Ive left out all the chemistry/leadership/social aspects of recruitment out of the post deliberately, so I can understand that would seem pretty sad. Typically most established teams, only pick up or poach established players anyway - and they only need to look at those aspects ive left out. Thats how most of the serious teams went about it when stats weren’t available.
For a team starting out that has a focus on winning, they dont have the luxury of being able to poach.
As a new team evaluating talent it takes a crapload of time if stats arent avaliable.
And exactly how often did that ever happen? The highly competitive top tier teams made up about 1% of clans. Did your clans ever take it so serious as to sit down and trawl hours worth of demos of players to see if they fit your criteria, or sit in 100’s of matches in spectator mode? You’re getting ridiculous now.
Naturally, recruitment was more personally involved because there were no statistics. These days, due to more advanced and accessible tracking recruiters have a larger net to fish in. They’ll gain better results by targeting the top spheres of a ladder rather than meet players in pubs or looking at replays. Doesn’t mean that if it were present back then it wouldn’t be used.
It’s a bit similar to people slagging of guitar-effects, pointing at Jimmy Hendrix and saying he made great music without it. Yeah he did, but if that technology was available to him back then he’d be all over it.
Where exactly was that questioned or refuted at all? I’m laughing at the sheer absurdity that if stats weren’t available then recruiting would be a massively laborious process which is absolute nonsense. The point was that this was never the case when stats weren’t available, so why would it suddenly be the case now given the same situation.
If there are no stats available - meaning the game itself doesnt have stats like end of game stats or awards, absolutely nothing, then theres no real way of determining whether a player dominated or not. One can only go by their direct experience with that player. The information extracted from direct experience with 1 player in a team game is difficult to discern, its not reliable. So that potential recruit would need to be looked at from first person view, assuming there were no stats at all.
Why would I point that out? Sockdog claims that competitive players wouldnt need stats.
Clearly the above exaggerated example ive offered demonstrates that isnt the case at all.
The only clans that would go to such lengths are high level, top tier clans that are absolutely about the win and hardcore comp play with sponsorships and prize money. Those clans make up a small percentage of the overall clan user base. By all means I may have led a sheltered clanhood and everyone was hardcore frothing monster gamers that must win no matter the cost and took recruitment as serious as the football transfer window, but in my experience, fun came 1st and clans were built from friends and getting to know others through regular play. Again that’s just my experience, did you or tok do some hardcore recruiting when you were clanners or is this just an educated guess at how players are recruited to Average Joe’s Clan these days and way back whence? It could be a cut throat recruiting world out there for all I know.
As for not needing stats, as tok said, if they were available they would be used. You seem to be suggesting that if they werent available then its a massive project to recruit someone?
I always assumed most clans just trialled people to see if they were up to scratch in both terms of skill and likability, that’s how it was in pretty much every clan I’ve played in, both fun and semi-serious, never been in a super serious clan though.
There are comp teams and there are pub clans. They are two separate things. Im talking about comp teams here.
Pub clans, are mainly about socialising. They will participate in comps, but are not participating to win, and if they win its a bonus. They tend to recruit craploads of players, and these players basically ensure that their “pub clan server” is full all the times. Some of them are so freaking massive, they hold their own comps with only their own players.
Comp teams on the other hand, recruit on skill and rep first, and provided the players are nice guys, the social stuff comes afterwards naturally. Its about winning first though, and yes sometimes its a bit cut throat -lot of rage, lot of trash talk, but its good fun.
edit due to edit :):
As for not needing stats, as tok said, if they were available they would be used. You seem to be suggesting that if they werent available then its a massive project to recruit someone?
My example was exaggerated to make a point that stats are needed. Maybe not your super duper stats site with graphs, but the game itself needs to reflect player impact otherwise theres no real easy way of discerning it in a team-game. One would have to watch a player in FP view to notice how well they played.
The point is, stats aren’t ‘needed’ as in a complete necessity. Clans, both pub and comp existed before stats did, thats proof that stats are not needed.
Again is your recruitment process based on experience or guess work?
Not being rude or anything I’m curious did you read my post?
Im pretty sure there were stats in ET and UT.
In fact both those games displayed stats both during the game, and at the end of the game.
Q3, RtCW, CS to name a few didn’t. Even of those that did, they were single instance and not concurrent. Unless you’ve got some secret hidden message somewhere then yes I am reading your post. You seem to think stats are absotely necessary when it comes to recruiting and I don’t, is that right? So again, are you basing this off of experience or guess work?
That’s not hidden, that was never even in question. Now I’m at the one that’s going to have apologise for being rude, but are you even getting the point here? Given that fact that a lot of games and heavy competition existed without access to those stats, you’re saying that without them there’s a need for hours of demo trawling or spectating which I believe is nonsense, so once more, are you basing this off of experience or a guess?
