I realize I'm dipping my toes here in a pool of very firm believers in their point of view, but allow me to offer a counter-point to stats review.
Smoke Adders asks for applicants to provide screenshots of your Mech page and weapons page (not your base stats page).
It's considered during our crew's review by four people and never spoken of outside of that group of players. In fact, it is extremely rare that we ever discuss someone's particular stats at all unless something really bears mentioning.
We look at a variety of indicators that together can give us a feel for someone's strengths and weaknesses, but we do not fixate on any one statistic.
For example, while KDR may not be a great statistic in isolation it can give some decent indications of a player's skills when looked at in conjunction with other stats (KPM, average damage done etc). Additionally, unlike most of the board warriors here claiming they average 600pts a game in whatever chassis/weapon combo, we recognize that bad matches happen, matches happen where you turn the corner and get wrecked, where you disco'd, where the game ended in objective cap or resources maxed etc and take such stats with a grain of salt.
But reality is, if you can rack up a decent KDR, KPM, avoiding dying, average a reasonable amount of damage per match etc over hundreds of matches you probably are not spending all of your time poaching kills.
That being said....what we're really looking for is what Mechs (weight/speed etc) someone tends to do well in on the one page and what weapons they tend to do well with on the second, especially because in those cases we can help (loadout tips, group roles, gunnery tips, etc).
Yes, your ML % probably goes down a tick because you like to test fire your weapons at the start of every map, but you fire the things thousands of times.....the tests fires are a drop in the bucket....your thousands of real attempts are more telling.
Finally, we don't use the stats we ask for as a screener to reject someone. We have "red" KDR's and "greens" aplenty. We do it to help people get better and for the ones interested in competitive play, we want to know what role to help them get into based on their demonstrated strengths and playstyles. We have never refused a player entry based on their stats. Stats can improve. Performance in a video game can be learned and improved upon, all while remaining fun.
We've only ever dropped someone's application due to inactivity or being abrasive (we don't dig people who are immature, blame others, like to point fingers, yell at PUGs or represent us badly....boorish behavior is a good indicator of poor sportsmanship and often lack of a team-orientation). The three players who we voted not to include formally, were players that were repeatedly getting into it with others in teamspeak, ranting during competitive 12's or otherwise not being team players and we let them go.
Stats can have a useful purpose. Fixating on stats is like anything else....myopic and usually not going to help people or organizations get better.
As to the OP's point....you shouldn't be trolling pages of stats to invite people anyway. Team play is less about pure stats (although demonstrated skill is clearly important) and more about synergy and teamwork. So I'd vote no to that premise of public stats.
If you recruit someone based on playing with them in game, and having learned whether their temperment/personality will might mesh with your team's, then stats can have a useful purpose outside of that. But trying to simply recruit people based on numbers will not net you a great team. It will net you egos that struggle to work together effectively and don't mesh.
Edited by Lukoi, 31 May 2014 - 11:11 AM.
1
Bishop Steiner, on 31 May 2014 - 10:06 AM, said:
I have brought shame to my family. Looks like I'll have to stop playing til they release the Hunchback IIC.
