Post Your Stats

[TheCapedAvenger]

Originally Posted by Blank

Are you a robot and/or asian? Cause you sure are hung up on math/formulas.

I don't think dividing two numbers is very complicated

I think we can all agree that kill/death and accuracy aren't very good measures of how good a player is. If you want to reduce it down to a few numbers, I'd go with xp/min, xp/kill, %win.

[Spirtz]

i agree with cape.......... that is all

[Kildayen]

2 days, 9 hours, 29 minutes

187,587 experience

6,928 3,548 1.95 loopy
261 165 1.58 bomber
426 253 1.68 explodet
4,346 2,323 1.87 biplane
231 174 1.33 miranda

[nesnl]

Based on my degree in advanced theoretical statistical video game analysis and application I think it is safe to say at this point Altitude boils down to this simple relationship:

Pillars > Blank > Ferret > Snowsickle

which, if my calculations are correct, simplifies down to:

Starcraft 2 >>> All !!!!

[Kildayen]

Any ranking that does not factor in my glory is fatally flawed.

[nesnl]

Originally Posted by Kildayen

Any ranking that does not factor in my glory is fatally flawed.

I was apparently writing my post while you were writing yours. But if you need me to include you, here you go:

Pillars > Kildayen

[Blank]

Originally Posted by TheCapedAvenger

I don't think dividing two numbers is very complicated

I think we can all agree that kill/death and accuracy aren't very good measures of how good a player is. If you want to reduce it down to a few numbers, I'd go with xp/min, xp/kill, %win.

I don't recall saying anything about it being complicated. None of the options you mentioned are a good way to define how good a player is.

For example: you suck, but you probably have a decent xp/min xp/kill rate.


(EDIT) Pillars cheats.
(EDIT #2) Needs more >>>> after my name to show the giant skill gap between me and pillars and everyone else. /ego

[Pillars]

Originally Posted by nesnl

Based on my degree in advanced theoretical statistical video game analysis and application I think it is safe to say at this point Altitude boils down to this simple relationship:

Pillars > Blank > Ferret > Snowsickle

which, if my calculations are correct, simplifies down to:

Starcraft 2 >>> All !!!!

Blank and Ferret are better dog-fighters than I am. Snowsickle and Kilyaden might be as well.

I haven't hit my skill ceiling yet, though. [Not that I believe any of they have either.]

EDIT: By dog-fighters I literally mean their ability to battle dogs and other dog-like creatures. My statements shouldn't be taken to refer to any Altitude specific skills.

[DiogenesDog]

So you're specifically talking about their ability to fight me, then? Because I don't see anyone else here with a dog name.

Btw, best part of this thread: Cape really IS asian.

[Triped]

Originally Posted by Pillars

As others have mentioned, statistical measurements can be useful / interesting to look at, but it's tough to quantify some of the most important attributes of a good, well-rounded player. By supporting a bombing run you're using the HP of your plane as a resource for your team's overall goals...in the statistics screens this is simply measured as a 'death'. Likewise for catching a bomb, or a failed bombing run of your own. Picking off the weakest players on the other team in the corner of the map nets you some kills, but you're doing this at the expense of helping your team control the important sections of the map. Some kills are simply worth more than others [killing the other team's best player, their bomb carrier, or the last defender between your team's bomb carrier and the enemy base.] This doesn't even get into stuff like drawing fire, suppressing fire, soaking damage, intelligent use of power-ups, general situational awareness, etc. Certainly many of these factors help to improve one's kill/death ratio, or one's xp/min ratio, but some of them actually decrease one's ratios.

Agreed. I have the worst K/D in this thread, but my team wins way more than 50% of TBD. Always chase down the bomb, always support the bomb, or run with it, always dedicate yourself to killing turrets in big enough games. Not very rewarding activities statistically.

So I guess I agree because it's the only way I can look good.

I'm really impressed by players who can win FFAs with a low death count, though. I win some of them, but even when I win I usually have almost as many deaths as people who lost.

