Spidey's Command List

MrChaos · Post by **MrChaos** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 2:37 am

jgbaxter wrote:QUOTE (jgbaxter @ Dec 11 2007, 09:32 PM) ARRRRRRRRRGH I'M A TROLL

Ok you get the last insult Bax and then I'll declare you winner /laugh.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":lol:" border="0" alt="laugh.gif" /> !

jgbaxter · Post by **jgbaxter** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 2:41 am

You're a passive-aggressive.

Moving along. /tongue.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":P" border="0" alt="tongue.gif" />

MrChaos · Post by **MrChaos** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 2:48 am

jgbaxter wrote:QUOTE (jgbaxter @ Dec 11 2007, 09:41 PM) You're a passive-aggressive.

Moving along. /tongue.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":P" border="0" alt="tongue.gif" />

Actually Im scary aggressive.... @#(!

YOU WIN

/cool.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

" border="0" alt="cool.gif" /> & /laugh.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":lol:" border="0" alt="laugh.gif" />

Sycrus · Post by **Sycrus** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 2:50 am

spideycw wrote:QUOTE (spideycw @ Nov 29 2007, 12:54 PM) I know many of you are curious on the criteria I used to decide which commanders went where.
My decisions were based on the following:
Ability to win
Flair and creativity
Ability to organize the team
Charisma
Fun to fly for
Ability to win without going Bios + GS + Sup w/ SY on
Listening to the team
Accepting responsibility for wins AND losses
Able to handle teams of 15+

That's me, I've actually told my team to leave the team so they wouldn't get penalized for my mistakes, and I have never won with Bios Sup before. Never tried :/
I actually ask my team what tech they want to go before I buy one.
Vote Leadivas for division III /mrgreen.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":D" border="0" alt="mrgreen.gif" />

jgbaxter · Post by **jgbaxter** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 5:22 am

MrChaos wrote:QUOTE (MrChaos @ Dec 11 2007, 07:48 PM) Actually Im scary aggressive.... @#(!
YOU WIN
/cool.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="cool.gif" /> & /laugh.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":lol:" border="0" alt="laugh.gif" />

Excellent, now get on your tummy for make-up sex. /wub.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":iluv:" border="0" alt="wub.gif" />

CronoDroid · Post by **CronoDroid** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 5:31 am

Once again, it's time for:

Allegiance. We Know Drama.

Post by **Raveen** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 8:59 am

jgbaxter wrote:QUOTE (jgbaxter @ Dec 11 2007, 10:50 PM) Take a someone plays 50 games in a week on the newbie server, weeee 50 useless games, they learnt a bit, not enough to be an Intermediate player, yet that's what the current system does. Maybe when I stop seeing players who honestly don't know what a nan is yet have an Inter rank I'll be less flustered on it.

Take someone who logs in for 1 minute every day for a month. They'll be rank highly due to how the age rank works despite the fact that they haven't actually played a single game. That, for me, is less accurate than a number that's at least based on playing games, even if those games are not the best learning opportunities.

Why does logging in give you more experience (or the same experience) as playing a game?

jgbaxter · Post by **jgbaxter** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 3:12 pm

I'm pretty sure the way to not convey your argument is to use the absolute worst example and say that's the norm.

Post by **Raveen** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 3:22 pm

jgbaxter wrote:QUOTE (jgbaxter @ Dec 12 2007, 03:12 PM) I'm pretty sure the way to not convey your argument is to use the absolute worst example and say that's the norm.

jgbaxter wrote:QUOTE (jgbaxter @ Dec 11 2007, 10:50 PM) Take a someone plays 50 games in a week on the newbie server, weeee 50 useless games, they learnt a bit, not enough to be an Intermediate player, yet that's what the current system does. Maybe when I stop seeing players who honestly don't know what a nan is yet have an Inter rank I'll be less flustered on it.

I was actually trying to pitch something that matched your playing of 50 newbie server games. Obviously neither are the norm but that's not the point, the point is how does logging in on more unique days (not necessarily playing of course, not necessarily not playing on the newbie server) make you a better player? Surely basing experience off games played is instantly going to be more accurate?

jgbaxter · Post by **jgbaxter** » Wed Dec 12, 2007 3:34 pm

Ah, I see what you mean.

Ok, allow me to further it.

While someone logging in every day for a year for 1 minute is never going to happen... newbies do end up playing a huge amount of games in a week or two, becoming inordinately ranked for their ability, skill, knowledge, and experience.

As to whether a rating system is going to be more accurate then AllegAge, the short answer is of course yes... however mostly in the median ranks, say 09-12, the further you get from that the more an AllegAge ranking is more accurate. I'm speaking generally of course and from watching rating systems which we've used and I've read in detail and helped contribute ideas for- y'al have seen the trends too I'm sure.

I know the ratings gang likely hates my idea, as it's fuzzy and not ultimate supreme maths. Well frankly, ratings are measuring one thing only depending on whom you talk to, and that is success... is that what the community wants it to measure- no, i certainly don't think so based on what I read of the posts. The community wants a rating system that measures ability- and no system can do that.

Ability is, I think, measured by success ("skill") and experience, I think blending the two components are needed. I do agree that the AllegAge system needs a tweak, to set a minimum length of time to be considered a log-in, or even something more imaginative, but a minimum length would be nice.

In closing, simply because I disagree with the concept that maths r winnrz doesn't make my opinion less valid, or even less correct since we are not talking about absolutes.