Countdown queues are the problem

(Locked)

01/18/2013 03:46 PMPosted by Squeak


CSS means combat service support to me.


I think he means CounterStrike Source. It was a very popular online shooter from about 1998 until about 2005. I think some servers may still run it to this day, but I haven't played it in years.


A lot of servers still run it especially gun game but even standard is way better then CoD with the stupid perk ups for killing streaks.

01/19/2013 10:39 AMPosted by Kiaransali
But they arent facts. They are generalizations presented as facts. Using totally doctored "percentages".
Something that is generally true is called a trend. I have admitted there are exceptions to what I say. For example when I say the vast majority of the whiners never broke 1500 this is a trend that can easily be proven by simply counting the number of whiners that never broke 1500 vs the ones that have. You like to focus on the exceptions & say I am "manufacturing" facts, but what I am saying is true. You just don't like this particular truth.


But the majority of people defending OQ that I have seen have never broken 1500 either and then you have people like Pleb who are very obviously running half to full premade AVs to roll people which is very obvious by win stats compared to other BGs. So it really does work both ways.
90 Undead Mage
1935
01/19/2013 10:44 AMPosted by Piñata
Generalizations may be true most of the time - that's why they're called stereotypes - they are right, most of the time.
There is a difference between a trend and a stereotype. Let's say we count up all the posts where someone is complaining about something like gear disparity. For argument's sake let's say 83% of those posters never broke 1500. Now it is commonly believed that success in PvP is a combination of gear & skill... we can debate which is more important but most players believe both are important.

So given the above scenario one could reasonably conclude that many players who aren't very skilled like to blame lack of gear for failing, when in reality their lack of skill is part of the problem. Is this a stereotype or a trend? I would call it a trend.

But the majority of people defending OQ that I have seen have never broken 1500 either and then you have people like Pleb who are very obviously running half to full premade AVs to roll people which is very obvious by win stats compared to other BGs. So it really does work both ways.
Some players that run in premades are bad... I put some of them on my blacklist. However most of the players I have run with were pretty good and seemed like normal, down to earth people (i.e. didn't do premades to stroke theire e-peen). Likewise even though I have said most solo players are bad that means some are good. It does indeed go both ways.
Edited by Kiaransali on 1/19/2013 10:57 AM PST
90 Undead Mage
1935
I'm sure some players that never broke 1500 are good, just like some 2K rated players are bad (i.e. got carried). However ratings are the best metric available to measure skill... far from perfect but the best we have. I have never tried to get ratings... I don't care about them. However I do understand that, generally speaking, a 2K rated player is much better than a player that never broke 1500.
90 Undead Warlock
7580
I have seen battlemasters drop like little green flies. That should not happen, if you are right.


Battlemaster is not a "skill" title like arena master. I have it, it's more just a pain to get (and time consuming).
90 Goblin Hunter
4900
01/19/2013 11:17 AMPosted by Piñata
Battlemaster is not a "skill" title like arena master. I have it, it's more just a pain to get (and time consuming).


That's just an example. My point is, regardless of what exalted title you have, I'm willing to fight you, because I honestly believe your title to be garbage. And guess what, it often is, they suck.

You can fairly easily tell when someone has purchased a carry - when their play does not match the title, they got a carry. It's *SO* common. So common that they are worthless. Ratings mean nothing, and never will, until Blizz finds a way to ensure integrity of those ratings. In the meantime, I may very well just click 'Chef,' for today, and kill you anyway.

Why do you have so much confidence in a rating system that you know is flawed?


They just did. Cause now getting carried to a high rating in one week does nothing for you other than raise your cap :) Goodbye win traders and rating sellers :)
90 Goblin Hunter
4900
01/19/2013 10:58 AMPosted by Piñata
For argument's sake let's say 83% of those posters never broke 1500.


Ok, let's assume that. How many of that 83% have never broken that rating because they tried and failed? What percentage of that group have never broken the rating because they don't like to play arena matches?

I have never broken 1500.

I have also never played arena, barring the times that a guildy or a family member asked me to help them grind some cp. Less than 20 matches, in all. Does that mean I suck, or does it just mean that I prefer more relaxed settings?


