361 replies to this topic

[Dogbreed]

In WoT i used win ratio only for comparsion of how well i was learning the tank i was driving. heck when i got my A20 that just kill that ratio because of the tier, but by the time i have grind thru to the next tank i had 7 kills in the last game with it. In comparision with my M2 all decked out my win ratio is about 50%

[Roland]

One thing that I would tend to be against, would be detailed statistics regarding things like weapons loadout, mech deployment history, etc.

That kind of stuff tends to be information that I feel a team should gather first hand, rather than just pulling up a screen to view. It starts to provide information which compromises the tactical planning of a lance. I'd rather the game be more about what goes on in it, than an exercise in data-mining outside of it.

That being said, I'm not going to freak the hell out either way.

[David Taylor]

Stats can be good. I agree with the folks who say private stats only available to friends and/or team leaders though. Need to know basis.

[Kaemon]

the issue is not with stats, it's with the depth of the stats you would have access to.

Scouts would have a lower K/D, if you based your team on that stat, you're scouts are not scouts, they are light asaults, so when they engage an atlas or even multiple targets and get smoked and you're left with no scout assets left on the field, that could cause an issue.

Knowing what assets you have, and how to utilize them correctly, will lend itself to higher stats.

I'd love to see some role warfare stats, and I would be especially interested in the 'commander' stats.

[TimberJon]

I'm probably more than a little late here.

I did find this quoted "Upgrade skills and refine your role in gameplay using an all-new leveling system, and up-to-the minute detailed player statistics allow you to compare, track and share your progress with other players."

Found here: http://watchusplayga...or-pre-game-pc/
and elsewhere I'm sure.

I DO remember reading something somewhere that Piranha chose a certain company to partner with for the game stats, but I now can't find any mention of it. I am sure it was also sought to provide behind-the-scenes metrics for them to run specialized reports on usages.

[TimberJon]

Kaemon, on 15 June 2012 - 05:38 AM, said:

the issue is not with stats, it's with the depth of the stats you would have access to....

...I'd love to see some role warfare stats, and I would be especially interested in the 'commander' stats.

I'm not sure how effective a block of stats would be for a role. How do you rate the performance, skill, and/or reliability of a commander when he is in that role? For all I've seen gameplay, the commander might have different tools but we are still going to stomp out there and find the enemy, then proceed to worry about nothing else post-contact except shooting at them. The constant is that we all will be using one of the four weight classes. I think pseudocoding the parameters to output role-based stats would be a ridiculous amount of work.

I just hope that whatever stats the system provides, I can view and compare them based on a weight class variable.

[Baron Kreight]

I beleive stats are closely connected with the balance issue. Stats can be manipulated. In WoT for example there are certain tanks which can give you higher win rate irrespective of your general skill. KV is one of those tanks. It is overpowered for its tier and many use it to boost their overall stats.

Pretty sure same will happen to MWO unless devs have ideas on how to handle the issue.

[Dozer]

Statistics themselves are not intrinsically good or bad. The problem is that "99% of statistics tell 49% of the story". Let me explain.

A lot of people arguing here for public statistics believe that it's necessary to improve the game experience, mostly for themselves. Many use real world examples like 'grades at school' and 'sports statistics' to strengthen their case. The problem is however that this is an online game where such parallels cannot truly be made. Why? First; a lack of information supporting the final statistics presented. We simply don't know what important variables lead to the final result, ergo the final result holds little tangible benefit to the reader to use. Second; a lack of control over those important variables. For example, at school or on the sporting field a student/player or teacher/coach has a lot more control over their ability to improve individual performance in comparison to a multiplayer online game. So in short, a lack of supporting information and control makes having these types of statistics in the online gaming environment far less productive than in the real world yet people continue to consider them equal.

