361 replies to this topic

[Kettingzaag]

hornet331, on 13 June 2012 - 04:36 AM, said:

Welcome to my ignore list.

I love getting slapped on ignore lists by folk that shoot themselves in the foot with horrible counter arguments and wikipedia articles that they don't read. It's almost as satisfying as bashing idiots that can't understand the contrast between the value of stat trackers in games like Quake and jokes like World of Tanks.

[McGruff]

You should be able to choose the stats/information you want to make public. All else is:
Name - Rank - Serialnumber!

[Kettingzaag]

McGruff, on 13 June 2012 - 04:41 AM, said:

You should be able to choose the stats/information you want to make public. All else is:
Name - Rank - Serialnumber!

Win/Loss all day every day number one stat to show.

[myke]

It would be nice if they can create badges for each stat category.
And it would also be really nice if it CAN'T be earned easily.

Medals and Ranks. Ranks are based on experience (how many battles won, etc.) while medals would be base on the stats.
You can also add up titles. Like the one in WoW, for having accomplishing a feat.

It's something people will try to achieve, and will make the game more competitive and fun.

[hornet331]

myke, on 13 June 2012 - 04:46 AM, said:

It would be nice if they can create badges for each stat category.
And it would also be really nice if it CAN'T be earned easily.

Medals and Ranks. Ranks are based on experience (how many battles won, etc.) while medals would be base on the stats.
You can also add up titles. Like the one in WoW, for having accomplishing a feat.

It's something people will try to achieve, and will make the game more competitive and fun.

So whats the difference to showing percentages... its the same, just that medals badges show you a range instead of a exact value.

[Akea]

well there are many speculations on WHY winratio in WoT is around 50%, the moast likely theory is that the MM in that game which everyone agrees is **** untill they rech tier 9 or 10 (8 for artillery)

but the moast prominent reason many ppl have found in WoT is that as soon as you get above 52% win u start to get such **** teams matchup that there is a theory behind that the mm is intentionally trying to kep ppls winrate DOWN to promote gold ammunition buying or platoon play, (i find this theory VERY convincing as ive actually tested it several times)

but since MWO isnt going to be a p2w (using devs words) there is no fancy Speshul missiles or bullets, ive heard that there is going to be some special equipment u cant buy but i think its going to be available to buy if your part of a group that owns the correct planet/planets for that equipments manufacturing lines. (speculation)

lookt at me rambling on as an old old coot.

but yes please have these stats and for the sake of all ponies allow us to keep em hidden if we want to and if were joining a company maybe the commander will require u to let him see your stats (friends can only view stats setting?)

also i do hope things get balanced right so this game dont become like WoT where you go up a tier (weight class) and are by defacto cannon fodder (german and american tanks are notorius for this)

[myke]

hornet331, on 13 June 2012 - 04:48 AM, said:

So whats the difference to showing percentages... its the same, just that medals badges show you a range instead of a exact value.

Well yeah, but aside from making it look nicer on your profile. It is also a less bit harsh for people who performs bad.

[Pun Pundit]

Kettingzaag, on 13 June 2012 - 04:40 AM, said:

I love getting slapped on ignore lists by folk that shoot themselves in the foot with horrible counter arguments and wikipedia articles that they don't read. It's almost as satisfying as bashing idiots that can't understand the contrast between the value of stat trackers in games like Quake and jokes like World of Tanks.

You have provided no coherent argument as to why World of Tanks stats are a joke except that most players fall between 40% and 60% win/loss. This is easily explicable by there being 15 tanks on each team, and tanks having no way to heal damage sustained during a battle. Therefore there is only so much a player can do to influence the outcome of a battle - accumulated damage from multiple skirmishes will do almost any player in. On the other end, 14 tanks vs. 15 tanks is not that uneven a match - experiments have shown that an empty tank tends to win about 40% of the time (unless it is top tank).

The only way to work around this is to be unspotted when you kill tanks - my highest winrate tanks are the Marder II and the AMX 13 90 for this reason (these are both extremely lightly armoured tanks that have relatively high camo value and good spotting range). I expect the same to be true for MWO.