Arena isn't for everyone. But the competitive nature that it does bring out also exposes that person for the PVPer that they are. Play enough arena, and nerves and high tension go away, cause you can just queue right back up again. And playing at 1500 rating is easy if you and your partner are decent, especially by the way your describe yourself. Being able to 1v1 someone is different than arena and BG/RBG cause this game is not based around 1v1. Some classes have distinct advantages over others in 1v1 situations, especially if that person is fully aware of these advantages and can exploit them as they should.

My point is, dueling is a good measure of skill, moreso than rating imo. However, just cause someone is good at dueling, doesn't mean they're good in the ring or in RBG. It takes a lot more skill and effort to play competitively in a team environment than in a 1v1 situation, although they both take skill and practice.

I personally use duels to hone my skills all the time in addition to finding out my weaknesses vs certain classes and their strengths and weaknesses as well. Dueling is the best way to learn about another class in addition to asking for tips.
90 Goblin Hunter
4900
01/19/2013 11:51 AMPosted by Piñata
They just did. Cause now getting carried to a high rating in one week does nothing for you other than raise your cap :) Goodbye win traders and rating sellers :)


Maybe I'll switch to 'Chef' permanently, then. It will be much more satisfying killing the masters with such a title, when they earned theirs. I still don't buy ratings as the end-all-be-all of skill.

It's good that they will ensure the integrity of it, now, through whatever nebulous means you refer to, but I'm still not all that scared. Maybe after Blizz fixes the right things, I can even buy the xpac and play at max again, but I'm still not overly impressed with ratings.

Besides, who's to say that a way won't be found to manipulate whatever they do? People always find ways.


This xpac is awesome dude, you should totally get it. You're quite the forum goer here and considering, I just thought u were posting on an alt. This xpac made me come back. Despite all the forum whiners, this is IMO the best xpac of them all. It may also be because I discovered a great community called oqueue. The people in it are great. I found all of my RBG team mates here.
90 Goblin Hunter
4900
Arena is not that great, imo. 2's, especially. 3's-5's seem more balanced, imo, but 2's, which I grinded through to get cp for others, is a joke. A comp that can beat you is a comp that can beat you, period. With 3-5 players, it's a bit different, but I didn't get to play those.

Not like I cared. I like the random gutters, where I can use my pots and toys, and play something not so intense. Arena seems to be about who can sucker punch the other team the fastest, and at my age, well, my reflexes are not up to par with a teen.

I like something where I can calmly, rationally, in stealth go about deciding the game plan, before I open at all.

See, that's one thing I don't think is addressed much about the ratings. Your reflexes in hitting those little keys has a lot to do with win or lose in arena, and I simply am not that fast any more. I prefer something where I can bring experience and knowledge to bear, rather than just clack away on the keyboard slower than you.


Reflexes are part of skill and experience though...anticipation, teamwork, etc. Arena/RBG (ie competitive environments) isn't for everyone as you noted. Nothing wrong with enjoying the more lax environments. But that's why it's competitive. Similar to sports, the best are the best because they excel in other areas where others struggle, whatever their reason might be.
90 Human Rogue
2845
01/19/2013 11:01 AMPosted by Kiaransali
I'm sure some players that never broke 1500 are good, just like some 2K rated players are bad (i.e. got carried). However ratings are the best metric available to measure skill... far from perfect but the best we have. I have never tried to get ratings... I don't care about them. However I do understand that, generally speaking, a 2K rated player is much better than a player that never broke 1500.

The problem with your logic about ratings can easily be turned back on you. Do you like when someone completely disregards your comments/efforts just because you've never broken 1500? People don't care that you "try" or not. So using your logic, I could simply say that your arguments that your teammates are bad and it's why you lose games is just another sub 1500 scrub blaming their teammates for their losses (I don't think that btw.) That's the problem with the way you handle those around you on the forums, you constantly lump everyone into said category, and use that as your basis for premading. Wouldn't you find it ridiculous if that's how you were treated? Your words just ignored and you tagged with "1500 scrub" instead?

That's why using ratings as a measure of individual skill and "quality" is flawed. Far too many variables involved in a player's ratings that don't necessarily rely on skill. There are plenty of people you berate in these posts that probably have a similar feeling about arena as you do. That they don't care about ratings. But you still continue to place them in the same category of bads, and ignore their complaints simply labeling it as whining. Bots are a problem, gear disparity is a problem, premades are a problem, certain battlegrounds are biased, the matchmaking system needs work, etc etc. You don't need 2800 rating to make those arguments valid, so why disregard it when a "scrub 1500 player" proposes it? I'm the same, I've never taken arena seriously, it's always been a means to an end. I've played like 10 3v3 just messing around, and got 1900 or 2k in 2s a few seasons ago. None of that makes my points anymore or less valid than someone else's. Discuss the points, not the players behind it.
90 Human Rogue
2845
Arena is not that great, imo. 2's, especially. 3's-5's seem more balanced, imo, but 2's, which I grinded through to get cp for others, is a joke. A comp that can beat you is a comp that can beat you, period. With 3-5 players, it's a bit different, but I didn't get to play those.

