This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Gs Vs. Skill
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
138583
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
HoleofArt
Low GS = low gear.
Low gear = less dps.
Low GS = low average ilvl
Low average ilvl = possible low dps
Less or lower are both relative terms. Less than what? Lower than what? What is the relative point you are comparing the subject to?
<3 when people only choose one snip-it of the discussion to reply on, then sound ignorant when the answer is right below it in the post.
Sure, you could do very nice dps with a low GS, but if two equally skilled people play the same character, only one has 5k GS and one has 5.7k GS, who's going to do better?
The 5.7k. That's all GS does. It tells you who is more likely to benefit the raid.
I'm comparing the lower GS character, to the higher GS character.
After a wall of text proving (with examples) that they arent comparable in any relative way? Nice try.
How the hell are they not related? You're telling me that a 2k GS can pull more than a 5k GS no matter what, if the players are competent? That gear in no way equates to a better player? None at all?
You're ignorant. That's just stupid logic.
Just because you've found people who don't fit into that rule of a higher chance doesn't make it not a rule.
That's like saying you have a higher chance of say, rolling on 1-4 with a dice, but according to you, if you roll a 5 or 6, then it disproves the higher chance of rolling a 1-4? No.
Higher GS always will have a higher
possibility
of a better output by the player. This entire time I said it was a higher chance, not always.
Not 100%; therefore just because you find people who don't follow the rule, it doesn't exclude the entire WoW population. GG on sounding stupid.
Stop talking.
Post by
barthem
raidleader cant sie how skilled players are, however you can judge them on there gearscore
Post by
368348
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
138583
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
368348
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
havtor
Actually i happen to have
ilvl 264 dodge trinket
in the bank while deliberately using
lower ilvl trinket
. The problem with your statement is that i am not a GS anticonformist. Higher GS doesnt automatically make an item worse (because thats what you seem to claim). I am just stating that ilvl of a trinket is irrelevant to me choosing it or not. Just like GS is irrelevant to my gearing.
The 264 trinket is just flat out better than the one you are using when taking melee damage. And my main point would be why don't you take the triumph trinket then, if you love effective health so much? Its armor outweights the health on the 200 trinkets, but I guess you prefer having more visible stats (health) over the greater benfit of the armor on the other trinket.
Thats very true to in at least several cases for several classes.
Also there are no avoidance fights in ICC. Not a single one.
Not tanks though. More item level means more Stamina, armor and useful stats, unless you don't like the stats on PvE tank gear. As tanks value effective health so much it generally goes that more ilvls means more of it, making it better.
Saurfang. Or do you not need avoidance on melee centric fights?
You play tank?
Dont think so im pritty sure he gets more out of the stamina trinket then for the dodge i dont know but im guessing he is in diminishing returns on the dodge
that means he wil get less use of the dodge then if he was not and the 20% minus in dodge do not take away diminishing returns.
we take 192 stamina then add kings or sanc to it and the 20% from buff inside icc
192*0,1=19,2 192*0,2=38,4 so in worst case senario its 192+19,2+38,4=249,6 thats about 250 stamina
but what i belive it is is 192*1,1=211,2 + 20% of that so 211,2*1,2=253,44 thats about 253stamina plz correct me if im wrong i belive 1 stamina = 24 so
250*24=6000 so 6000hp so its 10 hp this line is the only thing so are wrong with the math then
250*10=2500 and this is STILL NOT with any talents so wil make it more stamina
thats only with blessings of kings 10% and NON of talent buffers witch wil make it even higher
And the dodge trinket got 3,86% befor diminishing returns atlist im sure what i wud use
Also even if its a alt its really easy to get dodge to a state where it suffers from diminishing returns
you can pritty easly get to that point befor going in to icc
Post by
HoleofArt
1) Zakkhar, everything you keep saying leads me to believe that no matter how we point out to you that you're wrong, you'll remain ignorant. Fine. I'm done trying to sway you.
2) What Cemi says is correct. Zakkhar, you are ignoring the main points we've said to you with random bull^&*! like saying we need to "measure the probability", which people (the own link you had, for instance) listed how more experience usually comes with better gear equaling better output. Stop being stupid. We don't need to do anything. I could use that logic and tell YOU that YOU need to go measure how many people with high gearscores are bad players. Tell me if it's more than 50%. It won't be, because that's just *!@#ing stupid. Sorry.
3) Havtor, 1 stam = 10 hp. Therefore most your math is wrong if I'm not mistaken. I can't really follow it to well, the commas are irratating. Also, the trinket comparisons are very based on which class Zakkhar plays, and his gear level. As his tank is an alt, I'm pretty damn sure he'd benefit from the dodge still, and wouldn't be even close to diminishing returns, let alone for the armor. GG.
4) Zakkhar, be less of a $%^&. It's pretty bad how you act like everyone is so inferior for using GS as a tool, and how if they don't believe your BS, then they're lesser than you. Don't deny that you don't act like this, it's in all your posts.
