99 replies to this topic

[Demona]

I always put the team and the objective first no matter the game I play. I still tend to get a 1.5:1 or 2:1 k/d ratio. I consider a k/d ratio to be of mild importance. In order to win as a team you typically have to avoid being dominated by your opponent.

That being said, w/l ratio is of the utmost importance to me. I routinely see people that are on the losing team (in any game) brag about how much better they are individually than the winners. It's pathetic and shows how unskilled the person really is. If the braggart was playing a FFA then they'd be entitled to boast. In team play? It's nonsense. If your team lost then the individual skill doesn't matter (but if they are good losers, I'm inclined to give props to the people who did damn well).

At the end of the match the only thing that matters is winning or losing. All other stats are irrelevant. Even k/d is irrelevant based on the role. I prefer seeing people that provided some sort of role support. Be it a FPS or an MMORPG, things like healing, assists, technical assistance, repairs, protection, suppression, etc... matter every bit as much as the player who got the most kills. Would the kill leader do so well without a good support? I think not. Not in a team based game.

Work together, work to win, recognize everyone's skills and contributions and have fun even when you lose (as long as you all did your best).

Edited by Demona, 03 July 2012 - 12:04 PM.

[WardenWolf]

Is my post up above invisible? No one has responded to it, but it solves *all* of the problems raised so far - expect perhaps those who insist on being able to see everyones stats in order to judge folks, but I haven't actually seen anyone espouse that position here.

[SuomiWarder]

Whether stats are private or not is not the issue. Frankly, a deep set of stats on all kinds of things would be valuable to me for evaluating my own performance over time.

But when it comes to what I would use to evaluate other pilots - that would be XP and xp per drop. Assuming that XP will be gained from doing damage as well as perforing your role, it seems like the best indicator of overall performance. I would need baseline (the medium XP per match of all players in a given time frame for example) to make proper use of the XP value though.

[BatWing]

MWO should be a "different" game. A different approach to achieve goals and objectives

If that is true, the "old fashion" stats should not be directly appliable on MWO.

K/D is to me useless in MWO. you should not be rewarded for your personal performance but for your team performance. Obviously if you have a poor performance that will affect your team. I do not believe in succesful teams when each ring of that chain is weak. On the other end, self-satisfactory scores like K/D are just mining the teamplay.

W/L has a sense ONLY when related to a team, not a single. A team as such has a roster of valuable players and will WIN or Lose as a team, each one being accountable for their responsabilities. In BETA there are no teams, on fianl version ALL should be based out of teams, therefore a fighter makes sense only if part of a team. Teams should have W/L scores to measure their success.

Then other scores should be implemented. XP should be granted for succesful actions:

• Hitting your target making damage should grant XP
  
• Staying in enemy base while conqurring the base should grant XP
  
• Scouting a target for the rest of the team as a Scout should grant XP
  
• Making damage to a mech within your base, therefore acting as Defense, should grant XP
  
• Killing an Enemy should grant XP - without being specified as a Kill
  
• being Killed should remove XP - without being specified as a Death

And much more should be considered as XP. Then, the only thing that counts when it comes to factors such as "mine is bigger than yours", that would be the personal Player XP points.

The higher XP points are, the most respect is due to that guy, because he is simply doing the right thing...

How easy is that?

[WardenWolf]

SuomiWarder, on 03 July 2012 - 12:19 PM, said:

Whether stats are private or not is not the issue. Frankly, a deep set of stats on all kinds of things would be valuable to me for evaluating my own performance over time.

But when it comes to what I would use to evaluate other pilots - that would be XP and xp per drop. Assuming that XP will be gained from doing damage as well as perforing your role, it seems like the best indicator of overall performance. I would need baseline (the medium XP per match of all players in a given time frame for example) to make proper use of the XP value though.

Would it be sufficient to have access to average (mean) stats of all players, alongside your own? The average numbers are safe, since they don't pinpoint any specific player, and then any players that *want* to could share theirs publicly. Unless someone absolutely needs to have data on every other player in a match then this should take care of things... or am I missing something?

[Pun Pundit]

Bodha, on 03 July 2012 - 11:19 AM, said:

The problem with win loss ratio is its a stat that can be padded by stacking games potentially. Also people try to use it to say person A with 1% better win rate than person B is a better player. The truth might be that person A gets more games in with stacked teams, while person B could be soloing all the time and is a really good player.

Case in point. Another game I happen to play I have a 60% win rate. When I originally was leveling myself through the trees in that game my win rate was somewhere around 52-54%. Then I got in clan of really good players and saw it creep up to around 57-58%. Then I left the game for RL for awhile and came back. Now the server pop is a bit different and I am able to sway more games in my favor so my win rate has crept up further even though I solo a lot now, and do some group stuff maybe 30% of the time. Am I a good player? I would say yes. Am I a better player now than when I was when I had that 57-58% win rate? I dont think so. Just my competition has changed in such a way as to favor my playstyle. As a side note I used to get a lot more awards for killings lots of enemies in matches and survived far fewer matches. Now I get less kill awards and survive more. Did I change how I play? No. Just circumstances have changed.

