Jump to content

The Fallacy Of "jarl's List = Knowledge"


226 replies to this topic

#141 Brauer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2019 Top 8 Qualifier
  • CS 2019 Top 8 Qualifier
  • 187 posts

Posted 19 January 2020 - 01:57 PM

View PostKhobai, on 19 January 2020 - 12:26 PM, said:


I dont doubt that youre right. My point was simply that there is no way for you to prove it. You are simply asking me to take your word for it which does not constitute actual proof. The inability to distinguish between solo and group games is one of the inherent limitations of jarl's list.

And yes good players will have better stats in the long run. I am not refuting that. My point was simply that jarl's list has limitations and as such should not be used as the sole means of determining if a player is good or not. And your stats certainly should not determine the validity of your opinion or justify behavior like statshaming. I find it hilarious that players like Ash measure people's value by their MWO stats, because their only way of validating themselves in life is how good they are at MWO. Whereas most normal people simply dont care about stats one way or another.


Right, Jarl's has limitations, as does anything. GroupQ is dead so that is not a limitation worth giving much thought unless you are looking at data from before something like July 2019. Any data since about July '19 is largely uncontaminated by GroupQ because the queue is dead.

Also, we conveniently have several other places to test our mettle, see Solaris and numerous player run competitions (ISC, MoR, MWOWCS to name a few).

I wouldn't give much stock to the opinions of someone who hasn't performed well in at least one of those areas, and it's not like there are a whole lot of high performing comp or Solaris players with horrible, or even unexpectedly low, stats on Jarl's. A player with low stats might really just have bad mechanicals skills and understand the game at a high level, but my experience as an erstwhile potato who has played against and learned from some of the top players in the game is that the higher the performance of the player the more likely they are to have a deep understanding of game mechanics and strats. That's partly that high level players have, at some point at least, devoted significant time to building that knowledge base, and because they notice things and connect dots that others might not. It's also due to the fact that high level players active in comp have a chance to test ideas against other high level players, which gives a better sense of the absolute merit of a build or strat.

I am sure I missed reasons high level players are far more likely to understand the implications of changes to the game, or understand how to build a mech or approach a particular scenario, but that's at least a start.

Any time we deal with data there are limitations. You seem to be of the mind that having any limitations in a dataset renders it invalid. That's just wrong. We've identified the issues with the data, and their likely impacts, AND that the GroupQ issue is dead along with the queue.

BTW stats or in-game achievements are just that, stats and in-game achievements. They don't mean anyone is worth more than others (though they can give some sense of who I would prefer to drop with in a competitive drop!). I've played both with people who are much better at the game than me, and significantly worse. I respect and value all of those folks.

Edited by Brauer, 19 January 2020 - 06:12 PM.


#142 dario03

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,237 posts

Posted 19 January 2020 - 02:37 PM

View PostKhobai, on 19 January 2020 - 12:26 PM, said:


I dont doubt that youre right. My point was simply that there is no way for you to prove it. You are simply asking me to take your word for it which does not constitute actual proof. The inability to distinguish between solo and group games is one of the inherent limitations of jarl's list.

And yes good players will have better stats in the long run. I am not refuting that. My point was simply that jarl's list has limitations and as such should not be used as the sole means of determining if a player is good or not. And your stats certainly should not determine the validity of your opinion or justify behavior like statshaming. I find it hilarious that players like Ash measure people's value by their MWO stats, because their only way of validating themselves in life is how good they are at MWO. Whereas most normal people simply dont care about stats one way or another.


Statshaming isn't even that bad around here. It usually only happens when somebody with something like 180avgms, sub 1w/l, sub 1kdr is trying to tell players how to play and going against what most would say. And nobody ever tells that person they are terrible at life because of game stats, just that they probably aren't in a good position to be giving out game advice. Which in a case like that is probably true and since they are trying to give game advice on a game forum it makes sense to bring up stats.
Its not like people are finding out who these people are in real life and telling them their game advice is bad because they failed 9th grade English or that they can't do their real life job because they have bad stats in this game. Its not even all that common to see people stat shame based on close stats, like hey I have 3% better stats then you therefore I am always right and you are always wrong.

Edited by dario03, 19 January 2020 - 02:47 PM.


#143 Marquis De Lafayette

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blazing
  • The Blazing
  • 1,235 posts
  • LocationIn Valley Forge with General Washington

Posted 19 January 2020 - 02:41 PM

View PostKhobai, on 19 January 2020 - 12:26 PM, said:


I dont doubt that youre right. My point was simply that there is no way for you to prove it. You are simply asking me to take your word for it which does not constitute actual proof. The inability to distinguish between solo and group games is one of the inherent limitations of jarl's list.

