150 réponses à ce sujet

[Creator Limbs]

Ooooh

[landylan]

Do you outscore pugs? You're above average.

That doesn't make you that good though.

[dumdum2]

Dunvi wrote...

ftr i'm fully aware that he's a troll and all of his posts are troll threads. regardless, it involves a point that i want a serious answer to. why is soloing considered such a standard to judge your abilities by in this game? i know people who can solo platinum with non-crutch classes, but i don't consider better players than me for a number of reasons. soloing just shows your abilities in a specific aspect at this game - one that isn't even very relevant in a game with even just one more player.

It has been a long time since I used to troll, can't believe people are still thinking that. I haven't made a single troll thread since I got back to this game and this forum.

You are absolutely correct. Soloing just shows your abilities in a specific aspect of this game, but it is an important aspect. Because usually you are on your own when playing in a team if there are good players, you don't bunch up together in a group but instead you run around the map on your own killing things. If you are not that good in soloing then you might not be able to leave your team and make the game go a lot faster. Also, when playing with PUGs it is common that someone will have to carry, and if you are not good at soloing then you will have a harder time carrying, especially if all of your teammates die and you have to clutch it constantly.

You also have to realize that I never said anything about someone actually having to solo Gold or Platinum to be an average or good player. I focused on their abilities only. There are a lot of people here who can solo Gold with ease just that they find it boring or that they don't have all their weapons leveled up and such (thus it becomes tedious). So even if they haven't yet done a solo it doesn't take away the fact that they have the "skill" and the ability to actually do the solo.

If you are good at killing enemies in a solo then you will be even better at it when playing with a team. If you are good at surviving when doing a solo then you will survive even more easy when playing with a team. If you are good at kiting when you solo then you will realize that there is no need to kite when playing with a team thus making the whole match go a lot faster and smoother. Basically it is like this, that if you are good at something while soloing then you will be even better at it when playing with a team, and that is why soloing is a good measure of the individual players ability.

Modifié par dumdum2, 27 juin 2013 - 06:49 .

[Dunvi]

dumdum2 wrote...

Dunvi wrote...

ftr i'm fully aware that he's a troll and all of his posts are troll threads. regardless, it involves a point that i want a serious answer to. why is soloing considered such a standard to judge your abilities by in this game? i know people who can solo platinum with non-crutch classes, but i don't consider better players than me for a number of reasons. soloing just shows your abilities in a specific aspect at this game - one that isn't even very relevant in a game with even just one more player.

It has been a long time since I used to troll, can't believe people are still thinking that. I haven't made a single troll thread since I got back to this game and this forum.

You are absolutely correct. Soloing just shows your abilities in a specific aspect of this game, but it is an important aspect. Because usually you are on your own when playing in a team if there are good players, you don't bunch up together in a group but instead you run around the map on your own killing things. If you are not that good in soloing then you might not be able to leave your team and make the game go a lot faster. Also, when playing with PUGs it is common that someone will have to carry, and if you are not good at soloing then you will have a harder time carrying, especially if all of your teammates die and you have to clutch it constantly.

You also have to realize that I never said anything about someone actually having to solo Gold or Platinum to be an average or good player. I focused on their abilities only. There are a lot of people here who can solo Gold with ease just that they find it boring or that they don't have all their weapons leveled up and such (thus it becomes tedious). So even if they haven't yet done a solo it doesn't take away the fact that they have the "skill" and the ability to actually do the solo.

If you are good at killing enemies in a solo then you will be even better at it when playing with a team. If you are good at surviving when doing a solo then you will survive even more easy when playing with a team. If you are good at kiting when you solo then you will realize that there is no need to kite when playing with a team thus making the whole match go a lot faster and smoother. Basically it is like this, that if you are good at something while soloing then you will be even better at it when playing with a team, and that is why soloing is a good measure of the individual players ability.

Except I carry regularly. And I still can't solo silver consistently. And it's not that I don't want to, though admittedly I don't try because I have no inclination to. I honestly can't. Mostly from careless mistakes, and lack of focus, (and the fact that I always pick my normal classes instead of crutch classes and also go UU when soloing) but I don't think I would succeed even if I tried.

The interesting thing is that there actually are significant differences in the way the game plays both when with useless players who are on the other side of the map, and also when you're carrying. Most notably about how spawning works, but also with how the enemies react. Being a good soloer has nothing to do with being good when playing with a team. They are often correlated, but not necessarily - and interestingly, I know some people who are very very good at soloing, and surprisingly mediocre in a full team. Soloing is a crap measure of an individual player's ability.

Modifié par Dunvi, 27 juin 2013 - 07:06 .

[DHKany]

Can finish gold/silver with a decent team.

Modifié par DHKany, 27 juin 2013 - 07:10 .

[dumdum2]

Dunvi wrote...

