Pretty disappointed in "top" players

[.Churr.]

I've been using a new account to play. It's a pity...

Guess what I see? Players bragging themselves "Hey, I am a pro pilot"; then they play the entire round in the AH-1Z (gunner and pilot), and kill anyone trying to get the chopper (with the cheap M95) or using the uber cheap "out of bonds" technique:

The pilot flies next to the bounds, but while he is in the bounds, the gunner is out then he dies. Very lame; although I rarely see guys that can do this well.

Some people look at your rank - if you are under like 1st Lieutenant or whatever they will simply label you noob. Pretty stupid IMO.

[=IMO=THJones]

Re: Pretty disappointed in "top" players

myself i look at anyone with the rank above capt with great suspicion, there is no way if the didn't pad and i consider doing one vehicle only and not trying all the kits and being part of a team effort padding legal though it may be.

i hate the look at me i get over 100 points a game, ya right your so l33t tking for the ah and never ground pounding... can you say lame....

[[GU]LIZARD{GEN}]

Re: Pretty disappointed in "top" players

Well I ranked 2,300 in the chopper. I'm only a master sgt. So people can think what they want.

[Red Ghost]

Re: Pretty disappointed in "top" players

Rank = Time spent, not skill

[Strega]

Re: Pretty disappointed in "top" players

Rank = Time spent, not skill

WRONG.

If I can get 60+ points a round and you get 10, I'm gonna Rank up 6x faster than you are. So if we both have 500 hours played, and you have 10k points, I'm going to have 60k points. That's skill, not Time Spent.

[Sloi sauce]

Re: Pretty disappointed in "top" players

I've been using a new account to play. It's a pity...

Guess what I see? Players bragging themselves "Hey, I am a pro pilot"; then they play the entire round in the AH-1Z (gunner and pilot), and kill anyone trying to get the chopper (with the cheap M95) or using the uber cheap "out of bonds" technique:

The pilot flies next to the bounds, but while he is in the bounds, the gunner is out then he dies. Very lame; although I rarely see guys that can do this well.

Some people look at your rank - if you are under like 1st Lieutenant or whatever they will simply label you noob. Pretty stupid IMO.

"Top" players are only in such positions because they've played and amassed kills for prolonged periods of time: I've always said that they should make more appropriate filters and leaderboard options so that we can better determine who the good players are. I'm sorry you had to deal with some of them...

[[FM]Master_Chief]

Re: Pretty disappointed in "top" players

WRONG.

If I can get 60+ points a round and you get 10, I'm gonna Rank up 6x faster than you are. So if we both have 500 hours played, and you have 10k points, I'm going to have 60k points. That's skill, not Time Spent.

But if we both can get 60+ points per round and I only played half the time you have or I can get 80+ points per round and still have half your time in game then his statemnt is RIGHT.

[imported_Immunity]

Re: Pretty disappointed in "top" players

Rank = Time spent, not skill

To a degree, you're right. I've seen plenty of Privates, Seargents, Master Seargents outgun Lieutenants, Captains, and Colonels. The inverse is often just as true though.

In the strictest sense however, since E.A. based the system off of raw score rather than ratio, yea, it does equal time spent.
In practice, it often doesn't.

Skills are honed through experience, and experience is gained through time spent playing. The more time you spend, the better you get.

Thus, rather than judging a player solely on his rank, judge him on his rank in relation to his performance.

Ex. Although [GU]Lizard may only be a Master Seargant ranked 2300 in the helo you can rest assured he can fly on par if not far better than a particular Captain ranked 22 in the helo

I look at rank as more of a way to judge the progress rather than sheer skill. Give everyone a chance to prove themselves rather than thinking they are inferior simply due to rank.

[Rambo-82(NOR)]

Re: Pretty disappointed in "top" players

i think many(not all) with scores above 200 000 points are possible cheaters/hackers/or stat padders ..say what u will

[Red Ghost]

Re: Pretty disappointed in "top" players

WRONG.

If I can get 60+ points a round and you get 10, I'm gonna Rank up 6x faster than you are. So if we both have 500 hours played, and you have 10k points, I'm going to have 60k points. That's skill, not Time Spent.

Ok, fine, but rank still does not equal skill. Nothing skill based is calculated, only hw many points you have. The more points you have generally the more time you have put into the game, but in a FEW cases this might equate to some semblance of competence. Most of the time however it just indicates that they have spent their game time using the aircraft, rather than doing the hard slog with the rest of the team.

[Zefram]

Re: Pretty disappointed in "top" players

time doesn't equal skill... but I'm not squading up with privates... time equals experience.. and I'd rather see higher ranked players on my team that noobs.

[imported_Apostle]

Re: Pretty disappointed in "top" players

Depends how you want to play the game.

I know, if I want to earn lots of points I should go get in a jet or helicopter, or on a city map be a medic.

I don't play like that though, I enjoy doing it my way, and having fun. I won't lose sleep at night if someone calls me a noob

[Red Ghost]

Re: Pretty disappointed in "top" players

To a degree, you're right. I've seen plenty of Privates, Seargents, Master Seargents outgun Lieutenants, Captains, and Colonels. The inverse is often just as true though.

In the strictest sense however, since E.A. based the system off of raw score rather than ratio, yea, it does equal time spent.
In practice, it often doesn't.

Skills are honed through experience, and experience is gained through time spent playing. The more time you spend, the better you get.

Thus, rather than judging a player solely on his rank, judge him on his rank in relation to his performance.

Ex. Although [GU]Lizard may only be a Master Seargant ranked 2300 in the helo you can rest assured he can fly on par if not far better than a particular Captain ranked 22 in the helo

I look at rank as more of a way to judge the progress rather than sheer skill. Give everyone a chance to prove themselves rather than thinking they are inferior simply due to rank.

I agree with that, but again there is no actual skill calculations in ranks. Who is to say that [GU]Lizard did not just play maps like mashatur and shoot up the ground troops, or who is to say that he didn't spawn rape (get back in your pram, its an example ).

I agree that everyone should should not take any rank for granted, for all you know anyway a private could be the alternate account for a general :)

[BloodFlood]

Re: Pretty disappointed in "top" players

Most confirmed cheaters i see have high ranks, so whats that say about your "skill" and "time spent" theories?

[lil donnie]

Re: Pretty disappointed in "top" players

Look ma! Ya raised an idiot!