[McBrahman]

my stats: wl 1.02 ; kd 4:1; acc 15.5% ...this might help some in here to juge my posting...

1. I dont see how stats like that help to improve yourself. Trainig will improve youreself - if you dont know how and what to train, ask someone who knows (try to ask the numbers? lol)

2. I am here because i am looking for competition. But i want a fight mech vs mech and not mean vs mean.

[Scarlett Avignon]

I don't mind having a W/L stat. However, in a game where, for the most part, you're going to be thrown into matches with 11 strangers who you've never played with before and who you likely won't voice communicate with, that stat means pretty little.

There are SO MANY factors that cannot be taken into account. That stat could mean anything from, "You're the unluckiest fraker in the world" to "Mere mortals should worship your skill."

Of course, as humans, we like to think the best of ourselves, and as internet trolls, we like to think the worst of others. So, when our stat is high, it's because we're awesome, and when it's low, it's because match-maker is screwing us. Conversely, when another player's stat is high, it's because they are lucky and when it's low, they are a noob.

Other stats are more important, but screwed much more. Take accuracy in WoT. Accuracy is, by definition, the percentage of times you hit what you aim at. I assure you that 100% of the time, I hit the buildings I shoot at while I'm trying to destroy cover an enemy is hiding behind. However, this is scored as a miss by the computer. Artillery pieces in the game likely hit where they want on the ground most of the time when they try to splash damage a target (I don't play arty, so I don't really know.) Heck, You even get screwed when you pull the trigger, and another shot flies in before your's hits the target, destroying it. You shell hits a dead hull, scoring as a miss. Did you miss? Not by any stretch of the imagination, but your score doesn't reflect that.

More precisely, those two stats should be called "Team win percentage" and "Rounds on live tanks ratio."

TL;DR - Stats are nice, but are poorly recorded in online gaming.

Edited by Franklen Avignon, 13 June 2012 - 05:05 AM.

[hornet331]

Akea, on 13 June 2012 - 04:53 AM, said:

also i do hope things get balanced right so this game dont become like WoT where you go up a tier (weight class) and are by defacto cannon fodder (german and american tanks are notorius for this)

I doubt you have to fear that much, because as opposed to WoT there is next to no randomization in MWO. If you aim for the cockpit in MWO you will hit it with a laser, and not suddenly the laser decides to make a 30° turn and hits something else, or the mechwarrior inside the mech has applied sun blocker 100k and just gets a slight sunburn for 0 dmg.
Personal skill will play a far bigger roll in MWO then in WOT, cause even light mechs can soften up heavy mechs, strip there armor bit by bit, instead of doing zero damage.

Edited by hornet331, 13 June 2012 - 05:05 AM.

[Dugra Dugrasson]

I hope they play it like Dota 2. Some stats, like # of wins and previous matches, are public while more specific stats, your W/L, your "performance" (still have yet to figure out how they calculate this crap) with individual 'Mechs or weapons, match replays, and so on are kept private. Leave the stat-padding to FPS.

Edited by nodebate, 13 June 2012 - 05:07 AM.

[Stygian Steel]

im hoping that if there are stats shown at the end of matchs then let there be objective captures/defends number of assists and support actions (such as spotting enemys that kind of thing) as well as number of kills e.t.c

[Kettingzaag]

Pun Pundit, on 13 June 2012 - 04:57 AM, said:

You have provided no coherent argument as to why World of Tanks stats are a joke except that most players fall between 40% and 60% win/loss.

Akea, on 13 June 2012 - 04:53 AM, said:

well there are many speculations on WHY winratio in WoT is around 50%, the moast likely theory is that the MM in that game which everyone agrees is **** untill they rech tier 9 or 10 (8 for artillery)

Sure is 0 damage hits on top tier tanks, Pun.

Also, regarding the P2W trend in games these days, having cash items that influence gameplay in a major way, ie armour and munitions from a cash shop, sure sounds like a game based around skill.
Stats in a game with a cash shop are often times pretty funny. Do you remember APB?

Edited by Kettingzaag, 13 June 2012 - 05:17 AM.