Except I carry regularly. And I still can't solo silver consistently. And it's not that I don't want to, though admittedly I don't try because I have no inclination to. I honestly can't. Mostly from careless mistakes, and lack of focus, (and the fact that I always pick my normal classes instead of crutch classes and also go UU when soloing) but I don't think I would succeed even if I tried.

The interesting thing is that there actually are significant differences in the way the game plays both when with useless players who are on the other side of the map, and also when you're carrying. Most notably about how spawning works, but also with how the enemies react. Being a good soloer has nothing to do with being good when playing with a team. They are often correlated, but not necessarily - and interestingly, I know some people who are very very good at soloing, and surprisingly mediocre in a full team. Soloing is a crap measure of an individual player's ability.

Well, what I'm saying is not a fact at all, it is just my own opinion and my own experience from playing this game. I noticed for instance that the better I got at soloing the better I would play in a game with a full team. Just because that applies to me doesn't necessarily mean that it applies to everyone else.

It is a matter of opinion based on own experiences, that's the whole purpose of this thread. I was never asking for a logical conclusion to what an average player is, I was asking for people's own opinon of what that word meant for them personally.

We don't have to argue about who is wrong and who is right, because in reality none of us are either right or wrong.

[Dunvi]

dumdum2 wrote...

Dunvi wrote...

Except I carry regularly. And I still can't solo silver consistently. And it's not that I don't want to, though admittedly I don't try because I have no inclination to. I honestly can't. Mostly from careless mistakes, and lack of focus, (and the fact that I always pick my normal classes instead of crutch classes and also go UU when soloing) but I don't think I would succeed even if I tried.

The interesting thing is that there actually are significant differences in the way the game plays both when with useless players who are on the other side of the map, and also when you're carrying. Most notably about how spawning works, but also with how the enemies react. Being a good soloer has nothing to do with being good when playing with a team. They are often correlated, but not necessarily - and interestingly, I know some people who are very very good at soloing, and surprisingly mediocre in a full team. Soloing is a crap measure of an individual player's ability.

Well, what I'm saying is not a fact at all, it is just my own opinion and my own experience from playing this game. I noticed for instance that the better I got at soloing the better I would play in a game with a full team. Just because that applies to me doesn't necessarily mean that it applies to everyone else.

It is a matter of opinion based on own experiences, that's the whole purpose of this thread. I was never asking for a logical conclusion to what an average player is, I was asking for people's own opinon of what that word meant for them personally.

We don't have to argue about who is wrong and who is right, because in reality none of us are either right or wrong.

If soloing was a milestone for you in your improvement at the game, then that's cool. But you were saying that it's a generic marker of skill, and that's what I disagree with. There are too many good players who can't solo consistently, and there are even more crap players who solo gold nearly every time they try.

[dumdum2]

Dunvi wrote...

If soloing was a milestone for you in your improvement at the game, then that's cool. But you were saying that it's a generic marker of skill, and that's what I disagree with. There are too many good players who can't solo consistently, and there are even more crap players who solo gold nearly every time they try.

Yes, for me I would say it is a generic marker of skill combined with the other generic markers that I pointed out earlier. Again, just my own opinion.

I've never met a "good" player who couldn't easily solo Gold, but I have met a lot of crap players who couldn't even solo bronze. Maybe we just have a different standard of what bad, average, good an great means? If you can regulary complete a Gold match in around 14 minutes without using any rockets, then you usually have a team of good players. A Platinum without rockets usually ends in 17-18 minutes with 4 good players.

It sounds more like you are focusing on what makes an "average" or a "good" team instead of a player. But even though some average players can make a good team, an average team with good players can get a better result. A good team of average players might not get below 20 minutes on Gold without using rockets, but an average team with good players will get between 14-15 minutes tops.

When everyone is used to soloing on higher difficulties they tend to ignore teammates completely and just do their own thing. That usually results in a very quick and effective match regardless of difficulty. If I do a Gold solo I can end up between 25-30 minutes in time, if I have another good soloer with me we can finish the game in 14-18 minutes depending on map and enemy. If I have 2 more good soloers in my team then we basically have a hard time trying to find things to kill since everything just dies so fast. 4 good soloers means less ground to cover by yourself, and if each and every one of those players can take out a spawn by themselves it makes a lot of difference in gameplay.

Again, opinions based on experience.

[baldmop]

Here is my take on "average player " they are solid at what they do : objectives, revives , killing , assists , and extracting . The average player can play all levels and contribute and also die on all levels way less on bronze but can happen . The average player just performs doing what needs to be done they may top the score or maybe not come close . I don't think classifying an average player should be a bronze, silver ,gold thing for you can be average in all of them because your play style adjust accordingly .

[Cyonan]

dumdum2 wrote...

