What is the difference between a "skilled" player and an "average" player?

Maybe I've been lucky with the players I play with, but I've found most of the hot-shots are just plain exceptional and they know it. They don't need to flaunt it, it's there for everyone who is at least able to evaluate a player somewhat to see.
It's usually the non-exceptional who may cause drama out of some inflated sense of self worth.

You need to keep that MT alive. Toss a DA.

A skilled to exceptional player knows their class, how what they do impacts the classes they play with, is more than point click rinse repeat, understands that they can do more than what someone tells them, can think with their brain, isn't afraid to try something out of the ordinary or use a different spell/tome/etc. to accomplish something, isn't afraid to tell somebody that they are wrong when somebody tells them all their class can do is X when they know it is capable is X and more ... and isn't a jerk about it

DA is for them Squishy DPS casters parse adjustments

It's all about being able to grow a glorious handlebar moustache.

I think a lot of the definitions and cutoffs for player skill are kinda arbitrary, but getting a variety of opinions can be helpful. I’ll add mine to the OP, going by “Average” as most players, “Skilled” as possessing acquired abilities, and “Exceptional” as beyond that.


Average players press buttons. The buttons probably are “wrong” in some capacity, and likely not enough presses total. It may be clear why they are doing what they’re doing. It may not be clear why they’re doing it. Regardless, it generally isn’t part of a solid plan. Its either not a plan, or a bad plan. Performance is all over the place, or consistently bad. They’re likely only aware of their own mistakes if they are catastrophic.


Skilled players are usually plugged into the metagame in some capacity, meaning external sources or other players that allow them to get additional information on the game and how it is being played in various places by various people. They will have more sources than just themselves.

Skilled players will generally have a plan or a pattern, and that plan will usually look like it is the “best” at something. They’ll be optimized for something with some respect/exceptions payed to the difficulty of execution. They’ll probably use this plan in situations it isn’t the best for, but it’ll tend to be a good one-size-fits-all plan if that’s the case.

Skilled players will often make modifications on the information they get from other sources. Coin flip if these improve it or not, but the success or failure of these modifications will not have much impact on the confidence in the opinions they hold, largely because accurately predicting the outcome gets lost in statistical noise.

The best of the “skilled players” bracket will see a sort of regression towards the mean with exceptional players, where in normal situations they’ll have performances that look a lot like the exceptional ones.

Skilled players can probably handle a fair number of one-off mechanics in raids and group settings. Skilled players will have a lot of button presses if mechanics do not flatly prohibit it. They’re somewhat aware of their own mistakes.


Exceptional players are usually more integrated into the metagame, either by deriving or re-deriving aspects of the game for themselves and others, or are heavily connected with a lot of quality players to expand on the sheer amount of time that can be drawn from in testing different methods. They are a major information source themselves, and have access to other quality sources. This is often built up over a long span of time, but not necessarily.

Exceptional players can choreograph their activities in a more predictive fashion, knowing what will happen ahead of time. This generally extends to being able to anticipate a reasonable amount from patch notes or subsequent tests.


Exceptional players will have what amounts to a more complex “plan”, which will branch based on what’s happening to them and around them, or lots of individual ones for different scenarios. This will be pegged to some underlying reality, and changes will only be observed if they'd actually improve something, not simply because it looks intuitive. They will have an activity level that is as high as it reasonably can be under the circumstances. They’re generally aware of small mistakes in the order of their operations.

Since a lot of this is stuff that by definition can be learned, players can float up the hierarchy.
Since information has a shelf life due to patches, and the mindfulness going into reaching higher performances can be impaired if you're showing up in a poor state for a long time, players can also float down the hierarchy.

These are incredibly narrow views for those 3 tiers of players that you list.
First of all, average does not mean bad. Yet thats a word you used in your definition.
The spectrum of average, skilled and exceptional players cannot be pigeonholed into nice, neat, narrow definitions.
I have seen "average' players that can sometimes surprise the hell out of you with great performances when the fit takes them. Typically inconsistency, laziness and a massive amount of complacency are the greatest hallmarks of average players. Note, lack of skill is not necessarily what makes a player average, its more about the attitude.

Skilled players can be all over the map. I have known highly intelligent, knowledgeable people that know some of the very finest intricacies about their classes, but lack in their ability to "put pen to paper" as it were, when it comes to applying their knowledge to their performance.
I have conversely known "dumb as a box of rocks" players that somehow manage to achieve very solid results.

Exceptional players can vary just as much as any of them. You have players that know their class at a genius level, and are very thorough and methodical, that could answer any question you ever had about the subtleties of their class, the Iceman type of EQ players. Then you have the instinctive players that may not know every minute detail or why it works, but they know that it works through trial and error and experimentation, the Mavericks of EQ. The Iceman players probably consistently achieve the highest average results, but sometimes the instinctiveness of the Mavericks will achieve results that defy logic and convention, but nonetheless are possible.

