409 replies to this topic

[Alaskan Nobody]

Trucker, on 15 December 2013 - 12:43 PM, said:

I 100% pug, not teams at all. Also never played Meta mechs (ac/40s 2xPPC/AC5 or 2xPPC/Gauss etc) just Awesomes and cataphracts and a highlander for a while. All my cataphracts are brawler set ups and Awesomes using almost standard configs (except for engines/DHS)

That sir: is VERY impressive
My hat is off to you.

[White Bear 84]

Once i had a KDR of 8.0, then i started playing lots of PUG games, then the LRM issue came out, then OP ecm, then the sniping meta, then I played more PUGS.

Now im at a modest 1.93. Executive decision made to only play PUG with certain mechs and salvage KDR on my best mechs...

Would be happy with a 4/5 if didnt PUG so often. Still, would rate damage and assists much more than KDR.

Ironically KDR dropped .5 in the last week alone, with a lot of 12:0 stomps. Feel like the game is once again broken because players are not playing so the ELO/matchmaker range is really off + imbalanced tonnage drops, invincible spiders etc.. Not to mention it is just rotten with a game score that ranges "0 0 0 0 5 8 15 22 55 128 187 487" with only three mechs actually carrying the team...

ahh i QQ...

[Omaha]

heh, well here is where im at...nothing too crazy i think. I don't really pay attention to my score, just playing for fun...

[Redshirt enraged]

RichAC, on 12 December 2013 - 01:03 PM, said:

how come? they are both great games to get into with big learning curves, just as much as quake imo. I like how quitting the first game in LoL you got a warning from the developer and enough quits will get you banned lol. But to behonest, I'm more an fps guy, and i'm jut not into the that type of 2d graphics style type game, I feel like i'm playing a game made for the ipad, not the video card or cpu I bought. But I guess thats part of its appeal, it can play on any machine and its not really a twitch sport. More about strategy and tactics.

Hm...Battlefield is published by EA...and EA is the devil that will steal your soul...lol,just kidding.

No,Battlefield,it´s just not my personal favor...
Hey now that i mentioned it...the last EA game i bought was...hm,i think that was before they introduced Origin
...but thats a other story.

In terms of LOL,as you said a round lasts 15min-1h...I´m a little bit limited on time,so i was´nt sure if that would be a
good idea,cause i often need a break. I did´nt found the the time yet to give it a try.

RichAC, on 12 December 2013 - 01:03 PM, said:

The reason quake is the only 1v1 game, and you can never ever have 1v1 in any rpg or any game like MWO where you have characters with different attributes to choose from, is because it will never be fair and balanced. Its just not possible. Common sense. Thats why quake will always be the most sportlike game in history to me....till this day. Everyone has all the same hitboxes, all the same armor and weapons, all the same exact attributes period.... No imbalances or advantages in a match, except the abilities God gave you.

I get your point,and you are right with that,it is imbalanced. But sometimes you got matches,where you are in a 1 on 1,and you are a able to break a superior opponent.
Call it lucky,i call it wtf.

RichAC, on 12 December 2013 - 01:03 PM, said:

A game like MWO has to be team based, and when your team is down a man or two the more players the better. I wasn't here for 8 man, but I'm glad they made it 12 to make things more even.

Aye the change to 12vs12 was´nt to the worse imo.
I started in august,this year,and the 8vs8 matches were a little bit like hide and seek,especialy on huge maps,like TT or Alpine. But sometimes they had their own charm. For example,on a conquest you were
able to go alone for a cap,with low chances to get roflstomped by a blobmonsterball of enemy mechs.

RichAC, on 12 December 2013 - 01:03 PM, said:

hmm, wouldn't work, You need an individual mandate lol

Why do you think so?

RichAC, on 12 December 2013 - 01:03 PM, said:

many people do even when theres no reason for it. human nature.

Agreed.

Edited by Redshirt enraged, 16 December 2013 - 05:37 AM.

