ArgathorJoin Date: 2011-07-18Member: 110942Members, Squad Five Blue
<!--quoteo(post=1915012:date=Mar 19 2012, 02:05 PM:name=Xostean)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Xostean @ Mar 19 2012, 02:05 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1915012"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If i see some one on the team who has a +30 KDR but isnt helping the team to do ###### other than kill and i see some one with a -30 KDR who is doing everything in their power to help the team win guess who is the noob? That's right, the self important KDR loving ######.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Like many of previous replies, you are making insanely stupid assumptions. The majority of players with strong KDRs are very good players, doing the right things. This is because playing the game very well, in the right way, with skill, gives you a good KDR. The only time this is not the case is if the opposing team significantly out skills you.
NS2 is not some hugely complex game, killing the other team well usually means you win. Anyone playing gathers/clan matches will know that map control and momentum are integral to the outcome of the game, in most circumstances.
KDR means nothing in ns and never did. I don't have enough play hours to say much about ns2 ...but I barely ever had a KDR higher than 1 in ns1 and still always contributed significantly to the team - often "carried" a team to victory. And I guess it's still the same. KDR means not being effective, it merely means you killed some enemies. You can camp at some point and kill everything that moves while your team is losing because nobody cared about structures. NS is a strategy game with different classes. A skulk's life is worth almost nothing. A skulk with 0.2 kdr can be more useful than a fade with 17 kdr. Lerks can create an area-of-denial without killing a single marine, gorges don't kill anything and yet you lose without them.
Kdr is a personal score only and doesn't say anything about your contribution to the team. I'd even dare to say that people with a VERY high kdr are contra-productive. They're mostly more busy with themselves, with killing and healing/retreating than with anything else. As Talesin said, kdr stats should be removed to prevent people from even thinking about it. Kill assists should count as points.
<!--quoteo(post=1915022:date=Mar 19 2012, 09:23 AM:name=Argathor)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Argathor @ Mar 19 2012, 09:23 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1915022"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Like many of previous replies, you are making insanely stupid assumptions. The majority of players with strong KDRs are very good players, doing the right things. This is because playing the game very well, in the right way, with skill, gives you a good KDR. The only time this is not the case is if the opposing team significantly out skills you.
NS2 is not some hugely complex game, killing the other team well usually means you win. Anyone playing gathers/clan matches will know that map control and momentum are integral to the outcome of the game, in most circumstances.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I should of been more clear about what i mean by "Self important KDR ######".
When i say that im speaking about those who think they are the master of the team, and that if the team loses its everyone's fault but them. Those who call another player a noob because of their KDR even though that "noob" just took down a hive.
If you have a good KDR then yes, you probably are a good player. But no one wants to hear about it nor your opinion on their KDR. If people are going to remark on others with a bad KDR make it helpful remarks. Explain to them what you see them doing wrong and suggest a way to fix it, help them get better not bring them down further.
<!--quoteo(post=1915022:date=Mar 19 2012, 04:23 PM:name=Argathor)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Argathor @ Mar 19 2012, 04:23 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1915022"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Like many of previous replies, you are making insanely stupid assumptions. The majority of players with strong KDRs are very good players, doing the right things. This is because playing the game very well, in the right way, with skill, gives you a good KDR. The only time this is not the case is if the opposing team significantly out skills you.
NS2 is not some hugely complex game, killing the other team well usually means you win. Anyone playing gathers/clan matches will know that map control and momentum are integral to the outcome of the game, in most circumstances.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Most people in this thread are also making silly assumptions. When somebody says that KDR doesn't matter, that doesn't mean they are saying that a player should try and die as much as possible without killing anyone, as most people clearly think it does. What it means is you shouldn't chase the first marine you see like a dog chasing cars. You shouldn't try to maximise your chance of survival at the cost of damage output. You shouldn't prioritise enemy players over enemy structures. Obviously none of these are universal rules that should be followed <b>at all times </b>but more often than not they should be followed, and that is what it means when someone says that KDR doesn't matter. Killing other players for the sake of killing them is not your primary concern.
Take the fade for example. Marine killing machine. That is his job, to kill the enemy. A high KDR with a fade is good, it means you are killing the marines without losing your lifeform. However, if 6 marines are hanging out in marine spawn and two marines are building a phase outside the hive, where should the fade be? Prioritising killing in marine spawn where targets are plenty, or defending a key position by killing the right people at the right time?
Another good example is a common way of repelling a marine rush on a hive. You can either go for as many kills as you can head on, right into the group of marines, or you can ignore the marines and go for the enemy comm station. They will have to beacon and the push is prevented. You don't even need to engage other players in order to win a game.
ArgathorJoin Date: 2011-07-18Member: 110942Members, Squad Five Blue
<!--quoteo(post=1915027:date=Mar 19 2012, 02:31 PM:name=Xostean)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Xostean @ Mar 19 2012, 02:31 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1915027"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I should of been more clear about what i mean by "Self important KDR ######".
