good player" or, better yet, "skill" -- especially in a team-based game? Does the leaderboard measure success/competence in the following areas that go beyond mere kills and match score, but do drive wins:

• command abilities
  
• playing vanguard
  
• distraction
  
• baiting
  
• enemy suppression

If they were driving wins... Doing all these "important" things...

Why do they ALL have a WLR below 1.0?

And those with high JL stats ALL have a WLRs above 1.0?


You're not fooling anyone with that strawman argument.

[HenryFA]

justcallme A S H, on 01 May 2019 - 03:58 PM, said:

If they were driving wins... Doing all these "important" things...

Why do they ALL have a WLR below 1.0?

And those with high JL stats ALL have a WLRs above 1.0?


You're not fooling anyone with that strawman argument.

crybaby mode: Because my team sux

[VonBruinwald]

justcallme A S H, on 01 May 2019 - 03:10 PM, said:

If you're below, sub 180, you're well outside any "standard deviation" given the volume of players between 185-220.

It's WELL below the average.

I don't believe he's as far outside the box as you imagine.

1 deviation is your average player. 2 deviations is your general population. 3 deviations is basically the whole population minus the face mashers and eSpurters (your outliers).

It would be good to see the numbers crunched and marked with the deviations.