Win rating changing based on the rest of the population in a game does not invalidate it as a statistic. The changing population changes your skill relative to the average member of the population - this is effectively the same as you changing skill while the rest of the population staying the same. Win/loss does not measure absolute ability to influence the outcome of a match, it measures relative ability to influence the average outcome of a match, as compared to other players.

As for padding stats, the solution to this is not less stats but more stats. Separate win%s available for solo, team, partial team, etc. Measure everything. Make sharing it optional.

I don't get why people in this thread want to put an emphasis on orders obeyed. That being a useful stat presupposes a competent CO. I would rather be on a team with someone who has a 70% win rate and a 40% orders obeyed rate than someone with a 40% win rate and a 95% orders obeyed rate. Teamwork is important, but much teamwork can be emergent; the CO does not neccessarily give useful orders.

Edited by Pun Pundit, 03 July 2012 - 12:38 PM.

[CCC Dober]

I'd rather go with headshots/kills based on the Mech in question.

[Reoh]

NWHHarrier, on 03 July 2012 - 10:01 AM, said:

Agreed. Perhaps assigning an average score based on the four roles?

I have a suggestion in that subforum about Match based Medals\Accomodations along those lines. If you've played tribes ascend then you'll be familiar with the concepts. Short version is you can get medals\accolades each match that relate to your role. This does including straight up killing, but also things like scouting, enemy mechs you're targeting info\Tag\narc that dies and lots others. These accolades rank up (bronze, silver, gold) based on the more you get in the match. The idea is to make it so all players have the same potential for end game score \ xp \ c bills.

[Gamgee]

For a glance over stats can be useful, like a resume. Ultimately the only real way to know is to see them playing the game and how they handle things.

[Kurogo]

K/D has it's positives and it's negatives, just like W/L. Both can be susceptible to padding, luck, or dubious play tactics. So if we are going to compare the two, let's break it down:

Exclude all solo work. K/D and W/L are essentially the same when playing solo. Some may argue this, but usually when playing solo you have 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc places. In Team play you simply have Win or Lose. So solo play is out.

Next let's exclude random pugs. The W/L ratio really only holds any merit when applied to a team, and if that team is not consistent the W/L ratio becomes a waste of time.

Now we are left with consistent teams and the stats W/L applying to the Team versus K/D applying to the Players on that team. I feel it would be a fair comparison to relate this game mode to basketball (or any other sport you choose). There have been cases where single players developed their skills to the point that they were the deciding factor in most of their games (Jordon, Bryant, Shaq, etc). There have also been cases where otherwise mediocre players worked so well together they were able to beat teams with better players (Mavericks).

In my opinion, K/D is part of W/L. Successful teams will determine how much a part of that K/D is, and will adjust their tactics accordingly. Is either stat important? Not for the general fun of the game, but for the players that like competition, it is vital to have both. And in a game where the central focus is one mech blowing up another mech, K/D is most important. The best scouts in the game are going to be banging their heads against the wall if their team can't make any kills.

Edited by Kurogo, 03 July 2012 - 01:42 PM.

[Pun Pundit]

Kurogo, on 03 July 2012 - 01:40 PM, said:

Next let's exclude random pugs. The W/L ratio really only holds any merit when applied to a team, and if that team is not consistent the W/L ratio becomes a waste of time.

This is fase. Random pug W/L is an indicator of a person's ability to influence the outcome of a match, divorced from any specific other players that they team with. Over a large enough number of battles the "luck" factor is eliminated through the law of large numbers, and the resulting win/loss ratio is a meaningful metric for how good a person is at pulling in a win for their team.

[Reoh]

Kurogo, on 03 July 2012 - 01:40 PM, said:

K/D has it's positives and it's negatives, just like W/L. Both can be susceptible to padding, luck, or dubious play tactics. So if we are going to compare the two, let's break it down:

Exclude all solo work. K/D and W/L are essentially the same when playing solo. Some may argue this, but usually when playing solo you have 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc places. In Team play you simply have Win or Lose. So solo play is out.

Next let's exclude random pugs. The W/L ratio really only holds any merit when applied to a team, and if that team is not consistent the W/L ratio becomes a waste of time.

Now we are left with consistent teams and the stats W/L applying to the Team versus K/D applying to the Players on that team. I feel it would be a fair comparison to relate this game mode to basketball (or any other sport you choose). There have been cases where single players developed their skills to the point that they were the deciding factor in most of their games (Jordon, Bryant, Shaq, etc). There have also been cases where otherwise mediocre players worked so well together they were able to beat teams with better players (Mavericks).

In my opinion, K/D is part of W/L. Successful teams will determine how much a part of that K/D is, and will adjust their tactics accordingly. Is either stat important? Not for the general fun of the game, but for the players that like competition, it is vital to have both. And in a game where the central focus is one mech blowing up another mech, K/D is most important. The best scouts in the game are going to be banging their heads against the wall if their team can't make any kills.