When i say that im speaking about those who think they are the master of the team, and that if the team loses its everyone's fault but them. Those who call another player a noob because of their KDR even though that "noob" just took down a hive.
If you have a good KDR then yes, you probably are a good player. But no one wants to hear about it nor your opinion on their KDR. If people are going to remark on others with a bad KDR make it helpful remarks. Explain to them what you see them doing wrong and suggest a way to fix it, help them get better not bring them down further.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> That is not the topic of this thread. The point is that you can make judgements about a game from the KDRs and that it is an important aspect of the game. At no point is this discussion about the minority of people who fall into the category of self important KDR ##### or good players who havent killed anyone. The vast majority of the time a good KDR means a good player.
Too many times are people attempting to use people who make up a tiny minority of players to refute the general idea of this thread. The OP is correct in the vast majority of cases, that is all that matters. There is always more to it, there are always unique circumstances, etc, etc. The general idea stands.
Although KDR is less important for an individual in NS it really does tell a story when you enter a game mid-match summing the aggregate team KDR. If one side is winning a majority of the rock / paper / scissor engagements in the beginning of a match it seriously effects the mid-game ie: less resource towers and less map control.
Entering a match in play and aggregating the team KDR is quite useful most of the time and these are my general observations (i'm not implying this is the be-all end-all but it is somewhat useful based on the 60 hours I've played):
Early game (5-10 minutes)
Introduction of hive catalyze obviously changed this but assuming in the future it will be retarded in some form.
A: One side with clearly higher team kdr usually implies that the majority of engagements have gone one way and map control and res nodes are in their favor.
B: Somewhat even +/- aggregate KDR on both teams usually implies that both teams are doing what they are suppose to be doing and are fighting over map control with some winners and losers, usually preludes to a great match (unless they improperly setup for mid-game).
Mid-Late Game (20-25 minutes)
Would say outcomes are more volatile in terms of engagements based on life form mix and upgrades and aggregate KDR becomes much less important in telling where a match is going unless the differences between the team KDR gap is huge. Generally by this time the result of the game is obvious or if not the game can really grind along (even matchup?).
With an even aggregate team KDR from both sides, the marine teams that can hold out until they max out upgrades can grind down the alien side on even match ups unless there are co-ordinated cc/base powernode snipes. Would be great to see some of the data that UWE has in regards to player vs player match ups.
Another good example is a common way of repelling a marine rush on a hive. You can either go for as many kills as you can head on, right into the group of marines, or you can ignore the marines and go for the enemy comm station. They will have to beacon and the push is prevented. You don't even need to engage other players in order to win a game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Minority circumstances are irrelevant to this discussion. There is also an equal chance (probably more towards the good KDR players in reality) that good/bad KDR players will also act in a tactically/strategically benefical way.
The general idea of this thread stands in the vast majority of cases, as there is the potential for combat in almost any scenario. People who are better at killing (and not dieing) are better at defending, attacking, rushing, scouting, almost everything. As there is always the potential for combat in a combat game.
I have read this entire topic and I can't believe that no one have made this argumet yet. The commander gets almost no kills some deaths yet he is the backbone of the team getting upgrades, supporting, dropping buildings and all that good stuff. (Yes people, we have commanders in NS2). But I guess that this is more talking about the FPS role but that is also why this K/D argument lacks. I do agree that K/D gives some information but I certainly don't base players skill by looking at their K/D atleast in a game like NS2. The objective of the game is to win however a win/loss ratio doesn't give much information either because one player can rarely change the tide of the battle if the rest of the team is bad. So I can very well lose the game even if I were doing well getting a lot of points, kills and assists. I don't think that there is a system that can define a persons skill in NS2. It was an interesting OP however I feel that this discussion is unhealthy and things are getting repated constantly so I think this is a matter of opinion.
I like the argument for aggregate team KDR, because pretty much everything a team does in NS2 (fighting, building infrastructure, destroying infrastructure) is to the end of making their team more effective in combat.
On the other hand, this emphasis on individual KDR is bugging me. I posit that sneaking around the map tearing down and setting up infrastructure, ending up with a 1:1 KDR, is much more important than shooting a few more skulks. I guess this isn't the "general case," but so what? It's the role I play every game, and which I see other people play every game. Guess those people don't exist?
IronHorseDeveloper, QA Manager, Technical Support & contributorJoin Date: 2010-05-08Member: 71669Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Subnautica Playtester, Subnautica PT Lead, Pistachionauts
edited March 2012
<!--quoteo(post=1915012:date=Mar 19 2012, 06:05 AM:name=Xostean)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Xostean @ Mar 19 2012, 06:05 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1915012"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->who is the noob? That's right, the self important KDR loving ######.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
does this include that fade with 30-0 score who has single handedly pushed the marines back into their base from across the map??
i seriously doubt anyone plays this game with that "need a good KD" mentality. i get high KD ratios all the time, but its because i'm tearing into players and shouting at my buddies to help with tearing down structures too -<b> all in the name of map control!</b> have to agree with IE on this one... you all need to stop assuming so much.
