Power Ratings and Skill
Power Ratings and Skill
Hi,
I've been wondering how the skill varies in what type along the PR
What's the skill difference between the rough PR range (PR 25 to PR 40+)
What are the certain skill things which someone knows, and someone doesn't know if he's PR 20 or PR 25, PR 30, PR 35 or PR 40 or more etcetra?
How PR and skill are related to each other?
I've been wondering how the skill varies in what type along the PR
What's the skill difference between the rough PR range (PR 25 to PR 40+)
What are the certain skill things which someone knows, and someone doesn't know if he's PR 20 or PR 25, PR 30, PR 35 or PR 40 or more etcetra?
How PR and skill are related to each other?
Doing what you like is Freedom...
Liking what you do is Happiness...
Liking what you do is Happiness...
Power Ratings and Skill
You can't say that every pr 30 player knows all this stuff but has no clue about this other stuff, and if they find out about it suddenly become pr 35. It's the overall skill and preferred civ choice and if team or 1v1 (assuming questions are directed at supremacy) and activity (decreasing in rank) that determines ones pr. Normally higher pr player means they are stronger players, but I guess most people only reach pr 40 by laming and couldn't do it through bad civ choice. In what way should we quantify skill difference absolutely though, this is quite hard. I guess we can only make relative statements by comparing players.
Don't let the things you can't change dictate your life.
Power Ratings and Skill
subzero wrote:Hi,
I''ve been wondering how the skill varies in what type along the PR
What''s the skill difference between the rough PR range (PR 25 to PR 40+)
What are the certain skill things which someone knows, and someone doesn''t know if he''s PR 20 or PR 25, PR 30, PR 35 or PR 40 or more etcetra?
How PR and skill are related to each other?
pr 40 has got very good knowledge and skill while pr 25 does many mistakes and miss important stuff or just doesn''t use hotkeys. Probably pr 40 played a lot of games more than 25 for example and also pr 40 has got a talent for videogames or at least aoe3. There are some player who played many games but still bad. Look at "cicatrene" "sammyzilla" "scrout" on nilla for example. They are pretty bad if we consider that their amount of games played should make them brigadier or up.
Power Ratings and Skill
nice thread
i think that the difference between the pr gets less and less the higher the pr is. best example were the streams lately where princeofkabul and somppukkunko struggled against players which prs were way lower. on the other side most of the ms will lose against 2nd lt and 2nd lt will lose against 1st lt but then it gets closer imo
i think that the difference between the pr gets less and less the higher the pr is. best example were the streams lately where princeofkabul and somppukkunko struggled against players which prs were way lower. on the other side most of the ms will lose against 2nd lt and 2nd lt will lose against 1st lt but then it gets closer imo
Power Ratings and Skill
Actually I'd say there is more difference between two high level (pr?) players than two average ones. And that's Just because at let's say 28-30pr there is still so much stuff to learn about the game that things can always swing greatly in favor of one player or the other, depending on which exact circumstances they're playing (MU, map, playstyle, etc.), regardless of (relatively small) pr gap.
At the highest levels players tend to know most of the stuff by experience (more rarely nowadays by actual research) so even slightly difference in skills or marginal knowledge (BO novelty) can tip the scales in favor of one player heavily.
Then again there are, or atleast there used to be, some milestones in the pr scale. (as the playerbase gets smaller the scale itself is less representative tho).
- < 2nd lt, kinda noob, still learning the basic of the game and rts in general
- 2nd lt, has learnt the basics and starts applying them
- 1st lt, knows the basics and has refined some personal strat, if he actually cared to read any sort of guide he may improve to the next stage fairly quickly
- captain, starts knowing things (this normally coincides with the moment when you start posting on forums because you feel you got some knowledge), and the gameplay gets bit refined because of experience
- major, same as captain really, but more refined strats, builds, better mechanics, still not aware of many things, can pull off nice games at times
- lt col, that's the level more or less when people start playing decently in the sense that they can play several civs and do atleast a refined strat with each of them. Skills may be closer to the previous or next level depending on whether the player is still in the learning process or decides to stop here (has reached his skill cap for the moment)
- colonel, same as lt col but better, jumping from the previous level to this one generally means you have a certain interest for the game and you're ready to do the extra mile to become good
- brigadier, same as colonel just more dominant in every aspect. A brig is just likely to win most of games vs a colonel, sometimes whit a big difference in skill sometimes just depending on small details
- maj general, more dominant than brigadier, at the current state of things it just means he is on a good streak of results and can keep it going. There used to be more level discimination past this point but now maj general seems the max.
I don't know where talent lies in this scale because talent can be hidden behind several high end levels, while PR tends to represent more the state of form of a player and its activeness.
It has to be said.
At the highest levels players tend to know most of the stuff by experience (more rarely nowadays by actual research) so even slightly difference in skills or marginal knowledge (BO novelty) can tip the scales in favor of one player heavily.
Then again there are, or atleast there used to be, some milestones in the pr scale. (as the playerbase gets smaller the scale itself is less representative tho).
- < 2nd lt, kinda noob, still learning the basic of the game and rts in general
- 2nd lt, has learnt the basics and starts applying them
- 1st lt, knows the basics and has refined some personal strat, if he actually cared to read any sort of guide he may improve to the next stage fairly quickly
- captain, starts knowing things (this normally coincides with the moment when you start posting on forums because you feel you got some knowledge), and the gameplay gets bit refined because of experience
- major, same as captain really, but more refined strats, builds, better mechanics, still not aware of many things, can pull off nice games at times
- lt col, that's the level more or less when people start playing decently in the sense that they can play several civs and do atleast a refined strat with each of them. Skills may be closer to the previous or next level depending on whether the player is still in the learning process or decides to stop here (has reached his skill cap for the moment)
- colonel, same as lt col but better, jumping from the previous level to this one generally means you have a certain interest for the game and you're ready to do the extra mile to become good
- brigadier, same as colonel just more dominant in every aspect. A brig is just likely to win most of games vs a colonel, sometimes whit a big difference in skill sometimes just depending on small details
- maj general, more dominant than brigadier, at the current state of things it just means he is on a good streak of results and can keep it going. There used to be more level discimination past this point but now maj general seems the max.
