MikeBnDe | 2015-10-23 07:16:10 |
I know this topic has been discussed before, but i cant findwhat i am looking for. Is there somewhere a table or something where the alt accounts are listed? I think its kind of unfair to 'hide' behind an alternate account. Every player has his certain style you can try to exploit but this goes faster if you know who you are playing against, so that you dont have to play 20 games again before figuring out the play style of a new account name. Besides, you dont go out with a mask in real life as well, do you? ;) In particular, i would be interested if CletusKasady is an alt account. this guy is rising in the rankings at an unbelievable speed, beating me on the way multiple times without any efforts. So he is either super-talented or an alternate account. Modified by MikeBnDe on 2015-10-23 07:17:16 Tendou | 2015-10-23 08:00:18 |
Yeah, definiately alt account, just forget that someone is talented and things like this. Nobody gets a winrate like 2/3 (66 %) for his/her first name, though it is common phenomena for the unknown players on the first/second page. I would say he is KingintheNorth because he is using accounts with pictures from popular tv shows or movies. It is impossible to keep track of who is whom, but there are some signs from pictures i may find like Zhao likes using pictures of drawn spectro card arts(discipleofjoy,DemonYang,lingege). I would just rather advise to ignore people with higher winrates than 60% before they reach like at least 1000 games and more because even if they are not alts of 40+ players they may be alts of 20+ players and you are still losing more than they get standardly by playing them so it is unfair either way. Also you can keep watching whom are playing in the lobby for a long time without jumping 10 levels every day, so even if you know that they are alts you may also know that their level matches their knowledge.
CyberneticPony | 2015-10-23 10:27:01 |
Yeah, definiately alt account, just forget that someone is talented and things like this. Nobody gets a winrate like 2/3 (66 %). This is my first account and I easily had that winrate when playing against the newer players since I had good concepts from previous games. I can imagine anyone talented or who had played enough to beat archmage can defeat most players easily up to about level 15. EDIT: Can confirm it's likely a Prospectro player's alt: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AzSZaP133M
Modified by CyberneticPony on 2015-10-23 11:00:58 MikeBnDe | 2015-10-23 12:04:08 |
Ok, thanks guys. Cant we use this thread to make an alt list? Always take the already existing list and add. Pattern: 1. A=B=C 2. D=E 3: F=G=H=I Next poster repost this and add so that the next post will be something like 1. A=B=C=J 2. D=E 3. F=G=H=I 4. L=M and so on, so that the last post always has all alts in it. Since i don't have an alt, and don't know alts, someone else has to start that list. I, personally am only interested in the alts of players whose maximum account has lev >= 20,but thats just a personal preference of course.
Modified by MikeBnDe on 2015-10-23 12:08:01 Tendou | 2015-10-23 12:07:42 |
... This is my first account and I easily had that winrate when playing against the newer players since I had good concepts from previous games. I can imagine anyone talented or who had played enough to beat archmage can defeat most players easily up to about level 15.
EDIT: Can confirm it's likely a Prospectro player's alt: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AzSZaP133M
It also depends on the amount of games for sure, but if someone has played like more than 1000 games, after that the winrate will definiately show some realities about the player, and i would say if its winrate stays more than 60% after that then he/she is expected to be at least 30+ of average level. What also matters is whom that guy is playing against because you can also see players with high amount of wins not matching their levels because they are playing against available players(usually not higher than 20). I doubt there are many players whom start online gaming by beating the archmage many times beforehand, but even if they do online against humans is i find to be different and the key point here is that you will have to climb slowly to get to a level of positive winrate consistently.
mamouliann | 2015-10-23 13:23:49 |
I'm still glad to play against a lvl30+ alt than not to play.
VoLdeM0rt | 2015-10-23 16:43:12 |
Go Alts Go
Sinist | 2015-10-23 16:45:17 |
Go Alts Go in Vorrivan we trust
Modified by Sinist on 2015-10-23 16:45:29 MikeBnDe | 2015-10-23 17:05:14 |
So, no alts list? :(
mammou | 2015-10-23 18:31:39 |
GrimJ0ker | 2015-10-24 10:59:42 |
Just for you: (error percentage 3%)
DuoMaxwell SeaLeta alt FingerBang KingInTheNorth alt ComfortablyNumb ChaosLord alt Filth KingInTheNorth alt durrr ChaosLord alt Se6astian GrimJ0ker alt foobar SeaLeta alt Dhalsimzhao discipleofjoy alt undefeated ChaosLord alt Trowa SeaLeta alt MyNameIsReek KingInTheNorth alt abcdzyx ChaosLord alt WhoAmI KingInTheNorth alt mrGall MrGall7 alt erickiller ChaosLord alt SpectroStat tosher alt ZeroC00L ChaosLord alt emittaeb SoAid alt WindInHead KnifeToBack alt Plynx103 ChaosLord alt GarryShe GarryHe alt NeverSN Alexx alt KIee Clever alt VampOverPower joy alt BOTIFARRASAXO EltioLaVaRa alt PussyMonster KingInTheNorth alt Evilone Alexx alt A1111 ChaosLord alt Gogoboy Kealah alt KermitTheFrog ChaosLord alt NewBalance Dokdo alt Negan KingInTheNorth alt TheFallen GrimJ0ker alt nashira Alexx alt dimurel dimurelka alt Johny2Johny John alt atoms AtomOfUniverse alt Woodcutter Kealah alt monoVamp StephanieF alt FlawLessTime TurinTuramba alt Zenit DKMIX alt Sylvia StephanieF alt Johnyk John alt bufff EltioLaVaRa alt Ungoliata Alexx alt BeeHive the biggest mistery of spectromancer
Modified by GrimJ0ker on 2015-10-25 16:13:37 HeadphonesGirl | 2015-10-24 12:27:44 |
Cletus Kasady is a spider-man villain. The name of the serial killer who merged with the symbiote's offspring to become Carnage.
Overall a dumb character. Should have gone with Norman Osborn.
MikeBnDe | 2015-10-24 15:32:40 |
Thank you very much, Grim!!!!
bluedawn | 2015-10-25 15:41:43 |
Soprano = Not SeaLeta
GrimJ0ker | 2015-10-25 16:13:25 |
Soprano = Not SeaLeta ok! fixed GrimPatron | 2015-10-25 17:05:39 |
... ok! fixed
Yeah, Soprano is Eric's alt.
MikeBnDe | 2015-10-25 17:44:24 |
So, what is the thing with Beehive, that GrimJoker calls it the biggest mystery in Spectromancer? ;-) Has he/she revealed that BeeHive is an alt, but does not reveal the primary account name? Or what? Why use an alt anway? I can come up with a few reasons of course, but for me, personally, none of this reason would be good enough to buy the game multiple times. Or at least, not more than two times: One 'real' account and one for testing purposes. PS: so, Soprano is erickillers=ChaosLords alt?
Modified by MikeBnDe on 2015-10-25 17:46:21 Tendou | 2015-10-25 19:48:39 |
So, what is the thing with Beehive, that GrimJoker calls it the biggest mystery in Spectromancer? ;-) Has he/she revealed that BeeHive is an alt, but does not reveal the primary account name? Or what?
Why use an alt anway? I can come up with a few reasons of course, but for me, personally, none of this reason would be good enough to buy the game multiple times. Or at least, not more than two times: One 'real' account and one for testing purposes.
PS: so, Soprano is erickillers=ChaosLords alt? It is one split of a second to make a new alt from your comp you are sitting at you dont need to buy more than once at all, wow, i didnt believe you wrote that :DDD. Also even you want to activate the game on more than one comp it used to be that you just needed one code and split it on five comps, after that you got blocked. Dont how it is working now though.
Modified by Tendou on 2015-10-25 19:50:27 MikeBnDe | 2015-10-25 20:00:13 |
Oops, didnot know that ;)
GrimJ0ker | 2015-10-26 01:10:44 |
So, what is the thing with Beehive, that GrimJoker calls it the biggest mystery in Spectromancer? ;-) Has he/she revealed that BeeHive is an alt, but does not reveal the primary account name? Or what?
I faced her (as she said) during the first official torunament in a really interesting match (1-1), she was new in the game, probably just 1/2 months of games in revnia valley, she used also to write some posts on the forum during that period of activity. Then she won easly the II official tournament beating 2-0 players like John,bluedawn,SerzhAP,Jeronimo and Kroma in final. The common opinion is that she was an alt but no one ever found out who she was. But it's still a mystery. After she/he retired from the game. Modified by GrimJ0ker on 2015-10-26 11:52:43 MikeBnDe | 2015-10-26 08:01:15 |
...
I faced her (as she said) during the first official torunament in a really interesting match (1-1), she was new in the game, probably just 1/2 months of games in revnia valley, she used also to write some posts on the forum during that period of activity. Then she won easly the II official tournament beating 2-0 players like John,bluedawn,SerzhAP,Jeronimo and Kroma in final. The common opinion is that she was an alt but no one ever found out who she was. My opinion is that she was just BeeHive, the best spectro girl ever played spectro. But it's still a mystery. After she retired from the game.
Interesting, sounds impressive. Too bad that we don't have replays of those matches, or do we? Eidt: I just found a clip on youtube. Will watch. Modified by MikeBnDe on 2015-10-26 08:06:30 GrimJ0ker | 2015-10-26 11:23:46 |
But I and my best spectro friend strongly suspect "she" is Plynx. :) Same playstyle, same posts style on forum and similar stats. Modified by GrimJ0ker on 2015-10-26 16:26:48 srbhkshk | 2015-10-26 15:27:49 |
But me and my best spectro friend strongly suspect "she" is Plynx. :)Same playstyle, same posts style on forum and similar stats. Plynx writes almost perfect english, Beehive's wasn't so good, It can of course just be a ploy to hide it, but there post style is not really similar. GrimJ0ker | 2015-10-26 16:07:27 |
She had the same playstyle during the II official torunament. She hated so much d7 just like Plynx. She never answered about her main account without an apparent reason. She didin't participate in the tournament of the champions. Plynx did. She wrote also japanese text in a post, Plynx is learning japanese. She talked in a post about "sequential limits" of the cards, the core of the PBG. She was not used to put classes with a strong random component like Goblins and Chaos just like Plynx.