(and IE, you need to stop personally attacking people, Tact, good sir, <u>Tact</u>.)
Sorry but KD does give an idea if a player is good, killing enemy players gives your team an easier time attacking defending or whatever... if a player is dead it means he is back at their base waiting to respawn having to spent time getting back in combat... if a lot of players in the enemy team are dead it means your team can push forward easier which also means the easier it gets to know where the other team could come from (if you push them back in their base you can cover the entrances) So you scout earlier what they are going to do, providing you more time to react.
K/D is not our enemy, while it is true that a player can also be useful and good with a low k/d having a high k/d does mean the player is doing something right and good for his team. Just play some scrims, a great aimer like treffnix, fana, and so on is a HUGE advantage to have... since most of the time killing enemy players decides the outcome of fight. While its also possible to win games with tactics that are not based around killing enemy players (like a good timed lerk or skulk rush in a CC) if they spot this tactic early enough they can easily deny it because they are great at killing stuff.
Players having high k/d usually also means they know the game and map extreamly good and counter enemy pressure pretty well - you wont ever lose a game because there is a player with high k/d in a game... you will only lose if you decide to not support this player using the advanages he provides. (i cant tell how often i destroyed all the eggs and respawn at a hive and asking for ammo or players to push in only to die because i didnt got ammo, or other players in a team decided to not push in and instead waste their time doing some useless ######, or the same as fade in a marine base - with not a single player comming to help even tho im shouting in the mic)
Somehow i feel like some ppl feel like they are not appreciated so they try to argue that k/d is something evil. So having a high k/d does mean a player is doing something right, not having a high k/d doesnt mean you are a bad player or doing something wrong but its something there is no penis meter for because its not really something you can measure.
edit: also other than in games like battlefield and cod, killing enemy players in ns does affect their resources and even if you dont do anything else than kill enemy players you do something very usefull for the team. (which is assisting in winning the game "getting the objective")
Soul_RiderMod BeanJoin Date: 2004-06-19Member: 29388Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue
When I'm playing the game I am constantly looking the overall KDR of the teams, to get an idea of how the battlefield is taking shape, especially as alien comm, it is one of the most important tools I can use to make micro-management decisions.
Mineshaft example. I tell team to hold Crushing, while we go for fast 2nd hive. Keeping check on the K/D ratio gives me lots of advice. A positive K/D for my team means, keep pressing on with the fast hive. An even K/D, to slightly negative K/D, keep pushing for fast 2nd hive, but build a couple of spare drifters. A massively negative K/D, abandon fast 2nd hive, switch to upgrade/defence focus and support the team.
I can get this information in no other way than from the K/D ratio's and the way they fluctuate during the game.
K/D is not the be all and end all, but by the same token to say K/D is irrelevant to NS2 and confined to 'N00b Pwzors!11' is elitist arrogance.
But that shouldn't be a surprise, as something as specialised as NS will always draw a clique around itself, to protect it from 'TeH N00bs!1!'
<!--quoteo(post=1915080:date=Mar 19 2012, 11:36 AM:name=Koruyo)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Koruyo @ Mar 19 2012, 11:36 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1915080"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->... so on is a HUGH advantage to have...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
i thought having NS2HD on your team was a disadvantage ..
I hope the Devs put in "Damage Output against Players" and "Damage Output against Structures" in the end game statistics, maybe even divide that with the player's deaths too, as I think that gives a good insight to player performance per life and the overall match :P
<!--quoteo(post=1915090:date=Mar 19 2012, 09:50 AM:name=Tweadle)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tweadle @ Mar 19 2012, 09:50 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1915090"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Problem: Nobody read the OP Solution: Read the OP<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Not true! The op was talking about KDR and the relationship to effectiveness and the utilization of resources. Some have pointed out some key elements as to why though it may give you a picture of the current state of that game, it doesn't give you a true depiction of any single players effectiveness. What's more important is their utilization of their lifeform and to limit their deaths in whatever role they're trying to fullfill. A dead player is an ineffective player, but that does not mean that what you were doing in the process of getting that death was ineffective as for example, getting the last bite on aphase gate near your hive that's being assaulted. You don't get a kill to improve your ratio, but you get an A for helping the team.
What's more important than the ratio is how that player is utilizing every death to fit the overall goal of winning the game as a team! :)
<!--quoteo(post=1915137:date=Mar 19 2012, 12:10 PM:name=Daphisto)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Daphisto @ Mar 19 2012, 12:10 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1915137"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If anything, this thread brings attention to the fact that the ns2 scoring system may need to be re-examined.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Gorge needs more points. :(
Gimme something for all the healing and building I do.
