lvl up

[GodlikeDennis]

I guess my working definition of a high level player would be someone who has a core understanding of all factions' units, teching and build orders and is proficient in the use of at least one faction to the point they are regularly able to win and are comfortable with performing at least several different strategies. They should be able to read and adapt to basic enemy strats and build orders against any faction and be able to adjust their own plan according to map control.

[SuperSoca]

It basically cost them money do it. And don't get any money from it. It's business.

To be exact, it's not up to Relic to add it, it's up to THQ to decide to add it. Then Relic can add it.

I fell sad about that. I really wish EF have a ranking sistem. I'm willing to buy/donate to this .

I guess my working definition of a high level player would be someone who has a core understanding of all factions' units, teching and build orders and is proficient in the use of at least one faction to the point they are regularly able to win and are comfortable with performing at least several different strategies. They should be able to read and adapt to basic enemy strats and build orders against any faction and be able to adjust their own plan according to map control.

Nice descript. I would add: "Players of lvl 15+" on it.

[GodlikeDennis]

Players of level 15 or more should easily cover those points, as should most people of 12+ or so.

[Chancellor]

I personally use 1v1 automatch rank as the only rank system to judge player skills, since the player and the player alone is the sole determinant of the outcome of the match.  2v2 random / AT ranks also hold credibility, although they are influenced by the skill of the partner, which is why 1v1 ranks are more solid.

1v1 Automatch Rank
1-5    - Total idiot to Noob Player
6-7    - Bad Player
8-9    - Below Average Player
10-11 - Above Average Player
12-13 - Good Player
14-20 - Very good to Gosu player

These also translate into partner reliability when choosing your respective partner for team matches, assuming you are facing an Average Joe team.

Partner Reliability
1-5    - These guys are fuck ups.  Don't expect them to do anything but give the enemy their own heavy weapons and also free vet.
Never reliable.

6-7    - Expect these guys to make lots of mistakes.  Don't expect them to be productive.  Partner with them at your own risk.
Very unreliable.

8-9    - These guys might do their part sometimes, but partnering with them is still risky.
Generally unreliable.

10-11 - They will do their fair share most of the time, and are generally productive, but don't count on it too much.
Generally reliable.

12-13 - You can be confident they will do their part.  These guys very rarely make mistakes, but you still can't expect to be carried to victory all the time either.
Very reliable.

14-20 - Unless you are a total idiot, prepare to be carried to victory.
Always reliable.

[cephalos]

Hey! That's not fair! I hate those levels and skill comparing! They spoil good fun, when you are getting kicked out of lobby because " 8+ only" or " lvl5, hes n00b". I don't play 1v1 Automatch AT ALL, and I'm not bad player ( can't compare to Yauz, though  ).

[Seeme]

Same here, cephalos.

[Killar]

You forgot to clarifiy who is rly at that rank and who is a smurf. A 25:24 ratio at lvl 7 1vs1 gives you a hint that this guy is rly on this particular lvl. When you have a lvl 8 10:2 ratio who began to play not long ago then there is hope that he is either a smurf or didnt develope his full potential yet.

In addition you have to recognize that when you begin to play a 1vs1 you will not play against the same rank all the time. You will face much higher ranks to determine how good your skills are.

[Max 'DonXavi' von B.]

Hey! That's not fair! I hate those levels and skill comparing! They spoil good fun, when you are getting kicked out of lobby because " 8+ only" or " lvl5, hes n00b". I don't play 1v1 Automatch AT ALL, and I'm not bad player ( can't compare to Yauz, though  ).

+9999999

[Pac-Fish]

Whats a smurf? I keep seeing that in multiplayer

[Alexander 'ApeMen' J.]

smurfs are players with new acc´s

sometimes they want to hid how good they are sometimes how bad^^



about the ranked games
i would say yes and no

i mean yauz is right about this

1v1 Automatch Rank
1-5    - Total idiot to Noob Player
6-7    - Bad Player
8-9    - Below Average Player
10-11 - Above Average Player
12-13 - Good Player
14-20 - Very good to Gosu player

but there are also many good players who never played in ranked games

[SuperSoca]

I personally use 1v1 automatch rank as the only rank system to judge player skills, since the player and the player alone is the sole determinant of the outcome of the match.

1v1 Automatch Rank
1-5    - Total idiot to Noob Player
6-7    - Bad Player
8-9    - Below Average Player
10-11 - Above Average Player
12-13 - Good Player
14-20 - Very good to Gosu player

Always reliable.

I agree with that, 1v1 automatch is the only reliable system to measure player skill. But i'm more cetic: I belive that only players 12-13 is above average, as lvl 12 players that I play on 1v1 frequently send hordes of airborne rigth to my feets.

[Chancellor]

Hey! That's not fair! I hate those levels and skill comparing! They spoil good fun, when you are getting kicked out of lobby because " 8+ only" or " lvl5, hes n00b". I don't play 1v1 Automatch AT ALL, and I'm not bad player ( can't compare to Yauz, though  ).

Heheh theres two sides to that coin too.  I get kicked a lot of times from basic matches too.  It doesn't really matter on vCoH, since I can always enter automatch, but on EF it gets really irritating trying to find a game.  No one enters the 1v1 games I host, and when I enter someone else's game I get kicked lol

@ Supersocca ^^: For me, I just looked at the distribution of skill like a bell-shaped curve, whereas level 9-10 would be around the 50% mark on either side.  If as you say levels 12-13 is "Above Average Player", then the distribution of "Below Average Players" and under would be around 80-85% of the CoH player base.

[FLgator]

These are all interesting points. Vonklaus and I average anywhere from lvl 6-8. I know that we have smoked a lot of you that say lvl 6-8 players are bad.

I guess we play better as a team. We probably are not as good in 1v1 situations.
About 20 of my losses on EF have been from the game freezing. Other times players have dropped and that is an auto loss usually.  Many games I go into with a noob partner playing against good players. A loss to be sure, but a challenge. Sometimes on EF there just aren't many players to choose from. You get tired of waiting so you just roll with someone who has never played before. Point I'm trying to make is that rank is not always indicitive of a good or bad player. Yhcrana is a very good PE player and only a lvl 8. Not sure exactly why that is. I think on the whole, a players level tells a lot, but not always. I follow the 'I know it when I see it approach.' 

My other question would be, what makes a rank? Is it soley based on your win/loss percentage, or is it also based on how you score in the game, etc.? 

[Dot.Shadow]

Well to bad for them. I know plenty of high level players who play this mod. And don't forget, there's Germans!

Considering that the guy who was #1 Terror Wehr Player in CoHO plays EF and loves it, I don't think it is an issue.

[GodlikeDennis]

Hey I was number 3 Blitz player for 4 days until I got bored .