Personally, I would rather just play the game rather than have to constantly deal with others who use of incomplete statistics to judge my performance. At the end of the day the only true judge of my performance is myself based on the objectives I set for myself in the game, which are typically team based. If I had no choice I would vote to keep them private. If I did have a choice I would vote to keep them out of the game because of the increased likelihood of them being used intentionally and unintentionally to reduce the enjoyment of the game for myself and those like me.

Edited by Dozer, 12 July 2012 - 11:56 PM.

[Terror Teddy]

The problem with such stats is that there will be players who are GOOD but due to faults of the engine their real stats never shows.

For example, bringing in smoke grenades in BF3 to help the team, racks up no points but gives cover to team so they can take an Mcom.

If we go with public stats all it will do is create elitists and (possibly) hackers who have stat wet dreams - and a lot of unsung heroes who help the team win a match but not neccessary kill anything and hardly get any points.

I dont need glory hounds in my team, i need competent pilots (well, a bit of insane balls to the walls assault mech pilots too).

[zudukai]

//insert "get out" terminator clip here//

[Sean von Steinike]

Only privately view-able stats. Public stats just promote asshattery and bad play.

[Polo]

I´d like to have some stats, but they should separate them in the mech classes. Something like Light Win/Lost rate, Medium, Heavy and Assault...

[Bodha]

First let me say I am bodha in WoT. I have a 60% win rate.

I do not believe win rate is everything. I do think win rate combined with xvm's player rating can give me a rough barometer on how knowledgeable a fellow player is in the game. I have seen high win rate high rated players do dumb things and I've seen low rated 45% win rate players do really smart things. However, more often than not the case is that the pug game hinges on key people playing their tanks well and being aggressive at the right times. I've seen many a game be lost by top tier low rating players who camp or push into the open with no support.

What I think the win rate and xvm player rating does allow me to do is have some degree of ability at determining who on my team will do the right thing. More importantly it gives me a good idea of how well enemies will play their tanks in a pug. For example. If I push up to a corner and see a low rated player sitting around the corner and we are in the same tier tank I will usually go for it. If I see its a high rated player I usually play it a bit more cautious b/c I expect him to play moderately well.

I will say for the record that I think anyone with a win rate below 45% is probably either terrible, done a good bit of botting, or having terrible lag once they get a few thousand matches played to establish a significant history. People who have 45-48% win rates are basically the normal players of the game. 49-51% know what they are generally doing and are perhaps a good bit better than the stat suggests (a lot of the ppl in this category actually have 55% win rates over the past 30 days of matches). People over a 51% win rate are good players. People over a 54% are really good or have a lot of stat padding from tank companies and clan wars etc.

I think since MWO will not have tiered tanks win rates will be of slightly more value than in WoT, but as with WoT stats a lot of padding can happen.

In the end I want to be able to see people's win rates be a private bit of info they can opt to share publicly or through a key to people who need to know for various reasons. For me the ideal would be privacy until you apply for a position in a unit and then that unit can gain access to stats to help them in the application process. I dont think people should always be skipped over b/c of stats, but I think for highly competitive groups it will help them reject or accept faster and for more casual groups it will help them identify people who will need help in getting better at the game more than others.

Think of stats as being a resume of sorts for the game. I want you to have a big resume. Lots of stats are good, but like resumes should be relatively private and like resumes don't tell the entire story. Unlike resumes though you can't lie about your stats.

What I would like the dev's to do though is to break stats into various categories.
I would like to see:
1. Win rate and avg objective/xp points per match for EACH mech variant.
2. Win rate and avg objective/xp points for the past week, two weeks, and 3 months along with the total matches played in those categories.
3. Win rate's while grouped
4. Win rate's while lone wolving
5. A snapshot of various streaks, longest winning streak, most consecutive kills before dying etc and what mechs you did these feats in.

I would also like to see players have a post match summary of notable things they did and the option to basically flag some of them for inclusion in the player's ingame bio. Imagine you have a really good match in a light mech where you pulled a clutch victory by killing the last 3 enemy mechs. Wouldn't it be cool if when ppl look you up in game your bio has a few spots for you to include references to these really awesome things you did?