IronHorseDeveloper, QA Manager, Technical Support & contributorJoin Date: 2010-05-08Member: 71669Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Subnautica Playtester, Subnautica PT Lead, Pistachionauts
edited March 2012
exactly daphisto. here is my suggestion, as its based around pres so it solves mass tech issues as well as scoring issues, and of course encouraging playstyles:
<!--quoteo(post=1910635:date=Mar 6 2012, 01:24 PM:name=ironhorse)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ironhorse @ Mar 6 2012, 01:24 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1910635"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->thats what im saying, there is no more "waiting" for res. i absolutely abhor getting rewarded for simply "waiting in a corner" its boring for the player and its detrimental to the team that has 1 less player fighting. in my model, <b>Pres come only from teamwork related tasks that you <u>personally</u> assisted in, not from resource points. Resource points contribute only to TECH that you can't personally buy yourself.</b>
meaning that if you cant buy a shotgun like the other guy did, thats because you weren't a)building b) following waypoint orders c)welding d)staying in groups e)destroying buildings etc etc etc. <b>half of these things already are recorded in game</b> and give you a little +5 notification when you do them. wouldnt be hard to make them the main method of Pres income - it encourages proper teamwork and coordination through personal reward, which immediately goes right back into helping your team again.
this leads to the game play where the new guy joins mid game and theres not a lot to build or weld, right?.. well he can still follow orders and he can still stay in groups and he can still destroy buildings with that LMG of his. you essentially will always have a chance at earning your reward/new weapon as long as the game isn't ended.
there are multiple ways to implement it, from flat rate for contributing to a %, to a % based on the number of players etc., We must take into account scenarios where you would be building a structure for ANY amount of time(The last 2 seconds)and you still get credit, (or do you?) just as much as the guy who was holding E the whole time, because that other guy was probably following orders, running from base, covering you while you built, etc. (could be yet another teamwork action recorded, being NEAR the builder for X amount of time)
it can be tweaked but i believe it still solves that issue of everyone having similar amounts of Pres based simply on TIME.
For aliens this can be implemented when pheromones come into play, as well as "Saving" your comrade when he's low on health, to healspray, to destroying buildings, to infestation, to parasiting, to using spores when your teamates are nearby etc etc etc.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I would have thought that everyone realised KDR <i>is</i> a measure of success in NS2 but it is certainly <i>not</i> the only measure. People are arguing like this is a black and white topic - of course it isn't.
Most importantly if a player is going to have a KDR much less than 1.0 then they need to at least be performing other important feats like destroying resource towers. If a player has a KDR much greater than 1.0 then they are being effective simply by denying the enemy team everything that comes with having players alive.
Since the effectiveness of player actions can be relatively arbitrary and situationally dependant they are impossible to quantify and track. Perhaps the hardest concept some people have understanding is that a player with a lower KDR can be more effective than a player with a higher KDR depending what other effective actions they complete to offset the lower KDR.
Perhaps the worst type of player is one who has a low KDR but also doesn't complete any effective actions (for example constantly waiting to ambush players and failing or rushing into the enemy base and dying whilst only inflicting easily repaired damage).
I'm not entirely sure but the case of a Skulk attacking an Obs is either misunderstood or there are just too many bad Skulks out there. In it my understanding that the primary reason to attack an Obs is to either a) force a Beacon to delay marines advancing on a Hive or b) during a group base attack to stop them from Beaconing so that more damage can be inflicted on other buildings. Both cases if successful are usually easily worth a death. Randomly attacking the Obs as a lone Skulk for no reason wouldn't be very effective but the KDR system does not distinguish between any of these actions.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I just wanna correct this, beacon doesnt spawn any marines,
rather it simply teleports all marines to one location near the obs<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> it does revive the ones currently respawning, so you revive people equal to the amounts of active IPs you have.
as for OP, i agree that it can be an indicator for exceptionally good or bad players. but there is so much randomness added to this value that it's<b> not really reliable</b> imo. basic example: killing a fade 1v1 will give you a kill as well as randomly shooting down a skulk as a group of 6 marines. yes, being powerful in direct combat (which is a benefit for the team on a large scale) will result in a good K/D. but <b>aiming for a higher cause (there are plenty of them) will actually decrease your K/D</b>. sure, you buy some time by killing an enemy. but you are likely to get hurt/lose ammo which will cost you time as well if you want to fully recover (welders for armor are still rarely found). unless you press on until you die (which does not always make sense, but most of the time). so i'd prefer to take a structure with me instead of going all the back to the last armory (unless i have expensive equipment). this will highly increase the risk of dying though. <b>there are many more higher causes</b>: meatshielding a gorge, distracting from an evolving onos-egg (you can usually distract longer if you actually keep your distance instead of trying to attack in melee), intercepting a fade under fire for a chance to kill it (and a much higher chance to die), going all-in to finish off a hive instead of trying to kill 4 skulks first, going through a phase gate absolutely knowing that you will die, just to place 3 mines on the ground and/or to add a distraction for the teammate approaching the phase gate by foot, attacking a skulk behind an extractor at 7% using the pistol or even just the axe because the rifle reload would take too long... the list goes on and on.
finally, your K/D does not resemble your strategic skills on a global scale. checking every room's ceiling even when the chance of a skulk is very low can slow you down, too. imo ns2 is ment to be played aggressively (unless you lack mines or attempt to camp-kill a fade etc.).
as for deaths, i think you have to differentiate here: if the team has a long spawn queue / low amount of eggs left, then dying matters much more than if you have plenty of eggs to waste either way.