I've never met a "good" player who couldn't easily solo Gold, but I have met a lot of crap players who couldn't even solo bronze. Maybe we just have a different standard of what bad, average, good an great means? If you can regulary complete a Gold match in around 14 minutes without using any rockets, then you usually have a team of good players. A Platinum without rockets usually ends in 17-18 minutes with 4 good players.

Back in the day my speed running team hit around 12-13 minutes with no missiles on Glacier/Gold.

and as it turns out, I can't easily solo Gold without using a setup like Kroguard/Geth.

[doozerdude]

Reegar+fire ammo is so mediocre

[dumdum2]

Cyonan wrote...

dumdum2 wrote...

I've never met a "good" player who couldn't easily solo Gold, but I have met a lot of crap players who couldn't even solo bronze. Maybe we just have a different standard of what bad, average, good an great means? If you can regulary complete a Gold match in around 14 minutes without using any rockets, then you usually have a team of good players. A Platinum without rockets usually ends in 17-18 minutes with 4 good players.

Back in the day my speed running team hit around 12-13 minutes with no missiles on Glacier/Gold.

and as it turns out, I can't easily solo Gold without using a setup like Kroguard/Geth.

Maybe you had some good soloes in your team then? 

Jokes aside. It was a standard in combination with the other standards like "head knowledge" of game mechanics, ability to play different classes and use different weapons well etc. The solo criteria was just one part of it and usually I see a combination of those criterias in the players that I play with. But as we all know some players can be a combination of other criterias and still make it work. Just look at sports athletes, their different combination of genetics, talent and skill can look very different between them and yet they still compete at the same level.

[joker_jack]

XFG-65 wrote...

Good - can solo platinum, can carry a platinum game with 3 useless pugs. Can play equally well with a vast range of characters. Regularly uses many different characters. Plays exclusively on platinum.

Average (me) - can't solo platinum. Can do okay on platinum, but needs a team of 3 average/decent players. Can't carry a platinum game where the rest of the team are useless. Good with a few characters, but can't perform equally well with every character,

Bad - doesn't use medi gels, bleeds out frequently. Doesn't stay in hacks/uploads/escorts. Refuses to do devices. Refuses to go for objects. Doesn't revive. Doesn't use mods on his/her weapons. Doesn't use a gear bonus.

You have a seriouly screwy idea of average. Then again the opinions of most on this board matter about as much complaing about the issue.

[Cohen le Barbare]

 Bad: 
- rage gels during the first three waves and end up with zilch when it counts. 
- don't rez during objective waves
- don't help during objective waves
- is on his own on higher difficulty and keeps dying
- don't use equipment on higher difficulty
- funky loadout (like shredder on a graal)
- poor missile use

Average:
- Somehow manages his/her consumables
- tries to play cooperatively
- more intelligent loadout
- equips some gear
- not so poor missile use

Good
- rez/help during objective waves
- will try not to screw up his loadout with disruptor if you're a biotic
- will prime/detonate power combos
- good missile use
- will stick with the team or regroup when things get hairy
- will equip some good consumables to make the game easy.

There's no such thing as perfection.

Modifié par Cohen le Barbare, 27 juin 2013 - 11:14 .

[Cohen le Barbare]

Cyonan wrote...
Back in the day my speed running team hit around 12-13 minutes with no missiles on Glacier/Gold.

and as it turns out, I can't easily solo Gold without using a setup like Kroguard/Geth.

No matter what "elite" players say here, soloing gold is not a walk in the park. I wish Eric had some time to gather data about solos and update the Gameplay Stat thread.

[asdpoiu]

 Since this game requires next to no mechanical skill, it comes down to who knows and is able to cheese the AI the best.

[Nathyrra]

Ok my version of it:
the definition of average cited by wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Average
"Average usually means the sum of a list of numbers divided by the size of the list, in other words the arithmetic mean. ..."
In my view that does not leave much room for own opinion or interpretatation, rather defining the collective of players you are looking at and take it from there to get your result :

So the "average player" of the collective of all MP3 players will be performing differently in average than the "average" BSNer (which brings you to another question: how do you define BSNer?) and this one will give you a diffrent result than e.g. a spectre in his/her average gameplay.

Now what is bad, good and great then? Now here you can also take opinions into account.


To my estimation: the average of all MP3 players will probably perform somewhere where ToYz_R_RusH previously stated.

Your definition of average  imho sets the scale pretty high
- so you must only play and know a lot of good  players and you must have never ever played a public game either - i do not have another answer, on how you came to your conclusion.
Well actually i have:  this is a troll thread. 

Modifié par Nathyrra, 27 juin 2013 - 12:13 .

