From: mdm@stegosaur.cis.ohio-state.edu (Michael Moore)
Subject: Re: Rank
Organization: The Ohio State University Dept. of Computer and Info. Science
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 01:42:35 GMT

In article <Bw1AG3.H5w.2@cs.cmu.edu> hill@norman.VI.RI.CMU.EDU (Robert Hill) writes:
>Michael Moore writes
>> 	I think if you don't scum, and you play for anything that even
>> resembles a long time, you're lucky to get 3.0 ratings.
>
>How's that?  The average value for the server should be 1.0 for each of  
>bombing, planets, and offense.  Thus, the average player will get 3  
>ratings.  A good player, will consistently get higher than 3.  Most of the  
>players that I respect get between 4 and 6.
>

	Hmmmm.... well, in light of total exhaustion (which is where
I am at now) I see what I truly meant to say was something like the
following (but entirely different, of course) :


	There are oodles of good players out there who for one reason or
another log on half the time and don't really give a shit.  They just
wanna ogg or blow up an SB or just hang out and do usefull things.  So
they aren't all that effective during this time, and really they are
not helping their team as much as they could.  But it is a game,
right, and what the hell does this player owe the other guys anyway?
Maybe they want them to help them win but they're tired, it's been a
long day, and they don't want to have to worry so much about tkaing
planets and bombing.  They'd rather hang out and ogg SBs and carriers
and defend planets, and generally just hang out.....
	
	These sorts tend to upset folks when they exhibit such
behavior on what is considered a cluefull server, but then if you're
gonna hang out in the netrek universe why not hang out where there
is clue, where all your friends are, where you've been hanging out
since forever....

	But when they do try, they know what they are doing.  You
need to respect them when they put their heart into the game, or 
else they will screw you over big time.

	And so it is these people whom I mention.  They have lotsa
hours and they'll match up with you well enough for effectiveness
in a pressure situation like, say, an INL game.

	And of course I fool no one pretending to defend folks other
than myself.  I of course feel I am one of these people.  Maybe I
am full of myself but I like to think that when I try my best I
can do as well as your average admiral.  I feel this has
been proven by my stats from INL games and from clued games.  I
do not think my teammates would say I was a loser who didn't know
jack.... I think I was effective in our INL games.... at least in
the Summer (I based most of spring so I didn't feel particularly
usefull, esp. since I blew up quite frequently and with increasing
regularity.... hmmm... come to think of it, I wonder why Jim never 
told me to get the fuck off his team :) )

	Anyway, ummm...., my point is that you play the game to win
and that's cool, and I know yer a better player than me, but just
because I don't always play to win doesn't mean I can't do it
just as well as the next guy when push comes to shove..... I find
being effective to be fairly taxing, and not very relaxing (though
more fun if you've got the energy for it), so I tend not to do it all
the time..... 

	Ta dumm....... that's what I meant to say.  I guess I'm really
defensive but I've always been insecure.  And it occurs to me maybe
you didn't imply anything contrary to the above and if not, well 
forgive me, I need a beer.

	-Michael  (Lesseeee, my first INL team was "At Large #2" and
			FillInTheBlank was our captain.... He was
			just as cranky then as he is now.... just
			so you know.....)  

PS - Sorry, but I get stupider and stoopider the longer I go without
		beer.
-- 
|Michael Delbert Moore |  Home : (614) 471-1937  Office : (614) 292-7161  |
|OSU Student Programmer|--------------------------------------------------|
|Ohio State CIS Major  |     Calories consumed for a 150 pound person     |
|mdm@cis.ohio-state.edu|                   Fencing : 300                  |
Newsgroups: rec.games.netrek