You can think what you want but this is my opinion. Plynx = Beehive. Modified by GrimJ0ker on 2015-10-26 16:26:32 Wavelength | 2015-10-26 18:31:30 |
Plynx isn't Beehive. This thread should only be used to discuss known alts and not to speculate For that matter, you should just ask Cletus what his main is in-game, rather than do wild mass guessing here.
Modified by Wavelength on 2015-10-26 18:33:01 MikeBnDe | 2015-10-26 20:39:01 |
Plynx isn't Beehive.
This thread should only be used to discuss known alts and not to speculate
For that matter, you should just ask Cletus what his main is in-game, rather than do wild mass guessing here. Whats so bad with speculating? @Grim: when i watched the games of BeeHive (before i read your last posts), i had the same thought: 'Hmm, her play style looks like Plnyxes'.
Modified by MikeBnDe on 2015-10-26 20:42:05 Sinist | 2015-10-26 20:43:13 |
Plynx isn't Beehive.
you cannot be 100% sure unless you are Beehive
j jones | 2015-10-26 22:02:52 |
what about, Nella = Valentyne ???
Jeronimo | 2015-10-26 22:14:09 |
GreenNoviceMage = Ruby456
Beehive is not Plynx
I can specially recall a moment in the past, one of first tournaments in which classes per given by random generator. I played "best of 3 duels" against her, and I got to use twice the class Dominator. She lost both games and went "a bit emotional" on the duels we played (I did W12 which blocked her mana in 2nd game).
There is another, maybe more notorious, fact that her writing style has nothing to do with Plynx: It was once she was teasing me while I was having a "forum conversation" with Valentyne. She writes to me *stuns Jeronimo* twice-> It's a reference to the Beehive card in game, which effect is that stuns the creature with highest life every turn (used by one of League of Heroes wizards).
You people better accept her as she was, simply a casual player that played this game for a period. I guess she also plays other card games, but respect Spectromancer, she tasted it for a while.
Anyway, I don't see Plynx with that kind of personality, the kind that creates additional accounts when he is bored. He even dares to experiment duels with "extra challenge" (weird moves) using his main account despite being ranked high and risks to lose lots of EXP only to prove his theories. Modified by Jeronimo on 2015-10-26 22:30:20 SpectroStat | 2015-10-26 22:55:52 |
i think CletusKasady = Heorhehe
GrimJ0ker | 2015-10-26 23:36:39 |
I was lvl.32 when she won on March 2013 No casual players in this game reach lvl.32(more 50% winrate in each class) playing just few months, moreover winning an official tournament defeating big players 2-0. (15 wins of 16) She was not a casual player. Her posts are very similar to the first Plynx's posts(2009). The use of the punctuation, the use of the double **, this face ^_^, the cursive and the bold, but especially the double -- which it' s really unusual. If all these little things have been taken individually seem nonsense. But when taken together they become the basis for a good suspect.
But guys...nevermind, that was just my theory. MikeBnDe asked me and I answered. I respect your opinions. ^_^
Modified by GrimJ0ker on 2015-10-27 00:42:00 Wavelength | 2015-10-27 04:54:59 |
Whats so bad with speculating?
People are allowed to create alts in Spectro. They are allowed to either reveal who they are, or not reveal who they are, for whatever reason they choose. Starting witch hunts or wild mass guessing over who an account "really is" is not productive and is going to lead to a lot of confusion and false accusations (not to mention invasion of reasonably-expected privacy). I imagine if the devs wanted players to be known by only one name, they would have tied accounts to subscriptions. I feel bad throwing cold water on this discussion because it's being conducted respectfully, but it's going down a road that I think is going to cause a lot of harm, and I'm very close to locking and hiding it. Basically if the conversation keeps going in this direction and an "alt" shows up and says "no that's not me", it's done.
Modified by Wavelength on 2015-10-27 04:57:41 MikeBnDe | 2015-10-27 09:11:56 |
... People are allowed to create alts in Spectro. They are allowed to either reveal who they are, or not reveal who they are, for whatever reason they choose. Starting witch hunts or wild mass guessing over who an account "really is" is not productive and is going to lead to a lot of confusion and false accusations (not to mention invasion of reasonably-expected privacy).
I imagine if the devs wanted players to be known by only one name, they would have tied accounts to subscriptions.
I feel bad throwing cold water on this discussion because it's being conducted respectfully, but it's going down a road that I think is going to cause a lot of harm, and I'm very close to locking and hiding it. Basically if the conversation keeps going in this direction and an "alt" shows up and says "no that's not me", it's done.
Well, i have absolutley no idea why harmless guessing without offending anyone could be considered 'witch hunts' and it is totally beyond me why the knowledge of fantasy_name_1 = fantasy_name_2 is an invasion of privacy (we still do not know if we are 'invading' the privacy of Obama or that of a 12 year old), but since i got my alt list (thanks Grim) i dont really care at this point. Modified by MikeBnDe on 2015-10-27 13:06:38 HeadphonesGirl | 2015-10-27 10:31:19 |
... People are allowed to create alts in Spectro. They are allowed to either reveal who they are, or not reveal who they are, for whatever reason they choose. Starting witch hunts or wild mass guessing over who an account "really is" is not productive and is going to lead to a lot of confusion and false accusations (not to mention invasion of reasonably-expected privacy).
I imagine if the devs wanted players to be known by only one name, they would have tied accounts to subscriptions.
I feel bad throwing cold water on this discussion because it's being conducted respectfully, but it's going down a road that I think is going to cause a lot of harm, and I'm very close to locking and hiding it. Basically if the conversation keeps going in this direction and an "alt" shows up and says "no that's not me", it's done.
Yeah, with all due respect I think you're way off base here man. If nobody is breaking any rules (which they aren't) it shouldn't even be up for consideration of closing. I'm confused as to how you think this is bordering on witch hunts when no one has even said anything bad about anybody. Speculating about who an alt might be can be a bit of fun. It's not going to hurt anyone.
srbhkshk | 2015-10-27 15:45:06 |
She had the same playstyle during the II official torunament. She hated so much d7 just like Plynx. She never answered about her main account without an apparent reason. She didin't participate in the tournament of the champions. Plynx did. She wrote also japanese text in a post, Plynx is learning japanese. She talked in a post about "sequential limits" of the cards, the core of the PBG. She was not used to put classes with a strong random component like Goblins and Chaos just like Plynx.
You can think what you want but this is my opinion. Plynx = Beehive.
All of that is fine, I just said that their English was not similar at all, no need to be aggressive about it. GrimJ0ker | 2015-10-27 20:09:05 |
I was not aggressive, like a cleric player Wavelength | 2015-10-27 21:20:47 |
.Well, i have absolutley no idea why harmless guessing without offending anyone could be considered 'witch hunts' and it is totally beyond me
why the knowledge of fantasy_name_1 = fantasy_name_2 is an invasion of privacy (we still do not know if we are 'invading' the privacy of Obama or that of a 12 year old), but since i got my alt list (thanks Grim) i dont really care at this point.
Yeah, with all due respect I think you're way off base here man. If nobody is breaking any rules (which they aren't) it shouldn't even be up for consideration of closing. I'm confused as to how you think this is bordering on witch hunts when no one has even said anything bad about anybody.
Speculating about who an alt might be can be a bit of fun. It's not going to hurt anyone.
To just explain where I was coming from - how would you like it if the whole community just randomly decided you (Mike, or HPG, or Joker) were another one of EricKiller's alts, and refused to recognize you as an individual player? You might find this funny at first. Would you find it as funny when you were still hearing about it months later, or when people were claiming your Tourney Win was cheating because you beat Eric in the playoffs? I sure wouldn't. If I were Beehive and I came back and saw this, I'd be pissed. If I were Plynx, I'd be pissed. Not to mention the whole blowup that came when Stephanie was accused of sockpuppeting accounts that she wasn't (which I realize had a lot of other factors, but this was one of them). However, yeah, maybe you guys are right - I'm probably overreacting to
this a bit. It would be rash of me to lock the discussion if I don't
see any evidence of harm done. Tendou | 2015-10-27 21:32:12 |
... ... To just explain where I was coming from - how would you like it if the whole community just randomly decided you (Mike, or HPG, or Joker) were another one of EricKiller's alts, and refused to recognize you as an individual player? You might find this funny at first. Would you find it as funny when you were still hearing about it months later, or when people were claiming your Tourney Win was cheating because you beat Eric in the playoffs? I sure wouldn't. If I were Beehive and I came back and saw this, I'd be pissed. If I were Plynx, I'd be pissed. Not to mention the whole blowup that came when Stephanie was accused of sockpuppeting accounts that she wasn't (which I realize had a lot of other factors, but this was one of them).
However, yeah, maybe you guys are right - I'm probably overreacting to this a bit. It would be rash of me to lock the discussion if I don't see any evidence of harm done.
Those whom are using alts deserve to face the uncomfortable consequences of any of their actions which they totally deserve compared to the damage they are doing every day to unsuspectful players. That is it!
HeadphonesGirl | 2015-10-28 00:22:07 |
how would you like it if the whole community just randomly decided you (Mike, or HPG, or Joker) were another one of EricKiller's alts, and refused to recognize you as an individual player? You might find this funny at first. Would you find it as funny when you were still hearing about it months later, or when people were claiming your Tourney Win was cheating because you beat Eric in the playoffs?
I don't know, I think I'd be flattered? I'd also think the person was a little nuts, since erickiller is so much better than me I'm not sure how the mistake could be made. In fact if anything I'd think erickiller should be the one insulted by such an idea.
If anything, Grim thinking Beehive was so good she must have been a Plynx alt is a rather serious compliment if she wasn't. (Personally I agree with the opinion that it is unlikely. Plynx doesn't seem like the alt type to me and the few times I played Beehive the way she conversed with me was nothing like Plynx.)
If it became a serious ongoing thing where a bunch of people were adamantly refusing x person isn't y person and resulting in arguments and bad feelings and whatever I can see how that would be different, but we're a long way from that here.
Modified by HeadphonesGirl on 2015-10-28 00:24:33 HeadphonesGirl | 2015-10-28 00:22:26 |
... Those whom are using alts deserve to face the uncomfortable consequences of any of their actions which they totally deserve compared to the damage they are doing every day to unsuspectful players. That is it!
Damn dude, sounds like you had a bad experience with an alt.
Tendou | 2015-10-28 18:47:46 |
... Damn dude, sounds like you had a bad experience with an alt.
Everyone had, it is not unique, definiately not basing opinion on bias.
Everyone had, it is not unique, definiately not basing opinion on bias.
what do you mean? i have never had a bad experience with an alt. please don't generalize
Modified by filip on 2015-10-29 09:28:26 MikeBnDe | 2015-10-29 10:20:51 |
Well Filip, you probably had a lot of games against a level 3x player, loosing more points than you normally would because he played with a level 15 alt. Thas what could be called a 'bad experience' ;) Modified by MikeBnDe on 2015-10-29 10:24:28 mamoulian | 2015-10-29 10:25:26 |
Well Filip, you probably had a lot of games against a level 3x player, loosing more points than you would normally because he played with a level 15 alt. Thas what could be called a 'bad experience' ;) But you had a chance to play with a great player and learn. I pay the extra xp gladly even if I know it's an alt. MikeBnDe | 2015-10-29 10:28:48 |
... But you had a chance to play with a great player and learn. I pay the extra xp gladly even if I know it's an alt.
Mamoulian, if he had played with his primary account instead, you would have had the chance to play with a great player as well. So i dont see why this could be an argument. And willing to pay the extra XP is a personal choice you can make for sure, but the problem is, other players who are not willing to do so have not that choice. The scoring logic has its reason and these fakers undermine it by using alts, stealing XP from a player, probably without its knowledge. Modified by MikeBnDe on 2015-10-29 10:34:44 mamoulian | 2015-10-29 10:36:17 |
... Mamoulian, if he had played with his primary account instead, you would have had the chance to play with a great player as well. So i dont see why this could be an argument.
Of course it was only an argument in a situation when it's obvious it's an alt (which is most of the cases I think).
However I always only cared about if I'm no.1 or not so I don't mind a couple more xp loss on the road to that. :P Modified by mamoulian on 2015-10-29 10:38:24 MikeBnDe | 2015-10-29 10:47:59 |
... Of course it was only an argument in a situation when it's obvious it's an alt (which is most of the cases I think).
Yeah, but first, not everybody follows the forum and knows the alts, secondly, if you search for opponent you get them whether you want to or not (you could blacklist of course, but only if you know its an alt and its quite tedious to find all known alts and blacklist all of them). So you intend to become No. 1? ;-) Good luck surpassing Plynx ;-) I played him recently, and the only 2 games i won was only because he was either experimenting or made a stupid move on purpose (E4 with 4 green mana as one of the first moves). And even then it was close, scary. Maybe i am too much intimidated by his high ranking and success so that my perception fails me, but when he plays normal, every move during mid- or lategame feels flawlesss. Plynx, if you are reading this, thanks again for the games.
Modified by MikeBnDe on 2015-10-29 10:48:58 HeadphonesGirl | 2015-10-29 11:24:40 |
Whether your post on the forums or not alts are usually easy to spot by their win rate. And if they don't have a really high win rate... well, your reason for not wanting to play against them is gone.
Mamoulian is the man. He knows what's up. Whenever people complain about their XP my thought is, "why do you care?"
Getting XP is like playing chaos.
mamoulian | 2015-10-29 11:32:18 |
...
I meant if you see a lvl 20+ player with few games and 60-70%< winrate it's mostly an alt. I didn't even know if there was an autosearch option until I saw the game's trailer not so long ago, till don't know why is it good. :P
Of course I'm intend to surpass everyone. If I'll ever think there's a limit of my evolvement the game is end for me. But I didn't see it in that way since the beginning of Astral. StephanieF | 2015-10-29 16:51:10 |
btw, this is the topic you looked for: http://www.spectromancer.com/forum.cgi#pageid=4733
I go even further now than here...all Alts (20+) should be layed open by the devs (and all 20- on request in Forum if Cooler has some time for it lol)!
The whole thing sucks as all discussions and experience about/with it shows now, not only for Mike (Tendou, Mamoulian)'s reasons also for what Wave said and more in this direction like simply having a nice community (more or less but at least more open)...
@HPG : I have nothing against you at all, but you show always a little horizont (in all discussions btw) but see and present yourself like Mr AlwaysRight and I see you never playing (You probably have no Alts or at least don't use them.)
@Grim: You are a really clever dude with nearly supernatural (of course demonic xD) powers but you have no line to the Light and there even wonders are possible (believe or not but I swear!) and Beehive is therefore my Goddess.If this is understandable too hardcore for you, female players can not be better than me, so the good old dumb chick (I am!) and I even agree these clishees are really very often true (even more nowadays)...
GrimJ0ker | 2015-10-29 17:39:29 |
@Grim: You are a really clever dude with nearly supernatural (of course demonic xD) powers but you have no line to the Light and there even wonders are possible (believe or not but I swear!) and Beehive is therefore my Goddess.If this is understandable too hardcore for you, female players can not be better than me, so the good old dumb chick (I am!) and I even agree these clishees are really very often true (even more nowadays)...
The sixth sense (supernatural powers) is nothing but note the details. Wavelength | 2015-10-29 23:14:06 |
The idea that alts are "stealing" XP is stupid. Who are they "stealing" it for? If the alt cared about about their Rank, they would use their highest-level account (because no matter how much you play an alt or how often, you will never get it as high as you would if you exclusively used your main account). If this is your main objection against alts, you should simply stop worrying about it. It's really not worth your time. Modified by Wavelength on 2015-10-29 23:16:01 HeadphonesGirl | 2015-10-30 00:50:01 |
@HPG : I have nothing against you at all, but you show always a little horizont (in all discussions btw) but see and present yourself like Mr AlwaysRight and I see you never playing (You probably have no Alts or at least don't use them.)
You're right that I don't play much these days. I do have a couple alts, but I don't use them either. I'm not sure what that has to do with this thread though. In general, if I post an opinion, it's going to be because I believe that it is right. I don't post things I don't believe. So if that means you think I present myself as if I'm always right, I don't know what to tell you. I've been wrong plenty of times and will be wrong again. Most of the time I'm right, though.
P.S. If I may be honest I find this a strange criticism coming from you.
CyberneticPony | 2015-10-30 14:36:42 |
P.S. If I may be honest I find this a strange criticism coming from you.
More burn than a Magic the Gathering red deck. MikeBnDe | 2015-10-30 18:06:11 |
The idea that alts are "stealing" XP is stupid. Who are they "stealing" it for? If the alt cared about about their Rank, they would use their highest-level account (because no matter how much you play an alt or how often, you will never get it as high as you would if you exclusively used your main account).
If this is your main objection against alts, you should simply stop worrying about it. It's really not worth your time. Your are right Wave, its not important, we should stop discussion that. But before we do ;-) Rankings are relative. When you 'steal' XP with an alt, your oponnent looses points. So his ranking drops, which benefits your main account as well, the gap widens, even if the scores dont get added to the 'thieves' main account.
Modified by MikeBnDe on 2015-10-30 18:06:33 Tendou | 2015-10-30 19:26:11 |
The idea that alts are "stealing" XP is stupid. Who are they "stealing" it for? If the alt cared about about their Rank, they would use their highest-level account (because no matter how much you play an alt or how often, you will never get it as high as you would if you exclusively used your main account).
If this is your main objection against alts, you should simply stop worrying about it. It's really not worth your time. That is why i among many others dont understand why people are using alts on the long run, but just because it is not rational, from their point of view, doesn't mean it is not offensive and in conclusion it at least partly undermines the rating system. Modified by Tendou on 2015-10-30 19:53:05 Tendou | 2015-10-30 19:28:29 |
... You're right that I don't play much these days. I do have a couple alts, but I don't use them either. I'm not sure what that has to do with this thread though.
In general, if I post an opinion, it's going to be because I believe that it is right. I don't post things I don't believe. So if that means you think I present myself as if I'm always right, I don't know what to tell you. I've been wrong plenty of times and will be wrong again.
Most of the time I'm right, though.
P.S. If I may be honest I find this a strange criticism coming from you.
I have to agree with Stephanie, you are the mass producer of politically correct posts without giving your own honest thoughts.
CyberneticPony | 2015-10-30 23:30:01 |
... I have to agree with Stephanie, you are the mass producer of politically correct posts without giving your own honest thoughts.
Being straight down the middle isn't political correctness.
PC behaviour usually is used to signify a desire to silence other's comments, not create ones which are apathetic or neutral; I'd say HeadphonesGirl is more diplomatically neutral. HeadphonesGirl | 2015-10-30 23:56:21 |
... I have to agree with Stephanie, you are the mass producer of politically correct posts without giving your own honest thoughts.
Sorry, I'll try to be more judgmental and jump to snap conclusions about things in the future. Thanks for the input.
Tendou | 2015-10-31 09:31:19 |
... Sorry, I'll try to be more judgmental and jump to snap conclusions about things in the future. Thanks for the input.