[Deerber]

Usually, when I say "average" I mean it in the mathematical sense of the word. However, there is one catch when I say someone is "average" at ME3MP. And it is that most of the people who play this game, as it is with every game, don't go on for more than just some days/weeks. It can easily be seen on the leaderboards. Since I feel that including this kind of players into the definition of "average" would not improve the usefuleness of this word at all, I just drop 'em out.

So, whenever I say "average" I actually really mean the average of the players who have played for more than, say, one entire month.

However, given the very nature of bsn and the amount of players that frequent it or not, the chances that a player on this board is "average" are very close to 0. The greatest majority is what I would define "a good player".

So sometimes, I might use "average" in the sense of "average on bsn", which would ultimately mean "pretty good player overall". I tend not to do that, but I cannot exclude that I did or will do in the future.

By the way, you, dumdum2, are *not* an average player by any of those two definitions. Stop calling yourself such 


Over the average bsn player there is a "very good player" level and then an "elite" player level, I'd say... And then there are some players that deserve their own spot, like "Sy7ar level", or "Stentron level", stuff like that 

[Draining Dragon]

Well, to start, how well you solo in a COOP GAME is meaningless. All it says is that you've missed the point of the game entirely.

[dumdum2]

Deerber wrote...

So, whenever I say "average" I actually really mean the average of the players who have played for more than, say, one entire month.

However, given the very nature of bsn and the amount of players that frequent it or not, the chances that a player on this board is "average" are very close to 0. The greatest majority is what I would define "a good player".

So sometimes, I might use "average" in the sense of "average on bsn", which would ultimately mean "pretty good player overall". I tend not to do that, but I cannot exclude that I did or will do in the future.

That is some good thinking on your part. I can agree on your definition of "average" to a certain extent.

Deerber wrote...

By the way, you, dumdum2, are *not* an average player by any of those two definitions. Stop calling yourself such 

Sure I am. I even started the "Average Xbox Players" group to have some other average players to play with. Caineghis was one of the first to join and you all know him very well on this forum in terms of his "skill". Anyone who joins that group is of course an average player in their own mind.

[dumdum2]

Draining Dragon wrote...

Well, to start, how well you solo in a COOP GAME is meaningless. All it says is that you've missed the point of the game entirely.

Yeah, especially when all of your teammates die leaving you to SOLO the rest of the game. I can see how that would be meaningless, better to just commit suicide and bleed out right?

[sabreracer]

 Given the official play stats

Breakdown by difficulty
Bronze (46%)Silver (33%)Gold (18%)Platinum (3%)

The average player is probably able to extract from Silver most of the time.  If you don't explode during the first wave on Gold you're probably above average.

However this is BSN so screw logic.

For BSN the average player is comfortable playing Gold and may not wet their pants during Platinum.

For regular "Known" BSN posters the average can play Platinum with ease.  

Then we have the "good" ones who just trash the game at any and all levels with or without decoys teammates.

[Cohen le Barbare]

dumdum2 wrote...

Draining Dragon wrote...

Well, to start, how well you solo in a COOP GAME is meaningless. All it says is that you've missed the point of the game entirely.

Yeah, especially when all of your teammates die leaving you to SOLO the rest of the game. I can see how that would be meaningless, better to just commit suicide and bleed out right?

It's a coop game, if they want to play selfishly (which is the opposite of coop) why bother with them? I can understand the rush/being willing to solo if you're closer to the end of the game, but why put yourself through multiple solo waves when it's clear your "teammate" don't give a crap about wether they fail or not?

[Supreme Leech]

I'm gonna have to completely and utterly disagree with the absurd statement that soloing has nothing to do with how good you are. Not sure if it was intended as a serious statement. Soloing is the single most important factor when it comes to determining how good someone is. Why? Because soloing puts you under way more pressure than when you are in a full team. You can't rely on people reviving you. You don't have anyone else to kite or distract enemies. Every single enemy on the map is gunning for you, and only you. There is no better test of skill than being in a solo situation. The ultimate test of skill is doing a platinum solo.

Here, I'll even rank the following things in ascending difficulty:

4 players on bronze
solo bronze
4 players on silver
solo silver
4 players on gold
4 decent players on platinum
gold solo
3 useless pugs + 1 decent player on platinum
platinum solo

There is a big difference between carrying and soloing. When carrying useless pugs, they're acting as decoys, which means that you're under little pressure because the enemies aren't just focussing on you. The reason why soloing is a big factor in determining skill (the main factor) is because of this reason. Carrying is a lot easier than soloing, because you have 3 decoys with you on the map. I can carry platinum without much difficulty on a good day, because even though my teammates are doing little to no damage, they're serving a very important function - distracting the enemies, making my job much easier. I have no hope of soloing platinum.

So, in conclusion...soloing is by far the single most important determinant of skill. Arguably the only important factor.

Modifié par XFG-65, 27 juin 2013 - 02:16 .

[lightswitch]

spectre