*it's funny that he copied my tournaments as his example.*

Yep, found you in other topic about profile ;) Just for show the star for tourney's 1st place.

I love the re-design you've created. Especially the graph of win percentages. Would be cool to see something like this implemented.

And, obviously win percentages mean something. They just don't mean everything.

Looks nice - feel free to send it to me at fizzer@warlight.net

win percentages mean next to nothing... I could create two accounts, and through proper tampering have them show 10% and 95% quite simply.. win ratio also doesn't take into account competition.. playing all auto games will tend to yield a higher winrate than playing in only tourneys with the top players, for instance.. not counting ofc' that winning 1/12th of the time in a 12 man ffa is equivalant to winning 1/2 the time in a 1v1, but the overall w/r does not recognize the difference..

that being said, I think it looks great, +1

Way to regurgitate what everyone else already said there Perrin...

thank you, I do my best

Win % is indeed THE most important stat that can't be cheated, always use it as a guideline.

My 58% 1v1, 59% 2v2 and 3v3 clearly indicate that I am an average player. Threat me as such when playing against me!

It seems like the complaint about overall win % is based on the fact that it is misleading, but I believe this isn't too hard to fix? Just take observed/expected (ex- I win 23% of 6 person FFAs, while expected is 16 and 2/3), then have sample size influence power (ex- I win 100% of 12 player FFAs- but I have only played one 12 player FFA). Then correct for opponents ability by weighting an individuals wins based off of their opponents overall %...

Oh yeah so that basically turns every ranked game into a ladder game, which reduces the importance of membership and makes the change counter productive to implement. If there is a change it will most likely be cosmetic and won't offer any new information, but cosmetic changes can be positive- so quit yer complainin!

All hail the almighty lobster ^

winning % is a very meaningful indicator, when used in connection with other information on the profile page.

indicators:

- winning %: 1v1s, 3v3s, 2v2s, FFAs, other team games. low FFAs % + high 1v1 % = weaker team player (maybe). high team % + low 1v1 = more cooperative teammate (maybe). well known player with high 1v1 %, good team %, but low FFA % = less strategically imaginative, relies on map/settings familiarity.
- join date: (a) after oct 2011 (winning % is inflated 10%-30%), (b) before aug 2011 (winning percentage is somewhat more reliable), (c) between aug 2011 and oct 2011 (maybe subtract 5% to 15% from players winning % to get a more reliable figure %)
- common games: (a) we have no common games (for me that means this person plays a lot of nobodies and the wins dont matter much, given the variety of games i play), (b) we have played (so i watch the moves, which tell me what that person was capable of *at the time of that game*)
- tournaments: have i seen this player in tournaments, even if i haven't played him/her? if so, the games are available to look at. moves on the board dont lie.
- ladder: the player is (a) on the ladder (ladder rank is a good indicator too) or (b) not on the ladder.
- name: certain names are rather stupid. it's like porn: you know a stupid name when you see it. a simple, unimaginative mind will make a certain type of name, while more intelligent people make other types of names.
- clan affiliation: if in a clan, that clan's affiliation points to ability. warlighters are cannon fodder, for example.
- in-game conversation: (a) team chat: if the player is uncooperative, hostile, selfish, overly sensitive, unwilling to help, unwilling to give or accept useful suggestions, this is a great indicator of overall ability. (b) public chat: harder to gauge, but the players' words here do provide impressions.
- understanding of game etiquette
- game settings when host: if the player hosts a game with strange, unfair or unbalanced settings as a means to gain a competitive advantage, this shows what type of player s/he is.

you only have one thing on there, evereux, which tries to solve the solution of the quality of the players the person plays with, which is really the primary problem with taking win % seriously.

it could be interesting to have a graph showing w/r in the common games section for each player, as that would be more reliable imho.

"a simple, unimaginative mind will make a certain type of name"

fuck. i guess being called "x" ranks me somewhere between fartzilla and poop sandwich.

X, it could be worse. Like, xxx - or something.

|> "a simple, unimaginative mind will make a certain type of name"
fuck. i guess being called "x" ranks me somewhere between fartzilla and poop sandwich.

But still well above anyone with an obviously contrived "Dr." prefix.

*Dr. XXX*

Whatever, I'm going with Gui's definition. Choosing your real name has to be the least imaginative name possible. Mine clearly denotes intelligence. Before I changed my name from just plain old "TypeSomething" I sucked. When I added the "Dr." in front of my name I instantly became awesome at Warlight.

|> Before I changed my name from just plain old "TypeSomething" I sucked. When I added the "Dr." in front of my name I instantly became awesome at Warlight.

Having the name "TypeSomething" tells the world that you don't even know what your own name is. Or have a grasp of capitalization. Adding "Dr." means you put extra thought into it, and still couldn't figure it out.

I think clearly we can't settle this on our own. Gui can be the judge. Just like in porn, he knows an imaginative name when he sees one.

My name is the best, ever.