level choices

[bahamut]

Is it stupid of me to play any level that my opponent wishes?
OR does it display respect and decent sportsmanship?

[birdseye]

[Jediluke]

written by LEE: I think if someone is more open with regard to what they play then this is a positive, but its not required to show sportsmanship. If anything, it shows you want to be the best by conquering all of Descent and not just a fraction of it. I've said it before but, I think this is a highly admirable trait, not stupid but fearless. How can you judge how good you are without testing yourself?

[Cyrus]

I give 13 levels - pick one. If you can't come close to me in one of them maybe you should improve? Having to know 30-40 levels to make everyone happy isn't something I'm trying to do. Call it selfish, but I was super stressed out after returning to descent to learn more than 2 levels that I was comfortable with - now I can play: Vamped, Skunked, Mindtrix, Lurk, Logic, Athena, Crimson, Ascend, Viral 3, RIP, Flea, Salute, Audacity. I think that's enough. I also know how to play take2, nysa, black rose, forte, wrath - but I hate them and very few pilots want those specific levels. (luke, rethink, baha want nysa); (lady silver, melvin, morfod want take2) ; (baha, zero want black rose); (mark392, baha want forte); (luke wants wrath). I think offering 13 levels and letting your opponent pick out of them is pretty fair, but I guess that's just me I must be an angler though

[Jediluke]

In the past you had people that would specialize in perhaps ONE level and then angle for that level. Some would specialize in ratting only levels. Some in missile heavy levels. There is nothing wrong with getting good at and/or liking those kinds of levels but I personally wanted to make sure that someone (let's use me as an example) couldn't take #1 and then basically force ppl to play me only in wrath x4 if you wanted a shot.

If we can't agree upon a level to play then we can roll the dice. This is, imo, an immensely important feature of the DCL. Admittedly, some pilots perhaps focus only on those levels giving no time or attention to mastering other facets of the game and that is unfortunate.

I get that the core levels might not be the most 'diverse' list of levels (cuz it's not meant to be) but it IS a reflection of level play that is recently popular and doesn't include overly specialized levels such as wrath x4, FRP or UGH for good reason.

I also get that I'm not the poster child for level diversity nor am I the poster child for the other end of the spectrum.

I do think that Birdseye speaks some truths and that Mark392 would likely agree with him also.

This IS a competition ladder and it has rules and guidelines that can be gamed to a degree and so people may choose to focus only on what is required. That is an unintentional side effect of the core levels guideline. This does, however, not invalidate the necessity of the core levels nor does it exclude the opportunity to increase the popularity of levels not currently in it (with the exception of speacialty levels).

So, personally speaking....I can see the value of what is achieved regardless of which kind of pilot you are but in what order do I rank the impressiveness or respectability?....well....

Let's just say that I think it is most impressive if you are GREAT at ALL the levels ever made....I mean how can you argue against that??

Exposure to levels you aren't currently familiar with will only help improve you as a pilot. Of course this can be done in non DCL matches so as to decrease the negative effect it can have on your record if that is of a concern.

I think it is admirable to play 'anything' but also misguided to expect someone to follow the same standard you apply to yourself.

In a perfect world we would all play any level at any time but alas we don't live in that world. If you desire to play non core levels you likely know the pilots that are down with that.

If you want to play people that play core levels ....well you know who they are too.

I respect Lee for his level diversity. This guy will play anything, anywhere. Sure, his record reflects that he hasn't yet mastered all levels vs all opponents but I bet he will continue to improve because of this and that IS respectable.

I'm no Lee....but I'm also not one of those people that may have said "If it ain't core, I ain't playin' it!"

Bottom line:

Choose your own path and find the kind of games you want with the pilots that are willing to play them with you. Be the kind of pilot you want to be and don't let the fact that not everyone else will be just like you deter you from continuing to be the kind of pilot you want to be.

[Morfod]

I remember a Cyrus that promoted RIP, Salute, and Crimson into the core. He hasn't been looking for new haunts in dome time though.

I think out of respect for what Vainiac has been doing, I'll play more Skunked and Savage.

[Vainiac]

My personal philosophy is that reciprocity should be expected. If not then to be as flexible as your opponent. You play me in anarctic? I'll jump in a game of ugh with you. You demand I play your preselected approved list of levels every game? Looks like we're not playing much. Hitting that random button doesn't make it a fair game when your opponent refuses to play all but a handful of levels outside of core.

[deimos]

I was thinking with less time to play lately I might cut back to Salute and Adept only.

[melvin]

D2 only, SRP and Dark Hall for me

[Drakona]

Everyone has their limits. For some, that limit is Octave Pro. For some, it's FRP. For some, it's shakers. Or D3. For some, it's Puck. Or the even more egregious lobber levels. One pair of pilots will enjoy and compete hard in circumstances that another doesn't like. This is fine, and even normal. Playing what we like is how we got the great game we have today.

On the other hand, we do need some idea of what it means to be able to compete everywhere 'reasonable', some way to distinguish someone who is missing an essential skill from someone who has a weird specialty.

The best philosophy I know is to play for the respect of your peers, and to respect awesomeness in whatever form you find it. You should never criticize someone's achievements in a level just because you don't enjoy the style, though it does make sense to try to persuade others to play things you enjoy more. And you should never, ever, ever downplay someone's achievements in an area just because you are not good at it. These are dishonorable - literally - community destructive for personal gain. Always respect others' achievements for what they are on their own merits, not for how they affect you - and expect the same.

Playing for the respect of my peers means beating them where *they* think it is meaningful, as much as possible, and defending ground that I think is meaningful. I work to maintain a broad enough game that I have something in common with everyone, and I always try to play opponents in a level we are both good at and which we both enjoy. I seek hard and worthy challenges rather than trying to protect a stat line, and this is not even as losing a strategy as it sounds like - this community is smart enough to judge that for what it's worth. A good record is one path to the respect of your peers, but a less reliable one than seeking out challenges everyone knows are tough and sometimes succeeding.

Greater breadth of excellence means more respect from more people. Conquer and defend the areas you see as worthwhile. And sure - learning one thing may make you better at another. That is the difference in part between an interesting subgame and an uninteresting one, in my opinion - it gives you something you can bring back profitably to the larger game.

We do need a common game for competition to be fair and meaningful - that is what core is for - and I think it covers pretty broad ground, and that going further away from a standard game, in whatever direction someone would like to go, should always be considered voluntary. This is the only way that makes sense to me - I think the only thing harder than picking one level fairly is picking two which are unfair in equal and opposite ways. The motivation for going beyond what is required is not that it is somehow secretly required anyway... it's that there are fun and interesting games to be enjoyed, useful skills to be learned, worthy challenges to be conquered, and accolades to be earned. If these reasons are not at least a little tempting, I'm not really sure what you're here for anyway.

I do think it can be foolish to play things you aren't ready to defend. I won't play ladder matches in levels I haven't played 1v1 before, and I won't let my opponents do it against me. Ladder matches are for games you feel ready to test under high pressure, not games you are learning the basics of. I think if you offer a game somewhere, you are at least claiming that you know enough about it to offer a reasonable fight. There is nothing wrong with training up a game off the record and avoiding games you don't choose to defend. Within reason, it's what you should do.