|
On December 01 2015 08:51 yamato77 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2015 08:46 Djzapz wrote:
Does RWS make players more individualistic, or did individualistic preferences lead to the creation of the RWS system. Or is it unrelated.
Write a paper! Unfortunately, almost all statistics that look at player performance have a bias towards being interpreted through an individualistic mindset. This is something that is apparent across video games from K/D/A metrics in shooters to GPM/XPM in MOBAs, and also in real sports with things like RBI, passer rating, goals scored, etc. RWS is just particularly horrible, as noted in the article. ELO is simply a better way to measure player skill in a team-based game.
Well yeah but I question whether the metric itself is affecting NA players to the point where they'd be more susceptible to being selfish or having an individualistic understanding of what a good player does? You can see the causal relation in one way, the other, or both. Or neither if you're meta as fuck. My point being, there's a good chance that NA is more individualistic, culturally. And so RWS might be a reflection of that. Does RWS make high level CSGO players more individualistic than they already are as part of good ole capitalist America?
Either way I couldn't confidently say.
|
11589 Posts
On December 01 2015 08:57 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2015 08:51 yamato77 wrote:On December 01 2015 08:46 Djzapz wrote:
Does RWS make players more individualistic, or did individualistic preferences lead to the creation of the RWS system. Or is it unrelated.
Write a paper! Unfortunately, almost all statistics that look at player performance have a bias towards being interpreted through an individualistic mindset. This is something that is apparent across video games from K/D/A metrics in shooters to GPM/XPM in MOBAs, and also in real sports with things like RBI, passer rating, goals scored, etc. RWS is just particularly horrible, as noted in the article. ELO is simply a better way to measure player skill in a team-based game. Well yeah but I question whether the metric itself is affecting NA players to the point where they'd be more susceptible to being selfish or having an individualistic understanding of what a good player does? You can see the causal relation in one way, the other, or both. Or neither if you're meta as fuck. My point being, there's a good chance that NA is more individualistic, culturally. And so RWS might be a reflection of that. Does RWS make high level CSGO players more individualistic than they already are as part of good ole capitalist America? Either way I couldn't confidently say.
I would say yes, for one reason. Because RWS is so important in the NA scene in terms of measuring player skill, people are always trying to get a higher RWS score. By "gaming the system" so to speak, these players are being rewarded by ESEA and their peers by extension for playing more individualistically.
EDIT: This problem might not exist if RWS was some other unknown metric only ESEA knew how to calculate, but since any player can see the things they need to do to get a higher RWS score, you naturally see players only caring about those things.
|
|
|
France9034 Posts
By definition I would say metrics you base yourself on to determine player impact, like RWS shouldn't be shared (heh), because then you might be able to game it. For example, if KDA was the metric you'd base on to determine who's the next player you try out in your academy team, I'd fear players would avoid entryfragging because this is very risky, compared to lurking...
|
they are too lazy and no working morale -.-
|
GRAND OLD AMERICA16375 Posts
On December 02 2015 01:42 Ragnarork wrote:
By definition I would say metrics you base yourself on to determine player impact, like RWS shouldn't be shared (heh), because then you might be able to game it. For example, if KDA was the metric you'd base on to determine who's the next player you try out in your academy team, I'd fear players would avoid entryfragging because this is very risky, compared to lurking...
maybe you can evaluate players based on demos and playing with them or watch them play while listening to their comms? Woah!
|
On December 02 2015 03:16 amazingxkcd wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2015 01:42 Ragnarork wrote:
By definition I would say metrics you base yourself on to determine player impact, like RWS shouldn't be shared (heh), because then you might be able to game it. For example, if KDA was the metric you'd base on to determine who's the next player you try out in your academy team, I'd fear players would avoid entryfragging because this is very risky, compared to lurking...
maybe you can evaluate players based on demos and playing with them or watch them play while listening to their comms? Woah!