[MeiSooHaityu]

99% PUG (on rare occasions I play with 2 other friends), Total is 1.41 KDR.

[DONTOR]

Because I use all mechs my overal KDR matters little to me. Its the individual mechs that I care about. Some mechs click and others, no matter how hard you try just arent great mechs. Not to mention levellng new mechs can hurt your KDR. If you really want to raise your overal,l stick to your best mechs and avoid gettng new ones till yor happy with your KDR.

[Jason1138]

depends on the mech. in my favorite mech its 2.50, in my least favorite its something like .10

[o0Marduk0o]

RichAC, on 13 December 2013 - 10:57 PM, said:

HOLY $#@! Thats all from puggin? whats your favorite best mech and loadout?

Of course no or just a few pug games, look at the W/L.

[Tesunie]

This seems like fun, where (at least the OP) isn't worried about how things appear, as KD doesn't inform one of a player's skills necessarily.

My stats:
Matches played: 2,703
Kills: 1,382
Deaths: 1,703
R/D: 0.81

Current best mech(s) for K/D:
Thunderbolt 5S
Matches: 30
W/L: 1.31
K/D: 1.81

(For above 50 matches)
Quickdraw 4H
Matches: 95
W/L: 0.83
K/D: 1.77

Worst mech (with at least 50 matches)
Locust 3S (I have worse, but they don't have 50 matches yet. AKA: Other Locusts are worse.)
Matches played: 51
W/L: 0.96
K/D: 0.38 (More of a support mech anyway)

Most played mech:
Quickdraw 4H
Matches: 95
W/L: 0.83
K/D: 1.77

(Off topic, but best W/L ratio mech)
Dragon 1N
Matches: 88
W/L: 1.35
K/D: 0.62

And most surprising results on a mech (a mech you wouldn't expect these results from what people say on the forums about it):
Raven 4X
Matches: 55
W/L: 1.08
K/D: 1.23 (One of my better K/D mechs)


I shall note, I personally will probably always have a low K/D rate, as I always seem to fill in a support role best, and tend to not do as well as others in direct, intense, combat. I'm a little... flighty once I start to see myself taking some serious hits...

(Full score as of 11/20/13, if anyone is interested.)

Spoiler

Edited by Tesunie, 16 December 2013 - 11:58 AM.

[Legend_]

Group and PUG player (Once upon a time at least)

Kills / Death 4,147 / 964
C-Bills 1,974,032
Experience Points 2,979,794
Wins / Losses 2,093 / 850
Kill / Death Ratio 4.30
Accumulative C-Bills Per Match 166,525.13
Avg. XP Per Match 1,012.50

Edited by chiXu, 16 December 2013 - 12:16 PM.

[kravkalash]

Troggy, on 23 November 2013 - 01:29 PM, said:

I would point out that by definition there are an equal number of kills as there are deaths. That means that total kills / total deaths always = 1.0

Therefore the average (arthmatic mean) K/D is 1.0.

The median K/D would be really interesting though! As would a look by quartile, quintile or even percentile (splitting the player base into bins and looking the average by bin). The stats nerd in me would like to see a break down by quintile, by chassis.
--
Troggy

I thought that for some time, too. But when you think about it, it's not true. While there's obviously almost exaxtly as many kills as there are deaths (some minor things like self destruction and team kills, which i don't think are counted towards the kill statistics), the average is not 1.0. If you have two players, P1 with 3 kills and 1 death (KDR 3.0), P2 with 1 kill and 3 deaths (KDR 0.33), that gives you an average KDR of 1.67.

[Tesunie]

kravkalash, on 16 December 2013 - 03:19 PM, said:

I thought that for some time, too. But when you think about it, it's not true. While there's obviously almost exaxtly as many kills as there are deaths (some minor things like self destruction and team kills, which i don't think are counted towards the kill statistics), the average is not 1.0. If you have two players, P1 with 3 kills and 1 death (KDR 3.0), P2 with 1 kill and 3 deaths (KDR 0.33), that gives you an average KDR of 1.67.