<b>so in the end:</b> yes, K/D does matter. but so does score. score also takes kills into account. and deaths, because your score will not grow much while you are respawning. sure, score does not cover all strategic aspects either, but it resembles more aspects than only those 2 values.
as for different roles... not counting the commander, i think a good marine should cover all of them, simply depending on the current situation.
In Natural Selection KDR is about as useless a measuring tool as the amount of score you have.
I regularly have 20 to 40 kill a match, but my team has lost many many times. Does that mean that I am not doing a good enough job??? No I means it's a team effort and even if you have only 1 kill a match your team can win if you all work together.
In NS2 the only measuring tool that matters is TEAMWORK!
People just need to look at how they place on average. Many times i get to the 1st position just because i get the lucky shot on the hive and get the 30 points when 4 others who were there with me get nothing. There have also been games when i have dominated ever aspect and a person who spent the entire game axing cysts out scores me. Even with these weird cases i still have no trouble knowing how each player performed and where i actually placed in comparison. The point system does need some tweaks because units like gorge don't get enough credit an perhaps commanders get to many points for turret kills. The KDR is a direct measure of skill for skulks, lerks, lmg and shotgun marines. A fade that goes 70 and 0 deserves to be the top scorer but his success is relative to the progression of the marine tech. He goes 70 and 0 against 3-3 marines with flamethrowers and jetpacks then he is very skilled but 70 and 0 against lmg 0-0 marines then I'm not impressed but at the same time not outraged by fades being op. If marines never get tech they should be slaughtered by fades.
Again k/d is a usefull stat to look at, its not a stat that tells you too much but it tells you how good or bad you did at killing and dieing - its not meant to be the ultimative indication of skill but its still a stat that can tell you a lot and give you something to look at and improve.
Lets look at Brink, which doesnt show you kills and deaths - only has a scorenumber that can be increased by many things... and even tho kills give you very little score in this objective oriented game - still ppl mostly focused on killing stuff instead of following objectives. (even tho they end up with a very low score because of that)
I dont see the point in questioning k/d - if you are not interested in it, that fine... but that doesnt make it not useful.
PS: its very unsatisfying not showing kills and deaths, because its a kinda important thing in a fps game(even if it doesnt mean that your team will win just because the kd is awesome) - where killing and dieing is a big aspect of gameplay, and improving on that is a nice motivating goal.
Comments
Like many of previous replies, you are making insanely stupid assumptions. The majority of players with strong KDRs are very good players, doing the right things. This is because playing the game very well, in the right way, with skill, gives you a good KDR. The only time this is not the case is if the opposing team significantly out skills you.
NS2 is not some hugely complex game, killing the other team well usually means you win. Anyone playing gathers/clan matches will know that map control and momentum are integral to the outcome of the game, in most circumstances.
I don't have enough play hours to say much about ns2 ...but I barely ever had a KDR higher than 1 in ns1 and still always contributed significantly to the team - often "carried" a team to victory. And I guess it's still the same. KDR means not being effective, it merely means you killed some enemies. You can camp at some point and kill everything that moves while your team is losing because nobody cared about structures.
NS is a strategy game with different classes. A skulk's life is worth almost nothing. A skulk with 0.2 kdr can be more useful than a fade with 17 kdr. Lerks can create an area-of-denial without killing a single marine, gorges don't kill anything and yet you lose without them.
Kdr is a personal score only and doesn't say anything about your contribution to the team. I'd even dare to say that people with a VERY high kdr are contra-productive. They're mostly more busy with themselves, with killing and healing/retreating than with anything else.
As Talesin said, kdr stats should be removed to prevent people from even thinking about it. Kill assists should count as points.
NS2 is not some hugely complex game, killing the other team well usually means you win. Anyone playing gathers/clan matches will know that map control and momentum are integral to the outcome of the game, in most circumstances.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I should of been more clear about what i mean by "Self important KDR ######".
When i say that im speaking about those who think they are the master of the team, and that if the team loses its everyone's fault but them. Those who call another player a noob because of their KDR even though that "noob" just took down a hive.
If you have a good KDR then yes, you probably are a good player. But no one wants to hear about it nor your opinion on their KDR. If people are going to remark on others with a bad KDR make it helpful remarks. Explain to them what you see them doing wrong and suggest a way to fix it, help them get better not bring them down further.
NS2 is not some hugely complex game, killing the other team well usually means you win. Anyone playing gathers/clan matches will know that map control and momentum are integral to the outcome of the game, in most circumstances.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Most people in this thread are also making silly assumptions. When somebody says that KDR doesn't matter, that doesn't mean they are saying that a player should try and die as much as possible without killing anyone, as most people clearly think it does. What it means is you shouldn't chase the first marine you see like a dog chasing cars. You shouldn't try to maximise your chance of survival at the cost of damage output. You shouldn't prioritise enemy players over enemy structures. Obviously none of these are universal rules that should be followed <b>at all times </b>but more often than not they should be followed, and that is what it means when someone says that KDR doesn't matter. Killing other players for the sake of killing them is not your primary concern.
