Jump to content


Rating system

game rating

  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

HassoCZ #1 Posted 05 May 2021 - 10:36 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 30045 battles
  • 103
  • [HYPFF] HYPFF
  • Member since:
    09-15-2012

I played 10 battles. Average damage 2100. 8 out of 10 battles lost. Seems to me this game does not value personal performance as much as winning battles. My overall rating is declining. I could easily shoot one hit per game and I would be in the same situation. Do I get it right? It doesn't matter how effective you are, but whether you win or lose. Is the rating system bad in this game? Im just asking.



Private_Miros #2 Posted 05 May 2021 - 10:53 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 34873 battles
  • 15,280
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    07-09-2011

10 battles isn't a relevant number for any global rating system. If you did 2100 avg damage you did well to great, depending on the tier. End of story.

 

Win rate is only relevant over many hundreds of battles.


Edited by Private_Miros, 06 May 2021 - 08:25 AM.


Isharial #3 Posted 05 May 2021 - 11:09 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 33456 battles
  • 3,393
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-19-2015

View PostPrivate_Miros, on 05 May 2021 - 10:53 PM, said:

10 battles isn't a relevant number for any global rating system. If you did 2100 avg damage you did well to great, depending on the team. End of story.

 

Win rate is only relevant over many hundreds of battles.

 

well, that depends on the tier surely?

 

2100 at T9 would be "ok, but basically average", the same at T6 would be rather good in comparison...

 

OP's most played tiers are T8 and T10 however, and 2100 at TX is pretty bad IMHO, specially if you want a lot of wins (so is 2500 (what i do) just to be clear on that)

 

 

OP, its about where and what you do. doing 2100 damage at T7/8, that's going to give you a nice score. The same at TX? not so much. Its not just counting on damage though, assistance and more will be counted IIRC

 

 



Private_Miros #4 Posted 05 May 2021 - 11:13 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 34873 battles
  • 15,280
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    07-09-2011

View PostIsharial, on 05 May 2021 - 10:09 PM, said:

 

well, that depends on the tier surely?

 

2100 at T9 would be "ok, but basically average", the same at T6 would be rather good in comparison...

 

OP's most played tiers are T8 and T10 however, and 2100 at TX is pretty bad IMHO, specially if you want a lot of wins (so is 2500 (what i do) just to be clear on that)

 

 

OP, its about where and what you do. doing 2100 damage at T7/8, that's going to give you a nice score. The same at TX? not so much. Its not just counting on damage though, assistance and more will be counted IIRC

 

 

 

2100 even at tier 10 places you well over average. But yes, not great. I didn't claim that either.

 

If on a larger battle number you get lower than expected WR with that you need to start looking at when and where one causes that damage, but in 10 games. Can win them all with 0 damage, and none with 3000. There's no system in place ensuring that you'll win or lose some in such a small sample so you're just the playing ball of random decisions of others. Things that even out over time, but not in 10 battles.



NUKLEAR_SLUG #5 Posted 06 May 2021 - 02:34 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 42358 battles
  • 9,427
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    06-13-2015

View PostHassoCZ, on 05 May 2021 - 10:36 PM, said:

I played 10 battles. Average damage 2100. 8 out of 10 battles lost. Seems to me this game does not value personal performance as much as winning battles. My overall rating is declining. I could easily shoot one hit per game and I would be in the same situation. Do I get it right? It doesn't matter how effective you are, but whether you win or lose. Is the rating system bad in this game? Im just asking.

 

2100 damage at a relevant moment or 2100 damage in the last minutes of the game after your team had already lost?

 

It makes a difference. You can farm damage from the back of map whilst your team dies around you. Might look good on 'personal performance' but it doesn't tend to win games. 



General_Jack_D_Ripper #6 Posted 06 May 2021 - 02:47 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 10303 battles
  • 1,133
  • [SPIKE] SPIKE
  • Member since:
    08-21-2016

If you do consistently good, your winrate will be good as well. Therefore this is not a problem.

I think winrate should be way more important in assessing player levels.

The other day a saw a unicum with lower winrate than me. That obviously means he relies heavily on his teammates to soak up damage. Every good player has an opportunistic playstyle, but some balance is important, in my eyes.

 

View PostIsharial, on 05 May 2021 - 11:09 PM, said:

 

2100 at T9 would be "ok, but basically average", the same at T6 would be rather good in comparison...

 

So you are basically average player?

I do not think so.

 

 


Edited by General_Jack_D_Ripper, 06 May 2021 - 04:58 AM.






Also tagged with game, rating

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users