97 replies to this topic

[vettie]

K/D is somewhat important to me depending on the Mech.

I am terrible with Light Mechs so the K/D doesnt matter much to me in those.

I prefer mediums and i try to keep the K/D ratio over 1 as best I can. I am not a sit in the back, snipe to kill, or wait til the enemy is busted up and rush in take a kill or two kind of player. I am pretty aggressive, brawler type player. I die a lot. I dish out good damage. i get a lot of assists and my share of kills.

So K/D ratio is somewhat important, but not most important. Damage dealt and accuracy are the most important to me.

W/L (except in group mode which is not tracked) really means nothing because in solo I have no control over my team mates or their actions. I can only try to guide them to better game play, some listen, some dont...

[Mcgral18]

Rorvik, on 04 January 2015 - 06:21 PM, said:

To everyone who says "stats don't matter", I suggest putting your money where your mouth is and post the following:

1. Your total / overall K/D ratio.
2. All stats for your four "best" Mechs in which you've played at least 25 games. I'll leave it up to each of you to decide how you determine "best" in this case. Make sure to post how many of each Mech's skills you've unlocked.

Hm...I'll bite.

3.56 K/d
1.54 W/L

Best mechs are:

WubShee 730 drops
4.9 K/d 1.77 W/L

ThunderWub (mainly pre nerf) 54 drops
6.94 K/d 3.5 W/L

DakkaMets 103 drops
4.86 K/d 1.34 W/L

NopeVa 350 drops
3.88 K/d 1.41 W/L


All mastered, of course. Doubled basics are big.

I feel, while having a low K/d might represent a new player, or player who could improve, a high score generally implies a player is competent, or know how to inflate them.

So, a negative K/d is a bad thing, and higher generally implies competence, but can be inflated.

[Triordinant]

Rorvik, on 04 January 2015 - 06:21 PM, said:

To everyone who says "stats don't matter", I suggest putting your money where your mouth is and post the following:

1. Your total / overall K/D ratio.
2. All stats for your four "best" Mechs in which you've played at least 25 games. I'll leave it up to each of you to decide how you determine "best" in this case. Make sure to post how many of each Mech's skills you've unlocked.

As I pointed out earlier in this thread K/D ratio is the worst stat to use when determining Mechwarrior quality and I proved it. Read that first. Some stats DO matter, but K/D ratio is the least of them.

[Wildstreak]

Only time I care about stats is comparing myself to myself otherwise given all the stat padding methods by which people can alter & manipulate them to make themselves look more important than they are, stats do not mean **** ever.

[Kiiyor]

vettie, on 04 January 2015 - 08:22 AM, said:

I know there are many that 'care' about their 'Kill to Death' stat / ratio and problem many that are also concerned with their 'Win / Loss' ratio.

I am interested to know how many of you care about these or some other stat.

Please be HONEST.

I could care less about W/L because for me playing PuG / solo it is mostly out of my hands. In Team / Group play it is different.

I do care about my K/D ratio but not enough to change my play style, or sit in the back and wait until 5 mechs are a breath away from being destroyed and then going after them, no I just continue to play my regular play style, usually to aggressive, lol

My main stat info I am concerned about is Weapons Accuracy.

I wish there were a couple of things that also showed on the stats page, like how much Team Damage I issued and What mechs the weapons were most used on / accuracy by mech/weapon load - meaning I have an 85% accuracy rating with gauss rifle on Highlander 732, but a 25% rating on a Victor 9S....I tried using a spread sheet, but that was just, well no.

So for me its Weapons Accuracy

You?

I like to use dmg/match and, to a lesser extent, dmg/kill (I also track DMG/Death to see which mechs are surprisingly tenacious). Weapon accuracy is fine, but ultimately doesn't (really) indicate your effectiveness with a weapon. I stopped caring (as much) about my KDR when I realized I was missing out on the hilarious fun that unconventional builds can sometimes be, and that kill-whoring is one of the more selfish things you can do in a pug.

You know. When someone is going after the completely neutered Stalker to the exclusion of all else, because they really, really want the payoff for all their hard work... despite the remaining fully functional enemy mechs that are eviscerating their teammates.

My KDR dropped substantially when I made it a priority to switch to more dangerous mechs after damaging my target enough to make it borderline ineffective, but my win/loss ratio went up enough to be noticeable.