Take the fade for example. Marine killing machine. That is his job, to kill the enemy. A high KDR with a fade is good, it means you are killing the marines without losing your lifeform. However, if 6 marines are hanging out in marine spawn and two marines are building a phase outside the hive, where should the fade be? Prioritising killing in marine spawn where targets are plenty, or defending a key position by killing the right people at the right time?
Another good example is a common way of repelling a marine rush on a hive. You can either go for as many kills as you can head on, right into the group of marines, or you can ignore the marines and go for the enemy comm station. They will have to beacon and the push is prevented. You don't even need to engage other players in order to win a game.
But building an extra CC would have to give the marines more than some extra nano's to do this.
When i say that im speaking about those who think they are the master of the team, and that if the team loses its everyone's fault but them. Those who call another player a noob because of their KDR even though that "noob" just took down a hive.
If you have a good KDR then yes, you probably are a good player. But no one wants to hear about it nor your opinion on their KDR. If people are going to remark on others with a bad KDR make it helpful remarks. Explain to them what you see them doing wrong and suggest a way to fix it, help them get better not bring them down further.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That is not the topic of this thread. The point is that you can make judgements about a game from the KDRs and that it is an important aspect of the game. At no point is this discussion about the minority of people who fall into the category of self important KDR ##### or good players who havent killed anyone. The vast majority of the time a good KDR means a good player.
Too many times are people attempting to use people who make up a tiny minority of players to refute the general idea of this thread. The OP is correct in the vast majority of cases, that is all that matters. There is always more to it, there are always unique circumstances, etc, etc. The general idea stands.
Entering a match in play and aggregating the team KDR is quite useful most of the time and these are my general observations (i'm not implying this is the be-all end-all but it is somewhat useful based on the 60 hours I've played):
Early game (5-10 minutes)
Introduction of hive catalyze obviously changed this but assuming in the future it will be retarded in some form.
A: One side with clearly higher team kdr usually implies that the majority of engagements have gone one way and map control and res nodes are in their favor.
B: Somewhat even +/- aggregate KDR on both teams usually implies that both teams are doing what they are suppose to be doing and are fighting over map control with some winners and losers, usually preludes to a great match (unless they improperly setup for mid-game).
Mid-Late Game (20-25 minutes)
Would say outcomes are more volatile in terms of engagements based on life form mix and upgrades and aggregate KDR becomes much less important in telling where a match is going unless the differences between the team KDR gap is huge. Generally by this time the result of the game is obvious or if not the game can really grind along (even matchup?).
With an even aggregate team KDR from both sides, the marine teams that can hold out until they max out upgrades can grind down the alien side on even match ups unless there are co-ordinated cc/base powernode snipes. Would be great to see some of the data that UWE has in regards to player vs player match ups.
Another good example is a common way of repelling a marine rush on a hive. You can either go for as many kills as you can head on, right into the group of marines, or you can ignore the marines and go for the enemy comm station. They will have to beacon and the push is prevented. You don't even need to engage other players in order to win a game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Minority circumstances are irrelevant to this discussion. There is also an equal chance (probably more towards the good KDR players in reality) that good/bad KDR players will also act in a tactically/strategically benefical way.
The general idea of this thread stands in the vast majority of cases, as there is the potential for combat in almost any scenario. People who are better at killing (and not dieing) are better at defending, attacking, rushing, scouting, almost everything. As there is always the potential for combat in a combat game.
The commander gets almost no kills some deaths yet he is the backbone of the team getting upgrades, supporting, dropping buildings and all that good stuff.
(Yes people, we have commanders in NS2).
But I guess that this is more talking about the FPS role but that is also why this K/D argument lacks. I do agree that K/D gives some information but I certainly don't base players skill by looking at their K/D atleast in a game like NS2. The objective of the game is to win however a win/loss ratio doesn't give much information either because one player can rarely change the tide of the battle if the rest of the team is bad. So I can very well lose the game even if I were doing well getting a lot of points, kills and assists. I don't think that there is a system that can define a persons skill in NS2. It was an interesting OP however I feel that this discussion is unhealthy and things are getting repated constantly so I think this is a matter of opinion.
On the other hand, this emphasis on individual KDR is bugging me. I posit that sneaking around the map tearing down and setting up infrastructure, ending up with a 1:1 KDR, is much more important than shooting a few more skulks. I guess this isn't the "general case," but so what? It's the role I play every game, and which I see other people play every game. Guess those people don't exist?
does this include that fade with 30-0 score who has single handedly pushed the marines back into their base from across the map??
i seriously doubt anyone plays this game with that "need a good KD" mentality. i get high KD ratios all the time, but its because i'm tearing into players and shouting at my buddies to help with tearing down structures too -<b> all in the name of map control!</b> have to agree with IE on this one... you all need to stop assuming so much.
