Quantifying Skill in AW

I've heard from a few players that it is impossible to quantify 'skill' in AW. Since I know the players who assert this have more game experience than I do, and I feel that they are being sincere, I'd first like to develop a working definition of what 'Skill' means in AW. Here's what I throw out for consideration.

Skill (in AW): The optimal utilization of upgrades, strategies, buffs/nerfs, diplomacy and game play towards the long-term maximization of earned SP, within the continuum of AW contests.

Reworded: Earning as much SP as you can with the tools you have available, per turn of gameplay, over the long-haul.

Notes:
- Skill is only pertinent to the maximization of SP. Some may be skilled at trolling. Not relevant. Some may be skilled at creating scenarios. Helpful to the game community, but not relevant. In CWs, the win IS the maximization of SP.
- A player with one Rank 3 account may indeed have more 'skill' than a Rank 10 player, but they may not be as effective in earning SP/turn played because they don't have the upgrades/strategies etc. to utilize. The most highly-skilled Rank 3 player is likely to lose against the most unskilled Rank 10 player due to experience as well as upgrades.
- Honorable play is compatible with this definition. A reputation of WFs and backstabs will earn one enemies, who might value the offender's obliteration more than their own SP maximization, short term.
- Skill can increase through experience. Losing SP to a skilled player, if the lessons are properly applied, is a short-term investment in the player's long-term maximization of SP.
- Playstyle, preferred game types, random events, and other tangible/intangible events may affect the outcome of a particular contest.
- People play AW for fun (it isn't an esport, at least not yet).

I didn't even bother reading it, but DELETE IT.

Just some minor comments:

• Check the player statistics for some discussions: https://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=9508.
  
• SP is definitely the worst indicator for skills since custom maps/scenarios are in the area! Take for instance players like Goblin, who only plays duels or 3v3s; he will never get as much SPs per turn as those players that play UN or other SP boosted maps/scenarios.
  
• ELO has a direct correlation to won duels; thus, can be considered as a vague indicator of due-winning-efficiency. But, check discussion on duel massification versus duel optimization.
  
• SP per turns played and player aggressiveness: players who play casual games tend to have a higher SP/turn and PCP/turn ratio.

Skill can't be measured. Skill cannot be defined by the ability to earn most SP in a game. First you have UN scenarios etc etc, second you might be playing a 3v3 where you die and take out two players with you or so on ; The variables to measure skill are too much.

I think it's just luck since I don't even know how TBing works but it happens to me alot and I lose games because muh 30 or so stack of infantry was attacked by 5 bombers on their way to my capital and never moved and my capital was taken and those motherfuggen Milita spawned in my capital and the enemy general is in my capital and its a reinforcement turn and I'm PD for christ sake and I spend like all my money for troops to take my capital back and I don't end up taking it because of reinforements and I quit

I blame Amok

This thread is bad and you should feel bad. Delete it.

Thanks for your opinion, but maybe there is a language problem here. If you and English are homeboys, perhaps you read my post with an agenda in mind, rather than an attempt to answer a question.

I am asking "what is skill"? Then I posted a working definition.
I do agree it is ENTIRELY POSSIBLE that skill cannot be quantified, but before even going down that road we would need a definition of what skill it.

Anecdotal: I have heard you are a highly-capable player. I know you are successful at winning duels. Many consider you 'skilled'.

Escrito por Goblin, 17.02.2014 at 03:11

Please delete this topic.

EDIT: i did read it all ...no statistic can be a good messure for skill. Not ELO, SP, battle PVP or anything but your own expirience against a certain player.

I know it's been rough for you. Literacy, maths, even elementary reasoning confuses you. You used to try to understand, but then you felt belittled and condescended to. You felt lonely, but soon found it was easier to lash out than even try to understand. Eventually you found others like you and you finally felt a sense of community.

Well, I'm not laughing. Please, continue to share your feelings. This is a safe place.

Escrito por bullet86, 17.02.2014 at 03:13

I didn't even bother reading it, but DELETE IT.