If anything, I think my categories are pretty broad. In the average case, I said "Performance is all over the place, or consistently bad". That "Surprise the hell out of you" case would be the former--massive inconsistency, all over the place. The latter, consistently bad, would be relative to the better players. Arguably I could delineate a few lower tiers, but that's actually making things less broad. Whether this is because they don't care, or because they can't do it isn't terribly relevant to the classification. They still end up choosing things that don’t work as well, or taking too few actions in general.


Defining people relative to eachother rather than relative to peak performance would mean saying "bad" doesn't make sense there. But it's pretty standard here to have a fairly elitist definition of correct play, or upper tier raiding, or whatever. There are more than a couple voices around here that have pushed the idea that if the top end can do something, that's what defines balance. It's reasonable to oppose that though.

As for skill, skill is not synonymous with knowledge and intelligence. It’s ability—acquired ability here. If they can’t put pen to paper, they haven’t acquired the ability. They have an assortment of information related to the ability that may or may not be correct.

Nothing I said disputes skilled players having a range, either. I even mentioned that many of them will look like the exceptional types at the top end of that bracket normally. Others may not.

As for the exceptional types, I include those who can solve things for themselves, or those who are well connected with others, or likely those who overlap the two.

Trial and Error and Experimentation are a way of solving things. Done properly I wouldn’t call that maverick behavior. I accept that someone might achieve results that defy convention. I refuse the idea that they can defy logic. If they defy convention, and are good, it means there’s something new for the convention to consume and add or replace.

If instead you're talking about someone randomly outperforming the best, randomness kind of damages the idea of something being based in a talent, inherent or otherwise. If there's a style that beats all others 1 time in 10, but fails the rest, using it until you win wouldn't make you good. If it isn't random, but instead repeatable, then it can be solved in some sense.

Skilled at what? Gearing? Raiding? Achievements? Collecting? Geeky Everquest knowledge?

There are so many facets to EQ, that in order to answer your question in any meaningful way, you need to be incredibly specific. The raiders answer from raid success standpoint. Further, the raid DPS answer from the DPS standpoint, the healers from healing/survivability standpoint, tanks answer from the survivability/aggro management standpoint, leaders from reliability/group/raid cohesion standpoint.

It goes on and on and on. It's not difficult for someone who has 12 hours a day to burn on EQ will eventually be skilled in one or more facets of the game. How quickly they came to be skilled is what differentiates them from their peers.

Average definitely does not mean bad. Bad is a whole other category. They truly stand out shining like a raging lunatic lighthouse that will pierce any level of fog.

Tons of great stuff has been said about game knowledge and how players approach the game. Since raiding isn't a solo operation, I think teamwork is a vital aspect of a skilled player. I'm not sure if was mentioned before, but I think good communication is one of the most important qualities of a "skilled" raid player. This starts with having a working headset and not having background noise. Nobody wants to hear your music. Ever. Using a non-headset mic is always a fail, due to feedback.

But the opposite is more important and applies equally to everybody: Don't talk if you don't need to. Invariably, somebody decides the middle of an event is a good time to recount some unrelated anecdote about their dog or their fantasy football team, and then the other 52 people can't hear the important calls.

Please remember that there are at least 53 other people in the voice chat. Would you go around in public yelling so that everybody around you always hears everything that comes out of your mouth? I can't tell you how many times I've missed important things because I have tuned out from people talking about fantasy football. Talk EQ, or go into a private chatroom to have your private conversations. For me, this even applies outside of events. Again: 54 people and the vast majority probably do not care about your cat's predilection for moving objects or sleeping.

During events, it's even more crucial to be concise:

Do say:

• "<your name> is tanking <mob name>."
• "<your name> down."
• "<your name> down, <mob name> free", or better yet, "<mob name> free, <your name> down."

Don't say:

• Anything that is not raid-related.
• "I..." anything. No matter how important you think you are, there are 54 people in the voice chat only 4 of them might recognize your voice. Speak in the 3rd person and identify your toon, if it is relevant.
• If you are tanking a mob and die, the important thing to convey is that the mob needs a tank, not that you are dead. Say the mob's name, say it is free (needs a tank), and then say you are dead.
• If you say more than 5 words, you're probably doing it wrong. The middle of an event is NOT the time to say, "I did this, and then this happened, and then this happened, and then I cast this, and then my power flickered, and then my girlfriend asked me to let the dog out, and then I died. Stupid keyboard!"
• Anything that is not important to the whole raid. If you are talking to one person (other than the leader), do it in a /tell. Otherwise, you are distracting the other 53 people in the raid.

For me, the ability and willingness to communicate (with voice and chat) is possibly the most important skill for a good raid experience, second only to knowing when NOT to communicate.

For the leaders: posting the instructions and overview of the event in chat and voice before every single event is a quality I highly value. Especially since there are so many followers who ruin voice chat.