(and IE, you need to stop personally attacking people, Tact, good sir, <u>Tact</u>.)
Sorry but KD does give an idea if a player is good, killing enemy players gives your team an easier time attacking defending or whatever... if a player is dead it means he is back at their base waiting to respawn having to spent time getting back in combat... if a lot of players in the enemy team are dead it means your team can push forward easier which also means the easier it gets to know where the other team could come from (if you push them back in their base you can cover the entrances)
So you scout earlier what they are going to do, providing you more time to react.
K/D is not our enemy, while it is true that a player can also be useful and good with a low k/d having a high k/d does mean the player is doing something right and good for his team.
Just play some scrims, a great aimer like treffnix, fana, and so on is a HUGE advantage to have... since most of the time killing enemy players decides the outcome of fight. While its also possible to win games with tactics that are not based around killing enemy players (like a good timed lerk or skulk rush in a CC) if they spot this tactic early enough they can easily deny it because they are great at killing stuff.
Players having high k/d usually also means they know the game and map extreamly good and counter enemy pressure pretty well - you wont ever lose a game because there is a player with high k/d in a game... you will only lose if you decide to not support this player using the advanages he provides. (i cant tell how often i destroyed all the eggs and respawn at a hive and asking for ammo or players to push in only to die because i didnt got ammo, or other players in a team decided to not push in and instead waste their time doing some useless ######, or the same as fade in a marine base - with not a single player comming to help even tho im shouting in the mic)
Somehow i feel like some ppl feel like they are not appreciated so they try to argue that k/d is something evil.
So having a high k/d does mean a player is doing something right, not having a high k/d doesnt mean you are a bad player or doing something wrong but its something there is no penis meter for because its not really something you can measure.
edit: also other than in games like battlefield and cod, killing enemy players in ns does affect their resources and even if you dont do anything else than kill enemy players you do something very usefull for the team. (which is assisting in winning the game "getting the objective")
Mineshaft example. I tell team to hold Crushing, while we go for fast 2nd hive. Keeping check on the K/D ratio gives me lots of advice. A positive K/D for my team means, keep pressing on with the fast hive. An even K/D, to slightly negative K/D, keep pushing for fast 2nd hive, but build a couple of spare drifters. A massively negative K/D, abandon fast 2nd hive, switch to upgrade/defence focus and support the team.
I can get this information in no other way than from the K/D ratio's and the way they fluctuate during the game.
K/D is not the be all and end all, but by the same token to say K/D is irrelevant to NS2 and confined to 'N00b Pwzors!11' is elitist arrogance.
But that shouldn't be a surprise, as something as specialised as NS will always draw a clique around itself, to protect it from 'TeH N00bs!1!'
i thought having NS2HD on your team was a disadvantage ..
:)
corrected it.
Solution: Read the OP
colors and power point would have been nice also ^_^
Yes. When you need all your players to spawn in a hurry, you use a beacon."
I just wanna correct this, beacon doesnt spawn any marines,
rather it simply teleports all marines to one location near the obs
alot of people missunderstand this
Solution: Read the OP<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not true! The op was talking about KDR and the relationship to effectiveness and the utilization of resources. Some have pointed out some key elements as to why though it may give you a picture of the current state of that game, it doesn't give you a true depiction of any single players effectiveness. What's more important is their utilization of their lifeform and to limit their deaths in whatever role they're trying to fullfill. A dead player is an ineffective player, but that does not mean that what you were doing in the process of getting that death was ineffective as for example, getting the last bite on aphase gate near your hive that's being assaulted. You don't get a kill to improve your ratio, but you get an A for helping the team.
What's more important than the ratio is how that player is utilizing every death to fit the overall goal of winning the game as a team! :)
Gorge needs more points. :(
Gimme something for all the healing and building I do.
<!--quoteo(post=1910635:date=Mar 6 2012, 01:24 PM:name=ironhorse)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ironhorse @ Mar 6 2012, 01:24 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1910635"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->thats what im saying, there is no more "waiting" for res. i absolutely abhor getting rewarded for simply "waiting in a corner" its boring for the player and its detrimental to the team that has 1 less player fighting.
in my model, <b>Pres come only from teamwork related tasks that you <u>personally</u> assisted in, not from resource points. Resource points contribute only to TECH that you can't personally buy yourself.</b>
meaning that if you cant buy a shotgun like the other guy did, thats because you weren't a)building b) following waypoint orders c)welding d)staying in groups e)destroying buildings etc etc etc. <b>half of these things already are recorded in game</b> and give you a little +5 notification when you do them. wouldnt be hard to make them the main method of Pres income - it encourages proper teamwork and coordination through personal reward, which immediately goes right back into helping your team again.
this leads to the game play where the new guy joins mid game and theres not a lot to build or weld, right?.. well he can still follow orders and he can still stay in groups and he can still destroy buildings with that LMG of his. you essentially will always have a chance at earning your reward/new weapon as long as the game isn't ended.
there are multiple ways to implement it, from flat rate for contributing to a %, to a % based on the number of players etc., We must take into account scenarios where you would be building a structure for ANY amount of time(The last 2 seconds)and you still get credit, (or do you?) just as much as the guy who was holding E the whole time, because that other guy was probably following orders, running from base, covering you while you built, etc. (could be yet another teamwork action recorded, being NEAR the builder for X amount of time)
it can be tweaked but i believe it still solves that issue of everyone having similar amounts of Pres based simply on TIME.
