The whole nature of this topic is based upon the deeply personal nature of our opinions. We could never all agree on an accurate measure of a person's abilities or skill. Neither am I debating the need for a topic like this, I find these discussions amusing at best. However, I am debating Skrimskraw's and Crafeksterty's claims that "competitive is the only place to rank pilots" or "pub doesnt exactly allow skill".
Skrimskaw, you're absolutely entitled to your own opinions on who you regard as the "best pilot". You're also entitled to form that opinion from whatever source you deem as valuable to you. In no way am I trying to take those ideas away from you. But by assuming that because a pilot only plays in public games is somehow inferior to a pilot who plays in competitive games I would say that the only person you're limiting is yourself.
Crafeksterty, there are indeed too many variables to perfectly evaluate a person's "skill". But this idea is not solely for the public scene but it applies for the entire game of 'Guns of Icarus'. It is impossible to fully comprehend the entirety of a person's skill due to the inherent imbalance of the game at its core. The asymmetrical design, maps, spawn locations, variable cloud cover, dust storms, winds, ships, weapon loadouts, gunner ammo types, captain tools, engineer tools, engineers, gunners, pilots, etc, all of these factors introduce "too many" variables to ever accurately measure a person's abilities. Even in the competitive circuit this holds true. And all of this without ever needing to assess the human element that is also wildly open to a barrage of inconsistencies.
Like any debate about who is the best "x" throughout history there are too many variables to ever definitively know.
I will admit that in my own personal opinion I value the abilities needed to operate in the public theatre more than the strategy of the competitive stage simply because I operate more in the public sphere. Going back to what nanoduckling said, "it depends on the skill you are looking for". In a pub game there are just some high level competitive players that I would not want as an ally because I know that they cannot handle the wild inconsistencies of a pub game. But in a competitive game they would be the ones I would want beside me. This idea works in reverse for pub pilots too.
For me personally, the measure of a captain's, pilot's, engineer's, or gunner's abilities is not based on how they can perform in the perfect conditions but instead how they perform in the imbalanced conditions. Can they pull a victory from almost certain defeat? Can they stand under the pressure of unfair odds? In life you will never have a balanced fight or war. There will always be imbalance in favour of one side. For me, what I value is the ability to recognise the imbalance and to use all the resources available to you to overcome those unfair odds.
I watched one game once, where a goldfish with an average level pilot and a mobula with a low level pilot faced off against a pyramidion with a high level pilot and a galleon with an average level pilot. At first the goldfish and mobula were ripped to shreds as the pyramidion and galleon tore through them over and over. The mobula always out of position and the goldfish's crew unable to handle the engineering strains put on them. The match was 0-4 in favour of the pyramidion and galleon but I watched as the pilots on the goldfish and mobula started to close up the weaknesses in their game. They rallied their novice crews, forging them into barely functioning units. They assessed their opponents and themselves and then reengaged on their own terms. I watched this for 40 minutes as they clawed their way back from a 0-4 situation and pulled a 5-4 victory from a battle that should have been finished in 6 minutes. You could never convince me that this wasn't a match of skill or ability simply because it was fought in a public arena.
The defining nature of public games for me is the ability to create victory from nothing.
ps. "If a good pilot crumbles in pub because he has random pub crew, that just means his crew wasnt good enough to support it." Crafeksterty, this is wrong because it is based on the illogical idea that somehow a "good pilot" is immune to error.
ps. "If you think pilots that solely play pubs are comparable in terms of skill with the top competitive ones you're delusional." Mezhu, if someone practiced their skills in public games it may mean that statistically they will be on average not as good as competitive players, but it doesn't mean that such a feat is impossible.
ps. Stop writing so many replies! I can barely keep up with all the comments!
/end