Maybe people would take you a bit more seriously if you changed your attitude a bit.
Post by
havtor
3) Havtor, 1 stam = 10 hp. Therefore most your math is wrong if I'm not mistaken. I can't really follow it to well, the commas are irratating. Also, the trinket comparisons are very based on which class Zakkhar plays, and his gear level. As his tank is an alt, I'm pretty damn sure he'd benefit from the dodge still, and wouldn't be even close to diminishing returns, let alone for the armor. GG.
Also i did not factor in any of the second things cos if you do that then the stamina trinket gives more hp and the dodge one gives armor However a tank shude not be at the 35% mark alot in any fight
So if REALLY unlucky 1-2 times a boss fight it might be up if more then the group is barly hanging in there However it do help alot when you are at that point
o btw for my paladin it seems like its 11, something hp per stamina so you are right
il explain how to do math with % (this is only with + not with -) 100% = 1
10%= 0,1
1%=0,001
the places where i do math with 1, something i take the original vaue and add a % so take 100+50%=100*1,5 or 1,50 for instant. this is ofc 150 so you add 50% of the 100 to the 100 and 50% of 100=50.
And no im not trying to insault you if you allrdy know this i just want to clearify if you dont know it
if you think anything is wrong here plz tell me and we can look over it
Post by
Uricidea
It is obvious that the Camps have settled into defense mode. I tend to lean towards Zakks' way of thinking. He has been made to defend, fairly well in my opinion, small points he mas made, but no one has even dented the essence of his argument. Read, with an open mind, his over all comments. His bottom line is (I hope you don;t mind my paraphrasing) that using Gear Scores as
the
measure of ability is at best short sighted.
There are just too many reasons why you need to look beyond GS when choosing PuG members. Looking back through the posting here will certainly point those out. I look at it like this: Choosing for high gear score only serves to perpetuate the "Take the easy way" mentality of most players. "I can't be bothered to ensure success so I will take the path of least resistance, grab the highest gs, and weed out the duds as we go."
What's worse, waiting to gear check before the Raid, or stop mid raid to replace the non-performers? By defending the "GS is good" approach you reward players that only gear for GS, not for performance. There is a difference. My impression is that GS has come to the fore because of the scaling system the LFD system works on, and you've seen the messes that creates. Look at their Spec/Gear and check for brains. It works every time.... oops. Nothing is certain.
Post by
HoleofArt
His bottom line is (I hope you don;t mind my paraphrasing) that using Gear Scores as
the
measure of ability is at best short sighted.
No. If you read through all the posts (it would appear you skimmed) you'd realize this isn't even the debate anymore.
We all agree that GS alone is not enough to judge whether someone should be taken for a PuG. We've went over this.
He's now debating that people who have a high GS have a (greater than) 50% chance of being bads.
I'm telling him that's ignorant thinking, and that if someone has a high GS, they're more than likely a better player, and don't fall into his examples (the hunter he brought up) because they've clearly been raiding, and most should know what they're doing at that point.
We've more then "dented" the essence of his argument, we've completely torn it apart and he's yet to provide a counter-argument besides stating that it's unmeasurable when it doesn't need to be measurable when you take into account everything (higher GS usually means more raiding experience, a player who's been playing longer, a player who knows what he's doing. You can't break 6k and be terrible. You'd need a guild run, or a pro PuG group that has the same people every week. If you were bad, you wouldn't be in either of those)
The gist of what he's saying is that more than 50% of higher GS players are people who suck. I say bull*!@#, because that would mean most people doing H ICC 25m LK kills weekly, 50.1 (or more)% of them are bad. How does that make sense?
I'd gladly take the 6.8k GS DK over the 5k GS DK if that's all the information I had. Want to know why? His gear. End of discussion.
Post by
524425
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
HoleofArt
To keep the discussion orderly: What We've All Agreed On
1.
GS COMPLETELY ALONE AND BY ITSELF DOES NOT MAKE AN ACCURATE JUDGE OF POTENTIAL
2.
ITEMS WITH A HIGHER GS DO NOT
*
ALWAYS
*
GIVE BETTER PERFORMANCE, BUT THEY DO
MOST
OF THE TIME
3.
PLAYERS WITH A HIGHER GS DO NOT NECESSARILY PLAY WORSE THAN PLAYERS WITH A LOW GS
Except Zakkhar. Which is what I've been trying to get him to agree to this whole time.
Post by
Uricidea
You are putting words in Zakks' mouth. He used examples of conditions that could/would explain how a better GS indicates a less capable player. Then he mentions that there is a statistical probability that a high gear score, at the cost of max performance, could indicate a player who wasn't as good as one with a better itemized, but lower GS.
You are trying to ram down our collective throats the notion that "More often than not, a high gear score indicates competence" when that isn't necessarily the case. How many well geared players have you had to dismiss because of poor performance? That should explain the point. How many times have you seen a "What's wrong with my Spec" thread show up on a forum, only to see the well geared player has totally botch their Gems/chants/spec? The point is driven home.
