Greatest player criterea...serious discussion

[jedi~tank]

Often times we have started threads about all time greatest and best players in this game, so how about a discussion thread about criteria..let me ask you this question...

What criteria in your opinion would constitute a player being one of the all time greats? I am not asking for your opinion about specific individuals..I am asking for a list, a formula of sorts devised..perhaps even with a rating system of 1-10 for points mentioned..let me give you an example of what I mean so as not to open the door for unnecessarry arguing..

1- impact on the game
2- leadership
3- longevity
4- influence..whether positive or negative
5- game change ability- did the player change or influence change of the game
6- politics
7- presence

etc..etc..etc...

All of the above are just examples, but you get the jist of my thoughts here. Enjoy.

[semper]

I think you have a fairly straight set of criteria there actually JT. It's a set that addresses more aspects of play than just "takin down a HUGE defence with the $500 he just spent" or "He sat down and layed waste to his social life for five years earning him a skill ranking on SGW so he's great".

I'd only add in some of the more and also important practical parts like massing/fighting ability. Are they an exceptional farmer or raider (and I mean exceptional....).

[Juliette]

Seems to be a straightforward enough set of criteria.

[~Dä Vinci~]

no one really it's a game so there just friends.. i can't put a finger on a greatest players they all have there unique points and there flaws..

[MEZZANINE]

Criteria seem fair enough but the whole question is far too subjective and down to personal preferences/experiences to score or agree on a winner.

Also you could never have an 'all time' winner since many of the greats had left the game or had their best days before many of the current players even started.

[Lithium]

maybe u can just add sacrifice for others

[Quina Quen]

maybe u can just add sacrifice for others

Definitely this.

'Taking one for the team' as I would put it myself.

[Ashu]

I think that this can only be defined by the only criteria valuable enough for me personally to point out who the greatest player is/was, and that is the impact he had on me and that build into me as a player and person.

By that criteria, segment of though i believe Semper and BMMJ13.

[Lithium]

also cash player yes/not attached next to the player

and dont forget its a war game

[semper]

and dont forget its a war game

Partly yes, but not entirely. It's an MMORPG. I'd say only someone with a very limited skill set could consider this as merely a war game.

[Noobert]

Taking one for the team definitely needs to be there.

Eg: Individuals who lack the capabilities to mass a massive defense, so throw in UU to help out.

[jedi~tank]

maybe u can just add sacrifice for others

That can be under leadership? As leading by example more often than not is infectious.

[Quina Quen]

That can be under leadership? As leading by example more often than not is infectious.

A little different JT - consider your average 'bully' who wouldn't dare/bother take on an alliance leader due to them generally being more powerful than the rest of his/her alliance members.

Taking one for the team, at least in my definition of such, would imply allowing yourself to take a beating (irrespective of if you deserved it or not) without turning to the alliance and/or negotiating with your aggressor to leave your fellow alliance members out of it. Sometimes, some people get into hot water through no fault of their own but are loyal enough to their comrades to take an ass whooping for the team from much more 'powerful' players.

[jedi~tank]

That can be under leadership? As leading by example more often than not is infectious.

A little different JT - consider your average 'bully' who wouldn't dare/bother take on an alliance leader due to them generally being more powerful than the rest of his/her alliance members.

Taking one for the team, at least in my definition of such, would imply allowing yourself to take a beating (irrespective of if you deserved it or not) without turning to the alliance and/or negotiating with your aggressor to leave your fellow alliance members out of it. Sometimes, some people get into hot water through no fault of their own but are loyal enough to their comrades to take an ass whooping for the team from much more 'powerful' players.

I agree with that to a degree..just to be sure I understand you properly..example, in DDE we commonly take turns or have taken part in running the gauntlet so to speak, and its usually the bigger players that roll with juicy relatively easy(not easy, but not hard either) stuff to kill thus drawing the fire of a team so the lesser accounts can function better than they could otherwise...is this the same thing as to what you are suggesting? Because being massed or massing does not make for greatness really..its a enter function and anyone can do it.

[solmyr]

That can be under leadership? As leading by example more often than not is infectious.

A little different JT - consider your average 'bully' who wouldn't dare/bother take on an alliance leader due to them generally being more powerful than the rest of his/her alliance members.

Taking one for the team, at least in my definition of such, would imply allowing yourself to take a beating (irrespective of if you deserved it or not) without turning to the alliance and/or negotiating with your aggressor to leave your fellow alliance members out of it. Sometimes, some people get into hot water through no fault of their own but are loyal enough to their comrades to take an ass whooping for the team from much more 'powerful' players.

like i used to be a vendetta **Filtered** to save my nooby TC

but yeah i like this, i like player for

personality
fighting/farming skill
mostly the way they play the game though, being dependable/honest.

for instance JT has my respect beacuse less because he raged on about ME and MS and that war all those times, but because he has never ever wavered from DDE or his beat-em-up stance. hero, villian dont matter, as long as your true to character and i love alliance loyalty. Gives me an idea for a new thread tehe


viewtopic.php?f=101&t=186822