Fair Ranks

Kirjoittanut zombieyeti, 16.02.2014 at 21:47

Yes, yes, I think we all know our Godel, Liebnietz, Descartes, Derrida and Nietsche (even those who have never heard of them), but in *rational discourse* we all contingently agree to accept a consensual hallucination: That there is a world, that there is knowledge, that from the axiom of identity to the theory of punctuated equilibrium, we can say 1+1 = 2 in decimal mathematics, and that for all A, B, and for all B, C, and QED If A, then C.

Now that we've both established our epistemological and information-theory credentials ....
- Just because bonker and I disagree on something does not prove anything, except perhaps that we think (and you think) we disagree. I accept his sincerity, and he concedes that there are games where skill can be measured, just that AW is not one of these games. To this, I posed the question in a different thread: http://et.atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=12303

- You may choose to ignore both pure reason and repeatable experiences, the very foundations of rational discourse. If that is the case, why would you be attempting, through discourse, to a) rationalize your view, and b) communicate this view to others? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denialism

"To deny the possibility of Truth is to deny the veracity of the statement itself" - Zom B. Yeti

Kirjoittanut Dr Lecter, 16.02.2014 at 20:19

Kirjoittanut zombieyeti, 16.02.2014 at 20:11

Again, I'll start a 'skill' discussion in another thread.
Perhaps we have fundamentally different meanings of the word skill, or quantification, or definition, since I *do* believe your assertion to be both informed (you're not making this assertion from zero foundation) and sincere (you're not merely trolling).

Kirjoittanut b0nker2, 16.02.2014 at 15:27

Try not to confuse yourself Zombie. 'Skill' cannot be quantified or defined in this game. Many games it can be, in this it cannot.

Let me explain in one sweet sentence:

This is a matter of subjectivity.

The very fact that you and bonker have contrasting beliefs on the definition & quantification of skill proves true that skill cannot be quantified.
There is no solid, universal measure. This is true for anything in life, in existence itself.

We as people rely on postulates. We accept things as true for the sake of convenience.

Go away, please.

Awkward.

Kirjoittanut Dr Lecter, 16.02.2014 at 22:22

Kirjoittanut zombieyeti, 16.02.2014 at 21:47

Yes, yes, I think we all know our Godel, Liebnietz, Descartes, Derrida and Nietsche (even those who have never heard of them), but in *rational discourse* we all contingently agree to accept a consensual hallucination: That there is a world, that there is knowledge, that from the axiom of identity to the theory of punctuated equilibrium, we can say 1+1 = 2 in decimal mathematics, and that for all A, B, and for all B, C, and QED If A, then C.

Now that we've both established our epistemological and information-theory credentials ....
- Just because bonker and I disagree on something does not prove anything, except perhaps that we think (and you think) we disagree. I accept his sincerity, and he concedes that there are games where skill can be measured, just that AW is not one of these games. To this, I posed the question in a different thread: http://et.atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=12303

- You may choose to ignore both pure reason and repeatable experiences, the very foundations of rational discourse. If that is the case, why would you be attempting, through discourse, to a) rationalize your view, and b) communicate this view to others? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denialism

"To deny the possibility of Truth is to deny the veracity of the statement itself" - Zom B. Yeti

Kirjoittanut Dr Lecter, 16.02.2014 at 20:19

Kirjoittanut zombieyeti, 16.02.2014 at 20:11

Again, I'll start a 'skill' discussion in another thread.
Perhaps we have fundamentally different meanings of the word skill, or quantification, or definition, since I *do* believe your assertion to be both informed (you're not making this assertion from zero foundation) and sincere (you're not merely trolling).

Kirjoittanut b0nker2, 16.02.2014 at 15:27

Try not to confuse yourself Zombie. 'Skill' cannot be quantified or defined in this game. Many games it can be, in this it cannot.

Let me explain in one sweet sentence:

This is a matter of subjectivity.

The very fact that you and bonker have contrasting beliefs on the definition & quantification of skill proves true that skill cannot be quantified.
There is no solid, universal measure. This is true for anything in life, in existence itself.

