361 replies to this topic

[hornet331]

Wow game isn't even live and we already havestat whiners...

While stats aren't the ultimate truth, they are a good indicator. I am always laughing when such a topic pops up in any game (usual by a "bad player") they say they don't care etc. etc. why it is bad and so on, yet they often spent several minutes to make a huge post to explain why they don't care or stats are bad.
Seems to me that are the same people that have problems with how grading in school works, hell in saome countries grades are posted on a public billboard in the school, anyway. What I always notice is that people rather complain about the system then rather try to improve them self.

WoT is the perfect example, when bad people get called out aka people with maus and 36% winrate with 50% hitrate,1500 avg damage and 10k battles they start to rant how stats are totally useless they show no intention to improve them self... because they reached T10.. so they couldn't have done anything wrong and its usually the fault of the tank or the team that they lose, not there own skill.
Thats why I like the approach of planetside 2, it basically the total opposite of wot, instead of only a few some what questionable stats, the give you a bazillion stats, with what load out the other player killed you etc. etc. Very useful to figure out what setups are more efficient then others and even provide noobs with a hint.

Last but not least, a pure pvp centric game without stats is basically useless... why do you want to play a pvp game when you can't compare yourself to others, thats thee whole point of pvp games.

[CCC Dober]

It was hinted at that there will be some sort of player ranking system. It would definitely make sense in a competitive Solaris 7 league (1vs1). Other than that I'd definitely opt out of it. 'Stat wars' are not my brand of cognac.

[Freyar]

KDA doesn't tell you anything useful other than what you're doing (not considering difficulty from other factors.)

Something like accuracy or where you're hitting with weapons and how much damage you're doing on average would be much more useful.

[chumppi]

It's sad but different stats keep players playing...

Edited by chumppi, 13 June 2012 - 02:37 AM.

[Fynn]

TBH, stats cn be a good thing, but also a bad thing at the same time, all depend on whos in your team at the time. Now in WOT, i have a win rate of about 48%, in one game i was in my E75 (84% hit ratio), and some ***** in amx 13-90, cliamed that we would lose becourse of my win ratio (he claimed his was at 70%), so game started and we won, the amx player was the first to die, as he rushed off on a suicide rush (for which he blamed me for his death) and i ended up with about 7 kills as well as steel wall and confederate. Now the opposeing team where made up of players with an average of 55% win rate (according to the AMX player), we beat them 15-2, another player on our team confirmed the average win rate on the other team, and confirmed the average on our team was 45%, with the amx player (who cliamed he was at 70%) with a win rate of 35%.
Now if you go purely by win ratio, my team should have lost, and not won. but we beat the odds and kicked buttocks big time. so a low win rate does not always mean your going to lose every match or a bad player. a lot of the time it is luck of the draw with whos in your team.

Edited by Fynn, 13 June 2012 - 02:43 AM.

[ElKobold]

Fynn, on 13 June 2012 - 02:41 AM, said:

Now in WOT, i have a win rate of about 48%...

Now if you go purely by win ratio, my team should have lost, and not won.

a lot of the time it is luck

An exception that proves the rule.

A better player will have higher win %. A weaker player will have lower win %.

That being said, every now and then a better player may enter the battle and do silly things just for lulz. A better player not _always_ plays to the best of his abilities. In the long run it will show though.
I had 50% when i started wot and knew little of the game. I have 59% now and it keeps growing. Am I that much "luckier" than others, or is there something else?

This view attracts a lot of hate as expected, as there are few good players and a lot of mediocre ones, who try to find excuses for their lack of skill.

Edited by ElKobold, 13 June 2012 - 03:06 AM.

[Pun Pundit]

Tobruk, on 13 June 2012 - 01:38 AM, said:

Absolutely correct! Perfect example is my Win/Loss for my Tiger II and T-34 in World of tanks which is hovering around 45% for both tanks (My overall Win/loss is about 52%) If the stats are to be believed then Im a poor player on those vehicles. Catch is Ive earned the "Ace Tanker" mastery badge for both these tanks which means my average scores put me in the top 1% of people playing them.

