HolyAvenger wrote...
Two equally good players. Goddess/Reapers/Gold. One is playing a Drell Adept and one is playing a Batarian Sentinel. The Drell Adept should be outscoring the BatSent at a rate of 2-to-1.
Are you advocating that good players should only play certain, powerful kits?
X2-Elijah wrote...
Yes, they should. Just because they don't play characters that can instaclear all spawns doesn't mean they should not play on gold. Without one spawnhogger, they might as well have had no problems and enjoyed a far more fun match.
I really resent this elitism that if a player can't facestride everything and hog up spawns, they shouldn't be playing on gold.
<sigh> i think i'm not explaining very well, or people are misinterpreting what i'm saying.
Score is fairly irrelevant, except the mechanics pointing out what the game assigns.
I'm not saying players should uses certain kits or play a certain way (or not) eg: spawn nuking.
I am saying in Gold PUGs, you do see players who do not seem to know the mecahnics, or how to use the kits they have or underlevelled kits (note: this excepts "bad" kits in the hands of a good player) and should these people be in gold.
When one looks at a scoresheet, you can only tell so much, but in a game you get a feel for players. Sometimes the score reflects this sometimes it dosent.
When there's say two equally good players, one a Drell Adept and one BatSent, yes the Drell should outscore, but a game with those two will make the game go faster and smoother than a poor playing Turian Ghost with a Harrier III who isnt really a gold viable player.
In all cases score is fairly irrelevant, but it's likely the poor player (regardless of kit) will be lower down the table as contributing less in real terms, and by how the game scores.