How Do You Define the Best Player?

[Madtown]

Now this topic is no suppose to be about naming names or alliances so try to refrain from that.

Now the question I am posing is how does everyone define the best player in the game and why.




For me the best player in this game comes down to who has the strongest will in this game and do to the way this game is set up a player that has and is willing to put quite a bit of time into this game. My reasoning behind this is that in this game stats mean nothing as most people know and so with that rank means nothing but you have something to mass. Now one could argue that army size could be the strongest though the reason I choose not to make this important is the fact that anyone over 50mil army size could potentially mass almost anyone in this game or any LG over 100mil army size could mass anyone in this game. So this is why I choose will and time as my factors for who is the best.

So what does everyone else think makes the best player?

[Clarkey]

Cheaters

[Demon Eater]

[Amar]

Well this game is really based on time. Whoever puts the most time into it will have the most powerful account. I say the bestplayers are those who fight the best and most. Therefore, Mr. .. oops almost said it. (I dont get it i just saw auriel say it)

[RepliMagni]

The best player? Someone who doesn't go running around massing noobs, but when the time comes will stand by his alliance mates and do his best for the alliance

[Nightmare]

You can't.
Period

[Amar]

That's me!

[[BERSERKER]]

Somebody who puts the game in front of their actual life in order to gain a competitive edge!

[Draleg]

You can't.
Period

seconded

[1horseman]

But then can you define the top 10/25/50?

[Envy]

But then can you define the top 10/25/50?

These days not really anymore.

simple reason massings alway's happens in team ofcource u have certian people that proved themselfs as best. But best of the best their is non.

People cant be better than others as if u mass they both will do it in the same thing 1 ats than 15 when the defence suits u the best. Thats a Good massing but doesn't make u the best.


So its hard by naming names.

[semper]

to find the best, one would have to have a state of perfection to compare to and say who is the closest to THAT level. As no 'perfect' account or style of game play exist's, the best player has to be drawn from the categories of power (referent, expertise and 'physical') army size and contacts, to see who has the most in each.

Namely to do so would be nigh impossible.
So yes, Imfamous is right, it cannot be done, and is just subjective on the communities stance at any given second.

[RepliMagni]

I don't think he meant "can you define", but how does each person define it....ie: what kind of player do you emulate and aspire to play like....obviously its subjective because its everyones opinions....

[SVaRuN]

But then can you define the top 10/25/50?

These days not really anymore.

simple reason massings alway's happens in team ofcource u have certian people that proved themselfs as best. But best of the best their is non.

People cant be better than others as if u mass they both will do it in the same thing 1 ats than 15 when the defence suits u the best. Thats a Good massing but doesn't make u the best.


So its hard by naming names.

Is it really just that...pressing the buttons...
Is it only about time?
What about predicting...?
What about making the best out of the situation?
What about being able to gether ppl?
What about being able to talk your way around things?
What about finding XYZ ways to grow, make money, to get stronger?
What about having the "guts" to do some things and what about having the brains to just do some that matters...


Imo its hard to find the best its hard to name names...but you can if you want and if you try to be as objective as possible...



Blue

[Rocky]

But then can you define the top 10/25/50?

These days not really anymore.

simple reason massings alway's happens in team ofcource u have certian people that proved themselfs as best. But best of the best their is non.

People cant be better than others as if u mass they both will do it in the same thing 1 ats than 15 when the defence suits u the best. Thats a Good massing but doesn't make u the best.


So its hard by naming names.

Is it really just that...pressing the buttons...
Is it only about time?
What about predicting...?
What about making the best out of the situation?
What about being able to gether ppl?
What about being able to talk your way around things?
What about finding XYZ ways to grow, make money, to get stronger?
What about having the "guts" to do some things and what about having the brains to just do some that matters...


Imo its hard to find the best its hard to name names...but you can if you want and if you try to be as objective as possible...



Blue

thats a nice listy ou have there and it pretty much sums up how you define the best player in each different way, most people would argue army size, stats and Alliance but some of those points are good ones and very true, the only thing i would add it how respected is someone and because of that will not be farmed or massed, also about reputation.