You are way more intelligent than just kill discussions with evading the problems i am posing. I know you were here way before i started and it is a recent trend that you just jump in the middle of discussions, lit the fire(make things worse for both parties in conflict) and then avoid responsiblity because you stayed neutral, so you can't be convicted of spreading falsehood, because you never said anything in the first place. Please don't misunderstand! I am perfectly fine with the way you are contributing, but you are not hesitant sharing your judgments of people and ideas without arguments(like a sheer declaration). I didn't even make a statement anything near to saying stuff like, i would like to ban alts or at least i would like to know of all players who is alt and who is not. Mike suggested to outline all the possible alts, and it is not realistic because people are making alts so they can practice unknownly as newcomers always finding opponents on the lobby without the fear of losing xp from their main alt. If we are at the topic let me show you that the problem of using alts is problematic mostly for the newcomers and players below level 10 usually. They are not yet there to understand what are the possibilities for getting better, and playing new alts may give them unrealistic expectations about how they should play to get better. Do you really think that you never had an experience when you were lower level that some player using alt beat the last breath out of you while you are looking for challange against players whom you can learn from? Do you think it is even near fair for a level 1 player and a 40+ player with a new alt play, and then get the same reward for their victory? The ELO system is based on the idea that there is only one player behind every account so that the player's current level always reflect the level of that participant , but of course it is at least partly can be undermined by using alt accounts, so i hope you can understand that and confirm such behaviour distorts the XP distribution this way. Also i am on the side of Jeronimo when he said that you can't learn from players whom are way above you and has much more experience, you won't be able to understand their thinking, it would be like trying to solve equations without knowing how to count. So as mamoulian likes to phrase: it doesn't matter whom you are playing basically because you either learn something or get xp, i think that thinking in case of a lower level player up against some 40+ alt player is not getting either of those. Also it is obviously a coward behaviour to pump up an account and than leave it there so you can hold a place at the first page for another year, playing only tournaments where you can only get more xp, and for that you are practicing with alts without the fear of risking your status. I mean seriously! Most people don't care if someone' s alt lost 10 levels in the last few days as long as he/she kept its status on the main name,.(For examples of such conflict see Grim's expression towards Jeronmo). So please realise that the real xp addicts are not those whom are looking for a fair challenge using one name, but those whom are not willing to stick to one account and show that they can keep their level without distorting the rating system. I can hardly imagine that i expressed anything new, especially to you, but i pulled out most of my thoughts about this issue. Please be so kind to take a look and as a player from long before confirm for those whom are getting a false picture of myself and the way things work in this game. Cheers. Modified by Tendou on 2015-10-31 09:37:31 Wavelength | 2015-10-31 09:38:17 |
Also i am on the side of Jeronimo when he said that you can't learn from players whom are way above you and has much more experience, you won't be able to understand their thinking, it would be like trying to solve equations without knowing how to count. I feel differently. I've gained several levels in the last month after some discussion with Plynx. The things he was saying seemed unintuitive to me at the time, but I was able to catch bits and glimmers of the wisdom - and after some struggle working them into my game, and then after giving up on it, I found that I had integrated parts of his game into my own. It's almost like religion - sometimes it is way above you, but even if you barely understand it, even if it seems like it doesn't apply to you... the wisdom sets in over time as long as you try, and eventually your mind can fully open to it. One more thing - Spectro does not use ELO (if it did, high-level players would lose truly enormous amounts of experience when defeated by low-level players).
Modified by Wavelength on 2015-10-31 09:40:19 Tendou | 2015-10-31 09:52:33 |
... I feel differently. I've gained several levels in the last month after some discussion with Plynx. The things he was saying seemed unintuitive to me at the time, but I was able to catch bits and glimmers of the wisdom - and after some struggle working them into my game, and then after giving up on it, I found that I had integrated parts of his game into my own. It's almost like religion - sometimes it is way above you, but even if you barely understand it, even if it seems like it doesn't apply to you... the wisdom sets in over time as long as you try, and eventually your mind can fully open to it.
Yeah, got your point. but in the situation i presented is different. Usually you may not have any discussion with the player you are playing, so you are just left with the mysterious loss of which you can hardly grasp the reason of. So basically i referred to players whom are learning the game and not really analysing themselves the way we do, they just want to try out things for their own success. Let me give you an example. If i say to a player below level 10 that master healer is usually not that good as most of them anticipate, and that they should avoid most of the times using phoenix, becuase both strategies require slow play and mistakes from the opponent, they would find the idea crazy, and fail to put those suggestions into practice because they don't understand the importance of time in this game as we do. Also, the XP system is not identical to ELO but it is a less harsh version of it, and when i put out that analogy i mean that the idea behind it is the same, nearly all the time the same amount of points get distributed after a match( in case of Spectro around 100 xp points) and you get a bigger share if you are lower level and you get less if you are higher level than the current opponent in case of winning.
Modified by Tendou on 2015-10-31 09:54:30 mamamou | 2015-10-31 09:54:40 |
... Also i am on the side of Jeronimo when he said that you can't learn from players whom are way above you and has much more experience, you won't be able to understand their thinking, it would be like trying to solve equations without knowing how to count. So as mamoulian likes to phrase: it doesn't matter whom you are playing basically because you either learn something or get xp, i think that thinking in case of a lower level player up against some 40+ alt player is not getting either of those.
The way of learning is not necessary to try to copy the moves and thinking of higher lvl players but to polish your own skill step by step and playing against good players is essential to this because you can't afford to make such mistakes against them like against lower lvl players.
Also I have to admit I'm selfish in this game because I really don't care about how alts affect the lower players I only care about my progress but I don't think it's that bad because the alts not going to stay at low lvl for a long time and you could indentify them very soon. Tendou | 2015-10-31 10:01:07 |
... You're right that I don't play much these days. I do have a couple alts, but I don't use them either. I'm not sure what that has to do with this thread though.
In general, if I post an opinion, it's going to be because I believe that it is right. I don't post things I don't believe. So if that means you think I present myself as if I'm always right, I don't know what to tell you. I've been wrong plenty of times and will be wrong again.
Most of the time I'm right, though.
P.S. If I may be honest I find this a strange criticism coming from you.
My other problem with not playing and having alts though besides that it is hypocritical, i can't start a discussion you in the lobby or anywhere else, beacuse i don't know your alts and you are not up with main account, so there is no direct solution and discussion, like i can do with Mike. Like last time i wrote him the fact that you don't need extra copies of the game and use alts really made me feel like he slapped his forehand in surprise :DDDD.
Modified by Tendou on 2015-10-31 10:01:31 HeadphonesGirl | 2015-10-31 14:25:49 |
... You are way more intelligent than just kill discussions with evading the problems i am posing. I know you were here way before i started and it is a recent trend that you just jump in the middle of discussions, lit the fire(make things worse for both parties in conflict) and then avoid responsiblity because you stayed neutral, so you can't be convicted of spreading falsehood, because you never said anything in the first place.
I'm sorry, but I have a hard time seeing how I have "killed" any discussion in this thread. Me being neutral, as you call it, is not a recent trend. Academically I studied philosophy and professionally I worked many years in customer service; being as objective as possible, and as diplomatic as possible, are basically instinctive behavior to me at this point in my life. Your problem with me is the same one FinalSlayer used to hate so much: I refused to believe any of his theories about the game because they couldn't be objectively proven, even though he held them as indisputable from his own observations. Pointing out the flaws in assuming truth from your own subjective experience is kind of my thing. I believe a recent example of what you're talking about is the thread wherein some people thought Plynx was insulting his tournament opponent when he said that he played a move to make an interesting game. My "staying neutral" in that situation was not because I was trying to avoid responsibility for what I said but because I was able to see the situation from both points of view. That is something I strive for and personally consider to be a virtue. My objective was to diffuse something that could have turned into another stupid flame war for no reason. That is why I said, "So I think we should not have an argument about this." The comment was popular, you may have noticed. Sorry if you don't like it, but allow my to express by non-neutrality on that by saying I don't give much of a shit and will continue to speak my mind as I have. But if you ever think something I say is false, you can most definitely bring that up and have a nice long argument with me about it if you want to "convict" me.
Modified by HeadphonesGirl on 2015-10-31 14:27:43 HeadphonesGirl | 2015-10-31 14:30:48 |
... My other problem with not playing and having alts though besides that it is hypocritical, i can't start a discussion you in the lobby or anywhere else, beacuse i don't know your alts and you are not up with main account, so there is no direct solution and discussion, like i can do with Mike. Like last time i wrote him the fact that you don't need extra copies of the game and use alts really made me feel like he slapped his forehand in surprise :DDDD.
If you want to have a discussion with me outside the forums, I can always give you my email.
Tendou | 2015-10-31 14:51:54 |
... I'm sorry, but I have a hard time seeing how I have "killed" any discussion in this thread. Me being neutral, as you call it, is not a recent trend. Academically I studied philosophy and professionally I worked many years in customer service; being as objective as possible, and as diplomatic as possible, are basically instinctive behavior to me at this point in my life. Your problem with me is the same one FinalSlayer used to hate so much: I refused to believe any of his theories about the game because they couldn't be objectively proven, even though he held them as indisputable from his own observations. Pointing out the flaws in assuming truth from your own subjective experience is kind of my thing.
I believe a recent example of what you're talking about is the thread wherein some people thought Plynx was insulting his tournament opponent when he said that he played a move to make an interesting game. My "staying neutral" in that situation was not because I was trying to avoid responsibility for what I said but because I was able to see the situation from both points of view. That is something I strive for and personally consider to be a virtue. My objective was to diffuse something that could have turned into another stupid flame war for no reason. That is why I said, "So I think we should not have an argument about this." The comment was popular, you may have noticed.
Sorry if you don't like it, but allow my to express by non-neutrality on that by saying I don't give much of a shit and will continue to speak my mind as I have. But if you ever think something I say is false, you can most definitely bring that up and have a nice long argument with me about it if you want to "convict" me.
