F2P Rankings: PVE & PVP

Status
Not open for further replies.
Aradiel said:
Hêéàls @ Tortheldrin - Game Guide - World of Warcraft Possibly banned? Bots heavily.
Genara @ Area 52 - Game Guide - World of Warcraft As well as the other Area 52 bots have over 100k HKs too.
Click to expand...

I have no intention of listing bots or inactive players. If anyone on the list fits into those categories, please let me know and I will remove them.

Not much point listing people under 2k achievements or 50k HKs. Limit it to 100k HKs as more people hit that mark too.
Click to expand...

Well, there is a real point. Any cutoff point will be arbitrary and should bebased up the effort involved in maintaining the list. A larger list is more inclusive for the F2P community, so that's a real benefit. Even if someone isn't on the Top 10 of either list, getting onto the list (in the unranked portion) nevertheless still requires some commitment.

Moving the goalposts by raising the cutoff basically keeps everyone but maybe 20-25 players out. Where's the fun in that?

You might also want to consider a games played, both AB and WSG, as well as flags capped and flags returned and KBs.
Click to expand...

I would have no problem adding that information to the list if anyone wants to compile it and send it to me on a regular basis. However, since most of those categories are tied closely to pvp playtime, I think it would be a list of the same 10-20 people listed in slightly different order.

Also, many achievements are PvP, so it's a poor choice of title.
Click to expand...

It's concise and descriptive, which is what a post title should be. The rankings themselves are fairly self-explanatory.
 
You would better base it on skill other than kills. The list would be entirely different.
 
Mialo said:
You would better base it on skill other than kills. The list would be entirely different.
Click to expand...


Look, I completely understand that HKs is not the perfect metric. But we both know that the perfect metric does not exist and, even if one did, no one would agree on exactly what it was. The bottom line is that HKs is something that everyone can easily track and identify with -- as long as we can filter out the botters.
 
Imirak said:
Look, I completely understand that HKs is not the perfect metric. But we both know that the perfect metric does not exist and, even if one did, no one would agree on exactly what it was. The bottom line is that HKs is something that everyone can easily track and identify with -- as long as we can filter out the botters.
Click to expand...

if we can validate botters then that would be fine but how do we do that, you cant follow a "he said she said" method.
correct on measuring skill....you really cant this is not some rbg thing but imo more of an achievement thing.
 
Certainly don't list KBs. HKs may not be a measure of skill, but they are quite useful as markers of dedication and achievement -- and will also, much of the time, roughly correlate to skill. KBs, on the other hand, mean nothing.

Caps and returns might be nice to list, but it seems a bit too burdensome to include those.
 
Skill is entirely subjective and situational, it's impossible to measure accurately, without a 1v1 of each spec vs. spec, and even then, racials could also be a consideration, as well as gear. Also, some people may be skilled against one class but not another. Skill is also not based on popular opinion, so again, impossible to accurately judge.

HKs can be had by stealthing in mid and doing almost nothing. Zero skill required. KBs require a little more skill. HK to KB ratio is another way to examine skill, but again, class makes a difference here too. I once took 40k damage from a lock in a WSG and was literally never in any danger of dying. Hunters can obviously get more kills simply because they can hit from range, which melee obviously can not. Rogues also do well at kill stealing. Healers will have very few KBs.

Caps and returns show what kind of player you are, defensive, offensive, and is certainly an interesting stat to track. If I'm interested in what kind of player someone is, I always like to look at this one.
 
Aradiel said:
Caps and returns show what kind of player you are, defensive, offensive, and is certainly an interesting stat to track. If I'm interested in what kind of player someone is, I always like to look at this one.
Click to expand...

You would probably have to classify it even further, for example the 500 or so returns I have on my druid are mainly from sitting in our FR and killing anything that touches the flag. This would classify me as a defensive player.

But I know a rogue with the same amount of returns and all of his come from going into the enemy base and downing the EFC on their turf, which most would consider playing offensively.

So I think that if a list were to be created of returns (and caps if you'd like) Then it would still be hard to determine what kind of player someone is D:

However it would be nice to have a way of tracking where people make their returns because I enjoy playing with people who do sit in our FR and defend. Most people don't realize that if you kill the 800 HP rogue BEFORE he gets the flag out to the 3k hp 24 prot pally, hell before he even sets foot out of the FR, and you greatly improve your chances of winning :p
 
Aradiel said:
Caps and returns show what kind of player you are, defensive, offensive, and is certainly an interesting stat to track. If I'm interested in what kind of player someone is, I always like to look at this one.
Click to expand...

But this is not accurate either because there are ranged and melee classes and melee classes are much sooner at the dropped flag and return. Hence even people could be a nice person and let others take the return. Also there are people who could fc on a hunter for example but they are letting a fc class carry the flag. Not to mention a fc or a whole team getting carried by others. These stats also don't say anything.

Observing and playing is the best way to value another player.
 
I think we all realize that there is no perfect metric. And if we settled on one, it would not be hard for players to come up with a way to maximize that metric with as little effort as possible.

It all boils down to whether we want to have a listing of pvp players and, if so, which flawed metric is the preferred one to use. HKs are straightforward and obvious, and it takes time and effort to run up high numbers even if you are trying to game the system like Kale suggests. The exception to this, of course, is botters.

Also, all of the metrics you guys talked about totally exclude players who prefer AB.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top