And yes good players will have better stats in the long run. I am not refuting that. My point was simply that jarl's list has limitations and as such should not be used as the sole means of determining if a player is good or not. And your stats certainly should not determine the validity of your opinion or justify behavior like statshaming. I find it hilarious that players like Ash measure people's value by their MWO stats, because their only way of validating themselves in life is how good they are at MWO. Whereas most normal people simply dont care about stats one way or another.


The good news for you is that a forum poster’s game stats aren’t the most important element in determining if he/she should be listened to. Consensus of the active community is. The worst of players can easily state all kinds of things on the forums, without fear of stat-shamming. As long as they are in line with the consensus. However, once you start disagreeing with what most of us think we know you are going to have to have something for us to weigh to determine if you might have a point or not. A bottom 40% player might post an opinion that a build is good....but if it isn’t generally viewed as at least decent he is likely to get roasted and his stats will be used as evidence that he isn’t a reliable source. That is the only way to separate the proverbial wheat from the chaff as far as opinions go here. Now, if by some chance it is some new and innovative build that most of us have missed, some top guys are bound to defend it as such (foruming a new consensus) and the guy will have some backers that folks will listen to and the guy will have done a service to the community by bringing it all up. Those situations are few on far between on these forums though. Mostly we see bad players with bad stats insisting the consensus is wrong and their good word alone is all we should require to believe them. So, stat-checking and using bad stats as evidence that a poster might not be a reliable source isn’t going away.

Edited by Marquis De Lafayette, 19 January 2020 - 02:45 PM.


#144 DarkFhoenix

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Serpent
  • The Serpent
  • 387 posts

Posted 19 January 2020 - 02:42 PM

I am a casual gamer . I log onto MWO to relax and have fun . It's just a game . Sometimes my mech makes 500 score , sometimes I get blown up first .

I will enjoy and explore all kinds of mechs and weapons and roles . I cannot imagine the stress a top 100 player experiences or the keyboard smashing when his buddies let him down . Nor do I want that .

I live in Africa , my ping is always on the high end . If I gave 110 percent , using the best mech and build and tactics, Jarls list would make me out as an average gamer .



#145 Ilfi

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 576 posts

Posted 19 January 2020 - 07:36 PM

Just popping in to ask if you guys figured out that Jarl's List is our best measure of game knowledge or not. Yes or No will suffice.

Sincerely, guy that mutes voice chat in solo queue.

#146 QuakeRiley

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Leftenant General
  • Leftenant General
  • 91 posts

Posted 19 January 2020 - 07:42 PM

View PostIlfi, on 19 January 2020 - 07:36 PM, said:

Just popping in to ask if you guys figured out that Jarl's List is our best measure of game knowledge or not. Yes or No will suffice.

Sincerely, guy that mutes voice chat in solo queue.


How do you measure something subjective like someone's knowledge with straight data?

Edited by QuakeRiley, 19 January 2020 - 07:52 PM.


#147 Ilfi

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 576 posts

Posted 19 January 2020 - 07:46 PM

Well, mainly you look at the data with your eyes and interpret it with your brain to come to a reasonable conclusion.

#148 Stormpaw

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 43 posts

Posted 19 January 2020 - 07:51 PM

there are few great stat performing players that are bad at the game, most poor stat performing players are bad at the game, take from that what you will

#149 Vxheous

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2019 Gold Champ
  • CS 2019 Gold Champ
  • 3,433 posts

Posted 19 January 2020 - 08:21 PM

View PostQuakeRiley, on 19 January 2020 - 07:42 PM, said:


How do you measure something subjective like someone's knowledge with straight data?


Straight data from Jarl's doesn't tell much other than if someone wins more than they lose, gets more kills than deaths, and overall general damage they average in game + actions that influence the game. (as a reflection of average match score). It also gives a trend, to see if someone is improving over time (for instance, looking at your Jarl's, it looks like you have made improvement over the last year and a half, and have probably hit a plateau a few months back).

Taking that data however, and applying it to other information, like advice given by said player, does in fact reflection "knowledge" of the game. For instance, if someone told me that an Annihilator with 1 LBX 20, 2 LBX 2s, 1 RAC 2, and 2 RAC 5 is a really good Annihilator build, and swears by it, and I see on Jarls that they predominately plays Assaults, but have a 0.5 W/L, a 0.4 K/D, and a Average Match Score of 140, I'm going to raise serious doubts as to that build being "good." Conversely, if someone told me that an Adder with 1xGauss + 3 ERML is a good "midline" mech, but not for duelling other lights, and I see on Jarl's that they predominately plays Lights, and their their W/L is 2.0, K/D is 3.4, and Average Match score is 400, I would definitely be convinced to try that build out for myself (that Adder build is actually quite fun, if you like slow lights).

The Jarl's list gives context to advice posts, on it's own, it can only really function on a macro level to discern skill. It can't really tell the diffference between a 99% Jarls and say a 95% Jarls player, but it can definitely tell you a 99% Jarls player is better than a 50% Jarl's player.