If i would not have continued the discussion, people could get the impression reading your post and getting attention for it that i am expressing my bias when i am defending new players, that is what i am referring to when i am talking about "killing" or "ending" a discussion. I find your evaluation of situations perfectly rational and i also regard empathy as a virtue, but most of the times i think you can't stay neutral in any sense. That doesn't mean i would like to provoke you into conclusions you don't agree with ever. Rather i just need your thoughts about the question of alts, and i am still looking for a response on that topic. I posed questions as well to which you can react. Also if you are having a background in philosophy you can surely recognise that you are conflicting neutral position with being/staying objective. Knowing that, the question is how many times do you find yourselves in situations where neutrality is plausible? Most of the time you have to be for example at two places at the same time which is not an option and no one would honestly think that it is plausible for anyone to do so. So when i say that you are not giving your honest thoughts, what i mean by that is sometimes you are not giving progress to the conversation, just seemingly fast jugdments and impressions of your own which may appeal to popularity consciously or unconsciously. Either way i am still waiting for your refutations about the problems of alts. In the case of your conversations with FinalSlayer, you are clearly expressing that you didn't agree with him on the theories that he advocated, but do you also reject the existing problem of alt usage?
Tendou | 2015-10-31 15:05:41 |
... I feel differently. I've gained several levels in the last month after some discussion with Plynx. The things he was saying seemed unintuitive to me at the time, but I was able to catch bits and glimmers of the wisdom - and after some struggle working them into my game, and then after giving up on it, I found that I had integrated parts of his game into my own. It's almost like religion - sometimes it is way above you, but even if you barely understand it, even if it seems like it doesn't apply to you... the wisdom sets in over time as long as you try, and eventually your mind can fully open to it.
One more thing - Spectro does not use ELO (if it did, high-level players would lose truly enormous amounts of experience when defeated by low-level players).
I guess i am not surprised that as a believer you used religion as an example for transcendent qualities, but without going off topic on this, or maybe opening an off topic discussion, we perfectly know how religions came about, what is their purpose, what knowledge they are having to offer and what is their validity today. You can't find anything other than the reflection of thinking and desires of people of meat and blood of whom wrote the holy texts of all religions. In knowledge of those things you wil not find anything appealing in that if you are not having a conservative mind set, trying to refer to fix notions of value, when the only truth you could ever get out of life is the ongoing and irresistable change that is going on all around us. So i am interested in what you find "above us" related to religion. And NO, projecting our own values into the unknown and coming up with unreasonable hypotheses about it is not a good argument in case it appears to anyone.
Modified by Tendou on 2015-10-31 15:06:04 HeadphonesGirl | 2015-10-31 15:38:04 |
... If i would not have continued the discussion, people could get the impression reading your post and getting attention for it that i am expressing my bias when i am defending new players, that is what i am referring to when i am talking about "killing" or "ending" a discussion. I find your evaluation of situations perfectly rational and i also regard empathy as a virtue, but most of the times i think you can't stay neutral in any sense. That doesn't mean i would like to provoke you into conclusions you don't agree with ever. Rather i just need your thoughts about the question of alts, and i am still looking for a response on that topic. I posed questions as well to which you can react. Also if you are having a background in philosophy you can surely recognise that you are conflicting neutral position with being/staying objective. Knowing that, the question is how many times do you find yourselves in situations where neutrality is plausible? Most of the time you have to be for example at two places at the same time which is not an option and no one would honestly think that it is plausible for anyone to do so. So when i say that you are not giving your honest thoughts, what i mean by that is sometimes you are not giving progress to the conversation, just seemingly fast jugdments and impressions of your own which may appeal to popularity consciously or unconsciously. Either way i am still waiting for your refutations about the problems of alts. In the case of your conversations with FinalSlayer, you are clearly expressing that you didn't agree with him on the theories that he advocated, but do you also reject the existing problem of alt usage?
Well I think part of the confusion here is that I don't agree with the term "neutral" to describe my stance in the first place, hence I put it in quote marks in my last post. So when you say being neutral and being objective are not the same thing, I agree, and that is sort of my point. Where you say I am being neutral I say I am being objective. I can see how it might look like I'm just being neutral, though, because very often, I think there is not enough information to have a definite opinion one way or another on a topic. In this case, I haven't taken a stance either way as to whether alts are good or fair because I am largely indifferent to the issue. I see why some people don't want to play against them. I don't really understand the motivation of those people (i.e. "get an arbitrary number next to my name higher") but if that's what they care about, I won't say they are wrong. I would disagree with the idea that alts should be banned, but no one has suggested that in this thread, so there was no reason to take that stance. I did take the stance that speculating about them is fine. I don't know what else there is to discuss. This is not an issue I feel strongly about. I came into this thread because there was an issue I feel strongly about, and that is whether or not people should be allowed to discuss this topic in the first place. I think I made my opinion on that clear. But if you want me to answer your questions: Do you really think that you never had an experience when you were lower
level that some player using alt beat the last breath out of you while
you are looking for challange against players whom you can learn from?When I was low level (and now, if I ever actually play) I always sought out players who were as much of a challenge as possible. If someone consistently beat me over and over again, I kept challenging them for as long as they would continue to play me, because I wanted to figure out what they were doing that was so much more effective than what I was doing. In my opinion this helped me get much better at the game. I don't agree with Jeronimo that this approach is unhelpful because of my own experience. However that's just my experience. Maybe there are other reasons I got good and I'm wrong. Who knows? Do you think it is even near fair for a level 1 player and a 40+ player
with a new alt play, and then get the same reward for their victory?Why wouldn't it be? The alt is low level, and the reward for winning is supposed to be your level getting higher. Wave already pointed this out. It's a meaningless question. If you care about your level getting higher, starting over is the opposite of helpful to that goal. If you don't want to play against a high level player using an alt, you can just look and see if they have an abnormally high win rate and not play against them if they do. The ELO system is based on the idea that there is only one player behind
every account so that the player's current level always reflect the
level of that participant , but of course it is at least partly can be
undermined by using alt accounts, so i hope you can understand that and
confirm such behaviour distorts the XP distribution this way.I think your premise is flawed. If the ELO system were based on the premise that every player only has one account, then alts would simply be disallowed. The ability to make them is built into the game. So I don't see how anything can be undermined by their existence. The only thing that would undermine the system would be methods of bypassing the system of diminished returns that makes it harder and harder to level up the higher you get. Alts don't impact this for the reasons already stated above. Also it is obviously a coward behaviour to pump up an account and than
leave it there so you can hold a place at the first page for another
year, playing only tournaments where you can only get more xp, and for
that you are practicing with alts without the fear of risking your
status. Actually I agree that the ability to gain XP and never lose it by participating in tournaments is a design flaw. I think tournaments should ideally have a separate ranking system. However I think calling people cowards if they only play in tournaments is jumping to conclusions and not being very fair. There are other reasons only to play in tournaments. The highest leveled players often have a hard time finding good competition just hanging out in the lobby and tournaments are a solution to that. Tournaments are very fun and social compared to the main lobby at most times. There is more sense of accomplishment in placing well in a tournament than just getting your rank higher in the lobby, too, at least in my opinion. Similarly I think it is unfair to say that using alts is cowardly because it "protects" your rank. In general, if someone gets to a certain level, the system allows them to at least maintain that level. It's getting higher that is tough. When was the last time you saw a high ranked player lose more than a few levels? In general, I find most players hover somewhere within 3 or 4 levels of a given point, higher or lower, until they break through to some new level of play and then start to advance to a new plateau. Playing with an alt has a number of virtues. Sometimes it is fun to do a mono class account and see how well you can perform that way. Sometimes it is an interesting challenge to see how good of a win rate you can maintain starting out like that. Sometimes it's just fun -- remember when WhoAmI won a big tournament and no one knew who it was? I thought the mystery was compelling. (And keep in mind this victory meant the person's main account missed out on the XP and glory!) Similarly the mystery of Beehive is fun to speculate about -- was Beehive an alt or wasn't she? We'll probably never know! It's like bigfoot. Fun to speculate about, but you don't need to take it too seriously. Those are my honest thoughts, at any rate.
srbhkshk | 2015-10-31 16:36:32 |
Do you really think that you never had an experience when you were lower level that some player using alt beat the last breath out of you while you are looking for challange against players whom you can learn from? When I was low level (and now, if I ever actually play) I always sought out players who were as much of a challenge as possible. If someone consistently beat me over and over again, I kept challenging them for as long as they would continue to play me, because I wanted to figure out what they were doing that was so much more effective than what I was doing. In my opinion this helped me get much better at the game. I don't agree with Jeronimo that this approach is unhelpful because of my own experience. However that's just my experience. Maybe there are other reasons I got good and I'm wrong. Who knows?
Do you think it is even near fair for a level 1 player and a 40+ player with a new alt play, and then get the same reward for their victory?
Why wouldn't it be? The alt is low level, and the reward for winning is supposed to be your level getting higher. Wave already pointed this out. It's a meaningless question. If you care about your level getting higher, starting over is the opposite of helpful to that goal. If you don't want to play against a high level player using an alt, you can just look and see if they have an abnormally high win rate and not play against them if they do.
The ELO system is based on the idea that there is only one player behind every account so that the player's current level always reflect the level of that participant , but of course it is at least partly can be undermined by using alt accounts, so i hope you can understand that and confirm such behaviour distorts the XP distribution this way.
I think your premise is flawed. If the ELO system were based on the premise that every player only has one account, then alts would simply be disallowed. The ability to make them is built into the game. So I don't see how anything can be undermined by their existence. The only thing that would undermine the system would be methods of bypassing the system of diminished returns that makes it harder and harder to level up the higher you get. Alts don't impact this for the reasons already stated above. .
Please don't consider this as a personal attack, but I must say your arguments comes across as a "I'm level 30", "I'm a monk", "I don't care about winning", "If something is not a problem for me it's not a problem for anyone" kind of stance, If i come to the lobby for the first time and get crushed by the alt of a level 40 guy 5 times in a row I wouldn't be thinking about "Oh, at least I got to learn something.", I would be thinking on the lines of , "OK, I'm shit at this game, I'm not playing it again." You and wave are constantly arguing about how the alt guy doesn't really gain anything while ignoring the fact that the genuine player against him loses more XP and motivation than he should for no fault of his, not everyone plays just for playing.
