Player Card Worth and Community

Yes but you can take what you learned and actually apply it, and you can also use said knowledge of your mistakes to recognize other peoples mistakes.

And this game really isn't deep enough mechanics wise to make the claim that there is some great massive gap between players skill levels. This game requires very good micro at higher levels across every single faction. But the unit list is far to small and the amount of strategies far to small to consider planning a real difference maker.

I do understand the feeling you are talking about, when I first got into visiting and speaking with streamers and whatnot I learned so much so fast (Thanks Sibchat!), but eventually I just discovered the only real difference between players at high ranks was the ability to micro units effectively.

True, all good points.

If someone saying something that in your opinion isn't true, you should appeal to points that are invalid by providing arguments, not by attacking his playercard.

If you are too lazy to provide arguments better don't post at all.
If you don't ready to listen to criticism - don't post either.

If someone saying something that in your opinion isn't true, you should appeal to points that are invalid by providing arguments, not by attacking his playercard.

If you are too lazy to provide arguments better don't post at all.
If you don't ready to listen to criticism - don't post either.

+1000

seriously though... wait i was being serous. i find it is most often used in a fashion that isn't helpful and destructive to the forum.

"hey i don't agree/like(/losing this argument) with this guy, lets check his playercard" -random forum user

the problem i have is its used as a way to often falsely prevent discussion instead of just being apart of the discussion. if someone makes a claim that is false that directly relates to his player card. eg: how many games hes had with x faction) The player card can be used as evidence but it certainty isn't an end all trump card that is being used as here far to often. (there are plenty of things the player-card doesn't track. such as multiple accounts, non auto-match, beta time, etc...

tl;dr: If you aren't willing to have a discussion. forums may not be the best choice for you.

If someone saying something that in your opinion isn't true, you should appeal to points that are invalid by providing arguments, not by attacking his playercard.

If you are too lazy to provide arguments better don't post at all.
If you don't ready to listen to criticism - don't post either.

Good post. Thank you!

Playercard is useful in arguments about the amount of gamez one plays/preferred faction type, but other than that using it to argue about their skill lvl(to a certain degree)/knowledge cap/ability to make reasonable statements makes no sense in my eyes.

The way i I see it is,If we're discussing how bad the ostheer is,and some rank 500000 guy with 80 games total as ost with a 30% win pct comes in saying that Ostheer needs a 2000 HP Tiger with 60 range,and InstaPin Mg42 in order to compete with combat engineer spam or something,I immediately discredit his whole post because he's just asking for an overbuff/nerf because he can't handle something thats clearly a L2p issue.


Now when a VonIvan,Jesulin,Cruzz,Or Luvnest with their ..."lovely" playercards and expierence come in complaining(which most high level players DONT do all that often or at all to be honest...) that their gren/mg42 combo is getting pwned by riflemen and their smoke nades(which is one of the legit issues.),I listen..i take note..because they KNOW what theyre talking about. They have experience. They arent just complaining because they aren't good enough or imaginative enough to handle something,which honestly is ALOT of the people that make these ridiculous nerf this buff that threads. You dont see Pro's complaining constantly...most of the time... They #ADAPT

on the other hand you have those that refuse to learn..will refuse to adapt or change... and will continue to spam Assault grenadiers against con spam on minsk pocket and complain that cons are OP and too good, or will charge Sturms across red cover and wonder why they lost to a penal squad horribly, and then they make a thread about it. Those are the people that need to be weeded out. Thats what a playercard is for.

Also playercards are useful for weeding out those guys that play 250 games of automatch total and dont have any ranks in the top 500,and claim they know everything because of "stats" or "replays". thats just not possible..

Theres a difference between wishful thinking from a replay you watched and a stat you saw, and actually executing and feeling that in-game.

I watch a fuckton of replays...learned so much. so much ignorance i had...like not reversing my tank far enough when a shrek squad is a-moving me, unit timings, what house is important to take......and so so much more.....but I had to put what I learned to action by playing the game and improving my ranks. you simply dont what you're talking about until you've done it yourself...you cant say you know as much about balance as insert top player here because you watch replays and hang out in a twitch chat.....until you've actually played against and with top competition how do you know what its like? How do you know what a balance issue is like in a top level game if you havent felt it...if you havent dealt with it..

You can still discuss your favorite unit quotes,or your favorite unit skin,but for gods sakes if you dont REALLY know what you're actually talking about dont discuss balance..Honestly the Coh2 Balance forum needs to be removed from the "Coh2 central" part of the forum and switcheroo'd with the Strategy state office section.

