Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2009 * Rating Thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • a2m+
    replied
    Originally posted by Crescent Seal View Post
    ya most of the players that play in twl or are on top 10 squads average 1:1, and are ranked higher...doesnt make sense...i guess experience counts then
    Alot of players don't try their hardest in twd. Also, alot of awesome twd players choke or can't play well in twl (5v5 is alot different than 4v4).

    Leave a comment:


  • Lock
    replied
    I didn't play TWL for the past two seasons nor did I play TWDT last season. So there is obviously some opinion put into these rankings.

    Leave a comment:


  • RaCka
    replied
    Originally posted by Exalt View Post
    well im fine with it, im pretty much over the whole * rating thing anyway, I was just being a smartass

    still don't see how racka is a 10* though
    hope off my balls already you annoying redneck

    Leave a comment:


  • paradise!
    replied
    Originally posted by Draft View Post
    wow thanks, i just noticed im '1024x768'

    >>http://www.trenchwars.org/index.php?v=pubstats&x=prof&s=rating&player=Draft& sb.x=0&sb.y=0<<

    how am i so good on a small screen, cant imagine what i'll do on anything bigger lOL
    I play 1024x768 as well, it's really not that big of a deal in twjd, and probably not in twbd. But in twdd, it's a significant difference.

    Leave a comment:


  • Crescent Seal
    replied
    Originally posted by Exalt View Post
    define "impact" for me burnt I mvped for my team almost every game, carried a big game when i needed to that would've decided playoffs or not when my team was struggling, and basically was alone with unabled when geio left midseason, rest of the squad was inactive, and kk was rusty, and managed to take the squad to playoffs, I think i did fairly well... oh and was top 5 in twl stats in wb, although I dont really care if im a 7 or 8 in twdt, but the point was worth mentioning that I disagreed, and another post I read said 7 was a player who started like 2 twl games and 8 was reg twl starter... so its why i was wondering wtf was up




    i'll agree, most players are around where they should be, or only 1 point off

    some are a little overrated, but they are overrated despite twdt, not because of it, so its fine

    in defense to cres though, most of evil isn't even 1:1 or is barely 1:1 in twd average too, but I'm sure cres probably cares a little more since he is a newer up and coming player
    ya most of the players that play in twl or are on top 10 squads average 1:1, and are ranked higher...doesnt make sense...i guess experience counts then

    Leave a comment:


  • Crescent Seal
    replied
    Originally posted by Burnt View Post
    from: http://forums.trenchwars.org/showpos...67&postcount=8
    6 = impact TWD player/ started 1 or 2 games TWL games
    7 = consistent TWL starter
    8 = impact player
    9 = top 10 in league
    10 = top 3-5 in league

    Kid Kaos was 65-76 last season in TWL, so 7 is a fair ranking
    Exalt was 84-74 so you could argue he's an 8 or a 7, depending on your definition of "impact"


    Cres, 7 is consistent TWL starter, what squad have you started for again?
    You're lucky to get a 6 considering you don't even average 1:1 in TWD (http://twd.trenchwars.org/profile/85291/stats) but according to: http://www.trenchwars.org/index.php?...&sb.x=6&sb.y=6 you're using 1280x800 resolution so how can you expect to be near as good as the players who use 1280x1024 and see over 25% more of the screen?

    Overall the ratings a pretty good, not perfect but almost no one is more than 1 rating point off where they should be.
    Idk this is my first year on this game, i havent played twl yet so i guess that makes sense. But alot of people that make twl seem horrible when i spec or play against them and thats what i was basing my own rating on. But I guess 6 makes sense for me then. I play on laptop so i cant change my resolution to anything higher.

    Leave a comment:


  • Exalt
    replied
    Originally posted by Summa View Post
    well one, being more recent is obviously more influential, at least in terms of the ratings i filled out. other people may have solely done last twl, some people may have just said fuck humid, his rating system is retarded, let me do it my own way.....oh and i hate eelam so let me give him a rating of 12. i cannot control that. what i can say though, is that next season ardour will have the new site up and all of this will be avoided. it will become put up or shut up time, not subjective preferences.
    well im fine with it, im pretty much over the whole * rating thing anyway, I was just being a smartass

    still don't see how racka is a 10* though

    Leave a comment:


  • Summa
    replied
    Originally posted by Exalt View Post
    well if thats the case then apok and racka clearly arent 10* wbs either
    well one, being more recent is obviously more influential, at least in terms of the ratings i filled out. other people may have solely done last twl, some people may have just said fuck humid, his rating system is retarded, let me do it my own way.....oh and i hate eelam so let me give him a rating of 12. i cannot control that. what i can say though, is that next season ardour will have the new site up and all of this will be avoided. it will become put up or shut up time, not subjective preferences.

    Leave a comment:


  • Exalt
    replied
    Originally posted by Summa View Post
    its based upon the past 2 twls and the past twdt, i prefer 3 sets of statistics to draw upon (source material), rather than 1
    well if thats the case then apok and racka clearly arent 10* wbs either

    Leave a comment:


  • Draft
    replied
    Originally posted by Burnt View Post
    but according to: http://www.trenchwars.org/index.php?...&sb.x=6&sb.y=6 you're using 1280x800 resolution so how can you expect to be near as good as the players who use 1280x1024 and see over 25% more of the screen?
    wow thanks, i just noticed im '1024x768'

    >>http://www.trenchwars.org/index.php?v=pubstats&x=prof&s=rating&player=Draft& sb.x=0&sb.y=0<<

    how am i so good on a small screen, cant imagine what i'll do on anything bigger lOL

    Leave a comment:


  • Summa
    replied
    Originally posted by Kid Kaos View Post
    I just dont think megaman89 deserves a 8* rating in wb especially if you are basing thise on last twld stats. The fact that dice wasnt even in TWLD last year is the main point... he didnt play a single game. so how was he a impact twld player?
    its based upon the past 2 twls and the past twdt, i prefer 3 sets of statistics to draw upon (source material), rather than 1
    Last edited by Summa; 06-01-2009, 08:24 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kid Kaos
    replied
    I just dont think megaman89 deserves a 8* rating in wb especially if you are basing thise on last twld stats. The fact that dice wasnt even in TWLD last year is the main point... he didnt play a single game. so how was he a impact twld player?

    Leave a comment:


  • Summa
    replied
    I am looking to have the ratings done by this Sunday for the caps. Apps in order to be eligible for the draft are closing come Friday. If you're submitting ratings then do it soon. Also Exalt, I think you have defended yourself enough, if you prove you're good in the season then it will pay off next season when it is stat based twlm style. I would prefer if this remains slightly on topic, although I know ego bruising must occur and I have allowed for flex room.

    Leave a comment:


  • Exalt
    replied
    Originally posted by tragiK View Post
    so why do you care so much? lol
    was talking about the twd average at the time, twl i do care about though, and probably will see me care a lot more now with ladder reset

    Leave a comment:


  • tragiK
    replied
    Originally posted by Exalt View Post
    but I'm sure cres probably cares a little more since he is a newer up and coming player
    so why do you care so much? lol

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X