I don't know where talent lies in this scale because talent can be hidden behind several high end levels, while PR tends to represent more the state of form of a player and its activeness.
It has to be said.
-
- Ninja
- Posts: 13004
- Joined: Apr 28, 2020
Power Ratings and Skill
I guess he meant iits more likely that a brig will lose to a colo or major than a captain to a 2nd lt or a ms.
-
- Ninja
- Posts: 13004
- Joined: Apr 28, 2020
Power Ratings and Skill
It''s not that hard ffsblackout wrote:somppukkunko
Power Ratings and Skill
pr doesn't really mean all that much tbh. If i wanted to I could buy a new account and get it to lt colonel in 10 games by bashing master sergeants, while in reality my highest account is a captian.
Power Ratings and Skill
Aww, I know some things but I know them for a long time. NEED PRACTICE, as Shia says, JUST DO IT (nike).garja wrote:- 1st lt, knows the basics and has refined some personal strat, if he actually cared to read any sort of guide he may improve to the next stage fairly quickly
- captain, starts knowing things (this normally coincides with the moment when you start posting on forums because you feel you got some knowledge), and the gameplay gets bit refined because of experience
If pr meant a certain number of skill points, and you could distribute them into different categories (knowledge, bo execution, map awareness, macro, micro and all these kind of things) do you think top level players have these points more distributed (boneng to ryan to kynesie are big differences) or do you think top level players know what is best and thus play quite about the same?
Same question around the captain level: Do you think that not knowing what is best leads to a big distribution of different skills (one can micro godly, the others know build order, another knows every civ and one found out an op strat on a specific map) OR not knowing leads to following the meta and thus everybody plays about the same?
Don't let the things you can't change dictate your life.
Power Ratings and Skill
Look at boneng , he is godly in adapting out of most situations. While his builds are not super crisp.
H20 is mechanically and micro wise very good, but in adapting and knowing meta a bit behind
Everyone has his strong and weak points
H20 is mechanically and micro wise very good, but in adapting and knowing meta a bit behind
Everyone has his strong and weak points
-
- Dragoon
- Posts: 467
- Joined: Mar 4, 2015
Power Ratings and Skill
Difference at all is in mechanic and physic of ur body... If someone is superslow in moving mouse or thinking about what to do, he suddenly will never reach the perfwction of erik bsop samwise etc.. They are just super fast in thinking and apm... IQ probly also a nameable fact except u play japs or ito all day.. Aizamk we love you
Power Ratings and Skill
Or let's say Ryan is too advanced, for example with the 1k food as dutch for a hussar transition.
Don't let the things you can't change dictate your life.
Power Ratings and Skill
What do you mean? There is an edit function to edit your posts.mnogobillione wrote:Iro*
Don't let the things you can't change dictate your life.
Power Ratings and Skill
Is a PR 30 non-lamer/non-OP civ-user better than a random PR 40 ottolamer in terms of skill?
Doing what you like is Freedom...
Liking what you do is Happiness...
Liking what you do is Happiness...
- lemmings121
- Jaeger
- Posts: 2673
- Joined: Mar 15, 2015
- ESO: lemmings121
Power Ratings and Skill
garja wrote:- 1st lt, knows the basics and has refined some personal strat, if he actually cared to read any sort of guide he may improve to the next stage fairly quickly
Cant fully agree with this... I got stuck in 1st lt for ages, while reading and trying to improve. Guess it just take more time and practice for some people... I had to practice a lot to actually become better..
I''ve seen quite a few players reaching huge pr/elo with a single strat, but he couldnt beat the same people twice...this case, yea, pr 30 is better.Jul 23, 2015 8:35:38 GMT -3 _DB_ said:
Is a PR 30 non-lamer/non-OP civ-user better than a random PR 40 ottolamer in terms of skill?
Power Ratings and Skill
As things are now, Id say at any level there is quite some diversity in people skills (which is a reflex of the PR system not predicting accurately) so inevitably there is quite a difference in players attributes. Ideally, you would expect players to have more or less the same attributes for the same level of skills.venox wrote:Aww, I know some things but I know them for a long time. NEED PRACTICE, as Shia says, JUST DO IT (nike).garja wrote:- 1st lt, knows the basics and has refined some personal strat, if he actually cared to read any sort of guide he may improve to the next stage fairly quickly
- captain, starts knowing things (this normally coincides with the moment when you start posting on forums because you feel you got some knowledge), and the gameplay gets bit refined because of experience
If pr meant a certain number of skill points, and you could distribute them into different categories (knowledge, bo execution, map awareness, macro, micro and all these kind of things) do you think top level players have these points more distributed (boneng to ryan to kynesie are big differences) or do you think top level players know what is best and thus play quite about the same?
Same question around the captain level: Do you think that not knowing what is best leads to a big distribution of different skills (one can micro godly, the others know build order, another knows every civ and one found out an op strat on a specific map) OR not knowing leads to following the meta and thus everybody plays about the same?
At the moment there is probably more diversity in the pr 35-40 range than at the 25-30 because of the reason you mentioned (players following the meta).
Power Ratings and Skill
Well you can have good strategy but bad micro or bad micro but good strategy.. Its not like a captain is certainly all around worse than a lt colonel or something.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests