DUST Search - Sticky:[Feedback] Player rank and stats

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Sticky:[Feedback] Player rank and stats

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 23 post(s)
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 17302	Posted - 2014.08.21 15:01:00 - [1] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: 90 degree turn guys I am wondering where the overlap of squads and skill lies. Let's discuss in 2 categories, where A is a beast and B is "normal" Will a single A win 3B's or even 6B's 1A vs 2B 1A vs 3B 1A vs 4B 1A vs 5B 1A vs 6B 2A vs 4B 2A vs 5B 2A vs 6B 3A vs 5B 3A vs 6B 4A vs 6B Please answer with your gut, Y/N on each. I don't think it can be quantified that simply. There are such a huge number of possibilities in fights that it really can vary wildly depending on what's done. As someone who'd consider myself an 'A' category player (Last I checked my KDR was over 5) I know that it's not because I can take 5 people in a straight fight, it's because I avoid straight fights and look to give myself an advantage like flanking. That said, I would say with the high tier players it's not just a tactical sense that sets them apart but against randoms people can and will win against multiple targets in a straight fight. So in a straight fight, with everyone's gear equal, if you classify B category players as your average blue dot (I may be a little bit derisive of the qualities of the average blue dot) and A category players as killing machines who really know their stuff and are talking to each other, I'd say it'd go something along these lines: 1A vs 2B - A wins 1A vs 3B - Could go either way 1A vs 4B - B wins 1A vs 5B - B wins 1A vs 6B - B wins 2A vs 4B - A wins 2A vs 5B - A wins 2A vs 6B - Could go either way 3A vs 5B - A wins 3A vs 6B - A wins 4A vs 6B - A wins I think it's an unfair way of thinking about it like this though. Some 'beast' players according to your ranking system might well be top quality logis, in which case they may be much less likely to win a 2v1 but would help a lot if paired with another A grade player. And fights don't always happen straight on. Once you get a group of people who know what they're doing together, the force multiplier is staggering. When you can have scans, a logi, and a bunch of competent slayers then randoms just have no chance at all. Communication can have a drastic effect on a match. Immediately, people squadded up are much more likely to get flanking attacks while teammates distract the opponents, get intel so they themselves don't get flanked, as well as getting all the other bonuses of squad support. If you said that the A players were highly skilled but soloists (even when there are several in the same fight) and the B players were of average quality but working together, I'd say those matchups would go much closer to this: 1A vs 2B - A wins 1A vs 3B - B wins 1A vs 4B - B wins 1A vs 5B - B wins 1A vs 6B - B wins 2A vs 4B - A wins 2A vs 5B - B wins 2A vs 6B - B wins 3A vs 5B - I'd favour A 3A vs 6B - I'd favour B 4A vs 6B - Could go either way Those are just my estimations though and they're definitely not anything approaching rock paper scissors levels of certainty. As I said, things can change wildly in a fight and there are a huge number of factors. Couple of questions I have though. Would this ranking system contribute to a harsher jump from academy matches to normal matches? Newbies coming from the academy with a background in shooters will probably have an inflated KDR and high score when they come out of the academy. If they immediately get thrown into really high ranking matches I imagine that'd be extremely offputting. Would there be a way to 'buffer' those newbies against it? So, for example, if the way you did it went off the last ten matches done, could you have newbies automatically created with ten zero scoring matches? So then they get their high scoring couple of matches which takes them out of academy but because they have a buffer of at least 5 zero score matches they don't get immediately thrown to the wolves. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake. 'Lucent Echelon' - Gallente FW channel
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution 17331	Posted - 2014.08.21 22:09:00 - [2] - Quote IgniteableAura wrote: Kevall Longstride wrote: I'd also say a 2.5/3 to 1 ratio. But I'd add a modifier for those working together in a squad. Kevall, I agree with a 2.5:1 ratio, but do we always want the B players winning (3:1)? I think a 2.5:1 would be better as it allows some leeway into winning the engagement. We don't want to make it so A list players are always losing engagements. I'm a little dubious of the idea that A list players would 'always be losing engagements' if they couldn't win a 3v1. You have long since made your choice. What you make now is a mistake. 'Lucent Echelon' - Gallente FW channel

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.