156 replies to this topic

[Faceless Priest]

restricting something because you feel that it makes a game too competitive or you don't trust people to not be idiots about it...

your for making large sodas illegal aren't you :glares at him:

[BlindProphet]

Gigadouche, on 12 June 2012 - 10:32 PM, said:

Quickly assess a player? Sounds pretty arrogant. Back in the day all you did in prior MW games was take a potential recruit to a private game and play against him yourself or in some kind of gauntlet scenario.

Seeing a few camps appear here.. one with some smugness claim that you shouldn't care about what other people think of your stats, etc... clearly extremely naive people who have never seen the light of day as it relates to competitive play... which is what this game is definately going towards. It's what MW is all about actually...

The other camp are those that are comfortable with the stats because they are measuring sticks...

Honestly I don't feel like being some kind of tryhard 24/7 - I like to play games to relax and have fun as well as enjoy a competitive environment.. when the game is tracking you all the time while you play you will feel forced to maintain your stats if you are a competitive player. And I play for fun first and foremost, competition second. I really enjoy the competition aspect but you can't let it take over. I've won a few tournaments, some nationwide in some various FPS games and mods, masters league in SC2, 2200+ rated arena player in WoW, pretty decent at MOBAs etc... And while that is all really fun and memorable the fact is 95% of the time you are playing just for ***** and giggles, but the thing is you can't really do that when you have to worry about how you look competitively as well.



You totally just do not get it. He DOES like the competitive environment, just not ALL the time. The thing is persistant stat tracking is PERSISTANT, so you can't switch it off. Have you ever played competitively in anything in your entire life? PSS is micromanging at its worst. It's fine when looking at COMPETITIVE levels of play but players shouldn't feel under the gun to maintain their stats when they just want to mess around normally...

Stats are a way of quickly assessing someones abilities. Is it the end all be all? No. Do they tell the full story? No. However they can offer a decent 'at a glance' assessment. Thats not being elitist. Thats the truth.

I do remember the days of having to play with people for weeks to figure out if they were good, if they were lucky, and what they were doing wrong. Having stats greatly reduces this time as it allows you to focus in on areas of assessment, and what questions should be asked of the individual.

Ontop of that...you do not have to be a tryhard to end up with good stats. I've ended up with good stats just from playing games the way I like playing them and not worrying about the stats. I go out, I screw around, I do things that don't particularly help my stats. But in the end good players, unless they're specifically trying to make their stats tank, are going to end up with good stats. If they don't, they're either making their stats tank on purpose or they're not actually good players.

If you can't enjoy yourself if stats are involved then you have other issues that you should probably address which have nothing to do with the game.

Gigadouche, on 12 June 2012 - 10:54 PM, said:

Hey bud you are about as clueless as that other guy but seeing as you are from Latvia I'll cut you some slack... All this talk about wasting time and "assessing" people, that's just so disgustingly arrogant... it's a game man, first and foremost. And this is coming from someone who has managed many clans and guilds throughout my nerdin' career. Not just some retarded World of Tanks (people actually play that garbage?) clan or something.. assuming this is where you're coming from. Making it easy to micromanage people based purely on a complete statistical aggregate of their playtime in the game makes everything that much more impersonal and that much less fun. It's bad for the community.. the devs... and the game in general. It fosters elitism and bad attitudes pretty quick - you're example enough of that.

I'd like to point out you call 'world of tanks' 'garbage' and then say stats is what fosters elitism and bad attitudes... Yet we don't have stats currently and you've already got an elitist attitude and aren't generally a enjoyable person to interact with already. So yeah I don't think it causes those things, I think people are elitists and have bad attitudes all on their own. Stats certainly give them a focal point, but it is not the cause. If people are elitist, or jerks, they're going to be jerks and elitists regardless of if persistent stats exist.

I'm a jerk and it won't matter if stats exist or not. I'll still be a jerk. You're a jerk, and you'll still be a jerk regardless. That is the way of things.