Yeah metrics after a certain point would be pretty useless. The kicker is how a player looks in demos and plays off a team.
|
Fantastic write up, great job guys. I followed CS1.6 way back in the day, 2002-2005. It is nice understanding some of the csgo history I missed.
|
NA gaming scene :DD what a joke
|
United States13143 Posts
On December 01 2015 08:51 yamato77 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2015 08:46 Djzapz wrote:
Does RWS make players more individualistic, or did individualistic preferences lead to the creation of the RWS system. Or is it unrelated.
Write a paper! RWS is just particularly horrible, as noted in the article. ELO is simply a better way to measure player skill in a team-based game.
tiiillllttttt
(Elo isn't an acronym, it's named after the chess player/physics professor who invented it, Arpad Elo.)
Good article!
|
|
|
11589 Posts
Generally when people bring this up, I see it as a vast oversimplification of the issue. Not every egotistical player falls prey to the Dunning-Kruger effect.
|
Gratz on the feature. Guess this means I need to write a article. Yamato I volenteer you to edit it...
|
|
|
On December 01 2015 07:53 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2015 05:39 Ragnarork wrote:
This is beyond ridiculous haha.
And he says that with the smile "hey you can't put ego asides".
Well, then, you won't put in the necessary practice and reach decent levels, doh. They are either not enough competitive, or too competitive within their small world... Well you have to understand that this interview took place after Dazed was banned and IBP had been dismantled, so you can't really blame him for being lighthearted about it in the interview. The competitive aspect was well in the past to him. And then he goes on to say that even when they started seriously, something would happen and shit would break loose, so yeah there's the guy's ego, as well as individual discipline that are screwing up. Having played in fairly competitive CS 1.6 teams back in the day, I can definitely tell you it's very difficult to get over it and take things seriously when you're into that mindset.
That's something I never understand. I play teamsports on a competitive level for a long time now and sure there are teams that I dislike because I don't like the people in it but I always respect them unless they really cross the line - and honestly, I never had that in my entire life. I would certainly, with every team if they asked us, do a training session or camp. I don't know, my competitive mindset consist of the will to get better. And you sure best get better in a tactical sport when you look at what other teams are doing, acknowledge their strenghts, analyze it and use it for yourself. Even if you have a big ego, you also want to get better as your first goal, right? Is it really that hard for people to push their ego aside?
It's really ironic that people with the biggest ego might also have the smallest ego when looked at from a different perspective.
|
I played competitive CS 1.6 till about 8 years ago for a few years and I really don't know why they can't put their egos aside if they want to achieve something. If you don't like your teammates very much, fine, try to respect them and find a groundlevel of understanding with each other. It's simply selfish to say as one player that he doesn't want to play with player X because he doesn't like him. The same with pcw partners... you don't have to hug them everytime you see them, just show a little respect in and out of the game and you can pracc against anyone and your game will improve.
If you would have behaved like an ass in the scene 10 years ago you never would have found a team or practice partners in Germany (well it seems still that way most of the time here, see Troubley who can't find a team if he pays them because of his behaviour).
It's harsh, but for me the NA scene is like the female scene. If they are not willing to invest everything necessary (time, respect, putting your ego aside, etc) they will never achieve anything when it matters.
|
France9034 Posts
Yeah, comparing the female scene to the NA scene is harsh for NA.
Especially considering the best female team is NA. 
|
It took a good leader for a NA team to be able to win big tournaments in Dota 2, ppd in EG. I suspect it's what's needed in the CS scene as well. I don't believe the skill difference individually is the main problem, it's more likely about mentality and psychological barriers that need to be overcome to compete at the top imo.
I hope Valve don't unban the iBP players, that's not the solution to NA's problems. What they did is unforgivable, scamming people of whom many are your fans, believe in you and bet money on your team...
P.S. I'm from Sweden and I've played a lot of CS but I'm far from a top player, we aren't all f0rest here either 
|
More Profesionalism is probably the difference
|
at the end of the day its all about practice... those European teams know they work and train harder then North Americans, they want it more then NA players do..
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