Also, It seems ridiculous to me to attack Tendou's claim of this being an ELO system just because of some trivial stuff, of course its not an exact ELO replica, but the essence of the system is very much ELO and alts and tournaments definitely do distort it.
Personally I don't think banning alts is feasible, this is after all a game and it makes no sense to remove a functionality that many people obviously like, what I can suggest that each key should have one main account linked to it, and all other accounts using the same key be marked as alts, alts should not be allowed to propose matches against main accounts, whereas main accounts should be free to propose duels to alts if they wish. Modified by srbhkshk on 2015-10-31 16:39:39 Tendou | 2015-10-31 16:43:02 |
Thank you very much for your reply, this is what I what i was looking forward to. But as you could guess :D, I disagree. I really appreciate feedback, so further from this point i won't ask for reply if you don't want to. Though let me return to the questions: 1, In defense of the newer players i would add, that everyone has different techniques of getting better, and using an alt may be one of that but the point here is that i am almost certain that for example you can't advance further than level 20 or something if you didn't read robvalue's draw distribuiton guide, or Plynx's guide about the way the program is giving you cards, because your information game won't be solid enough to predict the moves of the opponent and such, most of the time it is a collection of information that many players stuck at around level 20( like MissRandom) never even heard of, just maybe speculated about. So i think Spectro is also special in the sense that you can only advance in level for a limited amount just by playing against higher level players. And the example i was referring to was that it is healthy to play against someone whom is a good challenge, but not someone whom is way above you, and you can't find sense in his moves even watching for like 20 times after the match without someone describing it to you. 2, I would totally agree with you coming from the view of player using alt, but i was arguing from the standpoint of new/low level player trying to advance the way you outlined your playing methods. Also they may not even look at winrates either, and when the alt is still low in number of games they may not recognise if it is a good ride for someone new or an experienced player is behind it. What i forgot to add here is that you are not having access to play against players above 20 if you are below 10, so you are not allowed to pick the biggest challenge you choose in the lobby, and i think it is a good system which separates high level players using even original accounts to abuse people whom are still just tryng to grasp how to get ahead, and somebody who is using an alt account can still abuse new players because they are not separated from each other. 3, I don't mean to get stuck with the ELO system thing, but as you know it is used in famous sports where you can only have one player behind a ranking "account" so to speak, and in that way it is more fair than if you are having like 30 alts, each with different rating, contributing to the chaos of determining that player's real potential. Also, i don't think creating alts is build into to conform with the xp system at all, it is just a feature of the game whcih makes it harder for players in the lobby to recognise whom is behind whom in this sense. 4, Yeah, i agree i am not trying to put judgment on people whom are doing what described as cowardish, i am just pointing out the fact, that after reaching a high level, you can only get even higher if you are playing tourneys, but you agreed it needs change so this point is fine. I just can't see how it is exciting to speculate about alts, because all the times i read about such stuff it is degrading to know that people like Zhao and King can just make a new account every week and pull it up to the first page every time, creating a situation where they can play with the alts if their main name falls in ranking and vice versa, exploiting their advantage that they can play much more time than many of us. As Grim regards players using mono class as less of a player, i look at alts the same way when it comes to taking the courage to gain xp if it is going well and also taking the xp losses when you can't focus that much. Tendou | 2015-10-31 16:46:36 |
... Please don't consider this as a personal attack, but I must say your arguments comes across as a "I'm level 30", "I'm a monk", "I don't care about winning", "If something is not a problem for me it's not a problem for anyone" kind of stance, If i come to the lobby for the first time and get crushed by the alt of a level 40 guy 5 times in a row I wouldn't be thinking about "Oh, at least I got to learn something.", I would be thinking on the lines of , "OK, I'm shit at this game, I'm not playing it again." You and wave are constantly arguing about how the alt guy doesn't really gain anything while ignoring the fact that the genuine player against him loses more XP and motivation than he should for no fault of his, not everyone plays just for playing.
Also, It seems ridiculous to me to attack Tendou's claim of this being an ELO system just because of some trivial stuff, of course its not an exact ELO replica, but the essence of the system is very much ELO and alts and tournaments definitely do distort it.
Personally I don't think banning alts is feasible, this is after all a game and it makes no sense to remove a functionality that many people obviously like, what I can suggest that each key should have one main account linked to it, and all other accounts using the same key be marked as alts, alts should not be allowed to propose matches against main accounts, whereas main accounts should be free to propose duels to alts if they wish.
Yeah, the first one is my main point, many people can lose motivation for playing this game if they experience such continuous loss, Btw perfect suggestion for the alt issue i would say.
HeadphonesGirl | 2015-10-31 17:00:12 |
... Please don't consider this as a personal attack, but I must say your arguments comes across as a "I'm level 30", "I'm a monk", "I don't care about winning", "If something is not a problem for me it's not a problem for anyone" kind of stance, If i come to the lobby for the first time and get crushed by the alt of a level 40 guy 5 times in a row I wouldn't be thinking about "Oh, at least I got to learn something.", I would be thinking on the lines of , "OK, I'm shit at this game, I'm not playing it again." You and wave are constantly arguing about how the alt guy doesn't really gain anything while ignoring the fact that the genuine player against him loses more XP and motivation than he should for no fault of his, not everyone plays just for playing.
Also, It seems ridiculous to me to attack Tendou's claim of this being an ELO system just because of some trivial stuff, of course its not an exact ELO replica, but the essence of the system is very much ELO and alts and tournaments definitely do distort it.
Personally I don't think banning alts is feasible, this is after all a game and it makes no sense to remove a functionality that many people obviously like, what I can suggest that each key should have one main account linked to it, and all other accounts using the same key be marked as alts, alts should not be allowed to propose matches against main accounts, whereas main accounts should be free to propose duels to alts if they wish.
Don't worry, I don't take personal offense to disagreement. So, when it comes to winning, of course I care. But my point is that winning long term is a better concern than short term. If I didn't care about winning at all, I wouldn't be any more interested in playing a better player than an equal one. Back in the early days of one of my favorite games, Super Smash Bros Melee, there was a player called Korean DJ who was not very good, but who wanted to be the best. So he started challenging all the best players, people who were infinitely better than him, to money matches. He would bet them 5 bucks a match or so. This meant they would take the match seriously and try their hardest. He got beaten badly and lost a ton of money. But he also got to play against the best constantly, while everyone else who was at his level was just playing each other. He got better extremely fast and is now looked back on as one of the best players in the game's history. That is the approach I am advocating. (I also regard cases of players like this as counterexamples to
Jeronimo's argument that playing against top players when you are a low
level is not beneficial, even though it's a different game.) However, as I just said above, I recognize other people care about losing points so much that they don't want to do it even as a sacrifice to learn something, and that's fine. This is why I said I don't have a strong opinion on this topic in the first place. I only expressed these thoughts because Tendou specifically asked me to. So no, I am not saying that if something isn't a problem for me it isn't for anyone. It quite obviously is a problem for some other people. My opinion is that it shouldn't be -- but that's just my stupid opinion. So normally I wouldn't even bother to express it. Modified by HeadphonesGirl on 2015-10-31 17:04:47 Tendou | 2015-10-31 17:19:24 |
I understand your view on advancement, and i would go as far as to say that it works in every type of competition based games(sports) as long as there are no background information like(draw rules) which you don't get presented to, and if the starting positions are always the same so you can improve just by playing a lot and analyzing your game and others'. But in case of Spectro i find it amazing that this part is also very different. An international chess master player in his worst condition can beat you and me without taking a look at the boards we are playing on, just giving and getting instructions about the moves, because he/she could have sufficient plans even for the start way before we may try to find out what he is doing and able to use the very same strategies they use to beat anyone else, so i think that is why there could develop in many games where there is a fixed starting point a high degree of inequality of knowledge among players. But in Spectro it is much harder to hold solid performance in the long run becuase all the matches are different from the very start. So i agree with your concept, i just don't think it works as much in Spectro.
HeadphonesGirl | 2015-10-31 17:25:09 |
Well, regarding the draw rules, that's always been a topic of discussion since the game was new. It has often been suggested that those rules should be published in the game's help file, and for whatever reason the devs don't seem to want to do it, but I agree that this is info you have to have in order to do well at the game. It is fairly easy to find on the forums but you have to actually go on them which I'm sure many players don't.
But, I don't really see how that relates to alts. A player with that knowledge will have an advantage over one without no matter what level they are at. It's a disadvantage for all new players who don't read the forums, whether they end up playing against an alt or not.
srbhkshk | 2015-10-31 17:36:42 |
... That is the approach I am advocating. (I also regard cases of players like this as counterexamples to Jeronimo's argument that playing against top players when you are a low level is not beneficial, even though it's a different game.)
However, as I just said above, I recognize other people care about losing points so much that they don't want to do it even as a sacrifice to learn something, and that's fine. This is why I said I don't have a strong opinion on this topic in the first place. I only expressed these thoughts because Tendou specifically asked me to. So no, I am not saying that if something isn't a problem for me it isn't for anyone. It quite obviously is a problem for some other people.
My opinion is that it shouldn't be -- but that's just my stupid opinion. So normally I wouldn't even bother to express it.
Its totally fine that you prefer that approach, that is not the problem, I'm really talking about a less general thing here.
Specifically (and I'm ignoring the people who will never play more than 5 games because of this here) , let me consider "I recognize other people care about losing points so much that they don't want to do it even as a sacrifice to learn something, and that's fine."
This is not the issue being discussed, from what I've seen a huge majority of the community is perfectly ok challenging and losing to a superior player, the problem with alts however is :
1. The amount of points you lose is disproportionate and unfair , you say you are OK with losing points in the current system if you get to learn, would it still be OK if you lost 3000 points for every loss? or 10000? 1 million? 150? What is the cut-off here? When I lose to a alt the XP deduction I get is not / may not be proportionate to my learning, I will pay 100 bucks to learn playing guitar, I don't think I will pay a million however good the learning is.