[cipher]

Outrider01, on 13 June 2012 - 08:06 AM, said:

Hopefully MWO does not use that crappy lottery system like WoT does and uses league (minor, major, expert range of ability), I can do some great work stomping tier 5 heavies/mediums driving a tier 5 heavy/medium but when being out stat (tank armor/hitpoint/gun not player skill) by some chump driving a better tank by 3 tiers...no point to even try to win since you have a 5% chance of surviving in tier 5 vs tier 8.

You mean "matchmaker" for determining who joins what random battle? Because the matchmaker in WoT is horrible, I agree. It's only good for certain tanks (ie: tier 2s and 1s, or if you have a tier 9 or 10). For 4s up to 8s, the matchmaker really spreads the tier range out too far.

Worse, it doesn't take into account grouped players in a platoon. If a platoon is formed with a tier 3 arty and a tier 4 tank, it shouldn't shove you into a battle with tier 9s just because that arty is in there. Or for a platoon with two tier 1s and a tier 3 should enter a tier 5 match just because the 3 is there. It should put that platoon in a tier 1-3 game instead.

As much as I like WoT and still play it, I hate its matchmaker system. But to be on topic with this thread, I love WoT's stat system and disagree with you on that.

[grimzod]

Well, if they are smart they will have to keep stats for at least the purpose of balancing mechs against one another. Why on earth would you not want others to see your stats unless your self confidence is so weak a persons jibes at your low achievements really hurts you?

Edited by grimzod, 13 June 2012 - 09:03 AM.

[Dataman]

yeah, I hate the K/D ratio, win/lose ratio thing goes public view.

it discourage people when they're thrown against people who has K/D ratio 10:1 or win/lose ratio 50:1

Edited by Dataman, 13 June 2012 - 09:10 AM.

[MrLuao]

Not surprised to see such a topic. It seems like anything that remotely resembles and/or encourages competitive behaviour is shunned upon. I guess most of you don't enjoy any kind of sport either.

[Star Captain Obvious Kerensky]

Mechwarrior Online purports to be a "Team-Based" game. Publically viewable stats just encourage people to pad their own score at the expense of the team as a whole. Kills, Deaths, accuracy, etc. Last thing we need is players more worried about their long term K:D average than a team victory. There is plenty of epeen waving in video games as is. I don't care if anyone sees MY stats. I just can't stand a player who is more concerned about his stats than the match at hand.

Here are some really common mentalities I've seen in games where stats are tracked:

PlayerX: "ugh oh, looks like we might lose this match. <PlayerX Quits Server>"

PlayerY: "RARARARAR!!!!! you stole my kill you SOB now my K:D ratio is ruined!"

PlayerZ: "Pfft, you have less than 2 to 1 win to loss ratio. You clearly suck at this game and you can't join the team for this match"

PlayerA: "Bunch of people from the same clan on on the opposing team, I'm going to look for easier prey <PlayerAQuits Server>"
PlayerB: "The server is full of people with a terrible Kill/Death ratio. Time to go newbie stomping!"

Being the internet, and people are generally jackwads, publically viewable stats just encourage elitism and griefing. Pilots should be known by their in-game reputation alone.

That is not to say "all" stat tracking is bad, just ones that could be misconstrued as a indication of 'skill'. I certainly wouldn't mind if the game made public the total number of matches played (without win/loss info), and time spent in each mech chassis. One could look at those numbers and see "Player X has 1000 hours as a Scout. Player X is probably a good scout.".

[Sanction]

I think the only issue with only tracking K/D (if that's what is being proposed) is that people DO use it to determine "skill". Forum posts with the reply "Well, your k/d is only X, so your opinion isn't valid", etc. The only reason such things matter, is because it will push people towards heavy/assault, because as a medium or scout, your K/D will suffer. I'd like to see plenty of mediums and lights out there, and not have elitism from idiots giving medium/light pilots a bad rep.

My proposed solution though, is not a lack of K/D, but a more robust stat system, that takes into account what mechs you use, "points" for defending objectives, detecting/evading detection, accuracy, etc. And then just hope that the community actually takes those things into account rather than just the k/d.

[BlindProphet]

eldragon, on 13 June 2012 - 09:14 AM, said:

That is not to say "all" stat tracking is bad, just ones that could be misconstrued as a indication of 'skill'. I certainly wouldn't mind if the game made public the total number of matches played (without win/loss info), and time spent in each mech chassis. One could look at those numbers and see "Player X has 1000 hours as a Scout. Player X is probably a good scout.".