Besides defending his examples you guys agree with him, funny huh?
Post by
HoleofArt
You are putting words in Zakks' mouth. He used examples of conditions that could/would explain how a better GS indicates a less capable player. Then he mentions that there is a statistical probability that a high gear score, at the cost of max performance, could indicate a player who wasn't as good as one with a better itemized, but lower GS.
You are trying to ram down our collective throats the notion that "More often than not, a high gear score indicates competence" when that isn't necessarily the case. How many well geared players have you had to dismiss because of poor performance? That should explain the point. How many times have you seen a "What's wrong with my Spec" thread show up on a forum, only to see the well geared player has totally botch their Gems/chants/spec? The point is driven home.
Besides defending his examples you guys agree with him, funny huh?
How are we agreeing with him?
And no, we aren't putting any words down his throat.
because i am saying that higher GS wont always mean higher chance of better output of a player
That's what he said. We provided proof that it will.
Yes, there are those who don't fall into that statistic, because it's not 100% so of course there are those who have high GS and fail horribly.
I'm also confused as to why you're trying to defend him so badly (albeit with incorrect proof that we're putting words in his mouth).
Post by
Uricidea
Your proof wasn't as convincing as his. It turns out to be a toss up. Just like it would be without GS, so GS is almost useless in predicting competence. The idea is: how likely is a high gear score going to indicate ability? Because a poorly Gemmed/"chanted/Spec'd character can have a high gs. gear score cannot predict ability.
It has relevance vs. content, As in: "Can I measure up" to the content. But after that is has no certainty, or even a likelihood for success to predict for ability. It just plainly isn;t so.
You can continue to choose your raid members as you choose, but I can;t see how you can defend GS as a predictor of ability. I choose to look deeper, and spend less time spamming trade for a replacement.
P.S. Try responding to the argument not the creative license taken while making a point.
Post by
HoleofArt
Your proof wasn't as convincing as his. It turns out to be a toss up. Just like it would be without GS, so GS is almost useless in predicting competence. The idea is: how likely is a high gear score going to indicate ability? Because a poorly Gemmed/"chanted/Spec'd character can have a high gs. gear score cannot predict ability.
It has relevance vs. content, As in: "Can I measure up" to the content. But after that is has no certainty, or even a likelihood for success to predict for ability. It just plainly isn;t so.
You can continue to choose your raid members as you choose, but I can;t see how you can defend GS as a predictor of ability. I choose to look deeper, and spend less time spamming trade for a replacement.
P.S. Try responding to the argument not the creative license taken while making a point.
That IS his argument.
Why can't you use GS as a prediction for the player's ability? GS is a tool. That's what it's meant for. It's meant for an easy way of regarding someone's gear, and around what performance they should have along with a decent guess on how far into progression they've been.
Examples for each of those
"Easy way for regarding gear" - gives an average item level of that players total gear. Okay. Useful. Can't have a 3k GS in a 25m ICC.
"...performance" - Two equally skilled players, one is 2k GS, the other is 5k GS. Clearly, the 5k will come out on top for anything. (Healing/Not being one shot as a tank/dps)
"...progression" - You can't break 6k GS without being deep into ICC, which at least lets people assume you know what you're doing. Can't bring fail to Sindragosa, or Professor Putricide.(Although GS will show you how many times they've done each boss in the raid, which should be enough to go along with the gear itself anyways)
Yes, there are those complete fails that GS doesn't help you with, and several times, people have offered alternatives to pair with GS to find out if they're worth pugging.
Maybe you both are just on terrible realms which lead you to the conclusion that GS in no way factors into someone's performance.
Or maybe you've never led a PuG? Or this is coming from your own experiences of being booted from a raid for not being up to par or from having a RL who fails at using GS properly?
/shrug
GS is a tool. Use it. You just have to know how to use it properly.
Post by
Uricidea
Yes, there are those complete fails that GS doesn't help you with, and several times, people have offered alternatives to pair with GS to find out if they're worth pugging.
This is precisely why it can;t be used as a judgment of ability. There are just as many examples of how GS can/will steer you wrong as there is right. That is the reason, there is no certitude. It's all a crap shoot.
Why can't you use GS as a prediction for the player's ability? GS is a tool. That's what it's meant for. It's meant for an easy way of regarding someone's gear, and around what performance they should have along with a decent guess on how far into progression they've been.
You can, but I wouldn't use it because it doesn't measure ability. It measures gear collected, nothing more. If you believe Gear Scores were created, or intended as a marker for ability go for it, but look at what you said. It's the "Easy" way. Is it really easier to sort by GS and weed out the poor performers, or to choose players based on ability to start with?
It's harder to measure ability, but it is more dependable. Any player can get a GS high enough for ICC without seeing a raid. Farm Heroics for Triumph and prosper. Gear Score, in my opinion, is more a predictor of "time in", rather than ability.
Of course since I don;t agree with you I must be sub-par and/or covering for something. That's perfectly obvious. (feel better now?)
Post by
567203
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
138583
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.