M and OGL's list thread

Users who are viewing this thread

Fietta said:
? M said:
7.png
Late Competitive

Top 10 Infantry
5621140148_36b6ed98d2_o.png

  1
Germany.png
Scar
  2
Russian-Federation.png
Arni
  3
United-Kingdom.png
Anchor
  4
United-Kingdom.png
Gibby
  5
Spain.png
Charlini
  6
Luxembourg.png
Thorr
  7
United-Kingdom.png
Deacon Barry
  8
United-Kingdom.png
Fietta
  9
Spain.png
DarkLight
10
Poland.png
eRRoR

Wow I'm extremely flattered! Now, let's move onto the real problem, deciding Tier 3 placement. There's players in here from 'The Golden Age' which was a period of 1 year, were rated Tier 2 or Tier 1, yet performed in a period where everyone's skill was far below any of that past 2015. If you've included me in this top 10 list for the 'Late Competitive' which is currently over a period of 2 years, and having earnt medals and having a stellar performance in WSC2 in an 'underdog' top team, I'm questioning the justification behind the tier 3 placement, even before 'Late Competitive' I was atleast decent during the Late Modern Competitive era, yet I've been placed behind people who've played decent for 1 year in 2012? I'm not trying to have a go, but it's a very complicated list to understand. I'm not trying to argue for my placement in 'Tier 1' or something outrageous, I'm literally asking for a rightful Tier 2 placement. It's fine to disagree with me with justification (mainly on why these 1 year 2012 wonders are rated so highly). If I were to be egotistical about it, I'd have attempted to slam myself as tier 1.

Clearly there's no correlation between this upcoming era list and all-time list and are made by completely separate opinions on players, almost like you've handed out the list creation to a new team.
imagine caring this much about a list
 
I mean, they exist to attract attention and to give players insight into other player's skill and it's posted by someone who's respected, thus, yes, I most definitely do care. The whole point of a list is to show someone's skill and if that's not accurate, then how is it fair? What's the point in the list? I've placed thousands of hours in the game to then be unjustly rated by a respected player? I think not.
 
Great list, you can see alot of effort has been put into this. It's hard for me to judge on everything since I've only been around since NC2016, so I can't really say anything about some player's ratings. I disagree with a some ratings, but making a list everyone agrees with is impossible, especially in Warband :twisted:

Looking forward to any future updates you might have in store for us.
 
m1tchell23 said:
They've posted their stats and fact sources fietta, you can't argue with the FACTUAL and STATISTICAL list. That's the point of list makers l.

The list is subjective. Besides, like I said, being 'top 10 infantry' for the past 2 years, even in itself doesn't correlate to tier 3 all-time. If were were going off statistics and factual data, you'll surely be tier 4.
 
Fietta said:
I've been juked from my rightful tier 2 all-time spot, didn't realise playing in top teams since 2016 as a main infantry, having gold, silver and bronze medals and slaying men means being placed in tier 3, yeah Varadin could destroy anything I've ever done. It's very easy to say 'don't get offended', 'it's based on opinion' but when the list was made seriously, and posted by a respected member of the community then obviously people will feel their ratings are unjust, in that sense, the 'list artisans' you've mentioned, although didn't provide any names for completely no reason, haven't really justified the reasons for some of the ratings. You can quite easily be placed somewhere based solely on someone's personal quarrels. If you're saying these 'people' were hard at work, it's unfair to say that the list is accurate if the majority of that time was spent collecting players, figuring out teams from the past and where they stand and give solely an opinion based on something completely personal. Demeaning players by clearly giving no justification on some of the clear anomalies in the rankings is clearly unjust to players and unlawful with Taleworld's policy.

Being a 'powerful' and respected member of the community, by posting some of the most garbage ratings without your 'real' approval seems odd, you even stated yourself that you, don't agree with some of the ratings, but decided to let it go. A lot of people look at these sort of ratings from respected community members and take them as if that's their final skill, unjust or not, thus completely demeans some of the players who should rightfully be placed higher, based on anything from statistics to global community opinion. Of course, you don't see many 'complaints' on the thread for reasons which are clear, they don't want to flame someone with a lot of respect, they don't want list threads to go down the drain, but without any form of elucidation with the rankings, what's the point in even posting a list? Sure, the thread looks fantastic, but it's a complete waste of time without any form of justification, which is exactly what Taleworld's asked for, you decided to post a thread solely based on 'opinion' which most people take very seriously. There also seems to be no negotiation based on statistics because it's an 'opinion' list, which completely defeats the purpose of community opinion, it's basically a what you say goes dictatorship.