View PostDarkFhoenix, on 19 January 2020 - 02:42 PM, said:

I am a casual gamer . I log onto MWO to relax and have fun . It's just a game . Sometimes my mech makes 500 score , sometimes I get blown up first .

I will enjoy and explore all kinds of mechs and weapons and roles . I cannot imagine the stress a top 100 player experiences or the keyboard smashing when his buddies let him down . Nor do I want that .

I live in Africa , my ping is always on the high end . If I gave 110 percent , using the best mech and build and tactics, Jarls list would make me out as an average gamer .


There's no stress in playing QP matches as a top player, QP is just for skilling/trying out mechs. Real competition occurs in league play anyways.

Edited by Vxheous, 19 January 2020 - 08:30 PM.


#150 FRAGTAST1C

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hunter
  • The Hunter
  • 2,304 posts
  • LocationIndia

Posted 19 January 2020 - 09:44 PM

View PostDarkFhoenix, on 19 January 2020 - 02:42 PM, said:

I am a casual gamer . I log onto MWO to relax and have fun . It's just a game . Sometimes my mech makes 500 score , sometimes I get blown up first .

I will enjoy and explore all kinds of mechs and weapons and roles . I cannot imagine the stress a top 100 player experiences or the keyboard smashing when his buddies let him down . Nor do I want that .


Top players don't take QP seriously. I'm pretty sure they don't take even FW seriously and take in casual players into their group regularly. Only Comp. Queue matters to them (then again, there are many top players who could be pretty good at comp but don't do it 'cause they don't bother; all they want is big, stompy robots and are generally great people to play with).

#151 Ignatius Audene

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 296 posts

Posted 20 January 2020 - 12:50 AM

View PostDarkFhoenix, on 19 January 2020 - 02:42 PM, said:

I am a casual gamer . I log onto MWO to relax and have fun . It's just a game . Sometimes my mech makes 500 score , sometimes I get blown up first .

I will enjoy and explore all kinds of mechs and weapons and roles . I cannot imagine the stress a top 100 player experiences or the keyboard smashing when his buddies let him down . Nor do I want that .

I live in Africa , my ping is always on the high end . If I gave 110 percent , using the best mech and build and tactics, Jarls list would make me out as an average gamer .



Pretty much everything u write after your 5th sentence is bull...t

In your mind (u are not alone with this wrong aproach) everyone in the top x is tryhard and some / all need to get a real life.

The reality is pretty much the opposite. U can watch many of these players streaming, while they are leveling, trolling, drinking...
To get high in jarls is reaaaaaaly easy. I would argue, that I am pretty much the definition of an normal gamer. Full time job, wife, kid,cat and my best years in case of reflexes are over.
In quake I will struggle to get past 50 % mark.
In mwo u don't need this. Just tune down mouse sense to 0.1. activate arm lock from time to time and don't loose in mech lab to hard. Download minimap dlc or in game voip if u want to tryhard.

Ping not a big problem at all. Perhaps try personal challenge and just one month try to get as good as possible in your games. I am really excited about the result.

Edited by Ignatius Audene, 20 January 2020 - 12:52 AM.


#152 ShiverMeRivets

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • 374 posts

Posted 20 January 2020 - 01:04 AM

Data shmata...
Judge the argument, not the person giving it, unless his argument relies on “trust me” - in that case don’t trust him at all.


#153 Sjorpha

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 4,157 posts
  • LocationSweden

Posted 20 January 2020 - 05:03 AM

No one gets "stat shamed" for no reason, it is when you give dubious advice or make claims about your own performance that people will check those claims against the available data.

Yes all data sets are tools and they can be used in good or bad ways.

As an example, and this happens all the damn time, someone I've never heard about writes something like "I usually do 500+ damage with several kills..." and I go check their stats and see that in fact they have a k/d of 1.0 or less and sub 250 avg matchscore. Ok, I now know this person has either lied or is suffering from serious confirmation bias regarding their own performance. I WILL call that person out on that.

That doesn't mean I value the person by mwo stats, it doesn't mean having those stats is anything to be ashamed of or anything like that. But it DOES mean that person has lied or has an inflated image of their skill level, and that IS a reason to call them out on it and to be sceptical of their other advice and claims.

So just don't make false claims about your performance, for example don't call your peak performance "average", or act like some self proclaimed expert on the game, and no one will care about your stats.

#154 Kodyn

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Raider
  • The Raider
  • 1,277 posts
  • LocationNY, USA

Posted 20 January 2020 - 05:08 AM

View PostSjorpha, on 20 January 2020 - 05:03 AM, said:

No one gets "stat shamed" for no reason, it is when you give dubious advice or make claims about your own performance that people will check those claims against the available data.