[Blank]

Originally Posted by DiogenesDog

So you're specifically talking about their ability to fight me, then? Because I don't see anyone else here with a dog name.

Btw, best part of this thread: Cape really IS asian.

Dio is already 1:0 versus Nh'ers in fights but I think I can take him ;0 I know his fighting strategy (go for the balls).

[porpus]

Originally Posted by DiogenesDog

So you're specifically talking about their ability to fight me, then? Because I don't see anyone else here with a dog name.

Btw, best part of this thread: Cape really IS asian.

Haha that's classic. But if you're gonna use any stats cape's are as good as you'll find.

[TheCapedAvenger]

Originally Posted by Blank

For example: you suck, but you probably have a decent xp/min xp/kill rate.

That's the point of including %win as one of the numbers. If kill whoring really is bad for the team, then %win should be less than 50%.

[Pillars]

Originally Posted by TheCapedAvenger

That's the point of including %win as one of the numbers.

I'd like to see this stat as well.

If kill whoring really is bad for the team, then %win should be less than 50%.

This certainly isn't true. Dog-fighting is easily the most important skill a player can have in almost any game mode, and even a player selfishly pursuing his own kill-whoring goals, if skilled enough, can potentially do more to help his team [indirectly] than an unskilled but team-oriented player.

I'd expect to see CapedAvenger's "team win %" higher than 50%, but lower than other players who are at least equally skilled at dog-fighting and are more skilled than him in other areas.

[Spirtz]

i feel there should be more bomb stats involved. i personally want to see how many bombs defused, caught, and hit. right now the stats only show k/d. DF is important at the best part but, most of the time we're playing tbd. i like the win idea but also want to see how many bombs i've smashed into the enemy base.

[protest boy]

I find bomber boring to play.

I expected my ratios to be higher but I suspect it's because I picked up the game as a newbie at the same time stats started being tracked.

I agree that these numbers for the most part do not equate to player skill. (See Pillars' list of traits not expressed in numbers)

I also want to see % tbd games won. Would probably have to qualify a game to count, e.g. a game in which the player was present for more than 75% of it.

I also think the XP system needs to be reworked a little bit. In TBD's it's skewed too heavily towards kills, not enough towards base damage. Also, the amount given for assists/kills should get an adjustment based on damage done.

[Pillars]

Originally Posted by Spirtz

i feel there should be more bomb stats involved. i personally want to see how many bombs defused, caught, and hit. right now the stats only show k/d. DF is important at the best part but, most of the time we're playing tbd. i like the win idea but also want to see how many bombs i've smashed into the enemy base.

I'm sure we'll eventually see more stats added to the page, this is just a first pass. I'd also like to see more bomb-related stats.

I'd also like to see an experience value attached to bomb catching and an increase in the experience value attached to bomb defusal and base damage.

[Blank]

Originally Posted by Pillars

I'm sure we'll eventually see more stats added to the page, this is just a first pass. I'd also like to see more bomb-related stats.

I'd also like to see an experience value attached to bomb catching and an increase in the experience value attached to bomb defusal and base damage.

I think the problem with bomb catching EXP is there's no way to distinguish between a catch and someone just kamikazing someone with the big bomb (not to mention you die... I mean, I guess it'll kinda help people level up but it's not like you'll normally get bars out of it). Plus you'd completely miss out on people who wall/shield a bomb, which is just as good as catching except you live.

I'm pretty okay with the amount of EXP for bomb defusal/base damage.

[Pillars]

Originally Posted by Blank

I think the problem with bomb catching EXP is there's no way to distinguish between a catch and someone just kamikazing someone with the big bomb (not to mention you die... I mean, I guess it'll kinda help people level up but it's not like you'll normally get bars out of it). Plus you'd completely miss out on people who wall/shield a bomb, which is just as good as catching except you live.