Demeaning players by completely pulling information and opinions out your arse, doesn't give enough justification on players. I think there's some very obvious player who shouldn't be where they are, people will clearly look at this list and assume that's their skill level and recruit them, I think the list is great when it comes to history and clan ratings, I'm not flaming the amount of work put into the thread, it's just there's a lot of grey areas in some of the list ratings. Trying to discuss this with OGL was like talking to a brick wall, completely providing no reasons as to why I'd be placed in tier 3, giving the reply of 'study more' and Mork clearly having no interest in discussion. Obviously I complain often, but rightfully so on a list solely based on opinion and from the people I've talked to they also see how there's some major anomalies and just general rubix-like scrambling. Even if I provided statistics and prove it, it doesn't matter because it's all based on opinion and all I'd have to do is be friends with you from the start, which is how the original lists came with major flame.

? M said:
I don't fully agree with the lists below.

Then don't post it then, considering it's your list, having help from your 'artisans' sounds like Calamity. You even gave an example how you'd change your 'own' list but then proceed to not give any input and change it, as if these people actually checked statistics at all, that's outrageous. I could provide you a 10000 word essay on how players like Varadin who's played in low tier teams is not in tier 3, could also provide statistics on players like CristoTheVicious not being tier 1 or myself to be placed in tier 2, but you wouldn't want that would you? It's a list based solely off opinion after all. It's a bit silly really. You've also got to think of the fact you're basing all the players on the same skill level, through the years when clearly a 'tier 1' player in 2012 will most certainly he tier 5 now, which is where the list doesnt really make any sense because theres no context behind the placements. A 2019 tier 3 player in that all time list could completely dominate a tier 1 2012 player, so why do they deserve to be the top? The meaning of 'All-Time' is who's the best and whose the worse, taking into account the skill level at that period of time, I.E Tier 1 players in 2012 shouldn't be placed as tier 1 all-time but would be lower than the average tier 3 player. 'All-Time' should take into account the peak skill level and base it off that, not some wumbo jumbo from different years, it makes the list completely inaccurate. It would be fair to make a list by era, but an All-Time list doesnt really make sense, or atleast the way you've done it.

You’re actually a - snip -

Forum Rules said:
No trolling, flaming or anything similar
This is an open, friendly community and also the first stop for those seeking information or assistance of the game. We will not tolerate flaming or trolling; this includes but is not limited to [...] personal insults and verbal attacks. If you disagree with what someone has said, debate the point, not the person.
 
Cool list!  Not that I recognize many of the names on here, but it looks detailed and well thought out.  Enjoyed reading the narratives too.
 
Firunien is right the list should include KR_Warlord... he only played from 2010-2012 i think but still carried KR a lot back then
 
Fietta said:
I don't understand how stating facts is something worth insulting about. Forgot voicing an opinion seems to be the biggest mistake in any community. Lists were made to be criticised if they're clearly unjust.

It would have been better if you had not argued about this the way you did. It’s fine to criticise something, but go around it smartly. You state your arguments on your belief that you should be rated higher which no matter what you have to say implies that you argue because of selfish reasons. I don’t actually see any sense fighting for a place in a list, but do as you wish.
 
Fietta said:
I don't understand how stating facts is something worth insulting about. Forgot voicing an opinion seems to be the biggest mistake in any community. Lists were made to be criticised if they're clearly unjust.

You’ve been the weakest link in every good team you’ve played for. There’s a fact for you.
 
Hero_of_Ferelden said:
Fietta said:
I don't understand how stating facts is something worth insulting about. Forgot voicing an opinion seems to be the biggest mistake in any community. Lists were made to be criticised if they're clearly unjust.

You’ve been the weakest link in every good team you’ve played for. There’s a fact for you.

Don't know where you pulled that fact from, you probably sniffed it out, however, completely dominating in wonwokie, playing main infantry in FT, doesn't entirely prove your fact. Besides, It's hard to say that when on every current list I've been rated higher than people in the teams I've been in and all within top 10, sorry to disappoint. Any more facts you'd like to pull out your arse? Or are you still living in 2015?
 
Back
Top Bottom