Kill spread should be what determines end of game rankings

#231The BeansterPosted 11/12/2012 7:36:39 AM(edited)
bessy67 posted...
You at least agree that k/d spread shows a part of overall performance so maybe it should be factored into the final rankings?


Yes, it shows part of overall performance, but other than including it as a tiebreaker between players with the same # of kills + assists, I see no meaningful or helpful way it could be included in final rankings.

Also, you do realize that this wasn't your original argument, right?
---
i7-2600k @ 4.8 Ghz | 2x MSI 7970 Lightning @ 1200/1800 | 8 GB DDR3-1600 RAM
Currently Playing: Halo 4, Sleeping Dogs || GT: The Ownage
#232bessy67(Topic Creator)Posted 11/12/2012 7:44:48 AM
The Beanster posted...
bessy67 posted...
You at least agree that k/d spread shows a part of overall performance so maybe it should be factored into the final rankings?


Yes, it shows part of overall performance, but other than including it as a tiebreaker between players with the same # of kills + assists, I see no meaningful or helpful way it could be included in final rankings.

Also, you do realize that this wasn't your original argument, right?


My original argument was that K/D spread is more important than total # of kills. I still believe that to be true. But as is usually the case, when two people have different arguments one does not win the other completely over to their side, instead a compromise is reached. I still feel the way I always did and so do you, but we agree on this point at least.
---
"Immigrants. Thats all they do, you know. Just driving around, listening to raps, shooting all the jobs." - Malory Archer
GT: Bessy67
#233The BeansterPosted 11/12/2012 8:11:46 AM
bessy67 posted...
The Beanster posted...
bessy67 posted...
You at least agree that k/d spread shows a part of overall performance so maybe it should be factored into the final rankings?


Yes, it shows part of overall performance, but other than including it as a tiebreaker between players with the same # of kills + assists, I see no meaningful or helpful way it could be included in final rankings.

Also, you do realize that this wasn't your original argument, right?


My original argument was that K/D spread is more important than total # of kills. I still believe that to be true. But as is usually the case, when two people have different arguments one does not win the other completely over to their side, instead a compromise is reached. I still feel the way I always did and so do you, but we agree on this point at least.


Your topic title is "Kill spread should be what determines end of game rankings" and that's a bad idea even if you ultimately think K/D is more important, and I've explained a few times why.

As for "K/D spread being more important", I don't necessarily disagree, I just think that's an oversimplification the same way "more kills is more important" is an oversimplification.
---
i7-2600k @ 4.8 Ghz | 2x MSI 7970 Lightning @ 1200/1800 | 8 GB DDR3-1600 RAM
Currently Playing: Halo 4, Sleeping Dogs || GT: The Ownage
#234therickmu25Posted 11/12/2012 8:15:49 AM
This is not true for King of The HIll. I see countless worthless teammates that have 0 seconds in the Hill but think they helped by going positive and shooting people from the outside.

YOU ARE NOT HELPING IF YOU DON'T GO FOR THE HILL, GET IT THROUGH YOUR THINK SKULL.

So at least for KOTH it should strictly be based on how many seconds you take the hill. I see people that finish ahead of me with 0 seconds and I have like 40 seconds.
---
http://i.imgur.com/34Fj8.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/ZGQLw.jpg
#235SeraphLancePosted 11/12/2012 8:20:42 AM(edited)
therickmu25 posted...
This is not true for King of The HIll. I see countless worthless teammates that have 0 seconds in the Hill but think they helped by going positive and shooting people from the outside.

YOU ARE NOT HELPING IF YOU DON'T GO FOR THE HILL, GET IT THROUGH YOUR THINK SKULL.

So at least for KOTH it should strictly be based on how many seconds you take the hill. I see people that finish ahead of me with 0 seconds and I have like 40 seconds.


This obviously was never meant to apply to objective gametypes...

Anyway, I maintain that a metric without assists taken into account is not a sufficient metric in any situation. The skill gap in this game is low enough that among any players of decent skill, a mid-range DMR battle in 1v1 is always going to be a wash. In a 2v1, nothing short of a hardlight will keep the opponent alive. In those situations, the assistant deserves just as much credit for the kill as the one who delivered the final shot (which is totally up to chance).
---
Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.
#236The BeansterPosted 11/12/2012 8:20:08 AM
therickmu25 posted...
GET IT THROUGH YOUR THINK SKULL.


"think skull" lol

baddie
---
i7-2600k @ 4.8 Ghz | 2x MSI 7970 Lightning @ 1200/1800 | 8 GB DDR3-1600 RAM
Currently Playing: Halo 4, Sleeping Dogs || GT: The Ownage
#237deimos91Posted 11/12/2012 8:21:11 AM
ranking are performance you lost cause he did alot more if he managed to ouscore you with 25 kills
---
Intel core 2 duo E4400 2 GHZ|Radeon 4650 512MB|2 GB DDR2 ram/steam:fartman91/3DSFC:3265-5740-7951
#238faxmachnePosted 11/12/2012 8:26:47 AM
I do kinda agree with you

the only problem is assists

you see the guy who went 25/24 may have assisted you in your kills, and in other kills

that is a fairly large contribution that goes unrecognised in your system.

I think things like this need to be recognised
---
Thanks to the guy who blabbed on my old one