[Rorvik]

Triordinant, on 04 January 2015 - 08:29 PM, said:

As I pointed out earlier in this thread K/D ratio is the worst stat to use when determining Mechwarrior quality and I proved it. Read that first. Some stats DO matter, but K/D ratio is the least of them.

I'm not making any judgements on "MechWarrior quality" based on those stats. I'm simply asking people who think it's a useless / bad stat to put their money where their mouth is and post the stats. Just play along and let's see if an interesting trend develops...

[EgoSlayer]

Rorvik, on 04 January 2015 - 06:21 PM, said:

To everyone who says "stats don't matter", I suggest putting your money where your mouth is and post the following:

1. Your total / overall K/D ratio.
2. All stats for your four "best" Mechs in which you've played at least 25 games. I'll leave it up to each of you to decide how you determine "best" in this case. Make sure to post how many of each Mech's skills you've unlocked.

I don't see you posting your stats, but here are my best four damage per match (DPM) mechs. Jester is 100% pug and started with no basics unlocked (picked up during the sale), other three are about 95% PUG and are all mastered.

	   Played Wins Losses +/- WLR Kills Deaths +/- KDR Survival DmgDone DPM DpTpM XP Earned XPM Time Played
JESTER		 22  15  5  +10 3.00  27  11  +16 2.45  50%  8,789 400 6.15  37,962  1,726  02:44:53
STALKER STK-3F   83  47  35  +12 1.34  77  52  +25 1.48  37%  31,196 376 4.18  86,356  1,040  08:04:34
ILYA MUROMETS   218  107  109  -2 0.98  214  153  +61 1.40  30%  80,830 371 5.3  201,749  925  21:10:05
STALKER STK-5S   90  57  33  +24 1.73  80  47  +33 1.70  48%  32,317 359 3.99  94,053  1,045  09:06:20

[Rorvik]

EgoSlayer, on 04 January 2015 - 09:48 PM, said:

I don't see you posting your stats,

I didn't say they don't matter. Also, I barely have more than 10 games played on many Mechs with the current system. Most of my games are in the old, archived system, where many matches were 8v8 or had no matchmaker. As a result, a lot of my stats are changing wildly from day to day. Last week, I had a 0.79 K/D. Now, it's 0.64, thanks to all those times I died in my SIB (2 / 13) and Sparky (5 / 12).

[Rokuzachi]

I came to this game expecting to care about my stats since I'm usually competitive in this type of game back when it started.

Now I can honestly say I don't care, because this game has so many non-balance related issues which keep it from being an experience I can take seriously and actually try my best at.

Stats are fun when you accumulate them from putting your skill against other players. Stats are not fun when you are not only fighting other players, but also fighting the game itself because of poor design/coding/bugs/etc.

[Seeter 721]

Why taking care about stats, when nobody can see them unless you post them somewhere...
And where is damage taken stat? Given/taken damage ratio?

[Jabilac]

We are rewarded for performing certain actions in the game such as hit and run, flanking, protections, lance in formation, ect. I would like to see how often I get those rewards or how much CBills I've made off of those rewards. To answer the OP I generally care about cbills per match and xp per match.

[C E Dwyer]

I dislike published stats, I have the ones in my profile, I'm happy with those, I nearly always Pug solo, I don't group for time reasons, drop here or there, few old friends I drop with when they log on if I see them, and my daughter.

I don't like published stats , for the reason that the childish use them as I'm better than you, so shut up with your opinions, when it comes to talking on the boards.

I know there are people in MWO that say people don't want them published because it shows they suck, (see what I mean about childish)because they have been vocal about it here.

Well I have top 50 finishes, so I guess I don't suck that bad, I just became very tired of the, my stats are better than yours in other games, and I don't want this one also reduced to, nerh nerh I'm better than you arguments, because it most certainly will degenerate to that, despite the protests it won't , and when you think of the average age of the people here, its kind of disturbing

Few mentioned above, or my own thoughts, on what might be added as private stats.

team damage, I'm sure that people would use it as a see how much I can do, before i'm baned challenge, so I'd rather not see it included.

Most damage and solo kills, I'd like to see these included in private stats, as they are used in the tourney's, and i'd like to get a rough idea of how many I get, without manually adding them up.

[Joseph Mallan]

vettie, on 04 January 2015 - 08:22 AM, said:

I know there are many that 'care' about their 'Kill to Death' stat / ratio and problem many that are also concerned with their 'Win / Loss' ratio.

I am interested to know how many of you care about these or some other stat.

Please be HONEST.

I could care less about W/L because for me playing PuG / solo it is mostly out of my hands. In Team / Group play it is different.

I do care about my K/D ratio but not enough to change my play style, or sit in the back and wait until 5 mechs are a breath away from being destroyed and then going after them, no I just continue to play my regular play style, usually to aggressive, lol

My main stat info I am concerned about is Weapons Accuracy.

I wish there were a couple of things that also showed on the stats page, like how much Team Damage I issued and What mechs the weapons were most used on / accuracy by mech/weapon load - meaning I have an 85% accuracy rating with gauss rifle on Highlander 732, but a 25% rating on a Victor 9S....I tried using a spread sheet, but that was just, well no.

So for me its Weapons Accuracy

You?

For me it's one that isn't tracked, Assists.

I'm not a Laser Jedi or a Machine Gun/small laser starter, I'm a slow plodding Brawling Atlas. I like mopping up as much as getting the kill. If it helps remove opponents from the field faster I am all about it.

[Sixpack]

I am not very good at this game, so I simply don't bother looking at my stats

[Valdherre Tor]

Belkor, on 04 January 2015 - 04:40 PM, said:

Average damage per round is most important imo.

I have had private matches where I have farmed an atlas and got over 900 dmg to one mech. I think killing mechs more efficiently is more important than dmg. Head shots and back armor are not going to get you high dmg numbers but are a must shoot. I think the most important thing to look at on the match results is the match score. That tells how much you contributed to the success of your team.

[Abisha]

I dont really care about win/loss it's totaly out of my control.
that's the PUG life.
but i do care about Kill/death rate that's something i have control over.
if you die without a single kill you doing something serious wrong .

weapon accuracy is not so imported at least my accuracy is 77% so i guess i seldom miss.

[EgoSlayer]

Jabilac, on 08 June 2015 - 07:51 AM, said:

We are rewarded for performing certain actions in the game such as hit and run, flanking, protections, lance in formation, ect. I would like to see how often I get those rewards or how much CBills I've made off of those rewards. To answer the OP I generally care about cbills per match and xp per match.

These patch notes list the rewards 2.0 payouts in XP and C-Bills, although I think there have been some updates mostly on the Conquest/capture side to increase them:
http://mwomercs.com/...tch-notes-13345

[Hammer 13]

I only use kdr as a measure of 'am I improving?'. The actual number doesn't matter to me.

[Water Bear]

vettie, on 04 January 2015 - 08:22 AM, said:

I know there are many that 'care' about their 'Kill to Death' stat / ratio and problem many that are also concerned with their 'Win / Loss' ratio.

I am interested to know how many of you care about these or some other stat.

Please be HONEST.

I could care less about W/L because for me playing PuG / solo it is mostly out of my hands. In Team / Group play it is different.

I do care about my K/D ratio but not enough to change my play style, or sit in the back and wait until 5 mechs are a breath away from being destroyed and then going after them, no I just continue to play my regular play style, usually to aggressive, lol

My main stat info I am concerned about is Weapons Accuracy.

I wish there were a couple of things that also showed on the stats page, like how much Team Damage I issued and What mechs the weapons were most used on / accuracy by mech/weapon load - meaning I have an 85% accuracy rating with gauss rifle on Highlander 732, but a 25% rating on a Victor 9S....I tried using a spread sheet, but that was just, well no.

So for me its Weapons Accuracy

You?

This is...a little disingenuous. I honestly don't believe that weapon accuracy is the stat you care most about, making it ironic that you ask for an honest response.

I care about k/d and w/l. IMO w/l is the real indicator of skill, more so than even k/d. But neither is fool proof. I care about things which aren't measured, such as my own internal evaluation of my actions. For example, I feel good about taking command issuing non-trivial orders that result in success. A non-trivial order is, by my definition, any order I issue which my team wasn't already carrying out.

[ScarecrowES]

I'll wade in here. Stats don't matter in MWO because all stats are without any context. Win/loss ratio is fundementallly random when going solo. K/d isn't much less random as good damage performance is not synonymous with kills. Damage or score isn't useful because it doesnt show the context under which the results were achieved.

Examples... 500 damage in a 100 ton mech seems less impressive than 500 damage in a 35 ton mech. Losing a match but placing first on your team for damage, kills, and score... which factor reflects skill more? Getting a match score of 20 with less than 100 damage, but solo capping 3 conquest cap points resulting in a team win... who was more valuable, you or the guy with 100 match score?

Stats dont mean anything without context.