Any stat is going to have problems. You could argue that simply applying pressure to a bomb carrier such that he feel he's better off dropping it in your face than continuing to make his bombing run means you've had a positive impact for your team. There are other weird cases like four people 'catching' the bomb at once, or catching a randomly lobbed bomb in the face, but I still think bomb-catching is an important enough stat to merit an XP reward. It might be possible to tie in shield and wall blocking as well. Maybe this gets too complicated in the end, but bomb defense is a really important part of TBD and it would be nice to represent it in terms of XP if possible.

I'm pretty okay with the amount of EXP for bomb defusal/base damage.

The XP values might be fine for smaller [3v3] games, but once you get into 6v6 or 7v7 the XP values for base damage in particular seem pretty small relative to kill XP. Killing a three-bar opponent nets 30XP, dealing a direct base hit nets the same...the latter action feels far more valuable to me than the former.

[porpus]

Wow some of you guys play a hell of a lot.

And lam, you got a bit a bit of a problem with the s's on my name there.

[Snowsickle]

Originally Posted by Blank

I think the problem with bomb catching EXP is there's no way to distinguish between a catch and someone just kamikazing someone with the big bomb (not to mention you die... I mean, I guess it'll kinda help people level up but it's not like you'll normally get bars out of it). Plus you'd completely miss out on people who wall/shield a bomb, which is just as good as catching except you live.

I'm pretty okay with the amount of EXP for bomb defusal/base damage.

Almost all of these could be tracked within a certain radius of the base. Sure, you might deflect a bomb a mile up in the air on hills that would've otherwise hit your base, but it should work for a majority of cases.

Also, it may be possible to just predict whether a bomb is a hit or miss at the time of release, but I don't know how much extra coding that would require from Lam.

It could be tracked, but I guess it's a question of whether or not it's worth it at this point. Not a bad idea though.

[Blank]

Originally Posted by Pillars

Any stat is going to have problems. You could argue that simply applying pressure to a bomb carrier such that he feel he's better off dropping it in your face than continuing to make his bombing run means you've had a positive impact for your team. There are other weird cases like four people 'catching' the bomb at once, or catching a randomly lobbed bomb in the face, but I still think bomb-catching is an important enough stat to merit an XP reward. It might be possible to tie in shield and wall blocking as well. Maybe this gets too complicated in the end, but bomb defense is a really important part of TBD and it would be nice to represent it in terms of XP if possible.

I'm not AGAINST the idea, I just don't see the appeal of it. Even if it is something players should do, you're basically rewarding death. If anything was going to see an XP reward, I'd rather see a bonus to killing a bomb carrier (defusing already gives a little something).

^ is what I was about to post, but then I started thinking about it. How many idiots go after turrets because they see little numbers flash when they hit it? It might actually encourage people to "catch" big bombs more if they see that's the case. So meh, maybe it's a better idea than I first thought :P

On that note, I don't think turrets should give XP ^_^

The XP values might be fine for smaller [3v3] games, but once you get into 6v6 or 7v7 the XP values for base damage in particular seem pretty small relative to kill XP. Killing a three-bar opponent nets 30XP, dealing a direct base hit nets the same...the latter action feels far more valuable to me than the former.

I think a better way to cover this is simply impliment challenges that give +EXP for successful bomb defusing/base hitting. This way you don't get too many "free" bars doing it, but you still get some EXP for leveling purposes/encouragement.

[Triped]

Originally Posted by Blank

^ is what I was about to post, but then I started thinking about it. How many idiots go after turrets because they see little numbers flash when they hit it? It might actually encourage people to "catch" big bombs more if they see that's the case. So meh, maybe it's a better idea than I first thought :P

On that note, I don't think turrets should give XP ^_^

Uh, there's a real advantage to teams that can take out turrets efficiently. It's like permanently reducing the size of the enemy team and usually means 1-2 extra bomb attempts along a better route.

[Blank]

Originally Posted by Triped

Uh, there's a real advantage to teams that can take out turrets efficiently. It's like permanently reducing the size of the enemy team and usually means 1-2 extra bomb attempts along a better route.