Yes all data sets are tools and they can be used in good or bad ways.

As an example, and this happens all the damn time, someone I've never heard about writes something like "I usually do 500+ damage with several kills..." and I go check their stats and see that in fact they have a k/d of 1.0 or less and sub 250 avg matchscore. Ok, I now know this person has either lied or is suffering from serious confirmation bias regarding their own performance. I WILL call that person out on that.

That doesn't mean I value the person by mwo stats, it doesn't mean having those stats is anything to be ashamed of or anything like that. But it DOES mean that person has lied or has an inflated image of their skill level, and that IS a reason to call them out on it and to be sceptical of their other advice and claims.

So just don't make false claims about your performance, for example don't call your peak performance "average", or act like some self proclaimed expert on the game, and no one will care about your stats.


^This. That's exactly why whenever I give anyone advice, I always throw in a disclaimer that I'm only a mediocre pilot, which can be confirmed by my Jarl's. They can take it or leave it, and I never give super specific advice, just general tips that pretty much anyone who's been playing for any amount of time could confirm, common sense stuff. I feel like a lot of people try to swing above their weight and debate with people they shouldn't, and that's when they get called out, as they should.

#155 VonBruinwald

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Undisputed
  • The Undisputed
  • 1,855 posts
  • LocationRandis IV

Posted 20 January 2020 - 01:37 PM

View PostSjorpha, on 20 January 2020 - 05:03 AM, said:

No one gets "stat shamed" for no reason,


Unfortunately there's many that do stat shame for no reason.

View PostSjorpha, on 20 January 2020 - 05:03 AM, said:

As an example, and this happens all the damn time, someone I've never heard about writes something like "I usually do 500+ damage with several kills..." and I go check their stats and see that in fact they have a k/d of 1.0 or less and sub 250 avg matchscore. Ok, I now know this person has either lied or is suffering from serious confirmation bias regarding their own performance. I WILL call that person out on that.


This is the only time it's really worth stat shaming.

#156 Davegt27

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 6,349 posts
  • LocationCO

Posted 20 January 2020 - 01:47 PM

the Jarl's list's only purpose is to stat shame

everyone knows that

#157 Marquis De Lafayette

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blazing
  • The Blazing
  • 1,235 posts
  • LocationIn Valley Forge with General Washington

Posted 20 January 2020 - 01:49 PM

I have been around these forum for years and I have yet to see someone stat-shamed either who didn’t deserve it or who didn’t get defended by better players as to having some valid point in what they said.....making the “shamer” look petty for trying to shame the guy. 9/10 times it’s deserved and the occasional time it isn’t these forums police themselves pretty well. There really shouldn’t be a controversy about it.

#158 justcallme A S H

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2019 Referee
  • CS 2019 Referee
  • 7,390 posts
  • LocationMelbourne, AU

Posted 20 January 2020 - 06:42 PM

View PostKhobai, on 19 January 2020 - 05:39 AM, said:

If I lack the understanding then I implore you to prove me wrong. Come on prove it. I am waiting.

The person that needs to stop is you. Because you are wrong. You cant admit you are wrong.


Really? I'm wrong? lol... Every time I have proven you to be wrong as per below examples...

Lack of understanding of Match Maker
Clear lack of understaing of Range vs DMG
Linebackers are 65T - you then edited your post 4hrs later so you didn't look wrong.
Claimed 50% of cERPPC dmg does missing - refused to provide proof
Claming PGI cannot stop macros, yet they patched the RACro exploit



And the best one, most applicable to this discussion?

Prior incorrect claims about in-game stats despite people doing it live on stream daily


It's laughable you say I won't admit I am wrong. If I am - I will. It is you that can never admit it. You just move into another topic and start the process of spouting misinformation once again.

The fact is you don't play the game. You haven't for years, you just post contrarian rubbish on the forums. You can claim you "play" all you want, but the fact that you don't even know GroupQ is dead and has been for 8 months and you are trying to claim it's effects still on Jarls? lol Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image

Edited by justcallme A S H, 20 January 2020 - 06:43 PM.


#159 Dee Eight

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The People's Hero
  • The People
  • 6,199 posts

Posted 20 January 2020 - 10:36 PM

View PostDavegt27, on 20 January 2020 - 01:47 PM, said:

the Jarl's list's only purpose is to stat shame

everyone knows that


Actually that's the leaderboards period... jarl's just makes use of data PGI already made available with monthly leaderboards.

#160 OZHomerOZ

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Little Helper
  • 2,363 posts

Posted 20 January 2020 - 11:01 PM

View PostDavegt27, on 20 January 2020 - 01:47 PM, said:

the Jarl's list's only purpose is to stat shame

everyone knows that


I use it to compare players
If said players are ashamed of their stats
Is that Jarls List's fault?





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users