I'm going to skip over the first bit, and go straight to they hypocritical stuffs.

You start off with essentially "Not all stat tracking is bad, just ones that could be misconstrued as an indication of skill" then state you want time spent in each chassis so you can go "Player X has 1000 hours as a Scout. Player X is probably a good scout."

You just stated such stats were bad. Then you say you want such stats so you can make arbitrary judgements about player skill with a statistic that is worthless without more stats as context.... Please tell me you can at least see the hypocritical nature of these statements?

[0 Tharn 0]

You know -I was just thinking wouldnt it be funny if for every debate post going- there was a guy named 'asskicker'
and he just posted once in every thread..
I don't care what you people think- I'm going to kick all your *****..

[Star Captain Obvious Kerensky]

blindprophet, on 13 June 2012 - 09:20 AM, said:

I'm going to skip over the first bit, and go straight to they hypocritical stuffs.

You start off with essentially "Not all stat tracking is bad, just ones that could be misconstrued as an indication of skill" then state you want time spent in each chassis so you can go "Player X has 1000 hours as a Scout. Player X is probably a good scout."

You just stated such stats were bad. Then you say you want such stats so you can make arbitrary judgements about player skill with a statistic that is worthless without more stats as context.... Please tell me you can at least see the hypocritical nature of these statements?

I can see your confusion. My point is that 1000 hours in a Scout is sufficiently ambigious that it cannot be used as a measure of skill alone. No one is going to alter their game behavior because they want to pad out the number of hours spent in a Scout. Other than "Damn, I've only spent 2 hours as an Assault, maybe I should spend more time doing that" which would be a good thing as the player sees his own weaknesses.

Its certainly possible the guy with 1000 hours in a scout is terrible at scouting, and just plays a lot. Whereas Kill/Death and Win/Loss ratio would have a detrimental effect on player behavior.

Edited by eldragon, 13 June 2012 - 09:26 AM.

[Sanction]

Harabec Weathers, on 13 June 2012 - 08:45 AM, said:

Personally I want to see them, but I also don't really give a damn about my stats, I'll ruin them anyways when my guild does our first DrunkMechwarriorNight (aka "Get **** drunk, create the most hilariously BAD mech setups we can (AC/2s everywhere!), and go out and be stupid and get blown up") .Its great fun.

See, that sounds like a friggin blast.

[cipher]

THARN3, on 13 June 2012 - 09:21 AM, said:

You know -I was just thinking wouldnt it be funny if for every debate post going- there was a guy named 'asskicker'
and he just posted once in every thread..
I don't care what you people think- I'm going to kick all your *****..

I need your mech, your ammo, and your comlink. Time to kick azz and take names...

Edited by cipher, 13 June 2012 - 09:29 AM.

[BlindProphet]

eldragon, on 13 June 2012 - 09:24 AM, said:

I can see your confusion. My point is that 1000 hours in a Scout is sufficiently ambigious that it cannot be used as a measure of skill alone. No one is going to alter their game behavior because they want to pad out the number of hours spent in a Scout. Other than "Damn, I've only spent 2 hours as an Assault, maybe I should spend more time doing that".

Its certainly possible the guy with 1000 hours in a scout is terrible at scouting, and just plays a lot. Whereas Kill/Death and Win/Loss ratio would have a detrimental effect on player behavior.

See...the thing is stats don't have detrimental effects on player behavior. Those players who act like jerks over stats and such? Yeah they would have acted like jerks regardless...because they're jerks. Thats how it works. You don't have to worry about stats if you don't want to. Good players are going to end up with good stats at some point unless they purposefully work to tank their stats. Bad players are going to end up with bad stats. Its how the world works.