I do understand that it may not be possible to measure what skill is.
To work on falsifying the premise, I put a working definition of what skill is for consideration.

How do you define skill and how does it differ from my working definition?

Escrito por The Tactician, 17.02.2014 at 08:06

Skill can't be measured. Skill cannot be defined by the ability to earn most SP in a game. First you have UN scenarios etc etc, second you might be playing a 3v3 where you die and take out two players with you or so on ; The variables to measure skill are too much.

I am definitely interested in looking at the statistics.
However the question is "how do you define skill and how does it differ from my working definition?"

In the case of Goblin-as-a-dueler, my definition of skill absolutely applies (though it may not be accurate)"
If Gob only duels, and generally duels with those with similar upgrades, and Gob generally wins these contests, then he is definitely "maximizing SP ... within the continuum of AW contests." The whole "continuum of AW contests is there for those who choose to play primarily CWs and duels.

Escrito por Columna Durruti, 17.02.2014 at 06:38

Just some minor comments:

• Check the player statistics for some discussions: https://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=9508.
  
• SP is definitely the worst indicator for skills since custom maps/scenarios are in the area! Take for instance players like Goblin, who only plays duels or 3v3s; he will never get as much SPs per turn as those players that play UN or other SP boosted maps/scenarios.
  
• ELO has a direct correlation to won duels; thus, can be considered as a vague indicator of due-winning-efficiency. But, check discussion on duel massification versus duel optimization.
  
• SP per turns played and player aggressiveness: players who play casual games tend to have a higher SP/turn and PCP/turn ratio.

I know it's been rough for you. Literacy, maths, even elementary reasoning confuses you. You used to try to understand, but then you felt belittled and condescended to. You felt lonely, but soon found it was easier to lash out than even try to understand. Eventually you found others like you and you finally felt a sense of community.

Well, I'm not laughing. Please, continue to share your feelings. This is a safe place.

Escrito por Skittzophrenic, 17.02.2014 at 11:21

This thread is bad and you should feel bad. Delete it.

Escrito por zombieyeti, 17.02.2014 at 16:38

I know it's been rough for you. Literacy, maths, even elementary reasoning confuses you. You used to try to understand, but then you felt belittled and condescended to. You felt lonely, but soon found it was easier to lash out than even try to understand. Eventually you found others like you and you finally felt a sense of community.

Well, I'm not laughing. Please, continue to share your feelings. This is a safe place.

Escrito por Skittzophrenic, 17.02.2014 at 11:21

This thread is bad and you should feel bad. Delete it.

What the heck did you just flipping say about me, you big meanie? I'll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Tiny Tots Program, and I've been involved in numerous secret raids on the girl's bathroom, and I have over 300 confirmed noogies. I am trained in Nerf warfare and I have the most gold stars in the entire kindergarten class. You are nothing to me but just another butthead. I will beat you the heck up with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my dang words. You think you can get away with saying that baloney to me on the glowy type-box? Think again, doodiehead. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of teachers across the USA and your parents are being called to pick you up right now so you better prepare for the spanking, junior. The spanking that wipes out the dumb little thing you call your playtime. You're in big darn trouble, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can wedgie you in over seven hundred ways, and that's just with my bare hands. Not only am I extensively trained in unarmed fartfights, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the United States PTA and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your dorky bottom off the face of the playground, you little poopypants. If only you could have known what serious punishments your little "smartypants" comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your goshdarned tongue. But you couldn't, you didn't, and now you're paying the price, you silly doofus. I will spray boogers all over you and you will cry about it. You're frickin grounded, buttmunch

I am glad you feel better, but delivering a threat of physical harm over the internet doesn't really make this a safe place to share feelings anymore, does it? And one shouldn't threaten a child with physical harm should they?
It really doesn't make this a safe place to share feelings anymore.

Your threat is bad, and you should feel bad about making it. We'll work on emotional control next.

Escrito por Skittzophrenic, 17.02.2014 at 16:55

Escrito por zombieyeti, 17.02.2014 at 16:38

I know it's been rough for you. Literacy, maths, even elementary reasoning confuses you. You used to try to understand, but then you felt belittled and condescended to. You felt lonely, but soon found it was easier to lash out than even try to understand. Eventually you found others like you and you finally felt a sense of community.

