the stats

Traino

Poster
WOW! i just looked at the stats and im not doing to bad. but the stat system i love it :)
it tell you litterly everything :-D welll that all i really have to say for now
see ya on the battle feild everyone
 

BREAK_EM_OUT_JONES

EGO Is My Life!
ouch dont be mad. im crappy too according to the stats. they dont reflect my gameplay. flags not frags!
 

Jakemac

Poster Extraordinaire
lol i am not ranked... im 101... lol
 

JMAN

EGO Zealot
I am around the 200s
 
My thoughts on what the stats may be missing... and it's difficult, I know, but here it is:

1. On a map that favors one side over the other, like Avalanche, perhaps some small multiplyer can be used to weigh ability depending on which side you're on. Since Avalanche tends to favor Axis, a person on Allies would have a very slightly higher quality multiplyer due to being on the disadvantaged side.

2. Some factor for being on a side with less people on it should be taken into account. Playing on Avalanche, I tend to be on Allies, chiefly because they tend to need the help more. Being on Allies, I understand that there is some effort by the admins to even the teams, and I appreciate that, but most of the time on Allies is spend with at least one and usually a two man disadvantage. Some accounting for being on a team with less people should be accounted for.

3. There should be a final multiplyer based on area captured. If a team spends 95% of it's time worrying about it's last two flags because that 95% of the time the other team controls three of the five flags, some accounting for this disadvantage should be there.

These are my observations: I think it's a given that STG has advantages in one-to-one weapons (over BAR, of course, due to 50% more rounds before reload), and some may argue that the KAR is better (I'm not saying it is, but it's certainly not less than Garand). With inherent overall advantages in weapons and a map that is Axis-friendly, I find most of the higher-ranking members tend to gravitate to the Axis side. Now, many go on Allies, true, and some do switch around when the Allies are disadvantaged, and that's good. But, it's harder to get a really good stat ranking system that doesn't take into account such factors as map advantages, player number advantages, and the like. What I'm saying is that it's easy to skew your ranking by going just going to the side that maximizes the advantages.

I'm a type of player that goes to the side that needs me most. I'm not saying I'm a particularly good player, but I figure a better game is as even a game as possible. In any case, going to the side that needs me most is inherently dangerous for me stat-wise, not that it's a high priority, but it would be nice to compare apples to apples and not to oranges. I'm not angry or anything, I just think some consideration should be made for these other factors.
 
How exactly are the stats figured? I understand it deals with more than K:D ratio, taking into account type of weapon used and how many flags you capture, but I can't find anywhere where the exact breakdown is explained. I'd love to know what weight any of the variables have in the formulaton of the stats. Doe someone know where I can get this information from? Do I concentrate on flag capturing and kills per minute and then K"D? I just don't know how the stats system is weighted.
 

JMAN

EGO Zealot
Forrest Gump is who i've killed the most, ranked somewhere in the 110's right now i think...
 
Top