Stats do not show the whole picture but they give you a good idea of where to look at a player, and how much work they may or may not need. Stats are just stats. They don't make people jerks. They don't make people play different. I've played enough online games to know one thing, regardless of if there's stat tracking bad players are going to be bad. Particularly bad players I'll remember. And when I run into them regardless of stat tracking I'll either be elated that they're on the other team or realize i have to do twice the work because they're on mine... Basically bad players are going to end up being known one way or another, and yes its going to be held against them one way or another... I don't see that as a valid reason for not having persistent stats

[hornet331]

blindprophet, on 13 June 2012 - 09:35 AM, said:

See...the thing is stats don't have detrimental effects on player behavior. Those players who act like jerks over stats and such? Yeah they would have acted like jerks regardless...because they're jerks. Thats how it works. You don't have to worry about stats if you don't want to. Good players are going to end up with good stats at some point unless they purposefully work to tank their stats. Bad players are going to end up with bad stats. Its how the world works.

Stats do not show the whole picture but they give you a good idea of where to look at a player, and how much work they may or may not need. Stats are just stats. They don't make people jerks. They don't make people play different. I've played enough online games to know one thing, regardless of if there's stat tracking bad players are going to be bad. Particularly bad players I'll remember. And when I run into them regardless of stat tracking I'll either be elated that they're on the other team or realize i have to do twice the work because they're on mine... Basically bad players are going to end up being known one way or another, and yes its going to be held against them one way or another... I don't see that as a valid reason for not having persistent stats

Someone gets it. Its actually funny that those people who rave about how they don't care about stats and how they ruin the game actually bring them up constantly.. so they don't care by always caring about them..

If you don't care about them ignore them, I just laugh at people who try to justify there opinions solely on how good or bad they are... in the end they are still nothing more then opinions.

[Kittygrinder]

My opinion on stats in BF3:

Hours played doesnt reflect skill. Look at me, i have almost 100 hours played, and i still suck.

K/D ratios are stupid. The point is to win. Unless your part of a clan that solely does SQDM, it means nothing. What matters is if you can play as part of a team.



As for the people who do care about stats, and think they are every thing. Its a damn game. Just a stupid game. Stop caring about something so irrelevant, and enjoy your game.

To the jerks: The point is to have fun, if winning is the only way for you to have fun, your life is going to suck horribly.

[Star Captain Obvious Kerensky]

blindprophet, on 13 June 2012 - 09:35 AM, said:

See...the thing is stats don't have detrimental effects on player behavior.

Oh, but they do. See my examples above. Some players become more concerned with padding their stats that the game itself. Happens every single time. Some players may act like jerks regardless, but why encourage it?

If MW:Online teams were like professional sports teams, Stats would be awesome. Merc groups could fill out their roster with players who fill out the weaknesses of their team, and its like a giant game of Fantasy Baseball. But MW:O is a game on the internet where players drop in and out of a match at will and the vast majority of matches are pub matches. A handful of merc groups might use stats for filling the roster, but they would be better off just playing a few matches with a potential recruit.

Which brings me to another problem with stats: Some are only as good as the players you play against. A guy who exclusively plays in against skilled opponents in a league might have a terrible K:Death and W:Loss ratio, but his opponents are far more skilled. Compared to the guy who plays only in pub matches against newbies.

My point is, stats that can be gamed, like Win:Loss and Kill:Death, should not be tracked. There are other stats that are more ambiguous like accuracy, time spent per mech, total matches, etc that cannot be manipuated by picking easy opponents.

Edited by eldragon, 13 June 2012 - 09:53 AM.

[EyeOne]

I don't have a problem with persistent stat tracking for my own personal interest. Maybe because I majored in business and I actually really enjoyed my stats classes in college. But I did enjoy looking over my stats on Bungie's website for Halo 3.

But, I think it's a staple for MP games these days.

[SideSt3p]

I personally would like to see my stats.

I think that they only have a "weight" to them if you let people think that. I could care less if somebody bad-talks me based on my hit% or win-rate. If I don't care, then what does it matter what somebody through the internet says?

[hornet331]

Kittygrinder, on 13 June 2012 - 09:44 AM, said:

As for the people who do care about stats, and think they are every thing. Its a damn game. Just a stupid game. Stop caring about something so irrelevant, and enjoy your game.

Care to say the same about any sport game? Especial baseball? Baseball is probably the most stats obsessed game ever, I don't see people crying there stats are meaningless?