We as people rely on postulates. We accept things as true for the sake of convenience.

Go away, please.

Nothing can truly measure skill in this game, because this game is way to diverse.

elo only works for chess, because chess is standard, everyone plays the same move, and share the same strengths and weakness.

the only way you can test skill is play on a map just like a chess board, and i actually happen to make such a map just for that purpose in mind.

however, even that said, it still not an absolute test for skills. you will have people who specialize on one gameset, but have no skills on other gamesets. so what is skills

Kirjoittanut Skanderbeg, 16.02.2014 at 05:15

Maybe other clans have newbs and noobs but they are not playing CWs nor do they try to practice and play CWs.

We have some noobs and we play CWs. We also practice 3v3s. You're right though in that most of the time we end up facing more experienced players (including some of those you mentioned). I find it strange that less experienced players are not active on the CW scene. It's one of the most exciting parts of the game. What's stopping noob clans from CWing each other?

Elo (or other systems, like TruSkill for xbox etc.) works for many other contests, any time there are winners, losers and points awarded. You may be right that the game has too much diversity to allow fine measurement of skill, but I put the question 'what is skill in AW' in another thread because skill is a word used by all, but not yet well defined, and one shouldn't start measuring until the thing to be measured is defined.

Kirjoittanut Cthulhu, 17.02.2014 at 04:07

Nothing can truly measure skill in this game, because this game is way to diverse.

elo only works for chess, because chess is standard, everyone plays the same move, and share the same strengths and weakness.

the only way you can test skill is play on a map just like a chess board, and i actually happen to make such a map just for that purpose in mind.

however, even that said, it still not an absolute test for skills. you will have people who specialize on one gameset, but have no skills on other gamesets. so what is skills

Question:
If you have two sets of players (f.e. Rank 12, 11, 9) playing another set of players of the same rank, and they play several games (say 10) and the same team wins repeatedly, wouldn't we say that set of players is, at least as a team, more skilled at winning than the other team?

Isn't the point of relating to ranks to level, where possible, upgrades and experience, to make the contest a competition of 'skill'?

Yawn, Tito actually more CW's are played now then ever before. As I said before it is up to new players to step up to the plate if they WANT to, nobody should be forced.

lol Tito please learn your facts. Over 16 clans have cwed. some arent shown because they won none CW's this season, like JNA.
http://prntscr.com/2tvmgi , if my pic isnt showing. that it. http://prntscr.com/2tvmgi

I doubt that repetitively playing the "same", has to be considered in competitive gameplay. Scenarios are worse, don't you think? Scenarios have ALWAYS same picks, and it's always a matter of being a fag or not. Competitive gameplay isn't. You can literally do anything in first turn, it's not always "the same".
"Training" newbies won't work at all. I have tried it by myself, what happened was, I got about 25 noobs who only play scenarios, most of them are active. What happened? I asked in cln chat if they are willing to learn or not. It was hard to make them use cln chat, and when they did, only a few (3) were free. I then made a FFA game, eu+ 10k extra cities, just to see how they play, something to start with. I went poland LB to make it kinda fair since they had good picks. One of them, "had" to go because his friends were asking him to play Europa Universalis. The other two, allyfagged on me (Yes, even though I said it was FFA. I forgot to disable alliances but they would probably still have done the same). Probably those were some random UN fags/kids, I got kinda butthurt because I dc'd 3 turns in a row, killed one, and then couldn't recap. I told them I had to kick them because they were unethical. Next, after the game finished, I kicked them, but they won't relog and they started to spam cln chat with insults, saying I'm a cry baby etc. Maybe it was just unluck, or I didn't pick the correct people, but this was just an example. Though, I'm pretty sure that something like this will happen next time. Also, I always typed with good Grammar and punctuation (I never do in chat ). You just don't get it, newbies nowadays are WAY too focused on nooby scenarios in which they get free SP and they don't need skills at all. It's a matter of being a fag/allying. You can go ask a few beginners, and they will all say that "diplomacy" is the most important part of the game.

The real problem now with CWs, competitive games etc, is that Custom Maps literally raped it. Back in old school, there were more people interested. Playing the same settings in CW is not the issue in here, it was always like this and it worked fine before.

Kirjoittanut Cthulhu, 17.02.2014 at 04:07

Nothing can truly measure skill in this game, because this game is way to diverse.

elo only works for chess, because chess is standard, everyone plays the same move, and share the same strengths and weakness.

the only way you can test skill is play on a map just like a chess board, and i actually happen to make such a map just for that purpose in mind.

however, even that said, it still not an absolute test for skills. you will have people who specialize on one gameset, but have no skills on other gamesets. so what is skills

Very good post. Imo Skill is the ability to ADAPT to any scenario or map, and win with the least amount of allies.

If there was a random map generator that would be real tests of skill. Right now EU+ practice is not skill at all, just memorization.

Kirjoittanut Skanderbeg, 19.02.2014 at 09:33

Kirjoittanut bullet86, 19.02.2014 at 05:41

lol Tito please learn your facts. Over 16 clans have cwed. some arent shown because they won none CW's this season, like JNA.
http://prntscr.com/2tvmgi , if my pic isnt showing. that it. http://prntscr.com/2tvmgi

16 clans out of 18 right? And there are 200,000 players. Lets say average membership is 20, 18x20=360. Only 360 3v3 players and the rest are scenario folks. Yes, dont recruit, wait for them to ''step up'' and find on their own about clans and cw's. Its a freewill anyway.

Dude. not only 360 players of AW are 3v3 players. The Scenario folks obviously out count us, but more than that number play 3v3. It's just because not many like cwing, or they're not allowed to cw in their clan.

Kirjoittanut Aetius, 19.02.2014 at 09:53

Kirjoittanut Cthulhu, 17.02.2014 at 04:07

Nothing can truly measure skill in this game, because this game is way to diverse.

elo only works for chess, because chess is standard, everyone plays the same move, and share the same strengths and weakness.

the only way you can test skill is play on a map just like a chess board, and i actually happen to make such a map just for that purpose in mind.

however, even that said, it still not an absolute test for skills. you will have people who specialize on one gameset, but have no skills on other gamesets. so what is skills

Very good post. Imo Skill is the ability to ADAPT to any scenario or map, and win with the least amount of allies.

If there was a random map generator that would be real tests of skill. Right now EU+ practice is not skill at all, just memorization.

I haz 2 dizzaggreeee with the memorization part
Maybe the first turn, but not the rest. People are not aware of the amazing power of YOLO.

Kirjoittanut Skanderbeg, 19.02.2014 at 11:02

Kirjoittanut Guest, 19.02.2014 at 09:50

it's always a matter of being a fag or not.
The other two, allyfagged on me. Probably those were some random UN fags/kids. It's a matter of being a fag/allying. You can go ask a few beginners, and they will all say that "diplomacy" is the most important part of the game.

You mean noobs allyfag like this?

img

They just copy behavior from the real world, thats ''normal''.

WTF xD I was expecting something huge coming from you and now I see this, I lol'd.
This has NOTHING to do in AW, first because this is a game not real life :l AW is not realistic in many ways. Second, because noobs allyfag to win, not because they think that's the right thing to do because of real life? :S

Kirjoittanut Skanderbeg, 19.02.2014 at 11:48

Kirjoittanut Guest, 19.02.2014 at 11:09

Kirjoittanut Skanderbeg, 19.02.2014 at 11:02

img

WTF xD I was expecting something huge coming from you and now I see this, I lol'd.
This has NOTHING to do in AW, first because this is a game not real life :l AW is not realistic in many ways. Second, because noobs allyfag to win, not because they think that's the right thing to do because of real life? :S

Why people dont understand me... i feel like tik-tok sometimes. Point is: allyfagging should stay on games, in virtualness of the internet, away from real life.

I'm not saying anything about allyfagging in normal games, that's unstoppable, and will always be. Though, I even forgot to disable it so it was worse. My point is, people nowadays are the classic "roleplayers" or whatever. They have no skills, and are unethical. It's pretty hard to find someone active and willing to learn.

