Current battle player ratings
- Thread starter KaneMaB
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
**** list
ROFL said:
You got lucky
He's playing better lol?
Asediado: 16 kills, 40 Deaths, 8 Assists
Kane: 60 Kills, 29 Deaths, 28 Assists
Kane based his stats off current performances so I don't think an 84 rating is unfair. If he performs better i'm sure Kane will move him up.
Kane: 60 Kills, 29 Deaths, 28 Assists
Kane based his stats off current performances so I don't think an 84 rating is unfair. If he performs better i'm sure Kane will move him up.
Condemned Bas said:
No? Hes just playing on a better team while Asediado plays on a totally disfunctional team wich barely makes it to officials, is WIS the whole base for the rating on the lists? Then why am I 93 im playing trash on a trash team.
Gotta take into account how good is the team in wich a player plays and what input he gives to that team.
Yet he's applying those criterias to only some of the players, if this is based purely out of performance [In just WIS], why am I 96 as an example, or Ciiges 100, we're not playing on our peaks, and a lot of good players who are rated really high are playing on lower groups where its easier to perform, the best exemple is Spain, we were scrimming tier 2 and 3 teams and winning constantly, we decreased a bit activity, played on Group A and getting stomped all around. So to base the ratings on stats while the matches are on complete different levels seems really unaccurate and hard. Either apply it completly and set 'good players' at 60 if they having a hard time with no exceptions and buff everyone who is doing good performancewise or do a more subjective-type list, but here I believe the criterias are being mixed for some players.
I think it's also based on known potential, playing 'bad' doesnt entirely mean you're a bad player, especially in the current tournament. It's also sad that you're you're flaming kane's list when Gibby's is exactly the same and based on similar tournaments. As for Spain, you're all underperforming for the team you have, you've got carry players, which means you should be easily getting more rounds (not saying winning), and if you're not getting anymore rounds then players like asediado can't go up in the list. No one's saying you have to win to play well, but you atleast have to get a few rounds.
How's that Kanes fault? He's playing better becuase he's able to. If asediado is in a team that cannot perform even though they're considered 'group A' then its impossible to rate him higher until the team performs.
DarkLight said:
How's that Kanes fault? He's playing better becuase he's able to. If asediado is in a team that cannot perform even though they're considered 'group A' then its impossible to rate him higher until the team performs.
Not flaming his list, and you already know my opinion over the other one, but the point of this approved lists and the new list era and stuff was to provide lists that were objective and as fair as possible. Think which I believe hasn't been achieved at all and instead all opinion lists such as this one or the other one should be allowed that's all.
About what u said over spain, happens, when there's massive desinterest enough to barely be 8 for officials, even when you do gather people may act careless and get those results. It has nothing to do with people in the team getting ratings for the past while some others don't.
About what u said over spain, happens, when there's massive desinterest enough to barely be 8 for officials, even when you do gather people may act careless and get those results. It has nothing to do with people in the team getting ratings for the past while some others don't.
'Top' or 'high' tier players have a really high known potential and have almost reached top of their class, even if you're not performing that well in this tournament, that DOES NOT mean your rating should change that much otherwise its potentially unfair considering they can smash most players. For other tiers it could bounce vigorously, they're still growing players and are still learning a lot, so performances mean everything. This list is OBVIOUSLY opinionated when it comes to base rankings, but have been changed slightly to accommodate the performances of players in WIS.
Dont think this discussion needs to go any further, should take it to PM. Just think about it a bit more.
Gibbys 'current' list has been around for longer than Kanes, so there's no excuse to argue here (or even there but you get the point).
Dont think this discussion needs to go any further, should take it to PM. Just think about it a bit more.
DarkLight said:
Gibbys 'current' list has been around for longer than Kanes, so there's no excuse to argue here (or even there but you get the point).
Similar threads
- Locked