skills should be counted differently

[CBB]

i think skills should be counted relatively when it comes to ranking , and thus soc entries.

for example i got 6250 rifle, and in a rnaking someone with 2000 hg, 2000 rifle and 2500 fist, will count more

in fact i got 100 !! times more skills !!!

so in order to progress as soc or in a rnaking i gotta skill lame skills i dont like skilling, i like to put it all in my rifle, but by doing so i keep myself down in total skills

this is a wrong way of representing skills

skills should count relatively for soc rankings., so they coutn in person based rulez too

pleaz MA its fair!

greetz CBB

[Centech]

Well, your example is bad, because 6250 > 4700, but I get what you are saying.

Its often been said that if you threw out BS skills (scan human anyone?) the top 50 list would look different. That being said, I don’t see MA changing this.

[jdegre]

see this thread where an alternative method is proposed.
but, at the end of the day, nobody is telling you or your soc how to count skills, or how to organize ranks. if you think it is unfair, discuss with your socmates and do it some other way, but MA has nothing to do with it.

/jdegre.

[onyx_oZ_Zombie]

@Centech

but I get what you are saying.

not sure i do … can you perhaps explain it, Centech? i might know what’s being said, but I might not … another thing i’m confused over is how MA is involved at all in determining what societies choose as their promotion or entry skill levels …

[sherwood]

Calculating the average value of the average values of the prof-standings tables would be more fair since pro-standings involve attributes.

Anyway, I don’t think that players with 300000 skills have +/-2500 levels in everyone his skill assuming that he unlocked everything.

[Cyane_Cyanee_Ca]

@Centech

Well, your example is bad, because 6250 > 4700, but I get what you are saying.

Its often been said that if you threw out BS skills (scan human anyone?) the top 50 list would look different. That being said, I don’t see MA changing this.

Who says MA counts total skills like that anyway ?

[system]

@onyx oZ Zombie

not sure i do … can you perhaps explain it, Centech? i might know what’s being said, but I might not … another thing i’m confused over is how MA is involved at all in determining what societies choose as their promotion or entry skill levels …

What he says is that is that someone who has 6000 levels in one skill is actually “worth” more than someone who has in 6 skills 1000 levels each.

[Moonbiter]

@Cyane Cyanee Ca

Who says MA counts total skills like that anyway ?

Top 50 societies according skills is counted like that.

[dbelinfante]

@jdegre

see this thread where an alternative method is proposed.
but, at the end of the day, nobody is telling you or your soc how to count skills, or how to organize ranks. if you think it is unfair, discuss with your socmates and do it some other way, but MA has nothing to do with it.

/jdegre.

That’s only half the story. Skill ranking is important to socs, and MA decides how ranking is decided, not the socs. So even if a soc wanted to count and weigh skills differently, if they did not conform to MA’s way of skill ranking, they’d drop out of the top50 ranking (which is what it is about for most socs).

So (apart from CBB’s misspelling of numbers :D), I think he makes a valid point.

[Cyane_Cyanee_Ca]

@Moonbiter

Top 50 societies according skills is counted like that.

In the requirements for many top societies they do count like that yes, but that does not mean MA is doing it since it is a very illogical way to go about it, so if there is no actual info on what they count i dont think we shoud assume they use a system that seems to have been made up by players alone

Ps i stand to be corrected if anyone can actually show me any written info saying it is so

[dbelinfante]

@Cyane Cyanee Ca

In the requirements for many top societies they do count like that yes, but that does not mean MA is doing it since it is a very illogical way to go about it, so if there is no actual info on what they count i dont think we shoud assume they use a system that seems to have been made up by players alone

What other way is there? And the fact that soc members skill and chip useless skills to raise their skills totals, and the fact that it actually works the way everyone assumes is in fact empirical evidence.

[jdegre]

@dbelinfante

What other way is there? And the fact that soc members skill and chip useless skills to raise their skills totals, and the fact that it actually works the way everyone assumes is in fact empirical evidence.

Well, I don’t know how it is done by MA, but definitely, there could be many other ways than total number of skills.
When the profession panels were introduced, I noticed the “average” value shown after each panel (combat, mining, crafting, etc…), so, why could not MA use this value for the ranking? (just an idea, not saying that they actually do it like that).

/jdegre.

[dbelinfante]

@jdegre

Well, I don’t know how it is done by MA, but definitely, there could be many other ways than total number of skills.
When the profession panels were introduced, I noticed the “average” value shown after each panel (combat, mining, crafting, etc…), so, why could not MA use this value for the ranking? (just an idea, not saying that they actually do it like that).

/jdegre.

Wouldn’t that come down to the same thing?
What CBB is saying (and I kinda agree with that) is that in a practical sense, a lvl 50 blp sniper is a lot more useful and valuable than a player who is lvl 20 in 7 different disciplines (4 of which are Robot Investigator, Pet Handler, Humanoid Investigator and Animal Tamer ;)). But if only the total amount of skills is important, then you could (theoretically) have a top 20 soc, that gets its ass kicked by an equally large soc of dedicated hunters/pk’ers who don’t even make the top 50.