This is false. The 'Ace Tanker' mastery badge is gained if you have one battle with a higher XP value than that of 99% of players in the last week. One. It, of all the stats for tanks, is the one that reflects luck. Stats taken in aggregate reflect your ability to influence the outcome of a match.

Tobruk, on 13 June 2012 - 01:38 AM, said:

Win/loss stats (at least for public games) are not an indicator of how good you are but how lucky you are.

This is false. Over a large enough amount of battles, everyone has good and bad teams. Sure, you lost some matches where you did well and feel this is "punishing your stats", but you also won some battles where you were the first tank to die. How is this not "raising your stats"? Over thousands of battles, the only common denominator is you.

Tobruk, on 13 June 2012 - 01:38 AM, said:

Lost quite a few public matches in World of Tanks because teammates decided to start a flame war with each other regarding stats right in the middle of a battle... sooo pointless.

Hopefully MWO will keep stats private so people can concentrate on having fun instead.

And you won no matches where teammates decided to start a flame war with each other regarding stats, right? Let me quote wikipedia for you:

Wikipedia said:

A self-serving bias, sometimes called a self-serving attributional bias, refers to individuals attributing their successes to internal or personal factors but attributing their failures to external or situational factors.

[LordDeathStrike]

WalkingDeathBot, on 12 June 2012 - 08:22 PM, said:

Any of you who play World of Tanks know that most obsessed over stat in that PVP only game is win rate. This stat lingers around 50% obviously as the only outcomes are win, lose, or draw.

However, huge issues and forum rage have resulted from this stat. I.e. a person with a win rate of 44% or so is considered total garbage, and a person with a winrate of 56% is considered pretty good (and rightly so).

I'm thinking if MWO does have a winrate stat it would be nice to have the option of leaving that stat private.

Thoughts???

ild like marks on the appropriate areas of my mech for every mech chasis i crumple (like little jenners painted on the arms catapults on the thighs, hunchies on the fists ect) so if you get a good close look, you know youre screwed before i even fire.

in world of tanks the team that spends the most gold wins, their crews are all maxed out, they have golden bullets, they have golden armor that your regular free crap cant dmg even point blank jammed up their *** and fired repeatedly.

Edited by LordDeathStrike, 13 June 2012 - 03:20 AM.

[ElKobold]

LordDeathStrike, on 13 June 2012 - 03:17 AM, said:

in world of tanks the team that spends the most gold wins, their crews are all maxed out, they have golden bullets, they have golden armor that your regular free crap cant dmg even point blank jammed up their *** and fired repeatedly.

*yawns* These comments on WoT from people who have barely seen the game are getting repetitive. Give us something new to have a laugh at.

[CCC Dober]

Stat Wars round 1 has begun -.-
This is exactly what I mean. You have people equating OTHER people stats and abilities and are furious if THEIR personal chances of winning a TEAM game are reduced. The same people come out after the game and PRETEND that it was all personal performance if they win and blame others if they didn't. Does this 'behaviour' correlate with the accessibility of stats. Yes. Does it improve the game or meta game. No. Do I promote this? No.

There you go ...

[ElKobold]

CCC Dober, on 13 June 2012 - 03:24 AM, said:

1) PRETEND that it was all personal performance if they win and blame others if they didn't. Does this 'behaviour' correlate with the accessibility of stats.
2) Does it improve the game or meta game.
3) Do I promote this?

1) Not really. if there were no stats same people would still blame others in their losses. Only it would be harder for others to point that they themselves suck.
2) Of course. You have small % of people who actually care of their performance and are able to track it, making more better players.
3) Stats (properly implemented) should be in.

[Kettingzaag]

The Win/Loss stat mostly gauges how often you get put in a server with dumb pubbies, and anyone who thinks it gauges a player's skill is an absolute beardnecked aspie. Look at the other stats, or better yet, play with the person in question, if you want to gauge their 'skill'.