2. How do you even know whether the player you played against was actually really good or that he just got lucky or that he just played slightly better or played worse but had a better draw? even If I ignore the XP loss, its pretty hard for me to distinguish between losing to player 1 level above me and losing to one 30 levels above me, with a genuine level indicator I can be sure of such stuff, but with alts not really, taking the case of your own super guy, he made the bets because he was sure he was gonna play worthy people, I don't think he did the same with players his own level, did he?
Overall, basically the point I'm trying to make is that whether alts are unfair is not a matter of opinion , they are unfair for sure, what is a matter of opinion is to whether that much degree of unfairness is acceptable or not , even if that varies among people ... even if the general consensus is that it is acceptable (which at least is for the people who posted here , otherwise they wouldn't probably be playing the game for so long.) , attempts to resolve it should still be made, that can only help. HeadphonesGirl | 2015-10-31 18:02:21 |
Overall, basically the point I'm trying to make is that whether alts are unfair is not a matter of opinion , they are unfair for sure,
Now this I will respond to not because of Tendou's request but because I would say so regardless. I don't think you can legitimately claim this. A thing can only be fair or unfair in relation to a previously agreed upon standard. So let's take an example. Say two players are against each other in a card game which involves some skill and some chance. Player 2 has played better through the whole game, and Player 1 is about to lose unless something drastic happens, so he makes a completely risky play that has almost no chance of winning -- but, by a stroke of incredible luck, Player 2 loses to this move. Debates about whether this is "fair" rage constantly in online games that involve any amount of luck. Because the rules of the game make this move and the win legitimate, it is fair from that perspective. But others argue that the game itself is unfair because of this and that Player 2 was robbed. Now add a new domension. Say Player 1 is a selfish billionaire, and Player 2 is good-hearted but poor and starving, and the outcome of the game determined who would win a thousand dollars. Some would look at the result from this perspective and say it is not fair -- life is not fair, perhaps -- why do bad things happen to good people, etc? The fairness changes depending on the perspective you adopt. In this case, I believe that I do understand the perspective you're looking at it from, so I get why you feel the way you do. If a level 10 player loses to another level 10 player he loses much more XP than if he'd lost to a level 40 player. But if the other level 10 player actually has another account he has reached level 40 with, it's "unfair" for him to take away so many XP from the lower level player because his current level doesn't represent his actual skill. So, sure, if that's the perspective you look at it from, I can see how it's unfair. As far as I can see, the only reason to look at it from that perspective is if you think those points that were lost have a great deal of value. Which I don't. In fact I think they have almost no value. From my point of view it's not really unfair because the points lost in this case are inconsequential. So now we are in a situation where we can't say it's objectively fair or unfair. We haven't agreed on the standard with which to judge fairness in the first place. You are right this evaluation might change with a change in the number of points. I would probably look at fairness differently if you could lose 3000 points in this situation, but that would be the least of our worries, because the whole ranking system would be broken and unusable if that were the case. So I see it as being irrelevant. I'm talking about the game as it is.
Modified by HeadphonesGirl on 2015-10-31 18:04:59 Tendou | 2015-10-31 18:45:53 |
... Now this I will respond to not because of Tendou's request but because I would say so regardless. I don't think you can legitimately claim this.
A thing can only be fair or unfair in relation to a previously agreed upon standard. So let's take an example. Say two players are against each other in a card game which involves some skill and some chance. Player 2 has played better through the whole game, and Player 1 is about to lose unless something drastic happens, so he makes a completely risky play that has almost no chance of winning -- but, by a stroke of incredible luck, Player 2 loses to this move.
Debates about whether this is "fair" rage constantly in online games that involve any amount of luck. Because the rules of the game make this move and the win legitimate, it is fair from that perspective. But others argue that the game itself is unfair because of this and that Player 2 was robbed.
Now add a new domension. Say Player 1 is a selfish billionaire, and Player 2 is good-hearted but poor and starving, and the outcome of the game determined who would win a thousand dollars. Some would look at the result from this perspective and say it is not fair -- life is not fair, perhaps -- why do bad things happen to good people, etc?
The fairness changes depending on the perspective you adopt.
In this case, I believe that I do understand the perspective you're looking at it from, so I get why you feel the way you do. If a level 10 player loses to another level 10 player he loses much more XP than if he'd lost to a level 40 player. But if the other level 10 player actually has another account he has reached level 40 with, it's "unfair" for him to take away so many XP from the lower level player because his current level doesn't represent his actual skill.
So, sure, if that's the perspective you look at it from, I can see how it's unfair. As far as I can see, the only reason to look at it from that perspective is if you think those points that were lost have a great deal of value. Which I don't. In fact I think they have almost no value. From my point of view it's not really unfair because the points lost in this case are inconsequential. So now we are in a situation where we can't say it's objectively fair or unfair. We haven't agreed on the standard with which to judge fairness in the first place.
You are right this evaluation might change with a change in the number of points. I would probably look at fairness differently if you could lose 3000 points in this situation, but that would be the least of our worries, because the whole ranking system would be broken and unusable if that were the case. So I see it as being irrelevant. I'm talking about the game as it is.
I honestly can't see any other way you can judge the example you have given, I would really appreciate if you may give an alternative look at that. I think a good analogy here would be the taxation system. In the case of spectro i would say the minimum requirement of playing anyone(in real life the amount of income you have to earn for having any mobility besides self-preservation) is as we all know is level ten. Now the alt users may deprive freedom from those whom are below level 10 by keeping them in their position. Now i would say the same question is up to this game regarding alts and the taxation in the form of whether it is just to tax the same amount(deprive players of lower levels from xp by the same amount) every person regardless of income(level in game). This game makes the declaration that it is unfair, therefore distortion may arise if you can play(lead a firm) and not pay the costs of it overall( avoid tax paying). I think the example i gave for players whom are having multiple accounts on the first page is good to demonstrate this, if things are not going well for today, the guy may just switch account and use another one. That way they may get ahead in the system which is not representative of skill.
Modified by Tendou on 2015-10-31 18:46:12 Wavelength | 2015-10-31 23:13:24 |
If i say to a player below level 10 that master healer is usually not that good as most of them anticipate, and that they should avoid most of the times using phoenix, becuase both strategies require slow play and mistakes from the opponent, they would find the idea crazy, and fail to put those suggestions into practice because they don't understand the importance of time in this game as we do.
I still disagree - I learned from Plynx the First as well back in maybe 2010, and back then I was like level 6! It's possibly true that most "alts" aren't as generous about helping others as most "single accounts", but it's far from a universal truth - Erickiller and Kealah both have a lot of alts and are very helpful to other players no matter which name they are playing under. Also, It seems ridiculous to me to attack Tendou's claim of this being an ELO system just because of some trivial stuff, of course its not an exact ELO replica, but the essence of the system is very much ELO and alts and tournaments definitely do distort it. I wasn't "attacking" the claim so much as straight-out pointing out the claim wasn't true. The system shares one thing in common with ELO (opponent strength as a factor), but even ELO will slightly distort results when new players join a league or people get rusty. The nice thing about both systems is that over time they compensate for themselves. Here, if you lose 500 more XP than you were supposed to over 50 games against an alt, you will lose a level. But then your XP gains and losses against players of any given skill level are essentially weighted by +1 - so over 500 games (admittedly a lot) you'll recover it. Time heals all wounds. In addition, Cooler specifically decided to give out XP rewards for tournament wins and participation. A perfect "how skilled are you" ELO-type system would not do this. So even if Jeronimo is "gaming" the system by only playing in Tournaments, I don't think it's fair to throw shade at him for it. If you care about having the highest XP, do the same thing and see if you can beat him. If you just want to play the game, just play the game! I guess i am not surprised that as a believer you used religion as an example for transcendent qualities, but without going off topic on this, or maybe opening an off topic discussion, we perfectly know how religions came about, what is their purpose, what knowledge they are having to offer and what is their validity today. You can't find anything other than the reflection of thinking and desires of people of meat and blood of whom wrote the holy texts of all religions.
Yeah, we should take this to private chat sometime to discuss further, but as a quick preview of some of the things I will say: while I think the holy texts of many religions tend to be fantastic guides for expression of your love for God, it is not from organized religion nor from books that I find my conviction. Rather, I see evidence for a God above when looking at everything around us, or even at ourselves. I don't see intelligent design per se but I see intelligence in the design of everything. Evolution (via natural selection) is a great example of a system that, while in conflict with some holy texts taken literally, actually presents evidence to suggest the probability of God or at least some intentional creator. Even when you take things down to the smallest particles we know of - you can say those particles were always there, but why do they create elements? Why do elements come together to create things like water, with all of its properties? This takes "rules" so to speak - science is our way of describing and using these rules, but who wrote them? If the universe "just happened", it is much more likely, in my view, that it would just contain zillions of particles sitting there being particles, without rules for what they create. Instead, we experience a relatively orderly, habitable, merciful universe, and we are lucky enough to be given the gift of being able to ponder it. There's a lot more that I want to say, but like you mentioned, this is not the right place for it. Remind me next time we play. At any rate, whether you believe or you don't, I think the analogy is a really good one! Hearing a great Spectromancer player explain why they are doing what they are doing is much like opening your eyes to a new religious idea - a lot of it will contradict your entire way of thinking. You will only be able to grasp small parts of it and these small parts by themselves will be worse than useless - they will be counter-productive to your game. But you should still make that noble struggle and try to integrate them into your mind, because as you do, you will be erasing biases that you built your old strategies on. In their place you can build new foundations, and once they are fully integrated into the way that you think, you can build much stronger strategies on top of them - strategies that were previously out of your grasp.
Modified by Wavelength on 2015-10-31 23:14:18 GrimJ0ker | 2015-11-01 11:23:48 |
Ok, now I am very close to locking and hiding it.
mamoulian | 2015-11-01 13:05:10 |
HeadphonesGirl | 2015-11-01 14:42:24 |
Oooh maybe I should mysteriously drop out and be replaced with "EarbudsLady" ....