Well, I'm not laughing. Please, continue to share your feelings. This is a safe place.

Escrito por Skittzophrenic, 17.02.2014 at 11:21

This thread is bad and you should feel bad. Delete it.

What the heck did you just flipping say about me, you big meanie? I'll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Tiny Tots Program, and I've been involved in numerous secret raids on the girl's bathroom, and I have over 300 confirmed noogies. I am trained in Nerf warfare and I have the most gold stars in the entire kindergarten class. You are nothing to me but just another butthead. I will beat you the heck up with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my dang words. You think you can get away with saying that baloney to me on the glowy type-box? Think again, doodiehead. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of teachers across the USA and your parents are being called to pick you up right now so you better prepare for the spanking, junior. The spanking that wipes out the dumb little thing you call your playtime. You're in big darn trouble, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can wedgie you in over seven hundred ways, and that's just with my bare hands. Not only am I extensively trained in unarmed fartfights, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the United States PTA and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your dorky bottom off the face of the playground, you little poopypants. If only you could have known what serious punishments your little "smartypants" comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your goshdarned tongue. But you couldn't, you didn't, and now you're paying the price, you silly doofus. I will spray boogers all over you and you will cry about it. You're frickin grounded, buttmunch

Escrito por zombieyeti, 17.02.2014 at 17:13

I am glad you feel better, but delivering a threat of physical harm over the internet doesn't really make this a safe place to share feelings anymore, does it? And one shouldn't threaten a child with physical harm should they?
It really doesn't make this a safe place to share feelings anymore.

Your threat is bad, and you should feel bad about making it. We'll work on emotional control next.

Escrito por Skittzophrenic, 17.02.2014 at 16:55

Escrito por zombieyeti, 17.02.2014 at 16:38

I know it's been rough for you. Literacy, maths, even elementary reasoning confuses you. You used to try to understand, but then you felt belittled and condescended to. You felt lonely, but soon found it was easier to lash out than even try to understand. Eventually you found others like you and you finally felt a sense of community.

Well, I'm not laughing. Please, continue to share your feelings. This is a safe place.

Escrito por Skittzophrenic, 17.02.2014 at 11:21

This thread is bad and you should feel bad. Delete it.

What the heck did you just flipping say about me, you big meanie? I'll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Tiny Tots Program, and I've been involved in numerous secret raids on the girl's bathroom, and I have over 300 confirmed noogies. I am trained in Nerf warfare and I have the most gold stars in the entire kindergarten class. You are nothing to me but just another butthead. I will beat you the heck up with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my dang words. You think you can get away with saying that baloney to me on the glowy type-box? Think again, doodiehead. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of teachers across the USA and your parents are being called to pick you up right now so you better prepare for the spanking, junior. The spanking that wipes out the dumb little thing you call your playtime. You're in big darn trouble, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can wedgie you in over seven hundred ways, and that's just with my bare hands. Not only am I extensively trained in unarmed fartfights, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the United States PTA and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your dorky bottom off the face of the playground, you little poopypants. If only you could have known what serious punishments your little "smartypants" comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your goshdarned tongue. But you couldn't, you didn't, and now you're paying the price, you silly doofus. I will spray boogers all over you and you will cry about it. You're frickin grounded, buttmunch

http://vocaroo.com/i/s0txMB2YHR2r

A rank 12 at the top of his game could leave for a year and come back and then play like a noob as a result of being away from atwar for so long. All of his elo, stats, exc don't make for a fair representation of the player he is today.

Also, I think you should get your panties out of a twist, stop touching your nipples, and stop being so serious. It's a game bro have fun/ c:

Escrito por Fockmeeard, 17.02.2014 at 17:26

A rank 12 at the top of his game could leave for a year and come back and then play like a noob as a result of being away from atwar for so long. All of his elo, stats, exc don't make for a fair representation of the player he is today.