Not like I cared. I like the random gutters, where I can use my pots and toys, and play something not so intense. Arena seems to be about who can sucker punch the other team the fastest, and at my age, well, my reflexes are not up to par with a teen.

I like something where I can calmly, rationally, in stealth go about deciding the game plan, before I open at all.

See, that's one thing I don't think is addressed much about the ratings. Your reflexes in hitting those little keys has a lot to do with win or lose in arena, and I simply am not that fast any more. I prefer something where I can bring experience and knowledge to bear, rather than just clack away on the keyboard slower than you.


Reflexes are part of skill and experience though...anticipation, teamwork, etc. Arena/RBG (ie competitive environments) isn't for everyone as you noted. Nothing wrong with enjoying the more lax environments. But that's why it's competitive. Similar to sports, the best are the best because they excel in other areas where others struggle, whatever their reason might be.

It's hard to measure pure skill in a game like wow. I'll give you a great example. If anyone followed the tournament yesterday, you'll notice that Cdew, a world champion resto shaman, was killed in 40 seconds by a team that is barely viable in the ladder. Not to take anything away from the TSG team, they are also very skilled. But he was trained down in less than a minute. Should we call Cdew bad now? Also wow typically isn't considered a very skilled game to begin. A game with a GCD severely limits players potential. Every player is limited to the same number of actions a minute, regardless if their "skill" would allow for many more actions than that. APM is typically one of the better measurements of individual "skill" in video games. Just something to think about.
90 Goblin Hunter
4900
Just cause someone loses doesn't mean they're bad by any means. Every top player in a competitive environment loses as its the losses that you learn more from than the wins.

Additionally team compositions can affect the outcome of a match, as certain comps will do better or worse against other comps. But again, it doesn't necessarily mean someone is bad. It takes a certain level of skill to reach a higher mmr bracket in arena that most players don't have or at least their teams all inclusive of the players' collective skills don't have yet.

I know I'm a good PVPer but my server is now dead so I can't find anyone to arena with (like 5 people on my server pvp). So I do RBGs cause of xrealms and Oqueue.

U really can't argue though that there isn't a difference in skill level between players who have a high APM and those who don't. Being globaled is exactly that, regardless of APM, you are killed. The loss can't be attributed to the gcd however. Instead it should be attributed to the team and their setup for kills, defensive peels, communication, anticipating bursts to be more wary of positioning, and a plethora if other things. He's obviously skilled as his rating and being in the tournament suggests.
90 Goblin Hunter
4900
01/19/2013 12:09 PMPosted by Piñata
Reflexes are part of skill


Really? You are more 'skilled' than me, because you are 17, and I'm 67? That's a new one.


Age was never mentioned. You're manipulating my words to make a faulty argument. Yes being able to react quickly regardless of your age, gender, race, religion, etc. is still a part of skill.

Would you say a basketball player who has slow reaction is less skilled than one who has great reaction? Of course you would! Your argument makes no sense piñata.

A player who can text quickly to a healer casting on your kill target with a quick focus pummel or CC can win a match vs one that gets the cc off just after a big heal.

Would u see a 67 year old in a sports environment? No because their speed, agility, etc. directly affect their ability to play at an optimal efficiency.

IMO skill is measured with a collective assessment of ones experience>knowledge, reflexes, ability to anticipate, APM, ability to communicate if in a team setting, strategy and more I'm sure but u get what I'm saying by now hopefully.

You may lack the APM and reflexes of someone younger and u may still be skilled, but to say that you are just as skilled as someone who can react quicker than you can has more to do with your ego than anything else.
90 Goblin Hunter
4900
01/19/2013 12:09 PMPosted by Piñata
Reflexes are part of skill


Really? You are more 'skilled' than me, because you are 17, and I'm 67? That's a new one.


Also I'm 29 not 17
This topic is locked.

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)
Submit Cancel

Reported!

[Close]