A valuable scale of experience/skill

[PossiblyMG]

1 minute ago, Grimlock84 said:

The same could be said for any skill measurement implemented, a computer dosnt truly understand dem mlg trickshot skills

But that's what am I asking, what do you think would be the most efficient and reliable system?

[Grimlock84]

Just now, Maseguad_il_Belo said:

But that's what am I asking, what do you think would be the most efficient and reliable system?

the only real way to judge someones actual skill is to play with them.

like you said in the op, kills dont matter, time played dosnt matter, Mr dosnt matter because in a game like this non of them transfer into actual skill.

So basically either play a game with them, guess based off a combination of the three above things or look at there conclave standing ( Because conclave is bs and anyone whos high ranked enough knows what they're doing)

 

[ZodiacShinryu]

A good measure of skill is if I can remember your name after a mission is over because lets be real either you were good enough to have me notice or so bad for me to care (which is a skill all its own~ I mean you really have to try to be that bad).

On a serious note, as many people have said, skill is a subjective (set of) parameter(s) as well as being modified by expectations. If there is a parameter where you expect someone to fail and despite everything they pull it off then they could be quite skillful. However there isn't skills test in the world that can give you a completely accurate early warning to skill (in any subject). The only way to be sure is to observe their prowess in the field.

[Deatherage_]

there is no good way to determine a players skill

 

each person has their own view on what a "skilled player" should be able to do

from the "can they get from point A to point B without being a dead weight" can be one view and another can be "each person in the squad most know what everyone else is doing and predict when to press their 3 to combo it with someone else's skill" and a third view on skilled can be "do they have their gear upgraded to the point where they can just kill all of the mobs in a room?"

 

so in all reality to see if someone meets your view of a "skilled player" you really need to play with them to see if they match up with your opinion of being a "skilled player"

 

and hey if you don't have the time to find a group of people you considered "skilled" don't cry about noobs k?

[PatternistSlave]

2 hours ago, Maseguad_il_Belo said:

Mastery doesn't work, because half of the time it just means you had the time to sit at Draco 3 hours a day.

Hours played doesn't work, because you could just be standing afk or playing and still not learning anything about the game.

Kills, scans, events- All of it has no meaning.

What do you think would be a good scale to determine whether a player is skilled/experienced that would work 99.9% of the time? Do you think it's already in the game, or do you think DE should create a better system for it?

 

I rate you a 2.5 out of W.  Feel better?

[GoneBlank]

The community can't even agree what the word "skill" means so I don't really like your chances of trying to measure it.

It's funny when you play with an experienced FPS player - there are a few tells: like, they stay close to the group, they use cover (rhs advantage), they take the time to learn their character's powers (albeit weakly moded ones).... I remember playing with an MR5 player who ticked all these boxes - person was a pleasure to have in the group. It is hard to think of a metric that would represent such a person.

 

 

[Mastikator2]

1 hour ago, Maseguad_il_Belo said:

But that's what am I asking, what do you think would be the most efficient and reliable system?

Human interaction is the most efficient and reliable system. This game is too open and diverse for a computer to judge skill level. The best a computer can do is get a ball park figure of how much experience you probably have, ie. mastery rank. Experience doesn't always translate into skill, some people never learn, some start out really good, some missions require different skills that you don't learn by running long survivals.

[Hesyol]

For a moment I thought it's a nice idea if people could vote for each other after mission (like in Overwatch). But then I realised how high salt level will rise...

[DJkillz]

well 1 more comment from me.. if player doesnt complain about ur team setup and just adjusts accordingly.. its good... if anyone shows up asking "no trinity?" doesnt matter what build what mission. yea no skill period. when i join random squads and see ppls builds. if there is a trinity. i usually just leave. its usually the sign of noob players. if anyone suggests a team setup casue ur team setup looks weird.. then tryhard. close enough to not skilled. my point being. look for ppl who r NOT skilled. and u will know who is skilled :P not the other way around.

and i repeat. MR provides a good base for who can be skilled. generally more higher lvl ppl will be skilled than lower lvl.

[Syntax3Error]

12 hours ago, DiePainPain said:

Only when u learn how to play your frame and weapons, and get high rank mods, then u start forma your gears. Yr arguement is asking for the perfect solution, just provide if u have a better one.

Then people will just abuse it and have 100 forma on their sancti tigris/vaykor hek/any top tier meta weapon. People with high amount of plat will buy crazy amount of forma from the market.

[Tachibana_Hibiki]

I don't know what it should be, just do something.

I hate that ppl expect me to know how to play the game just because I'm MR15. 99.8% of the time I just run Mercury exterminates/survivals solo, but on rare occasions I join pug for some alert ppl are mislead by that stupid MR thing and expect me to perform. Maybe introduce new trial mission with, idk, 10 lvl 200 napalms and measure ttk. If ttk is longer than 0.4 seconds, group into "scrubs" pool, otherwise into "wise experienced veteran who knows what they are doing" pool.