Not saying I disagree with all the points you are making but your word choice is rather poor. Average is baseline and the vast majority of all players fall into this category by definition. I think for the sake of argument your average player is just here enjoying the game. They are neither going to do anything that makes a person go "wow that player is exceptionally good or bad". I disagree that they are "all over the place" but rather these players are probably the most consistent of all players. These players probably take fewer risks than good or bad players and therefor will have less major successes or failures.

Your exceptionally good and bad players make up the smallest percentage of overall players and will standout from the rest either for spectacular performance or those that make you scratch your head wondering if its a toddler behind the keyboard. Both of these groups have the greatest potential for inconsistency than the average group due to either one good or bad move making them appear to be better or worse than they really are. Its more difficult to maintain exceptionally good or bad performances over and extended period of time than it is to just sustain average performances. Both groups will most likely take more risks than your average player with the big difference your exceptional players know how to respond better to the situations while the bad player typically just bites off more than they can chew and ends up looking like a fool over and over again.

In your 3 tier category I am not sure how average, skilled and exceptional make up the tiers it just does not make sense. You could have skilled players who are bad, average and exceptional depending on the situation. Someone could be a bad player due to poor choices but be skilled at playing their class. Great reaction times, perfect skill/spell lineups, good class knowledge and yet they might not play well with other, neglect important quests/progression, are lazy and so forth. Overall they focus their energy and efforts into the wrong areas but are still skilled at playing their class. We see this a lot in sports with an athlete who has skills and talents that are unmatched but for what ever reason they are horrible at being successful which usually is a result of a poor attitude or lack of effort. Skill is just one trait that is important in being successful in EQ and anything really. The exceptional combine skill and effort (plus lots of other attributes) to be above average.

If you think you are exceptional, you probably aren't.

That's the good old Dunning-Kruger effect for you.

If you think you are good but there are always new things to learn and tactics to try you might, just might, be exceptional.

Best of the best players I've seen share this:

The knowledge of the current and useful spells, skills, abilities. And knowing when to most effectively use them depending on the situation they currently reside.

To the extent a player is lacking in the above.....you may lower their rating.

Lots of factors prevent many of us from becoming the best of the best.....a list might start out with: ego issues, simple lack of desire, game aptitude, significant others using boobs to distract us.

I have always thought that "free time" (aka "game time") was the single biggest factor that separated accomplished players from the average players. Far too many things in the game depend on the player having the time to grind them out. Doesn't really say much about skill, though. So it's very important, imho, to separate "accomplishments" from "skill" in the context of this thread.

But I will say that you can't really be the "best" without doing the grind. You could possibly be the most skillful, but nobody would know.

depends on the talent pool.

I would say that in my decade+ of playing EQ, I've met maybe 1-2 dozen "truly skilled" EQ players. I'm not one of them.

A small feat of greatness I once saw was a lvl 60 bard on Ragefire, during SoV era, was able to solo the kobold camp in Velks (albeit with raid gear). Three prophets and 1 namer were up and this bard just steamrolled right thru the lot of them. She knew exactly which mobs to charm, when to mez the prophets and disrupt their CH, which mobs to lull, knew exactly the order in which to engage the mobs to minimize adds, and even was able to make sure her final charmed pet was down to about 25% health so she could DPS it down to complete the camp.

Later, I took my semi-raid geared Bard and tried to duplicate the effort - I failed miserably 3 times. She was a really skilled player, I was average.

I would also add that, only a handful of classes can really benefit from a skilled player, and also usually only in smaller situations. The best raiding rogue in the world will probably parse exactly the same on Vulak as the next dumb jamoke who has a Ragebringer, disease cure shield, and a GINA trigger.

A really good enchanter or necro, in a non-OP group, however, will stick out like a sore thumb.

I think the problem with discussions such as these is that most people don’t know what truly exceptional game play looks like, and their imagination of such is limited to their own capabilities. They can’t see the player behind the keyboard, or get into their head, so they have no idea the thought that is going into their actions.

I’m usually the puller in my groups, regardless of the class I play, be it Monk, Shadowknight, Cleric, Necro, or any other class that I’ve mained over the years. When I pull, I develop a pattern and adjust it on the fly to maximize the number of dead mobs with minimal risk. I know the order that every mob is going to respawn. I time it so that if 5 mobs are clustered, two will respawn a few minutes out of sync with the other three so I only ever need to split the camp once. I time each pull so that there is never a moment where there isn’t a mob in camp. I’m making constant tweaks to this pattern if a named spawn that takes longer to kill or the camp includes mobs that are on different respawn timers. All of this is done while ensuring I can perform my group role at a high level. From an outsiders perspective, they only see me running around pulling mobs, and they have no appreciation of the effort and skill going into the function.

Believe it or not, even the absolute top guilds in EQ contain many average or above average players. Complying with every emote, particularly with the existence of GINA, does not make you exceptional. Casting XYZ number of spells in a minute does not make you exceptional. There are so many hidden elements to exceptional gameplay in EQ that aren’t even tested in most raid situations, a guild can be highly effective with a roster of above average players.

,

Bring this kind of stuff back.