If you took all the kills, and all the deaths, and averaged a single K/D from it, it should in theory equal a K/D of 1.0. For every kill a player has made, someone else has to of died. This should keep the numbers always equal on a grand scale. One death to one kill. (Look under next quote for maths.)

I find that the average scores I hear about are actually bellow 1.0. I think "average" is probably going to be around 0.90 (guess)? Without having a full data set, I can not actually tell you how much of this is true or just what I presume as a pattern to "make myself feel better" maybe. Remember, I have a 0.81, but not everyone can be a killer. For someone else to get a kill, someone else needs to die. This means that, no mater what people think, even a great player can have a low K/D simply because someone might always snag their kills at the last moment, or they in turn get killed more often than they can kill someone else. (Remember, for one to get a kill, someone else must die.) Some of the best players in the game also would be more known for either killing a target, or disabling a target and moving on to a target that is a danger. AKA: If someone has no weapons, a good pilot will ignore them in favor of another target that can damage them. A bad pilot will go for the easy kill, and may die shortly after because they ignored a more dangerous foe. (Am I making sense here still?)

Quote

If you have two players, P1 with 3 kills and 1 death (KDR 3.0), P2 with 1 kill and 3 deaths (KDR 0.33), that gives you an average KDR of 1.67.

P1: 3 kills, 1 death, K/D 3.0
P2: 1 kill, 3 deaths, K/D 0.33
Total K/D for the two of them is 1.0. 4 Kills, 4 Deaths when their scores are combined.
So, it all depends upon how you look at it. Is it combined Kills to Deaths (4/4=1) or actual average of their K/D score (3.00+0.33=3.33 | 3.33/2=1.67).

Each of you are correct, just going about figuring the math in different ways. One of you is combining all Kill numbers and finding the average, and all deaths and that average, then figuring out K/D from those two new numbers, the other one is taking the two direct K/D numbers and averaging them together. Same numbers, different ways of interpreting the information.

Edited by Tesunie, 16 December 2013 - 06:41 PM.

[Michael Abt]

100% solo PUG drops, 3k+ matches. Overall stats are pretty much the same compared to my favorite mech:

Hunchback HBK-4G (F)
matches: 1075
W/L ratio: 1.16
K/D ratio: 1.43

Unfortunately i am stuck in my personal ELO hell. Either i am thrown into matches with many players with less experience and the MM expecting me to save the day -with a Hunch-, or i end up in matches from the top side of my ELO range which are stacked with 4man premades. The later usually means i am either victim or spectator and my contribution is less than i am expecting from myself.

Why does pretty much everyone target my Hunch as soon i am in sight anyway, no matter the situation? It always feels like increased difficulty level.

[deforce]

my kdr is only 1.07. any tips to improve?

[Tesunie]

deforce, on 17 December 2013 - 11:01 AM, said:

my kdr is only 1.07. any tips to improve?

I could try to give you tips, but mines only 0.81. Wanna listen anyway?

[xCico]

Tesunie, on 17 December 2013 - 11:06 AM, said:

I could try to give you tips, but mines only 0.81. Wanna listen anyway?

he is trolling...

[ZtiffMeizter]

Newbie here: overall k/d 1.14 after 65 matches Best mech: Hero spider k/d 2.70 w/l 1.46

[Sug]

100% solo pug, 5,500 games since the reset.

1.61 over all KDR

Individual mechs with over 100 games played is anywhere from 1.34 to 1.97

[Joseph Mallan]

Down to a 1.24 on this and my PUG only account.

[Sug]

deforce, on 17 December 2013 - 11:01 AM, said:

my kdr is only 1.07. any tips to improve?

Group up. Use metamechs with high alphas. Hang back and wait to killsteal damaged mechs. Ignore things that contribute to winning. If you're the last mech left alive hide somewhere and power down.