 

Just find a way to match me with ppl with no expectations. I'm tired of adding to ignore all the ppl that rage on my ttk.

 

<3 <3

Edited July 25, 2016 by Tachibana_Hibiki

[(PSN)A_SimpleName]

13 hours ago, Maseguad_il_Belo said:

Mastery doesn't work, because half of the time it just means you had the time to sit at Draco 3 hours a day.

Hours played doesn't work, because you could just be standing afk or playing and still not learning anything about the game.

Kills, scans, events- All of it has no meaning.

What do you think would be a good scale to determine whether a player is skilled/experienced that would work 99.9% of the time? Do you think it's already in the game, or do you think DE should create a better system for it?

 

How about a combination of MR and time played? The easiest way for me to assess someone skill is to ask him a few simple questions.

• What do you think would be a good frame to bring to X mission? Why?
  • The answer can be anything as long as there is a good reason.
• I'm thinking of bringing Nekros to a Spy mission. What are some good ways to spy with Nekros?
  • To see if the person can think outside the box

Edited July 25, 2016 by (PS4)A_SimpleName

[PopGligor]

Mastery rank means not only that you got the mastery points, but you also passed the test. But I don't think that works. 

I think the need for skill is very contextual - you don't need skilled players for closing lith fissures, but you need intelligent players for LoR - not only players with good aim, who know how to play their frame, but ones who know how to synergize. I think a solution would be to heavily restrict LoR access - make it so that earning the right to enter LoR poses a challenge on its own. 

In my mind ability to overcome challenge is what demonstrates skill. If in order to enter LoR, someone had to first survive 20-30 minutes in a level 50-60 survival, you'd know they're fairly skilled.

Same thing with other skill-requiring areas - seal them off by areas requiring slightly less skill. Overcoming the previous challenge shows you have the minimum needed to engage with the new one. Example - have LoR keys as D rotation in ODS or Void survival and require everyone in the group to have a key to enter. No key - no entrance.

There can be a whole skill hierarchy in the game, where to access areas you have to prove yourself first. I don't think it's possible to get a stat that is indicative of skill. Stats can be manipulated. 

[CTanGod]

There is no way to 100% measure somebody's skill level since you can perform really good or really bad no matter how much time you invested. I personally judge a person's skill level in Warframe on their capacity to adapt to the current situation and use proper skills on the given situation, generally I think a skillful player is one who understands that CC and Utility is far better than damage.

In fact any player that uses Excalibur for Radial Blind is a skillful player in my book.

[Naruchico]

Spoiler

 

[DJkillz]

1 hour ago, CTanGod said:

There is no way to 100% measure somebody's skill level since you can perform really good or really bad no matter how much time you invested. I personally judge a person's skill level in Warframe on their capacity to adapt to the current situation and use proper skills on the given situation, generally I think a skillful player is one who understands that CC and Utility is far better than damage.

In fact any player that uses Excalibur for Radial Blind is a skillful player in my book.

and i believe dmg is far better than cc. and i consider myself pro.. offence is the best defence. this following part is excluding intercpetion or MD missions or anything that doesnt require any killing of any sort. imma give an example. sortie defence. no point dragging on with defence and tanking. its a defence. its not going to end until enemies die. so the point right there is to kill. meaning u kill stuff. not CC everything which drags the mission on more than it needs to. if nothing is surviving then there is no reason to CC in the first place and which means the operative is not in any danger either. thats just 1 example btw. but the bottom like in. in most missions the purpose is to kill and u make that ur focus. if mission doesnt require u to kill. then ill agree yes CC is best. 

[DxAdder]

MR means nothing nor will it ever mean a thing.

World of Warcraft devised something called the "Gear" system which was a base number that allowed you to know if you could complete a dungeon/raid.

This was based on a whole set or criteria and it worked for the most part but was highly controversial.

 

 

[Czygen]

On 7/25/2016 at 10:36 AM, WrathAscending said:

 What I would suggest instead is that Conclave Rating (perhaps with a different name) come back. It has its flaws but with some rebalancing, like making Steel Fibre worth more on Warframes with high Armour rating and so on, would provide a way to readily gauge how much effort a player has put into their current loadout, which should have an extremely strong correlation with how well they know how to use it. When Conclave Rating was shown some time ago it was easy to get a feel for another player's loadout. Anything under 500 represented Mods that weren't maxed out on Warframes with no Forma. 500-1000 showed maxed Mods and a reasonable amount of Forma. 1500 plus and you knew the player had bought their SRS BSNS equipment.

You sir, are one hek of a genius.

10/10 best solution.