StephanieF | 2015-11-13 05:20:57 |
I guess i am not surprised that as a believer you used religion as an example for transcendent qualities, but without going off topic on this, or maybe opening an off topic discussion, we perfectly know how religions came about, what is their purpose, what knowledge they are having to offer and what is their validity today. You can't find anything other than the reflection of thinking and desires of people of meat and blood of whom wrote the holy texts of all religions. In knowledge of those things you wil not find anything appealing in that if you are not having a conservative mind set, trying to refer to fix notions of value, when the only truth you could ever get out of life is the ongoing and irresistable change that is going on all around us. So i am interested in what you find "above us" related to religion. And NO, projecting our own values into the unknown and coming up with unreasonable hypotheses about it is not a good argument in case it appears to anyone.
Religion is the pest when you look at Islam...for example it is calculated that in 50 years The EU is a muslimic state...they simply overrun all and everything, they reproduce faster than rats lol, and we have a strong decrease, each generation halfed
in average, they have declared totally Jihad to nearly all especially lesbos and christians in their own countries and outside all have to be conquered by marrying the woman or rape them for example... is way to blind for reality (good pointTendou!) when you look at Christians of all forms...the Vatican is a satanic child-raping cult and those who know this believe in the coming of Jesus LOL, since they are in a condition of apathic hope...
does not lead to anything really when you look at Judaism, New Age, Buddhism and Taoism, they have all lost the esence of spirituality, they just proceed stupid rituals or look for dark power now LOL!
is self-deleting ridiculous ignorance for true masochists when you look at Science xD...(A product of Demonismn, they understand how to deceive and mislead...)
is devastating for the whole world when you look at the most powerful Religion today namely Satanism/Demonism...all the stars, politicians and more are deeply in it, you see it on their secret (actually totally open!) handsigns they use...
So yes Tendou, actually all the same primitive shit...the world cannot end, since Heaven doesn't want any of them (but you can advance to a normal beautiful Planet...), Earth will stay Hell (There is no other Hell!) as it always was, just totally now, a full demonic Planet! But the Karma runs much faster now, that's the only great point! (Btw nothing of my view is quoted or from other sources, all is my own insight!)
Sorry the topic was so boring now, since Grim is close to locking and hiding his genius of "Catched him" xD...please don't hide with your red reputation to me all of you, people who say the truth deserve a lot red (like the blood of life)...
At any rate, whether you believe or you don't, I think the analogy is a really good one! Hearing a great Spectromancer player explain why they are doing what they are doing is much like opening your eyes to a new religious idea - a lot of it will contradict your entire way of thinking. You will only be able to grasp small parts of it and these small parts by themselves will be worse than useless - they will be counter-productive to your game. But you should still make that noble struggle and try to integrate them into your mind, because as you do, you will be erasing biases that you built your old strategies on. In their place you can build new foundations, and once they are fully integrated into the way that you think, you can build much stronger strategies on top of them - strategies that were previously out of your grasp. Yeah, you have it Wave! And now answer me why God want to see you croak if he is not the Devil?? Either you must believe that as a correct result or think new/further... (Btw, the Demons believe that, but they also know of their immortality...) Modified by StephanieF on 2015-11-13 05:33:02 Wavelength | 2015-11-13 09:43:36 |
Yeah, you have it Wave! And now answer me why God want to see you croak if he is not the Devil?? Either you must believe that as a correct result or think new/further... (Btw, the Demons believe that, but they also know of their immortality...) You are asserting that God does things that do not make sense to us humans, then asking me, a human, to explain things that he does. Obviously, I cannot! But I am grateful to have been able to live, rather than to not live at all.
CyberneticPony | 2015-11-13 13:14:03 |
Stephanie, you're wrong. That's all I might as well say, since you don't listen to other people.
Tendou | 2015-11-13 18:03:08 |
... I still disagree - I learned from Plynx the First as well back in maybe 2010, and back then I was like level 6! It's possibly true that most "alts" aren't as generous about helping others as most "single accounts", but it's far from a universal truth - Erickiller and Kealah both have a lot of alts and are very helpful to other players no matter which name they are playing under.
... I wasn't "attacking" the claim so much as straight-out pointing out the claim wasn't true. The system shares one thing in common with ELO (opponent strength as a factor), but even ELO will slightly distort results when new players join a league or people get rusty. The nice thing about both systems is that over time they compensate for themselves. Here, if you lose 500 more XP than you were supposed to over 50 games against an alt, you will lose a level. But then your XP gains and losses against players of any given skill level are essentially weighted by +1 - so over 500 games (admittedly a lot) you'll recover it. Time heals all wounds.
In addition, Cooler specifically decided to give out XP rewards for tournament wins and participation. A perfect "how skilled are you" ELO-type system would not do this. So even if Jeronimo is "gaming" the system by only playing in Tournaments, I don't think it's fair to throw shade at him for it. If you care about having the highest XP, do the same thing and see if you can beat him. If you just want to play the game, just play the game!
... Yeah, we should take this to private chat sometime to discuss further, but as a quick preview of some of the things I will say: while I think the holy texts of many religions tend to be fantastic guides for expression of your love for God, it is not from organized religion nor from books that I find my conviction. Rather, I see evidence for a God above when looking at everything around us, or even at ourselves. I don't see intelligent design per se but I see intelligence in the design of everything. Evolution (via natural selection) is a great example of a system that, while in conflict with some holy texts taken literally, actually presents evidence to suggest the probability of God or at least some intentional creator. Even when you take things down to the smallest particles we know of - you can say those particles were always there, but why do they create elements? Why do elements come together to create things like water, with all of its properties? This takes "rules" so to speak - science is our way of describing and using these rules, but who wrote them? If the universe "just happened", it is much more likely, in my view, that it would just contain zillions of particles sitting there being particles, without rules for what they create. Instead, we experience a relatively orderly, habitable, merciful universe, and we are lucky enough to be given the gift of being able to ponder it. There's a lot more that I want to say, but like you mentioned, this is not the right place for it. Remind me next time we play.
At any rate, whether you believe or you don't, I think the analogy is a really good one! Hearing a great Spectromancer player explain why they are doing what they are doing is much like opening your eyes to a new religious idea - a lot of it will contradict your entire way of thinking. You will only be able to grasp small parts of it and these small parts by themselves will be worse than useless - they will be counter-productive to your game. But you should still make that noble struggle and try to integrate them into your mind, because as you do, you will be erasing biases that you built your old strategies on. In their place you can build new foundations, and once they are fully integrated into the way that you think, you can build much stronger strategies on top of them - strategies that were previously out of your grasp.
You just make me so much hungry for explanation, i would like to schedule for it :P. Tell when it is possible.
Tendou | 2015-12-14 20:09:29 |
... You just make me so much hungry for explanation, i would like to schedule for it :P. Tell when it is possible.
Can we conclude this discussion sometime? I am ready to go chat/microphone, either in the form of public or private,both good for me. I just don't like going on with this format because i can't immediately refute things at hand :P.
Tendou | 2015-12-14 20:12:52 |
... Now this I will respond to not because of Tendou's request but because I would say so regardless. I don't think you can legitimately claim this.
A thing can only be fair or unfair in relation to a previously agreed upon standard. So let's take an example. Say two players are against each other in a card game which involves some skill and some chance. Player 2 has played better through the whole game, and Player 1 is about to lose unless something drastic happens, so he makes a completely risky play that has almost no chance of winning -- but, by a stroke of incredible luck, Player 2 loses to this move.
Debates about whether this is "fair" rage constantly in online games that involve any amount of luck. Because the rules of the game make this move and the win legitimate, it is fair from that perspective. But others argue that the game itself is unfair because of this and that Player 2 was robbed.
Now add a new domension. Say Player 1 is a selfish billionaire, and Player 2 is good-hearted but poor and starving, and the outcome of the game determined who would win a thousand dollars. Some would look at the result from this perspective and say it is not fair -- life is not fair, perhaps -- why do bad things happen to good people, etc?
The fairness changes depending on the perspective you adopt.
In this case, I believe that I do understand the perspective you're looking at it from, so I get why you feel the way you do. If a level 10 player loses to another level 10 player he loses much more XP than if he'd lost to a level 40 player. But if the other level 10 player actually has another account he has reached level 40 with, it's "unfair" for him to take away so many XP from the lower level player because his current level doesn't represent his actual skill.
So, sure, if that's the perspective you look at it from, I can see how it's unfair. As far as I can see, the only reason to look at it from that perspective is if you think those points that were lost have a great deal of value. Which I don't. In fact I think they have almost no value. From my point of view it's not really unfair because the points lost in this case are inconsequential. So now we are in a situation where we can't say it's objectively fair or unfair. We haven't agreed on the standard with which to judge fairness in the first place.
You are right this evaluation might change with a change in the number of points. I would probably look at fairness differently if you could lose 3000 points in this situation, but that would be the least of our worries, because the whole ranking system would be broken and unusable if that were the case. So I see it as being irrelevant. I'm talking about the game as it is.
I would like to respond to that and having some questions. I would like to catch you online, when can i, and how?
Tendou | 2016-03-22 19:01:38 |
HPG may i ask for a direct contact? I would really like to discuss this topic further and i am pretty sure we can share some insights with each other (at least i am interested in yours). Just send a link for me in e-mail, you can find my e-mail address in my profile if you don't want to share it here. Looking forward the exchange of ideas . SpectroStat | 2016-03-22 19:56:06 |
you can find my e-mail address in my profile false assumpion
Tendou | 2016-03-22 20:19:49 |
... false assumpion
Nope, you just need to come online to find it :P, sorry about that and thanks for pointing that out, it is no secret: [email protected]
HeadphonesGirl | 2016-03-23 04:00:32 |
Sure, you can email me at [email protected]
Modified by HeadphonesGirl on 2016-03-23 04:01:34 |