I would maybe agree with you if people knew how to intelligently take out turrets. Instead, you have idiots who are dying 10-20 times to kill ONE turret, then gloriously proclaim "TURRET DOWN" in team chat as if they've accomplished something (meanwhile, your base is 1-hit away from destruction and you haven't even hit the enemy base yet).

Not to mention there are only a handful of turrets on current maps that warrant going out of your way to destroy. Seeing people try to kill turrets on LOST CITY is just painful to watch.

The Core and Grotto have that 1 turret near middle that's worth taking out, and it's usually dead for both sides within the first minute (ironically, it's usually the first target for the big bomb). I could maybe see taking out the lower turrets in middleground, but honestly, hitting up that low passage is almost always a bad idea. Forest, Cave, Lost City, Hills all have turrets that make the smallest overall impact on the game.

[Triped]

Originally Posted by Blank

I would maybe agree with you if people knew how to intelligently take out turrets. Instead, you have idiots who are dying 10-20 times to kill ONE turret, then gloriously proclaim "TURRET DOWN" in team chat as if they've accomplished something (meanwhile, your base is 1-hit away from destruction and you haven't even hit the enemy base yet).

Not to mention there are only a handful of turrets on current maps that warrant going out of your way to destroy. Seeing people try to kill turrets on LOST CITY is just painful to watch.

The Core and Grotto have that 1 turret near middle that's worth taking out, and it's usually dead for both sides within the first minute (ironically, it's usually the first target for the big bomb). I could maybe see taking out the lower turrets in middleground, but honestly, hitting up that low passage is almost always a bad idea. Forest, Cave, Lost City, Hills all have turrets that make the smallest overall impact on the game.

Well yeah, that's all true when few players are in the game, and newbies using Loopy to kill turrets drives me crazy. The low turret in middleground's definitely worth killing with grenadier and shield powerup or explodet and repair, circling. Unless I have the map mixed up.

[skywalker]

I've included comments within the picture itself.

[Kildayen]

Originally Posted by Pillars

a player selfishly pursuing his own kill-whoring goals, if skilled enough, can potentially do more to help his team [indirectly] than an unskilled but team-oriented player.

I like to think of this as "The Kildayen method".

[spits]

this is after 3 days

[JamesTechno]

Im not posting mine.
It changes too often for me to be content with it.

I'll just say my Biplane is over 1.5 Ratio.

[as red as black]

Originally Posted by nesnl

Take a screenie and post it up.

I was just looking through the forums (I got nothing better to do) and found this.....how times have changed hahahaha.

look at maimer's old xp

[Carbon]

Here are my stats. I play better when I'm high (I'm always high)

[Jayfourke]

OK, so it's a necrobump, but here are my stats. Yay 100 hours!



Yes, I die a lot. I try to bomb the base, and when I'm dogfighting I'm willing to die so long as the other guy goes with me.

[eth]

Thats weird.. I have questionmarks instead of commas Oo. O well.

[Smushface]

270 hours played? FLB really is the team with the most play time.

[as red as black]

Originally Posted by Smushface

270 hours played? FLB really is the team with the most play time.

kuja and game are both over 1 mil too (though game may have passed 2 mil by now haha)

[nesnl]

Originally Posted by eth

Thats weird.. I have questionmarks instead of commas Oo. O well.

You not only have question marks instead of commas, but you have commas instead of periods...

[Golden Bough]

Pretty typical IMHO.

[tyr]

See, don't need to have 2.5M xp and 10k xpph to be better than those flb guys.

[DMCM]

Time Played
239,3 hours

Total Experience
719.866

Loopy Stats (it's the only plane I use)

31.471 - 23.219

Ratio: 1.36



My ratio keeps increasing though. Last time I checked it was 1.29 and it was not long ago

[as red as black]

Originally Posted by DMCM

Time Played
239,3 hours

Total Experience
719.866

Loopy Stats (it's the only plane I use)

31.471 - 23.219

Ratio: 1.36



My ratio keeps increasing though. Last time I checked it was 1.29 and it was not long ago

someone's from europe...why do you guys switch around commas and periods?????