For aliens this can be implemented when pheromones come into play, as well as "Saving" your comrade when he's low on health, to healspray, to destroying buildings, to infestation, to parasiting, to using spores when your teamates are nearby etc etc etc.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Most importantly if a player is going to have a KDR much less than 1.0 then they need to at least be performing other important feats like destroying resource towers. If a player has a KDR much greater than 1.0 then they are being effective simply by denying the enemy team everything that comes with having players alive.
Since the effectiveness of player actions can be relatively arbitrary and situationally dependant they are impossible to quantify and track. Perhaps the hardest concept some people have understanding is that a player with a lower KDR can be more effective than a player with a higher KDR depending what other effective actions they complete to offset the lower KDR.
Perhaps the worst type of player is one who has a low KDR but also doesn't complete any effective actions (for example constantly waiting to ambush players and failing or rushing into the enemy base and dying whilst only inflicting easily repaired damage).
I'm not entirely sure but the case of a Skulk attacking an Obs is either misunderstood or there are just too many bad Skulks out there. In it my understanding that the primary reason to attack an Obs is to either a) force a Beacon to delay marines advancing on a Hive or b) during a group base attack to stop them from Beaconing so that more damage can be inflicted on other buildings. Both cases if successful are usually easily worth a death. Randomly attacking the Obs as a lone Skulk for no reason wouldn't be very effective but the KDR system does not distinguish between any of these actions.
rather it simply teleports all marines to one location near the obs<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
it does revive the ones currently respawning, so you revive people equal to the amounts of active IPs you have.
as for OP, i agree that it can be an indicator for exceptionally good or bad players. but there is so much randomness added to this value that it's<b> not really reliable</b> imo. basic example: killing a fade 1v1 will give you a kill as well as randomly shooting down a skulk as a group of 6 marines.
yes, being powerful in direct combat (which is a benefit for the team on a large scale) will result in a good K/D. but <b>aiming for a higher cause (there are plenty of them) will actually decrease your K/D</b>.
sure, you buy some time by killing an enemy. but you are likely to get hurt/lose ammo which will cost you time as well if you want to fully recover (welders for armor are still rarely found). unless you press on until you die (which does not always make sense, but most of the time). so i'd prefer to take a structure with me instead of going all the back to the last armory (unless i have expensive equipment). this will highly increase the risk of dying though.
<b>there are many more higher causes</b>: meatshielding a gorge, distracting from an evolving onos-egg (you can usually distract longer if you actually keep your distance instead of trying to attack in melee), intercepting a fade under fire for a chance to kill it (and a much higher chance to die), going all-in to finish off a hive instead of trying to kill 4 skulks first, going through a phase gate absolutely knowing that you will die, just to place 3 mines on the ground and/or to add a distraction for the teammate approaching the phase gate by foot, attacking a skulk behind an extractor at 7% using the pistol or even just the axe because the rifle reload would take too long... the list goes on and on.
finally, your K/D does not resemble your strategic skills on a global scale. checking every room's ceiling even when the chance of a skulk is very low can slow you down, too. imo ns2 is ment to be played aggressively (unless you lack mines or attempt to camp-kill a fade etc.).
as for deaths, i think you have to differentiate here: if the team has a long spawn queue / low amount of eggs left, then dying matters much more than if you have plenty of eggs to waste either way.
<b>so in the end:</b> yes, K/D does matter. but so does score. score also takes kills into account. and deaths, because your score will not grow much while you are respawning. sure, score does not cover all strategic aspects either, but it resembles more aspects than only those 2 values.
as for different roles... not counting the commander, i think a good marine should cover all of them, simply depending on the current situation.
I regularly have 20 to 40 kill a match, but my team has lost many many times.
Does that mean that I am not doing a good enough job???
No I means it's a team effort and even if you have only 1 kill a match your team can win if you all work together.
In NS2 the only measuring tool that matters is TEAMWORK!
its not meant to be the ultimative indication of skill but its still a stat that can tell you a lot and give you something to look at and improve.
Lets look at Brink, which doesnt show you kills and deaths - only has a scorenumber that can be increased by many things... and even tho kills give you very little score in this objective oriented game - still ppl mostly focused on killing stuff instead of following objectives. (even tho they end up with a very low score because of that)
I dont see the point in questioning k/d - if you are not interested in it, that fine... but that doesnt make it not useful.
PS: its very unsatisfying not showing kills and deaths, because its a kinda important thing in a fps game(even if it doesnt mean that your team will win just because the kd is awesome) - where killing and dieing is a big aspect of gameplay, and improving on that is a nice motivating goal.