EDIT: Ok let me put it clearer, I surmise that 99% of clans don’t give that much of a **** to that degree therefore your point is moot. I say that if stats weren’t available then no clans would trawl demos or spectate for hundreds of matches because of it. I also state that if stats were available, there would still be a process of some spectating and tryouts regardless.
If the game doesnt tell me who played well, then I cant really decipher that without actually watching the player.
If I actually really wanted to determine that players skill level, without the game offering me any info at all - I would have to watch their replays.
Does that mean I cant form a team, based on gut feeling alone? Ofcourse anyone can do that, thats not what is being discussed.
What is being discussed is the value of stats, other than bragging rights. Its a tool that allows players to decipher skill levels, whether you agree with that or not.
As for my personal experience, its not important. I dont feel like bragging
I also state that if stats were available, there would still be a process of some spectating and tryouts regardless.
Absolutely. No one is saying players are picked on stats alone. Its merely an indicator.
What I want to point out is, the recruitment aspect of what is said isnt important.
The thing I was highlighting was there are other uses for stats other than bragging.
I simply entertained the idea to illustrate that.
And personally I actually like knowing who kicked ass on the server, just out of pure curiosity.
[QUOTE=Humate;403777]If I was to take your example, and pretend for a moment I was recruiting for a team in a game that didnt record stats at all, then I would need to watch 100’s of matches of a player in spectator mode. Then I would need to play against them, and then I would need to play with them. With the aid of stats, in conjunction with direct experience - I would be able to determine the calibre of a player pretty quickly.
KPM / KDR / Accuracy / Headshot % / Damage Taken & Damage Received - for me is a solid start. A player cant really hide with these stats, but they can be inflated due to poor competition, and that is why direct experience is important.
As for boasting - doesnt bother me. Ive always seen it as a sign of scarcity.
As for other purposes - player improvement is a big one in competitive games.[/QUOTE]
Please read my original post to which you and I was referring to, emphasis added.
The point there was quite simply that stats/XP etc are flawed enough that they would not be relied upon 100%. Something you seem to agree with in your reply. If they were the indicators of skill or the utopian model of perfect gameplay as Tok likes to ejaculate over the forums then why would you need to actually review a player, ever? Oh wait, because they’re not perfect, they’re a rough approximation, prone to error and manipulation. Made even more magnified by every additional rule and restriction. Quite secondary to actual observation by other experienced players, there’s that brain simplifying things again.
In short (and I’m talking generally here not directly at you) if you wouldn’t bet the farm on these stats being accurate why act like they are? To then suggest that rewards, kudos and gameplay mechanics be layered upon these scores is pretty laughable.
Whats a stat score Sockdog?
Genuinely interested. Are you referring to in-game leaderboard score, based on some formula the dev has created?
If so, sure I agree - im not a fan of that either.
The reason I wouldnt bet the farm on that is because I know I’ll disagree with the formula.
Hence the desire for the stats to be listed separately at the end of the match.
Sorry I missed the /. Stats (K/D Accuracy etc) Scores (points/XP)
While the latter is certainly part of the algorithm/formula ilk the former is also widely open to interpretation. Again my point being that none are 100% indicators on how well an individual as has played in a match (multiple matches) or how well they played as part of the team. I just don’t think it’s wise placing heavy emphasis on stats as a means of kudos at the end of a game (hence liking Sponge’s random achievement idea for end of matches) or reliance on a fantasy formula that allows freedom of play while providing a perfect score.
For me, if it’s not an all out competitive game the goal should be to have a challenging but fun experience. Instead we see games that reward the stronger sides or promote rage quitting. I honestly don’t see why anyone you plays for fun rather than ego would object to a game giving a health boost to a weaker team. Screw score, the goal should be 16 players going “OMGWTFBBQ! Awesome game!” not “herp derp XP Level 8 achieved”.
I honestly don’t see why anyone you plays for fun rather than ego would object to a game giving a health boost to a weaker team.
SD already kind of does that with their dynamic spawn times.
The longer it takes to complete an objective the quicker the spawn.
While the latter is certainly part of the algorithm/formula ilk the former is also widely open to interpretation.
Exactly, and it should be open to interpretation.
For me, if it’s not an all out competitive game the goal should be to have a challenging but fun experience. Instead we see games that reward the stronger sides or promote rage quitting.
Skill ranked games = fun but challenging
I just don’t think it’s wise placing heavy emphasis on stats as a means of kudos at the end of a game
I dont think its wise for the dev to ignore them completely.
The goal should be 16 players going “OMGWTFBBQ! Awesome game!” not “herp derp XP Level 8 achieved”.
I have no qualms with players getting aroused over -xp/score/stats/medals/etc
Provided that the game itself is brilliant, I see no reason why these people shouldn’t be able to herp derp.
Typically most established teams, only pick up or poach established players anyway - and they only need to look at those aspects ive left out. Thats how most of the serious teams went about it when stats weren’t available.