Also, I think you should get your panties out of a twist, stop touching your nipples, and stop being so serious. It's a game bro have fun/ c:

I hope it's not me xd

Your point is well taken. I do not deny the possibility that a rank 12 could leave for a year and come back and then play like a noob etc.

But I am not sure of the relevance of your statement to the question "what is skill"?

Escrito por Fockmeeard, 17.02.2014 at 17:26

A rank 12 at the top of his game could leave for a year and come back and then play like a noob as a result of being away from atwar for so long. All of his elo, stats, exc don't make for a fair representation of the player he is today.

Also, I think you should get your panties out of a twist, stop touching your nipples, and stop being so serious. It's a game bro have fun/ c:

Escrito por zombieyeti, 17.02.2014 at 16:36

I do understand that it may not be possible to measure what skill is.
To work on falsifying the premise, I put a working definition of what skill is for consideration.

How do you define skill and how does it differ from my working definition?

Escrito por The Tactician, 17.02.2014 at 08:06

Skill can't be measured. Skill cannot be defined by the ability to earn most SP in a game. First you have UN scenarios etc etc, second you might be playing a 3v3 where you die and take out two players with you or so on ; The variables to measure skill are too much.

Like i said the variable's are too much for even defining skill. A player may be skilled in a scenario but not a 3v3, or a custom map but not world, etc. The closest thing i can think of is being put in any situation and maximizing efficiency in that situation. That way, if a player can only play one country then he is skilled in only that country but an overall noob in everything else. What contributes to this "skill" is experience, upgrade, wit, and tactical and strategical insight among others. Thats the best i can come up with.

I'm not speaking to measuring the thing-called-skill (which I hope people realize) until we've got a good definition of what 'skill' is. You may be entirely correct. There might be a good definition of what skill is, and that definition cannot be measured satisfactorily. I stopped trying to measure skill until we have that definition hacked out.

I do very much agree that overall AW skill is doing the best one can in a situation, or, as you put it "... being put in any situation and maximizing efficiency in that situation." Your 'closest' definition is only a bit more abstract than my working definition, but we both touch on the same principles: efficency and maximization.

Most times, would that mean one of these, or something like these?
- Winning [hopefully with honor]
- Helping Allies to win, when a personal win is unlikely?
- 'Maximizing a loss' [when a loss is inevitable] (play on to learn, earn as much SP as possible before surrender/defeat, damage the enemy who damaged you etc.)?
- 'Strategic Surrender' (surrendering early in the game, when a win is unlikely, but not yet inevitable)?

Escrito por The Tactician, 17.02.2014 at 23:15

Escrito por zombieyeti, 17.02.2014 at 16:36

I do understand that it may not be possible to measure what skill is.
To work on falsifying the premise, I put a working definition of what skill is for consideration.

How do you define skill and how does it differ from my working definition?

Escrito por The Tactician, 17.02.2014 at 08:06

Skill can't be measured. Skill cannot be defined by the ability to earn most SP in a game. First you have UN scenarios etc etc, second you might be playing a 3v3 where you die and take out two players with you or so on ; The variables to measure skill are too much.

Like i said the variable's are too much for even defining skill. A player may be skilled in a scenario but not a 3v3, or a custom map but not world, etc. The closest thing i can think of is being put in any situation and maximizing efficiency in that situation. That way, if a player can only play one country then he is skilled in only that country but an overall noob in everything else. What contributes to this "skill" is experience, upgrade, wit, and tactical and strategical insight among others. Thats the best i can come up with.

Http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/skill

Escrito por zombieyeti, 18.02.2014 at 11:57

....

Escrito por The Tactician, 17.02.2014 at 23:15

Escrito por zombieyeti, 17.02.2014 at 16:36

Escrito por The Tactician, 17.02.2014 at 08:06

Your definition of skill is good, but it doesn't cover everything. Its almost impossible to cover EVERYTHING, which is why defining skill is hard.

I agree to the difficulty. My suggestion is only a start -- and we kind of have to have a definition before we start saying it can/can't be measured, if indeed the thing exists. There's 'rankings' or skill measurements in all other kinds of contests where there are winners, losers, and points.