ElSlayer's nailed it. It's the classic ad hominem "argument", and it's up to us to just avoid their blathering and actually consider the body of evidence provided, and digest that in order to provide meaningful discussion, open minded inquiry and debate to move forward. Allow me to direct quote this from A Level Critical Thinking:


Credibility criteria: Criteria used to assess how believable a source of information is

1.Neutrality – How impartial a source of information is (biased or not).
2.Vested Interest – When a person or organisation have something to gain from supporting a point of view.
3.Expertise – Where the writer of information has specialist subject knowledge in a particular area.
4.Reputation – The regard in which a person of organisation is held in, based on their track record and their status.
5.Observation – A report from someone who directly perceived (heard, saw, felt) an event – an eyewitness account.
6.Circumstantial evidence - Physical evidence supporting the conclusion.
7.Corroboration – Where more than one source of evidence supports the same conclusion. 8.Selectivity – A measure of how representative information is compared with all of the information available.
9.Context – The situation in which information is collected.

All a player card is credentials to add weight to what you have to say, personally i would liaten to the guy in the top 100-200 then a fuy in the 1000. Should it be the "end all argument" of course not.

Its very simple. When Im getting tips from player better than me, even if dont like them, I know they are better for a reason.

But when Im getting tips from Jaigen or someone like Alexzandar and other people who are worse in all gamemodes than me its really annoying.

Its like gym. When someone bigger and better built than you is giving you tips its ok but when someone new is doing this its not ok.

If someone worse is giving you tips, why hes still worse?
Short statement cause im mobile

The only reason I care about the cards is to look at faction bias. People who heavily favour one over the other, whatever their skill, are less credible to me (as in listening to their views / advice) than those who play across factions.

Players need to play every single army (good amount) before posting their "balance" suggestions. I am sorry but if you only play OKW, you should not post apologetic rationale whenever a unit/Axis is criticized.

Its very simple. When Im getting tips from player better than me, even if dont like them, I know they are better for a reason.

But when Im getting tips from Jaigen or someone like Alexzandar and other people who are worse in all gamemodes than me its really annoying.

Its like gym. When someone bigger and better built than you is giving you tips its ok but when someone new is doing this its not ok.

If someone worse is giving you tips, why hes still worse?
Short statement cause im mobile

I'm not worse than you in ever game mode, I just don't play 1's because it bores me. Although it's adorable you seem to care so hard about it.

Nobody is above criticism, nobody is above "tips".

The only reason I care about the cards is to look at faction bias. People who heavily favour one over the other, whatever their skill, are less credible to me (as in listening to their views / advice) than those who play across factions.

How credible they are should be directly related to the quality of their argument, not because they have a higher number on an internet document.

Players need to play every single army (good amount) before posting their "balance" suggestions. I am sorry but if you only play OKW, you should not post apologetic rationale whenever a unit/Axis is criticized.

If a person plays every faction, but they play one more, this doesn't mean they don't understand the other factions.

If you want to know how to beat OKW, you need to know how to play OKW and visa versa.

There's also the issue of people bitching about units when they haven't even really put in any effort to counter it.

Reminds of the Battlelog Days when Battlefield 3 was in its prime. Couldnt have a single discussion without it degenerating into a big e-epeen waving contest since everyones stats was just 2 clicks away........

High level players absolutely know the ins and outs of the game better than lower level players.

However, I am much more annoyed by people purposefully warping discussion due to faction blindness than I am by the inexperienced people thinking they know everything. The latter group has some excuse; the former, none.

That's pretty much what the majority of forum users who frequent the balance forums do. There is one person in particular that is so blind by their favourite faction that they have almost 4000 posts which intentionally warp balance discussions to suit their own agenda.

That is the reason why balance discussions on here are pretty much good for nothing except identifying the hard cord fanboys who will say or do anything to help their faction not get nerfed or get buffed.

im a faction warrior do you guys take me seriously ._.

I going to agree with you Australian magic, if i am looking for help i check their player card right off the bat, in fact iam pretty sure when relics people look for suggestions in regards to the game they check player cards to make aure the quality of those people who share advice.People like Alexzandvar, ReForever and Jaigen is exactly why this system was implemented, basically filter the non sense for the genuine. I think player cards are important, but they can be abusive because all players have something to contribute.

well, i first got interested in playercards after i saw so many forum warriors spewing bullshits after bullshits.

It's kind of nice to know people get so angry about internet words that you need a spreadsheet showing you have won X many games in order for your opinion to be valid when all it takes to be good in this game is micro.

"Forum warriors" jesus this is getting pathetic.

It's kind of nice to know people get so angry about internet words that you need a spreadsheet showing you have won X many games in order for your opinion to be valid when all it takes to be good in this game is micro.

"Forum warriors" jesus this is getting pathetic.

Well by definition a opinion isnt something that needs to be vaild,however when someone talks about balance its nice to have proof of the quality of the advice over the subject matter, speaking of which can i see your playercard?

Well by definition a opinion isnt something that needs to be vaild,however when someone talks about balance its nice to have proof of the quality of the advice over the subject matter, speaking of which can i see your playercard?

your free to look it up if you want to, I don't care to post it because it's not relevant to the discussion in any way.

If your angry enough to demand to see another persons card you lost the argument a while ago.