Re BBALL.

Yeah they really could dominate a game, but if you take away their supporting players you've got a long list of qualified for the playoffs, but never got far.

[CyberCrist]

I don't judge other players. I'm not here to compete, rather here to have fun.

[Thrael]

I'm against this statistic.
It very fast become main way to judge unknown players which for example want to join good regiment.
But when you just start playing and leveling it is obvious that your winrate will be not the best. And when you get some skill you will be dragged down by all your young falts. And the only right way to improve statistic will be creating new account.
It is the main reason why i have lost interest to WoT.

[SyberSmoke]

The worst part of WRL and KDR are the elitists out there that use it to split apart the community. Saying "I am better then you cause your KDR is 35% and mine is 40%...you suck noob". Just on these grounds they should be abolished with due prejudice.

If you going to look at this statistically, that can be done also. If you look at WoT as a base, there is ALWAYS a 50/50 chance that one team or the other will win. There is also a 50-75% chance that you WILL be knocked out. Out of all the games I have played, the average of the bell curve is one team is killed (15 tanks) with the winning team suffering 50% casualties. That is just the game...and it makes the ratios really a pain in the ***.

I believe they should be left out. There are enough possible statistics that can be used in their place, Flat Kills, Damage Done, Support Damage (Spotting) done, Tons destroyed, etc. We do not need a statistically gimpy set of ratios to cause us further issues in the community.

[BDU SKINLESS]

I like the way Tribes Ascend did it. It's just win/loss and deaths are not even tracked just kills.

[Kurogo]

Pun Pundit, on 03 July 2012 - 01:45 PM, said:

This is fase. Random pug W/L is an indicator of a person's ability to influence the outcome of a match, divorced from any specific other players that they team with. Over a large enough number of battles the "luck" factor is eliminated through the law of large numbers, and the resulting win/loss ratio is a meaningful metric for how good a person is at pulling in a win for their team.

I disagree. The "luck factor" will always be a huge variable in pugs. Consistent teams can make their own measures to improve on different areas that the team needs, improving their combined skill and communication, or even replacing sandbaggers, leading to an improved W/L ratio. PUGS have to rely on luck. Not just luck that the best player on the team gets other good players, but that the worst person on the team isn't so bad they cancel out the best player. It is possible that a single player can bring a mediocre team to a victory, but it is equally possible that a bad player can cost them that victory as well. Consistent teams have the power to avoid that.

[Kurogo]

For my own ability to gauge my progress, I would like to see my K/D. I would use it to gauge if the mech and configuration I am using fits my play style, or if it might be time for a change. It would allow me to see if I am improving my skills, or if I need to try different tactics. To people that don't know me, K/D is more reliant on an Honor system; they would have to take my word that it is legit or not. But when it comes to building a consistent team, the way you treat your K/D will help your teammates decide if you are a good fit for them or not. I'm not the type to brag about these things, but would like to use it as a tool to improve my own gameplay. If I share it with teammates or friends, it is only because I am proud of improving it, I don't ever expect to be high enough to be elite-ist.

[Necrodemus]

I've never been that concerned with getting kills. There are certain roles that have to be filled that have the chance of seeing no/little action. Also, if you're in a role such as a scout your likelihood of getting kills is decreased compared to larger teammates simply due to their greater firepower. I'm not sure that I agree with your interpretation of Win/Loss vs K/D, but I agree with your general principal. Perhaps Piranha would implement a method to determine if someone is a team player versus a lone wolf. Awards/Medals/Badges may be helpful for this... dunno, though.


Edit: Magic Morphing Keyboard correction...

Edited by Necrodemus, 03 July 2012 - 03:09 PM.

[crabcakes66]

Pun Pundit, on 03 July 2012 - 10:52 AM, said:

You really don't understand statistics, do you? The other team is just as likely to be terrible as your team (if you are a good player it is in fact slightly more likely to be terrible, because your team already has one good player in it). The only common factor over a large number of battles (again, assuming random team placement) is you. The law of large numbers that I linked earlier says that you won't be put on the "terrible" team 60% of the time; you'll be put on it 50% of the time. Any deviation from that number in wins/battles-played (discounting draws, if these are possible) is an indicator that you influenced your battles toward a win (if over 50%) or a loss (if under 50%).

Sample size is key. I could literally go afk for 1000 games in WoT and end up with a 40/60 or 60/40 ratio. While having almost no impact on the games. Your argument only holds true with thousands and thousands of games played. Most people will probably never reach that many. Ask anyone who plays WoT. Win ratio means nothing. Hell there are mods that show win ratio of players in the game. And anyone who has used them knows they are not very good indicators of player skill.

It's very easy to have bad luck over a long string of games throw your win/loss ratio out of whack.


Saying that's indicative of player skill is downright asinine.