[Hally]

i think its fairly safe to asume that total skills is infact counted by ammount of xp and not by the numbers we see

uber socs might ask for 150k skills or more but theyre not gonna fall for a guy with 2-3k in all skills they want quality also

[Mercury]

I believe MA does it by the numbers. 2k rifle+2k HG worth more than 3.5k rifle in top 50 eyes. Ofc I don’t like this considering my 360k-400k skill is worth more in tt esi than about 5 of the players in the soc that was above us recently.

[jdegre]

@dbelinfante

Wouldn’t that come down to the same thing?
What CBB is saying (and I kinda agree with that) is that in a practical sense, a lvl 50 blp sniper is a lot more useful and valuable than a player who is lvl 20 in 7 different disciplines (4 of which are Robot Investigator, Pet Handler, Humanoid Investigator and Animal Tamer ;)). But if only the total amount of skills is important, then you could (theoretically) have a top 20 soc, that gets its ass kicked by an equally large soc of dedicated hunters/pk’ers who don’t even make the top 50.

Yes, it would be similar concept, but just wanted to point out that MA does not necesarily use a plain arithmetic sum of skill value as the rank order.
I see CBB point too, and (once i saw that he did not mean internal ranking inside a soc) I’m not saying that I don’t agree, but at the end, as the thread I pointed earlier shows, there are many many ways to compute “how skilled” you are. Hard to tell what’s the most “fair”.

/jdegre.

[dbelinfante]

@jdegre

I see CBB point too, and (once i saw that he did not mean internal ranking inside a soc) I’m not saying that I don’t agree, but at the end, as the thread I pointed earlier shows, there are many many ways to compute “how skilled” you are. Hard to tell what’s the most “fair”.

/jdegre.

Better question would be: “How good are you at your chosen profession?”
It obviously makes no sense to have 20 useless professions, but MA’s way of ranking makes it artificially worthwhile.
Perhaps ranking should only be counted by the three main professions? So being good at all combat disciplines, crafting and mining at leasts rules out the 50 or so useless skills.

[Xen]

I’m pretty sure MA just adds up the skill totals for each avatar and uses the average.

And btw,

← <2k total under the info tab, <1k animal taming/lore, no beauty, no tailoring, no coloring, etc… Many people in top societies didn’t get there just by skilling “useless” skills. :rolleyes:

[Cyane_Cyanee_Ca]

Isnt it pretty fair to assume that Ma would use a system they already have implemented to count skills? Meaning imo the most probably way to do it would be to use the Esi total value of skills, i guess an average of pro standings could make sence too…but since this is a more recent addition that probably isnt the case.

[Mandragon]

@dbelinfante

What CBB is saying (and I kinda agree with that) is that in a practical sense, a lvl 50 blp sniper is a lot more useful and valuable than a player who is lvl 20 in 7 different disciplines (4 of which are Robot Investigator, Pet Handler, Humanoid Investigator and Animal Tamer ;)). But if only the total amount of skills is important, then you could (theoretically) have a top 20 soc, that gets its ass kicked by an equally large soc of dedicated hunters/pk’ers who don’t even make the top 50.

I have to disagree with this, the example you use is only relevant to hunting or PvP. The Lvl50 BLP has 50 Lvl’s the other has a total of 140 Lvl’s, the area’s those skills cover is irrelevant, he/she is more skilled, end of story.

So what if the top 20 soc (in your example) get’s it’s ass kicked in PvP, maybe they are a crafting soc, or a pacifist soc! Hunting isn’t the only use for skills, so what if someone wants to spend all their time taming animals, maybe they enjoy that more than running around shooting mobs. This is a ‘Virtual Universe’ not everyone in the ‘real universe’ has the same areas of ability, is a banker of less skill than an athlete, is a doctor less skilled than a lawyer? Skill is skill, the area it covers doesn’t matter, it has been worked for in some way and should be recognised as such.

I’m not ‘picking’ on you as an individual, just using your post because it seemed to sum up most peoples attitude towards the skills being discussed. Hope I didn’t go overboard but this annoys me! I was in a soc with an entry level of 50k skills (I only had 15k total and felt I was below standard so left) because they are aiming for top 50 status, good luck to them. But the idea that only some skills should apply or are more important is really annoying, and a completely false assumption. If you are a hunter, yes rifle is of more use than taming for example, but if you decide you want to get a pet your rifle skill will not help!

So in summation…I think total skills is the fairest possible guage of a players ability, not the selection of a few high level skills. Wherever those skills are they are still hard earned and useful for something, whether or not you agree!
(Eg..Scan Human, yes it may seem pointless, but some people like scanning people to see what they are wearing, their skill levels etc…therefore it has a use! A limited and narrow use, but still nevertheless a use!)

Thank you for reading my rant :ahh: