81 replies to this topic

[Mawai]

MischiefSC, on 09 April 2015 - 05:52 AM, said:

That is the real problem. People all want to think they are already amazing and the truth is they are average. The actual top tier players are fundamentally those who can recognize that and focus on changing what they do to get better. Everyone else wants to just do what they have always done and change the metrics to say they are better, or make excuses for why the metrics are wrong.

LOL ... that describes me ... I play decently most of the time but usually I am not focusing on playing better and more effectively ... I am playing to have fun.

When I am driving a light mech for example ... I take way more risks than I should ... usually they work out ... I am a decent light pilot and it is fun ... but I could be more effective in the long term if I ensured my survival while still supporting the team.

Recently, I've been playing my HBK-4G and the play style required by the mech is often a close support role ot heavies and assaults (I usually prefer fast skirmishers - Firestarter/Jenner/Jester). Playing that way has resulted in more wins on average and a higher K/D for that mech. I have been fine tuning the play style to maximize the results and that is likely showing up in my medium mech Elo score.

Judging by the fact that most folks in the matches I play appear to play decently ... I'd say I am probably slightly over the middle hump of the Elo curve ... I see the occasional "C" mech which may be someone in a trial or could be someone who bought a champion mech. However, honestly, I think that is really the only way to judge your relative skill level ... stats like W/L, average damage done, K/D are far too easy to manipulate if you actually try that I find them generally meaningless.

W/L - get on an organized team that plays well together (not just a bunch of folks chatting on coms)

K/D - try not to die as much as get kills ... use a sniper ... play alternate win game modes ... I have seen several laser sniper Raven 3-L who likely have an outstanding K/D ... though it doesn't say much for their team play ability

Average damage done - I spectated the last mech on my side ... a Timberwolf ... get 3 or 4 kills and score hundreds of damage all while being hunted down by the remaining 8 mechs on the opposing team. He had stayed back from the fight most of the match ... peeking in and sniping with lasers. Absolutely useless team play but the end of match statistics showed 1100 damage and 5 kills ... someone might have said he should have carried harder except that I watched him get most of it AFTER the match was already done. So I take even those apparently amazing performances with a grain of salt these days.

[STEF_]

El Bandito, on 09 April 2015 - 05:59 AM, said:

Presenting such argument with a screenshot of a single game is not gonna convince me. You need to realize that such games are not all that common and your pug WLR will average out in the long run due to MM doing its best to fit you with bad teammates as you gain more victories. Only those who are at least moderately skilled will continue to beat the odds in pugs and have more than 1:1 WLR. The rest are simply tumbling along MM's tender mercy.

Pug WLR is a good indicator of how well you stack up against other puggers (85% of the player base)--after few hundred matches or so.

Still you, me, and any other pilot, are only one with other 11 in a random team, and it is the team that win or lose. One pilot can contribute for 1/12 of the match.

edit: that's why in my previous posts, I talk about dmg/ton/match, if OP wants to see "where he's standing".

Edited by Stefka Kerensky, 09 April 2015 - 06:38 AM.

[Tordin]

Im far from the best PUG player. Its near the cellar level IMO. I've felt I do much better in CW, though I want to work out the kinks in pug matches also. It dosent help when I get matched up by varying factors that dosent exactly help/ guide me, *cough* team killers *cough* Also facing elited and mastered versions of the same chassis you drive, can be a painful reminder of grinding xp to stand a chance, independent of loadout etc.

Edited by Tordin, 09 April 2015 - 06:38 AM.

[Ursh]

InspectorG, on 08 April 2015 - 05:32 PM, said:

Find some of the comp guys and go to their practice?

Ive heard some of the comp guys are only average in a solo duel but murderous as a unit. Prolly different skill sets that what normaly works in Puglania.

That's been my experience. When you watch some of the videos from RHOD, for example, a lot of the people don't blow you away with their individual skill, although almost everyone on those teams are very competent players, at the least. It's their ability to work as a team, to tank for teammates, to follow the script, and follow orders, that makes their unit great.

It's just like other team based video games. When I played MMOs a lot, most of the top guilds weren't filled with super-elite players, they were filled with functional players led by good people. I imagine MWO top teams aren't so different in composition.

When I dabbled in 12 mans with my old unit, we ran into a couple of teams that spewed trashtalk from the beginning to the end of each match. Yes, they stomped us, but when you looked at the end of match screen, there were like 2-3 guys who were responsible for most of the carnage, and the other 9 dudes were just soggy biscuits tagging along for the ride. So, 25% of their team were great players, 75% of their team thought they were great players because of the contributions of the 25%.

Edited by Ursh, 09 April 2015 - 06:41 AM.

[Makeynalluhvin]

The average win/loss ratio across all players would be 1.0. But there are a lot of players that try the game for less than 1 month and quit the game. Those players are most likely not very good and have a W/L ratio of less than 1.0. The average W/L ratio for players who stay in the game then should be greater than 1.0.

This is somewhat subjective but I think if you W/L ratio is >1.5 then you are a good player and >2.0 a great player if most of it is achieved in solo matches.

KDR is too easy to manipulate.

[Nick86]

A rolling player view only leaderboard for their own last 30 odd games or so would be a great feature to be able to refer to.. but based on match score and nothing else maybe? KDR is pointless and cynical play to improve it should be wiped out in my opinion.. then again, the crummy matchmaker makes leaderboards problematic; I've been in ELO hell whilst grinding mechs. Puts you off the game.. Nonetheless, a player private leaderboard system which only the player can view would be a great indicator if it was done on a rolling basis.

[cleghorn6]

Mcchuggernaut, on 08 April 2015 - 09:12 PM, said:

I don't think your right about how the matchmaker works. Everything I have heard and read before is that the matchmaker works by looking for an average skill level that is as close as possible for the two teams, and doesn't do it how you say. To my knowledge, it works by finding an AVERAGE skill level by adding up the skill levels of two teams. This is why you get so many teammates that don't do well after you have a particularly long streak of good games, and get a lot of competent teammates when you have been consistently doing poorly for a while. That explains a lot of the "streaks" of wins and losses a lot of players see, as well as those sets of games where you easily pull off 600+ damage a match but your team keeps melting and self-destructing on you.

https://en.wikipedia...nfirmation_bias

I'm an average player at best and I see the same things. The "forum wisdom" in this case is categorically wrong, for well known reasons. Mawai's post is the best I've seen on the way the MM actually works and I'll be referring people to it in future.

[STEF_]

El Bandito, on 09 April 2015 - 05:59 AM, said:

Presenting such argument with a screenshot of a single game is not gonna convince me. You need to realize that such games are not all that common and your pug WLR will average out in the long run due to MM doing its best to fit you with bad teammates as you gain more victories. Only those who are at least moderately skilled will continue to beat the odds in pugs and have more than 1:1 WLR. The rest are simply tumbling along MM's tender mercy.

Pug WLR is a good indicator of how well you stack up against other puggers (85% of the player base)--after few hundred matches or so.

Just trying to convince you


Not a screenshot but stats.
Why da hell ZEU-9S has 3,29 w/l ratio?
Ok, it's my fav Zeus, I'm happy and have fun with it... but still... it seems like I do well in assaults, while I suck with assaults !!

I think w/l ratio it's all about luck. Because it is has kd ratio and dmg/ton/match (= 374,26; while zeu-6t has 369, and zeu-6s has 373) only slightly better than the others 2 variants.

[El Bandito]

Stefka Kerensky, on 09 April 2015 - 07:18 AM, said:

Just trying to convince you


Not a screenshot but stats.
Why da hell ZEU-9S has 3,29 w/l ratio?
Ok, it's my fav Zeus, I'm happy and have fun with it... but still... it seems like I do well in assaults, while I suck with assaults !!

I think w/l ratio it's all about luck. Because it is has kd ratio and dmg/ton/match (= 374,26; while zeu-6t has 369, and zeu-6s has 373) only slightly better than the others 2 variants.

That's still too few. Try something closer to this.

[Almond Brown]

Mcchuggernaut, on 08 April 2015 - 05:51 PM, said:

Aaaaannnnnddddd this is why people are so hesitant to state their stats and ask their peers about where they think you stand overall. You get accused of bragging. Or ridiculed if they aren't good. I was pretty sure someone would do that, but the potential knowledge I could gain from other answers I felt was worth the hating of some haters.

I am curious as to what this "knowledge" you so yearn to know will do for you and your playing in the future?

Seriously. If you found out you were "The MWO Man", what then? What would be gained in the long run...

Are you not always trying your best every Match already?

[STEF_]

El Bandito, on 09 April 2015 - 07:23 AM, said:

That's still too few. Try something closer to this.

I know you are good.
And looking at stats, you are a smart one, undestanding what's happening in the match (and reacting properly), because you managed to have 1,5 w/l ratio and 1,76kd ratio.... with a relatevely poorly efficent mech: only 4,03 dmg/ton/match!!!

Well, maybe the streakcat hitting ct helped a lot, and the splatcat too

[Joseph Mallan]

Here's a trippy stat for you!

PANTHER PNT-10K
W6 L6 1.00 K5 D10 0.50 1,957 11,455 01:17:14
ENFORCER ENF-5D
W5 L5 1.00 K2 D9 0.22 1,218 8,655 00:46:39
GRASSHOPPER GHR-5J
W1 L2 0.50 K2 D2 1.00 405 1,665 00:15:13
ZEUS ZEU-6S
W5 L5 1.00 K4 D8 0.50 2,113 7,770 01:21:30

I am just about perfectly average with the Resistance Mechs For wins and losses. But I do appear to sacrifice myself quite a bit more than I should.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 09 April 2015 - 08:12 AM.

[Kristov Kerensky]

Where do you stand in relation to others via your skill level?

No idea, MWO has nothing to track that because it's a team oriented game and your personal skill level isn't as important as your ability to work as a member of a team.

Can you hit a Firestarter moving at full speed laterally to you at 400m with a gauss 75% of the time?
Can you hit a shutdown Dire Wolf at 20m in the cockpit and drop it?
Can you tell me where you are in relation to the rest of your lance and your team at any time during a drop?
Do you know what that funny thing in the bottom middle of the screen with the red, blue and green markers is?

I can go on with lots of questions that help determine if you are skilled player and if you are a useful team player, but the simplest way is this...

Do you do your best to make sure your team wins, regardless of the final outcome? Most of us really don't give a rat's furry rear end about your ability to go 1v1 with someone else, we want to know you aren't going to shoot us in the ass because you don't have any situational awareness, we want to know if you are going to hit R, and we want to know if you are going to play bait or tank to help us kill the enemy, even if it means you get 0 kills.

That's what most of us look for in a good player, just so you know.

[Shae Starfyre]

My impression, if it matters, is that you assist more than you kill, and your damage reflects an amount consistant with not just spraying and praying (how to calculate that is not something I want to do right now), there is a sense of your team-oriented battlefield awareness rating in there somewhere.

It doesn't matter if you win, if you are only wondering about how skillful you are.

A couple of things to note:

1.) Are you wanting to measure how skillful you are at making a kill? Then determine your damage to kill ratio (less damage might mean, not always, that you are a good marksman and are aiming for critical components or areas to kill quickly) where as, those who show a lot of damage, few kills and few assists would not be considered a good marksman.

2.) Are you wanting to see how skillful you are at team play (does the win/loss rate this; not really because you cannot, in pug-landia, control the outcome as well), so you might look at your assists and damage done ratios an those c-bill bonus for tag, narc, components detroyed, etc (this could also be an indicator in number 1).

3.) Are you wanting to see how skillful you are at solo style play (as in one on one; but potentially at the determint of your team), flank and find a pilot alone and see how it goes. I have played flanking routes to good effect at times, and when I see that my score is 3 kills and 0 assists, low damage, and the enemy was fresh, that I shot well, moved well, and basically, did better than the other guy.... but who or at what level was that guy?

All of it is subjective; so much so, I have not looked at more score page in 2 years now. I have no clue what my scores are.

[blood4blood]

Do you go into training grounds with a single laser mech to practice head shots and learn all the hit boxes on each chassis? Do you then do the same with real loadouts, and practice while moving? Do you explore the maps carefully to find good tactical positions as well as any glitches, bugs, or exploits? Do read developer's posts and patch notes religiously, and immediately grasp the implications of how it will change weapon/chassis/variant/quirk balance? When you go into mech lab, are you just having fun and trying different configs, or do you have a specific plan and build toward an objective? Do you buy new chassis based on their performance characteristics or for other reasons? Do you play with a team where you are pleasantly surprised when you reach the middle of the pack on the score board, and/or otherwise readily admit your teammates are better than you? Do you discuss the game with like-minded competitive teammates and friends, and constantly learn from them new things about the game that you didn't know before?

MWO doesn't have enough community involvement to really figure it out beyond that stuff. Back in the MW4 leagues and on the Zone, everyone who was around for a while knew who the really good teams and players were. From that experience and knowing how I approach MWO now, I have a good idea where I stand - pretty average, very inconsistent, but I don't do my research, practice, and play in a purely competitive manner so that's no surprise. I know how to get better, but honestly, I really just don't care that much. As far as K/D and W/L in this game where you have random teammates AND random opponents, those just aren't very meaningful measures.

[Amsro]

Mcchuggernaut, on 08 April 2015 - 05:10 PM, said:

Really? In pure pug matches I would think those things would be good indicators. How do you win a game of MWO? You either capture an objective (which very rarely happens) or you destroy the enemy team. Therefore, wouldn't killing more enemies than times you are killed help your team and therefore boost your w/l ratio above 1/1? That's my take on it. Either that or extremely good spotting/narcing/team coordination, but those circumstances are considerably less common.

The problem with using KDR and WLR as metrics to determine skill is all the variables that go along with 23 other players in the match with you.

If you are talking 1vs1 skill then it comes down to the player with the most knowledge of the battlemechs and loadouts. Knowing which location to shoot/disarm. After that the use of terrain and proper engagement location. And then once again mastering your heat and being able to battle in the 95% range without shutting down.

Even then having a great match doesn't mean you are better then the other player overall.

I think there is a ceiling for skill in the game that a lot of players have reached, after that the difference is in the minor details.

[Roadkill]

Adiuvo, on 08 April 2015 - 10:45 PM, said:

There are many players out there with W/Ls far above 1 in the solo queue, and KDRs far above 2. It's not some mythical thing that only happens to the lucky.

I don't think anyone is saying that those players don't exist.

What we're saying is that it's difficult to get a WLR much above 1.15 or so. If you can manage that, then yes you're pretty good. PGI's Elo implementation has a cap, which means the very best players are underrated by design. Those players should have a WLR well above 1.0 even in the Solo queue.

KDR above 2 is easy if that's the style of play you enjoy. My best Mech is just shy of 4.0 KDR, and yes it's a dedicated sniper. I also know I'm not a top-tier player, so I stand by my estimate that a really good sniper should be pulling down at least 5-6 KDR.

I prefer brawling, though, and it's tough to maintain a KDR of 2.0 as a dedicated brawler. If you can, you're pretty good.

[Revis Volek]

Mcchuggernaut, on 08 April 2015 - 02:49 PM, said:

I am curious as to where I actually stand skill-wise. A lot of games have percentile rankings, or in-game ranks based on player performance, but as far as I am aware, MWO has no actual official way to see how you compare to the whole player base.

Right now I'm sitting at a 1.92 k/d with a 553/480 win-loss ratio. I usually sit around 2.0 k/d but my numbers are currently recovering from a couple recent and disastrous build experiments that pulled them down. Grinding new clan mechs to elite status also didn't help, but at least I'm done with that for a while. I also understand that because of the way the matchmaker works, the better you are the crappier teammates you get paired with and vice versa, and this drives your win/loss ratio close to 1/1 no matter if you are good or terrible.

So a normally 1.9-2.0 k/d: Good, bad, in the middle? What stats do top-tier players have? Is there a place to check out leaderboards and my individual standing?

K/D means nothing for the most part....lots of guys just stand around and poach kills. I wouldnt use that as a good measuring stick.

W/L is a better indicator but still not the greatest, do some leader board challenges and compare DMG and Match Score to other people on your team. Those are better indicators then solely kdr.

[Deathlike]

The best way of looking at this...

As long as your k/d ratio and w/l ratio is above 1, then you're probably doing alright.

When you are below that... there's lots to work on... and usually this will take a while, but it's not impossible to do.


There are too many things that affect people's perception or are just arbitrary measures of what people think is good or not good. Unless you have played with/against this person frequently, you will never truly know how good/great/bad this player may actually be... and so the numbers you see can always be influenced by just stacking or playing in a way that preserves your k-d ratio instead of being a credit to the team at times.

It is what it is, and trying to measure your e-peen is a waste of time in the grand scheme of things.

[Lily from animove]

Mawai, on 09 April 2015 - 06:27 AM, said:

Average damage done - I spectated the last mech on my side ... a Timberwolf ... get 3 or 4 kills and score hundreds of damage all while being hunted down by the remaining 8 mechs on the opposing team. He had stayed back from the fight most of the match ... peeking in and sniping with lasers. Absolutely useless team play but the end of match statistics showed 1100 damage and 5 kills ... someone might have said he should have carried harder except that I watched him get most of it AFTER the match was already done. So I take even those apparently amazing performances with a grain of salt these days.

,Not so sure here, if hemade 3-4 kills by finishign, true. But when one can make hundrets of damage takign out mechs in 1 on 8 situation, you should ask, how 11 vs 12 made such a bad play before. In most cases those are stupid impation teamrushes wherehalf the people go in while the others are still not able to go in because they are too far away.
When 11 go in stepping each other in the way, no focsu fire and all that nonsense. Sometimes a team is lost, even if they try teamplay. but with a single guy missing getting only 3 takeouts while losing 11 mechs, and this guy rakcing hundrets vs 8, it tells me the team still did many many things wrong.