chills wrote:
I agree that these lists really should not be taken so seriously. Beyond the fact that different players have different quality hardware, there's also the fact that geographical location (relative to the server) seems to affect gameplay as well.
There are those who perform extremely well no matter what. Truzi, for example, is always a hard nut to crack, and his ping is almost never below 250, usually ranging around 300-400. The ping fascists are always trying to vote him off the grid because of his ping, but he still cleans their clocks. Your_mom also complains about only getting 20-25 fps, and he's wanting to try Linux to see if he can get a better framerate. He made everyone's list, I think. So yeah, I'll cede that hardware/net connection confers a serious advantage, bad hardware/net connection doesn't auatomatically mean you'll always suck.
chills wrote:And of course, what does it mean to be "good" anyway? There are so many different ways to measure that, and the one(s) you choose will be subjective.
I'd say "good" means you can win.
One of the problems with determining who wins is how the game determines who wins. The winner of the round is always the last one standing, even if he didn't get any points. The winner of the match, however, is frequently point-based. (In fact, it's always point-based, but scoring is pretty flexible) So I'd rate match wins as more indicative of good than round wins. Surviving isn't to be underrated, but surviving to the end of the round doesn't mean you actually bested anybody in a contest of skill.
So "good" also means that no matter how good you are at any specific skill, you can usually find your way out of trouble and you can usually find a way to kill your opponent. So a good grinder doesn't necessarily always beat a bad grinder, because the bad grinder has found other ways to kill the good grinder. See what I mean?
chills wrote:Some players win a lot of matches, other players win a lot of rounds. Some players are good when there are a lot of other people playing, other players are most scary when they duel one-on-one. Some players are brilliant grinders, others are amazing mazers, some do crazy tricks with double-binding, and some are masters of grid strategy. Some players are great with infinite walls, whereas others play best with finite walls. Some play better solo, and some play best on teams. And other players, even if they're not always the best in these different ways, are a whole lot of fun to play against, so there's no objective way of saying who the best players are.
Well, I would assume that "top fifteen current players" means "the top fifteen players that win the most". Which is one reason I haven't tried to compile a list, personally.
You see, the people I have the most fun with aren't always the ones that win a lot. Exactly like you say, some players are lots of fun even though they're not very skilled. My list would also be different if it were teams or not teams for the same reasons. Some players are lots of fun to have on a team while other players are really annoying on a team, but fun for solo play. So I'd have to break it down before I could generate a meaningful list.
But there are also players that regularly kick the snot out of me that are still lots of fun to play with, even though the chances of winning a match drop so dramatically when they show up.
So, yeah, hard to make a list. And my frail short-term memory means I can't always remember 15 player names when asked, but I'll remember every player as soon as I see them on the grid.
) Anyone here go to anime conventions? I always bring my laptop to those.
lol
anyway, never played Yaza though, is that a valid excuse?