Escrito por The Tactician, 19.02.2014 at 01:21

Escrito por zombieyeti, 18.02.2014 at 11:57

....

Escrito por The Tactician, 17.02.2014 at 23:15

Escrito por zombieyeti, 17.02.2014 at 16:36

Escrito por The Tactician, 17.02.2014 at 08:06

Your definition of skill is good, but it doesn't cover everything. Its almost impossible to cover EVERYTHING, which is why defining skill is hard.

So you're of the belief that there is a significant 'experience' quality to skill? All three of the modern definitions in the link you posted have that as a measure. I observe a strong correlation between 'experience' (games played/turns played/SP earned) and upgrades for the account, but I would venture that when two equally upgraded-and-'experienced' players play each other frequently, 'skill' is the independent variable which determines the overall winner in those contests.

Escrito por Skittzophrenic, 18.02.2014 at 20:23

Http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/skill

Damn son, you really are grinding my gears. It's just a damn word.

Why don't you just play the game and develop your own skills rather than attempting to coin a definition to define everyone else's?

It always irks me when low ranks who think they are big shots bring up this topic. Skill in atwar is not quantified. I tell my clan mates that there are the only upgrade that one could get to make oneself play better even if one doesn't actually get experience is +1 inf range, which you can easily be achieved at rank 5. Other than this one upgrade, the only way to get better is through experience. Zekrom6889, a good rank 7, got beat by Hadrakon on an alt account (rank 3). If skill is really quantified, then the reverse would have happened.

It always irks me when low ranks who think they are big shots bring up this topic. Skill in atwar is not quantified. I tell my clan mates that there are the only upgrade that one could get to make oneself play better even if one doesn't actually get experience is +1 inf range, which you can easily be achieved at rank 5. Other than this one upgrade, the only way to get better is through experience. Zekrom6889, a good rank 7, got beat by Hadrakon on an alt account (rank 3). If skill is really quantified, then the reverse would have happened.

... and what would I be developing, exactly?
You've thrown the word around, and what does it mean?
If it hasn't occurred to you yet, it is the definition of the word that I seek.

Escrito por Fockmeeard, 19.02.2014 at 13:16

Why don't you just play the game and develop your own skills rather than attempting to coin a definition to define everyone else's?

It frequently amuses me when middle ranks who lack basic literacy competence reply to my topics.
Skill in atwar hasn't yet been fully defined.
I ask the AtWar Community for a definition, and many reply with irrelevant non-sequitors, irrespective of rank.
Occasionally there are venomous replies that have little to do with the question at hand, and a few of those repliers, having re-read the 'working' definition realize that their statements are actually in agreement.
Other than a few productive responses, I see anecdotes which players purport must be universalized to everyone else, merely because they experienced it.
If 'skill' were defined meaningfully, perhaps we could move on to the really contentious issues.

And if you're struggling to understand the relevance of all of this, it is because your one post captures all that was execrable from the other posts, but you did it in ONE post and one paragraph. Undiluted ignorance in six sentences. I did the best I could to pay homage to your style in my reply, though I lack your ... conciseness.

Escrito por Racoonshot, 19.02.2014 at 22:01

It always irks me when low ranks who think they are big shots bring up this topic.
Skill in atwar is not quantified.
I tell my clan mates that there are the only upgrade that one could get to make oneself play better even if one doesn't actually get experience is +1 inf range, which you can easily be achieved at rank 5.
Other than this one upgrade, the only way to get better is through experience. Zekrom6889, a good rank 7, got beat by Hadrakon on an alt account (rank 3).
If skill is really quantified, then the reverse would have happened.

Skill = ability to beat frequent tournament winners like TopHats, Chess etc. in 1v1

To do this you need a decent initial country choice and an efficient opening and throughout the whole game you need resource management, strategical unit positioning, clean execution of unit movement and proper decision making / mind games.

But tbh ELO is the best indicator for player skill at the moment. Mostly its accurate and there are only a few exceptions of players who farmed.