[ElKobold]

Kettingzaag, on 13 June 2012 - 03:34 AM, said:

The Win/Loss stat mostly gauges how often you get put in a server with dumb pubbies, and anyone who thinks it gauges a player's skill is an absolute beardnecked aspie. Look at the other stats, or better yet, play with the person in question, if you want to gauge their 'skill'.

http://en.wikipedia....f_large_numbers

[Kettingzaag]

ElKobold, on 13 June 2012 - 03:36 AM, said:

http://en.wikipedia....f_large_numbers

... And that's exactly why almost everyone's win/loss is between 40% and 60%.

[hornet331]

Kettingzaag, on 13 June 2012 - 03:34 AM, said:

The Win/Loss stat mostly gauges how often you get put in a server with dumb pubbies, and anyone who thinks it gauges a player's skill is an absolute beardnecked aspie. Look at the other stats, or better yet, play with the person in question, if you want to gauge their 'skill'.

http://en.wikipedia....f_large_numbers

If skill would have no influence in win rate all players would have 50% and there would never be players that get beyond the statistical variance.

Kettingzaag, on 13 June 2012 - 03:38 AM, said:

... And that's exactly why almost everyone's win/loss is between 40% and 60%.

try more like +/- 5%

Edited by hornet331, 13 June 2012 - 03:44 AM.

[ElKobold]

Kettingzaag, on 13 June 2012 - 03:38 AM, said:

... And that's exactly why almost everyone's win/loss is between 40% and 60%.

And that's exactly why after 10K games if someone has 70% win ratio its not just "luck". And anyone who thinks differently is

Kettingzaag, on 13 June 2012 - 03:34 AM, said:

an absolute beardnecked aspie

Edited by ElKobold, 13 June 2012 - 03:45 AM.

[Kettingzaag]

hornet331, on 13 June 2012 - 03:38 AM, said:

http://en.wikipedia....f_large_numbers

If skill would have no influence in win rate all players would have 50% and there would never be players that get beyond the statistical variance.

I said /mostly/ gauges. Stop being an Autist. In a game where the team is a major factor in whether or not you win or lose, Win/Loss is irrelevant to whether or not a player is hot **** or the result of a week long vindaloo binge.
If someone has a 3/1 KD ratio over a course of hundreds to say, a thousand kills, but a ****** win/loss, does that mean they're horrible at a game?

[LordDeathStrike]

ElKobold, on 13 June 2012 - 03:24 AM, said:

*yawns* These comments on WoT from people who have barely seen the game are getting repetitive. Give us something new to have a laugh at.

this is a matter of fact all the way up through tier 8 that ive seen of the game so far now. people have maxed out crews and machines and are just camping new players trying to play the game for free. with the broken RNG mechanics of hits never hitting higher armored angled tanks while they 1 shot you while you hide in cover with camo nettings on not moving and you shoot them 20+ times in a row but deal no noticeable dmg, they eventually find you based on the angle of impact indicators and put one right through you, and if you dont have any buddies around they just driver over till they find you and kill you even faster.

its a good thing that mwo wont have these glaring exploits since youll always be able to see an enemy if you look in their direction and have line of sight and your scouts will find them on radar, and no matter what chasis you are in or weapons you are using, if you aim at them, and land hits, theyll actually do intended dmg.

WoT, broken game is broken, its only fun for the maxed out people camping the new players from my experiences with it. and for me that would get stale after a while.

[Kettingzaag]

hornet331, on 13 June 2012 - 03:38 AM, said:

I sure do love the smell of counter arguments that prove my point.

[ElKobold]

Kettingzaag, on 13 June 2012 - 03:44 AM, said:

If someone has a 3/1 KD ratio over a course of hundreds to say, a thousand kills, but a ****** win/loss, does that mean they're horrible at a game?

Yep. Most of those 3/1 KDs with low win %. Are driving high tier vehicles and get their chance to blow up an occasional scout or two before being blown up by top tanks of opposing team.

That being said, show me one such player. With 3/1 KDS and 45% wr. I dare you.