[Keifomofutu]

WulfNine, on 13 June 2012 - 06:13 AM, said:

Now you have

Should enable the server reticule. No gun is actually THAT inaccurate. On that note I really hope MWO has some form of server reticule that shows the actual client position of your gunsights.

And I would love as many stats as possible to be implemented in the game, but definitely displayed split up into the four mech types. Knowing K/D on your scout is nice but isn't the main point of the chassis. Knowing your K/D on your assault is of course much more critical.

Edited by Keifomofutu, 13 July 2012 - 12:15 AM.

[Bodha]

TimberJon, on 15 June 2012 - 06:26 AM, said:

I'm not sure how effective a block of stats would be for a role. How do you rate the performance, skill, and/or reliability of a commander when he is in that role? For all I've seen gameplay, the commander might have different tools but we are still going to stomp out there and find the enemy, then proceed to worry about nothing else post-contact except shooting at them. The constant is that we all will be using one of the four weight classes. I think pseudocoding the parameters to output role-based stats would be a ridiculous amount of work.

I just hope that whatever stats the system provides, I can view and compare them based on a weight class variable.

I would say any skills you have could have a stat referencing how often or effectively you used that skill. For commander's it might be how often you use the battlemap per match, what % of each match you spent on the battlemap. How many air strikes you called in and how much damage they did. Easy to find stats to track. Problem is how people interpret them and whether they are of any real value. I for one would be interested to see how much mileage some commanders will get out of the air strikes and other offboard support and how little some other will. It will also be interesting to see how much time some people spend looking at the battlemap rather than fighting and how little some others use those skills.

I think similar things could be found for many of the skills in the other roles, but I think some of the skills do not lend themselves at all to stat tracking all that much.

[Dozer]

If this game turns into Baseball with Mechs then it's gone in entirely the wrong direction.

[Bodha]

Cobra6, on 15 June 2012 - 12:53 AM, said:

Win rating on it's own does not say much, also not in WoT. These stats are important but have to be combined:

-Average win rating
-Average hit ratio
-Average XP (>350 for none premium, >700 for premium in WoT)
-Average damage per battle

If you combine these 4 you can get a pretty good picture about the skill of said player.

Cobra 6

you sound like you are a WoT clan recruiter. I also count up players medals in various tanks and benchmark them against people I know have similar overall stats to them within those tanks. For example 2 guys with roughly the same amount of matches in E-75s. Both have the same win rate. One has a lot of steel walls and snipers and one doesnt. Upon further investigation I find the one with snipers and steel walls also has a higher avg xp in the tank, more kills, and dmg done. Based upon those things I would be willing to say the guy with all those steel walls and snipers is working to earn his win rate, while the other guy might be padding with a platoon a good bit, or is simply lucky to have his win rate. And btw that example is from a pair of ppl who's stats I was looking at last week. One had 52% win rate and 200~ matches and the other guy had a 52% win rate and 190~ matches in his E-75. The guy with less matches had more avg xp and almost twice the number of medals. When I did some investigating found out the guy with the 200 games had been platooning a lot with 2 friends while grinding through the tank. In his defense though he had not unlocked anything before he began grinding the tank while the other guy had unlocked his tracks and engine before grinding.

[Adm Awesome]

The real point, is this game is 100% team work, if you're looking at a single player's stats, and judging that single player, then you're an *****. If someone loses games, it's because the whole team lost, not just him. I in general think the stat is bs, because I'm not a 100% win everytime freak, I love to play serious and to win, but there's also those days where you want to play a completely different set up and kinda just mess around a bit, which you're probably subject to lose.

[Affront692]

I think stats are good but you should be given the option of visible to public or private. My concern is that stats can divide the community and that would go against everything mechwarrior.....

[Siegwald]

Consider me in for the crowd that wants stats. Loads of them.

But I would also welcome the option to keep them private and / or make them visible only to friends.

That should make most people happy, shouldn't it?