Yes but no matter how good you are, it will never show as you will lose vs. others anyway no matter what, being good only makes you lose a little bit less. You don't have to be good to get rr11, you just need a lot of time. If you're good + have a lot of time you can get rr11 faster.Driwen said:
http://www.morchaoron.com/~xeanor/halowinners.jpgSaggy said:
Saggy said:
And how do we know that "the best" player is joining that event at all? All we find out is the best players of that event, that's it. Sure, cash is good enough motive to join up for many peeps but not for everyone.Morchaoron said:
Mythic could organise such an event if they wanted toMorchaoron said:
ehhhh, isnt this exactly the same with sports?Saggy said:
Saggy said:Mythic could organise such an event if they wanted to
Saggy said:Yeah, but there is still going to be the best daoc-player
No there isn't.Saggy said:Yeah, but there is still going to be the best daoc-player
It costs €10 to enter the qualifications and they pay your flight/hotel/etc.Saggy said:One can be too shy, too fat, too lazy or rich enough not to bother just to give few reasons not to join
Yes, when skill is involved there is always someone who is better than others. You can measure daoc-players "skills" by looking at their RPs or FPS-players "skills" by looking at their frags-count - neither of them shows the whole truth.Morchaoron said:Logically there is a best for everything, but if you cant measure it such information is useless
Yes, they have no right to say so but it still doesn't change the fact they are better. I wouldn't brag and claim to be the best Halo-player if I win event mentioned above, might even say that the worse player won thanks to good luck if that was the case.Xeanor said:
Oh, playing a 15-minute UT2004 match will show the truth. The best wins.Saggy said:
Your definition of "The Best" is wrong, there could always be someone better in your case, maybe someone is better than a person who won a world championshop 10 times, maybe someone is, but there could also be someone better than that person, your definition has a false "best" person. But if someone wins a championship with extremely good players, he's the best in my books. (in that year) If he wins multiple championships, he's the best ever, in my books.
Voting doesn't give a valid winner, and recording doesn't say it all. It's about winning. I suppose you play more nervously when youre at a world tournament and 1000 people are watching how you do it, rather than when youre at home or something and just do it for fun or training. The best = if you can do it perfect, and keep doing it perfect when there's pressure on you. (If you lose this, you miss out on the 1st title, $**** cash, etc.)Daoc is more of an team-based game which makes finding the best player even harder - suppose the only way to do it is watching movies and voting, that would give just as valid winner as 1vs1 FPS-game events. Do we know the best player is recording at all? No, we dont
who says they are better? ;oSaggy said:
You can't be the best by not being the best and by being the best you are the best and no one can be better than the bestXeanor said:
You seldomly dont find that person and in Daoc's case that is almost impossible for the very same reason why you find it almost impossible to name the best footballer - its team-based. Does that mean one of the players isn't better than the others? No. Is the winner of 1vs1 Halo fight the best Halo player? No, he could be the best at 1vs1 but that's not all Halo is about ;oThey just are and they may know it or they may not know itMorchaoron said:
Saggy said:
You can be the best, defeat everyone who thought they were better, and you're the best.Saggy said:You can't be the best by not being the best and by being the best you are the best and no one can be better than the best
That's right. Football is team-based and thus you can never say someone is the "best footballer".
He is the best Halo playerof 2004 at least, he defeated those that thought they were better. And 1vs1 is not Halo is all about?.... The game isn't different in 1vs1 or anything, it includes everything from the game apart from teamplay, but teamplay = "the best team", you can't speak of individuals there.
You can always keep saying this and never see a "best". What most people call the best = the one that wins most.They just are and they may know it or they may not know it
Teams can't be compared, as the performance of a team is quite "variable", it changes daily and their performance totally depends on who they're facing. (Team A defeats Team B 10-0, next day Team B defeats Team C 10-0, then next day Team C defeats Team A 10-0) The only thing teams can do is win tournaments by luck of events and eventually choosing the right choices in the right situations.
There is a relativaly low limit to that. There's not that much to daoc, every class does their usual thing in most situations, for example, a wizard in fg vs. fg, the thing he does is choose the right target (usually, all the good players will choose the same target if you question them "which of these 8 would you choose first"), nuke it, get interrupted yes or no, and then your next move... most do this exactly the same - the best way, which is quite obvious in daoc (imo). There's also a bit more things like positioning, etc., but those things are quite irrelevant most of the times, when they aren't thought of. (Like, I don't care where I am when i nuke the shit out of someone with a wizard, I do care about standing in line of sight when defending a keep - something everyone thinks of)
The difference between the best and the 2nd best would be extremely small as 95% of the best choices to do in situations are very obvious and a lot of people can make the best choices there. The difference is so small that it wouldn't make a difference between winning or losing, maybe 1 out of a 1000 fights.
Anyways,. the arena thing looks fun, will be fun to battle opted grps vs eachothers without getting adds.That's right, I believe in something logical and you only believe something that will never lead to a result.Saggy said:
Ok, put it like this:
There is a best in everything, it just depends on the definition of the best. And it can change, yes yes.I dont care about knowing who is the best, you do. I dont think we will ever find the best in anything, you do. I dont see "the one and only" way to measure who is the best, you do. Matter of opinions and opinions are something we can always argue about
Xeanor said:
It's there, but the limit is relatively low, like the time you have to press a spell again to add it to the spell queue, you just have to be fast enough to press it within that time, which is quite easy to learn.vintervargen said:
Reactions make a difference in daoc, but not that much 99% of the times.
Old.Ilum said:Could be false if someone had /webdisplay none?