[Alex Wolfe]

I like the way TF2 does stats, with only positive ones (longest life per class, most points scored per class, most backstabs in one life etc).

It's a good way to encourage improvement without discouraging new players (who are certain to have bad win/loss ratio at the start), and I think that would be the way to go for MWO.

The only thing W/L ratio encourages that "most points" counter isn't is cable pulling.

[BulletChief]

there shouldn't be stats...

they tend to focus the players on their own benefits rather than the team's success...

[FaustianQ]

My brain wanted to explode on reading the first page and the circle jerk of bad player justification. I keep hoping that some game will eventually have people that understand math or isn't full of those who'd deny an entire field of science legitimacy through their "superior, non-mathematical deductive reasoning".

Yes, I so do want stats, because if there are none, then how will I ever improve my game? Without some ability to gauge my progress as a player I'll never improve. Instead I'd wallow in my ignorance like any subpar player does. I also want very specific stats - what is my damage with a UAC/5 as compared to the LBX-10? How far to I often travel in a medium v Assault, and what is the general playtime of each specific chassis?

It may also hurt to know that the devs use such recorded metrics to balance the game - small laser boats with 75% W/R regardless of source? Nerf. AC/2 armed Blackjacks can't pull above 47%, regardless of player? Buff.

Kettingzaag, on 13 June 2012 - 05:12 AM, said:

Also, having cash items that influence gameplay in a major way, ie armour and munitions from a cash shop, sure sounds like a game based around skill.
Stats in a game with a cash shop are often times pretty funny. Do you remember APB?

You're hilarious, and your ignorance of the gameplay for WoT is showing, as is the basis for many of it's core mechanics.

[Scarlett Avignon]

hornet331, on 13 June 2012 - 05:02 AM, said:

I doubt you have to fear that much, because as opposed to WoT there is next to no randomization in MWO. If you aim for the cockpit in MWO you will hit it with a laser, and not suddenly the laser decides to make a 30° turn and hits something else, or the mechwarrior inside the mech has applied sun blocker 100k and just gets a slight sunburn for 0 dmg.

Considering wargaming.net has modeled the internals of the tanks based on real-life schematics they have access to and PRI has to model critical hits based on the internals of mechs that have never existed (and sometimes don't even make physical sense) I think you'll find critical hits in MWO to be quite random.

Also, regarding your comment about 30° shell turns:
Shells ricochet. It happens. Sometimes, they ricochet in weird directions. It blows my mind that people can't grasp this concept. Personally, after years of physics studies and years of shooting guns, I find that wargaming's physics simulator for the shells is all at once amazing and well-done. Talk to a real tanker who has shot at a live target (or find an article written by one.) They will tell you about some of the strangest bounce, penetration, and damage stories you will ever hear.

[RedHairDave]

if my say matters i am for no public stats, or even better, no stats at all.

stats are only used to belittle people on the internet. this is the way that goes. there will always be someone better and of those who are better (on the internet anyway) 90% will be a$$ hats. if there were no stats there would be less insulting. that is just a fact.

Quote

[color=#959595]It may also hurt to know that the devs use such recorded metrics to balance the game - small laser boats with 75% W/R regardless of source? Nerf. AC/2 armed Blackjacks can't pull above 47%, regardless of player? Buff. [/color]

the devs will obviously have stats, we dont need to see them.

Quote

[color=#959595]Yes, I so do want stats, because if there are none, then how will I ever improve my game? Without some ability to gauge my progress as a player I'll never improve.[/color]

well if you are winning alot, something you should be able to notice, then you are fine. if you arent then change your plan. you dont need stats to know that. there are lots of games without public stats and people do just fine.

the only reason for public stats is to feel superior to someone else.

remember, your not special, neither am i, neither is anyone else.

Edited by RedHairDave, 13 June 2012 - 05:26 AM.

[Kettingzaag]

FaustianQ, on 13 June 2012 - 05:19 AM, said:

You're hilarious, and your ignorance of the gameplay for WoT is showing, as is the basis for many of it's core mechanics.

http://wiki.worldoft...om/Gold_Economy
Refined core mechanics.