We're encountering a language barrier here.
yea I think you need to be more specific and to the point.
Your English is not clear to me.
My English is not great but at least I think it is fairly reasonable.
Your points aren't built on solid grounds, that is the problem, they are built on your own experience(which is a mixture of the factors i mentioned).
That is why you have such a confusion, since your deriving your analysis from a very complex viewpoint(statistics) with a very simplistic view.
I said that not only games vs noobs are not affected by luck.
wow, I bet you misunderstood me here, Games vs noobs are effected by luck(that is a fact)
what i said, is that that luck is not enough to pay for the superior skills of the skilled player.
games vs average and above are not affected by luck
here is where i wasted a paragraph trying to explain to you that you cannot generalize like this. Thus committing a Hasty Generalization fallacy.
Playing vs noobs and vs skilled players is a completely different game, and factors have different values.
Vs noobs skill makes a huge difference(you can afford to do silly mistakes and have bad luck)
Vs noobs luck is not that relevant
Vs other skilled players doing no mistakes is a pre-requisite(you cannot afford to do one)
vs other skilled players where the game is much more interesting, luck becomes a bigger factor and can decide a game.
You did not prove my statistics meant nothing.
I did, and i say it again.
Unless you filter those factors I mentioned which are independent of the kills/experience of each player, you cannot consider statistics as a reliable source for deriving factors.
There are no judges unless you go yourself and ask people to judge those games.
They are just numbers.
How many games did you ask pros to judge your game on this subject and look for the luck/skill/mistakes/experience factors?
Then eliminating the factors I mentioned.
Then put them down on a list to make a proper statistical analysis.
How many games?
The problem is your mind is too dense to recognize the reason of the multiple people who have disagreed with you.
Appeal to the Bandwagon fallacy(majority means nothing when it comes to an argument)
You lack the imagination to think of a valid statistical approach
I explained why statistical approaches are too hard if not impossible, I have tried it myself, that's why i could explain it to you.
Player merit is an even more simplistic version of skill.
skill is what a player can do
player merit is a collection of what he can do + some other factors he carry with him, mood, etc..(if that is what you mean)
this means that you are making it even more complex because you are grouping different factors together as 1 thus you will not understand when one of the factors is bigger then the other since you are adding them up from the start.
In my simple version of skill i went as far to separate skill in 2(player skills and map/settings experience).
To understand something you need to open the groups not put them in an even bigger group.
Try understanding Einstein field equations without opening them up piece by piece.
You think too simplistically and that is why you cannot understand what i am saying.
Edit:
I think this short booklet about fallacies may help you:
https://bookofbadarguments.com/
Edited 7/8/2014 01:08:37