Is there a way of measuring how much skill it takes to overcome a certain tactic?
Lets say that there are two similarly skilled players in an FPS, one is a camper, the other is an assaulter. In a certain situation, it takes the assaulter, on average, five attempts before he can take out the camper. So that would mean the camper has a 5x skill advantage.
But if the player acting as the assaulter was considerably more skilled than the camper and manage to maintain a 1:1 kill ratio. Then that would mean he's 5x more skilled than the camper. A skilled camper on the other hand, will be expecting his attacks so it's back to the camper having the 10x advantage.
The thing is, when i'm in debates regarding tactics. The other guys would often reply, "meh, i can just go in there and kill him". Completely disregarding the whole point of being a camper (Hard to reach, but easy to kill from). I have the sudden urge slam the table on top of him every time this happens.
When it comes to arguments regarding tactics, i always assume that both players/teams are of the same skill level before weighing the pros and cons (Never assume that you're better than the other guy!).
When in a team game, if there are 16 people on your team, there are probably around 2 that are actually elite level. If you're a good tactician, you don't base your tactics on how well those two elites do, you base them on the fact that there are 14 cannon fodders on your team.
So i need a way of quantifying skill just so i can put teammates in different categories.
Lets say that there are two similarly skilled players in an FPS, one is a camper, the other is an assaulter. In a certain situation, it takes the assaulter, on average, five attempts before he can take out the camper. So that would mean the camper has a 5x skill advantage.
But if the player acting as the assaulter was considerably more skilled than the camper and manage to maintain a 1:1 kill ratio. Then that would mean he's 5x more skilled than the camper. A skilled camper on the other hand, will be expecting his attacks so it's back to the camper having the 10x advantage.
The thing is, when i'm in debates regarding tactics. The other guys would often reply, "meh, i can just go in there and kill him". Completely disregarding the whole point of being a camper (Hard to reach, but easy to kill from). I have the sudden urge slam the table on top of him every time this happens.
When it comes to arguments regarding tactics, i always assume that both players/teams are of the same skill level before weighing the pros and cons (Never assume that you're better than the other guy!).
When in a team game, if there are 16 people on your team, there are probably around 2 that are actually elite level. If you're a good tactician, you don't base your tactics on how well those two elites do, you base them on the fact that there are 14 cannon fodders on your team.
So i need a way of quantifying skill just so i can put teammates in different categories.