Not to oversimplify, but:

Kirjoittanut Skanderbeg, 19.02.2014 at 11:02

Kirjoittanut Guest, 19.02.2014 at 09:50

it's always a matter of being a fag or not.
The other two, allyfagged on me. Probably those were some random UN fags/kids. It's a matter of being a fag/allying. You can go ask a few beginners, and they will all say that "diplomacy" is the most important part of the game.

You mean noobs allyfag like this?



They just copy behavior from the real world, thats ''normal''.

I don't mind when people ally fag, and i respect that decision of winning by any means possible.

winning by any means is survival, and people want to survive.

Also, I never had problems with ally fagging, because a person is giving up resources for a tactical position,
it places a lot of a trust into coordinating attacks, and 95% of the time, they don't coordinate well, and
that how I crush them. If you had all the land vs. someone that has all the land, the units would be like

100 units vs. 100 units.

However, allyfaging = 30 units vs. 100 units. then 30 units vs. 80 units. etc.

High ranks who do this are either unaware of this fact (noob) or
realize they don't stand a chance against a better opponent and desperately cling to life (smart).

A pro at large map [world] or medium [eurasia] could be okay at small. vice versa.
What really interesting would to see a cw 3v3, randomly assign a country. and see them play and win from that position.
That a real challenge. You could do that using a random list generator. or play a different map that more balanced like a chessboard, thats real skill.

Kirjoittanut Skanderbeg, 20.02.2014 at 04:33

Kirjoittanut Guest, 19.02.2014 at 14:35

I'm not saying anything about allyfagging in normal games, that's unstoppable, and will always be. Though, I even forgot to disable it so it was worse. My point is, people nowadays are the classic "roleplayers" or whatever. They have no skills, and are unethical. It's pretty hard to find someone active and willing to learn.

Ah i see now, same case like with Bonker. Well think about football clubs for instance; they have many branches where they train their players(juniors, cadets, seniors, team B and the team you watch on telly team A), + they send scouts on every possible match to search for talents. So they accept young boys age 10 to practice, age 15, age 20, put them in their respective branch, and try to pull the best of them, if they got talent and are hardworking, they are getting in team B and A eventually, if not, after finishing as senior, they will sell him to some club in second league. Point is they are trying hard to make good team at the end, always observing, always looking for new talent, they are always hungry for new reinforcement. And what happens? Barcelona was just one of the strongest clubs, Real Madrid is pwning, Manchester United kick(ed) ass, Liverpool strong.

You have to recruit, train and always maintain activity in your clan, you have to be hardworking if you want results, giving up after 2 noobs and claiming it is impossible because they are roleplayers is stupid, there are bunch of players, with proper selection you can make clan of 30.

You're right there, but like I said, there are no more people willing to learn, whatsoever. Scenarios should be nerfed ((

Perhaps you disagree with the implication, but certainly you understand the connection.

Kirjoittanut Skanderbeg, 20.02.2014 at 04:37

Kirjoittanut zombieyeti, 19.02.2014 at 18:38

Not to oversimplify, but:

I dont understand. On the left you have ''defensive'' alliance invading sovereign and neutral country(the leader of neutral non-aligned movement) and on the right you have alliance made to conquer the world(centrals) and alliance made to stop it(entente). I dont see the connection.

Kirjoittanut Skanderbeg, 21.02.2014 at 04:30

Kirjoittanut zombieyeti, 20.02.2014 at 16:52

Perhaps you disagree with the implication, but certainly you understand the connection.

Kirjoittanut Skanderbeg, 20.02.2014 at 04:37

Kirjoittanut zombieyeti, 19.02.2014 at 18:38

Not to oversimplify, but:

I dont understand. On the left you have ''defensive'' alliance invading sovereign and neutral country(the leader of neutral non-aligned movement) and on the right you have alliance made to conquer the world(centrals) and alliance made to stop it(entente). I dont see the connection.

I tried, i tried to see connection and figure out your point, but i still dont understant. And with what i (can) disagree?

Again, not to oversimplify ....

Kirjoittanut Skanderbeg, 21.02.2014 at 06:52

Kirjoittanut zombieyeti, 21.02.2014 at 06:29

A long long time ago,
one man's burning desire to forge a Greater Serbia led to the events which set off WWI.

Austria-Hungary wanted every south-slav land in their possesion, after they got Slovenia, Croatia they annexed Bosnia. One Yugoslav(not serb, from Bosnia) killed their heir in Sarajevo but Austria-Hungary sent ultimatum to Serbia if they dont allow investigation within 2 days, Austria will attack. Where is logic in that nigerian killed my prince and im sending ultimatum to China where i want to investigate? Obviously Austria wanted Serbia in their possesion so they made lies like ''great serbia'' which last till this day. Great Serbia is a myth, Yugoslavia was true dream and later reality of all south slavs.

Kirjoittanut zombieyeti, 21.02.2014 at 06:29

Another man's iron will brought Greater Serbia through WWII and eventual independence from the Soviet sphere.

Chetniks wanted greater serbia but WITHIN Yugoslavia so they can protect serbian people in some new war. Very logical conclusion after what nazi Ustaša did(million dead serbs). That serbia would just be larger for few regions, it wouldnt be a country. But they lost in WW2, communists won with Tito in charge, who was Yugoslav so he made Yugoslavia, not Great Serbia. Yugoslavia was a superstate(state where all people have equal civil and political rights) so great serbia was not in sight.

Kirjoittanut zombieyeti, 21.02.2014 at 06:29

With that man's passing and the Soviet threat gone, as Greater Serbia fell apart, a third man's burning desire to hold Greater Serbia together, again threatened another world conflagration at a key moment in history.

I believe you mean Milošević attempt to defend RS and RSK, i dont know what there happened as everyone was dragging on his own side, there werent plan and strategy how to survive that era, neither Serbia and Croatia were right because fascists were on power(Janša, Tuđman, Milošević, Izetbegović, Gligorov). So even if Milošević wanted to create great serbia, Tuđman wanted ethnically cleansed Great Croatia, Izetbegović ethnically cleansed Greater Bosnia, and Gligorov ethnically cleansed Greater Macedonia. So using only 1 side out of 5 is bad example.

Kirjoittanut zombieyeti, 21.02.2014 at 06:29

European and American leaders rightly feared everything from Mujahideen infiltration and Chinese intervention, to a humbled Russia striking outward during its own troubles.

USA and NATO funded Bosnia with arms, even transfered mujahideens and al qaeda in Bosnia so they can help those fascists in dividing even more Yugoslavia. US air transports were landing in Tuzla airport twice a day. USA was pushing, provoking Russia to enter war. They even bombed chinese embassy in Beograd were 3 chinese officials were killed, therefore provoking China as well.

Kirjoittanut zombieyeti, 21.02.2014 at 06:29

The lesson learned was iron-willed Southern Slavs who pursue Greater Serbia at whatever cost are not good for world peace.

Lesson learned is USA wont stop until they implement puppet regimes in every state on this planet, genocide its population and stealing their resources. They will proceed with lies, tricks and wars to fullfill their goals, even if that mean nuclear total war.

Now you're just being disingenuous, which is fine for me, but not everyone is as aware of history. The first man was Dragutin Dimitrijević, not Gavrilo Princip. And you know this.

The second man was obviously Tito, who got a Greater Serbia, and more. I would not want to play poker or chess against him. Pan-Southern-Slavic liberation *must include* Greater Serbia as a subset. He got both. And, again, you know this.

Clearly Milošević was the third man. That his goals couldn't be accomplished didn't change his desire or his will to act.

If the goal of the USA was to install puppet regimes worldwide, kill everyone, and steal their resources, really, what do you think the Germans, Italians, Greeks, Albanians, foreign Muslims and Chinese would have done in Serbia?

Is the government of Serbia a puppet of the USA, denuded of resources, dancing to the American fiddle?
Frankly I think NATO was duped by the KLA ... but they don't listen to me.

Look guys, even jesus hates you all! You guys suck with all these long ass essays i wont even bother reading.
Now for some lolz

Locked