Which is the better player?

Games Other Halo
1

Post game carnage report:

Player ABC: RANK 1st SCORE 400 KILLS 22 ASSIST 7 DEATHS 17

Player XYZ: RANK 2nd SCORE 385 KILLS 21 ASSIST 5 DEATHS 2

Is player ABC or XYZ the better player? Why?

Is it fair that player ABC has 17 deaths be ranked first while player XYZ had only 2 deaths? Which contributed to the actual team win, ABC or XYZ?

What can be done to fix this kind of result? Should XYZ be rewarded in some way so that tehy are actually ranked first?

Or,should the amount of deaths every player has see a reduction of 5 points per death subtracted from their SCORE in order to rank players post game more appropriately?

Or, should things stay as is as the actual game results used in the example above are fine as is?

Discuss if you would like too.

Cheers

EDIT: Neither player used a vehicle, but it was a Slayer game type.

2

Ignore my post.

3

I think that deaths should subtract points. Its really annoying coming in second when I got 2 less kills than someone but 10 less deaths.

4

> I think that deaths should subtract points. Its really annoying coming in second when I got 2 less kills than someone but 10 less deaths.

Ia gree.

While the example I gave was from a team win, more often than not I find these sorts of results, ie player ABC’s results are on the losing side and its that sort of thing which sees many losses occur…its frustrating but, OT, its more about when it happens on the winning team.

5

I would say XYZ. Player ABC had died the most and gave the enemy team a ton of points that could change the match, depending how much in the lead of course.

6

> Post game carnage report:
>
> Player ABC: RANK 1st SCORE 400 KILLS 22 ASSIST 7 DEATHS 17
>
> Player XYZ: RANK 2nd SCORE 385 KILLS 21 ASSIST 5 DEATHS 2
>
> Is player ABC or XYZ the better player? Why?
>
> Is it fair that player ABC has 17 deaths be ranked first while player XYZ had only 2 deaths? Which contributed to the actual team win, ABC or XYZ?
>
> What can be done to fix this kind of result? Should XYZ be rewarded in some way so that tehy are actually ranked first?
>
> Or,should the amount of deaths every player has see a reduction of 5 points per death subtracted from their SCORE in order to rank players post game more appropriately?
>
> Or, should things stay as is as the actual game results used in the example above are fine as is?
>
>
> Discuss if you would like too.
>
> Cheers
>
> EDIT: Neither player used a vehicle, but it was a Slayer game type.

Not enough details to make a conclusion. So many more variables to take account for.

Player XYZ could of just sat in a corner and camo/bs’ed his way to a 22-2 game while player ABC was actively hunting down the other team. (just an example)

You can not list scores and say who is the better player, because so much more goes into truely determining the better player.

What if Player ABC was red bar half the match and still pulled down 22 kills but the red bar in lag could of attributed to his 17 deaths.

What if player ABC was the camo/bs camper and player XYZ was the active hunter…

See so many other variables have to come into play when determining the so called “better” player.

7

Too take it a step further.

Team A plays Team B in 3 matches of CTF.

Team A consistently out kills team B

Team B wins 2 out of 3 matches.

Which team is better?

8

> I would say XYZ. Player ABC had died the most and gave the enemy team a ton of points that could change the match, depending how much in the lead of course.

I agree.

Player ABC types and, there are sooooo many of them…game after game, do have an outcome on the results.

Look, to be 100% honest and fair, I once was one of those Player ABC types. I would run gun and spray and pray and rake up lots of kills on Halo Reach but die heaps. For the most part, up until I was almost SR130 on Halo 4, I played that way.

Now, on Halo Reach my overall KD was 0.45 and Slayer 0.41 and that was after 14,000 games!

On Halo 4, up until I git to SR130, my Halo 4 overall KD was about 0.6 something and Slayer 0.7 something.

It is now 1.19 overall and 1.84 Slayer and holding (down from a high of 2.01 but that’s fine as I enjoy the play styles I have settled on).

What changed?

First, family purchased me the Halo 4 Guide Book at about the time I reached SR130. I also started watching heps of videos, MLG game play, Halo4Tutor, Bravo, Ninja and so on… I learned to strafe, juck, think smart, learn to use different weapons properly, tactics and so much more…

I was a horrible player as my Halo Reachs stats show. And, I was making the same mistake at the start of Hlo 4 too. But, if I, the one labeled the worst or one of the worst Inheritors on halo Reach can make such a dramatic change by taking the time to actually learn to try and play better, so can any other Player ABC, which I once was, and no longer am.

I acknowledge, though, that most Player ABCs don’t visit these forums or actually care and so, things won’t drastically change.hence, my idea about changing the formula on ranking which player actually ranks 1st and so on down the list. You see, I have tried to improve my play style and have done so and am still improving as there is so much more to learn and get better at. But, having done so, it feelslike I (you) are being penalized for playing well.

Cheers

9

> Not enough details to make a conclusion. So many more variables to take account for.
>
> Player XYZ could of just sat in a corner and camo/bs’ed his way to a 22-2 game while player ABC was actively hunting down the other team. (just an example)
>
> You can not list scores and say who is the better player, because so much more goes into truely determining the better player.
>
> What if Player ABC was red bar half the match and still pulled down 22 kills but the red bar in lag could of attributed to his 17 deaths.
>
> What if player ABC was the camo/bs camper and player XYZ was the active hunter…
>
> See so many other variables have to come into play when determining the so called “better” player.

Thank you for your post.

While Player XYZ actually did get involved in CQC etc, it is unknown how Player ABC played…I’d have to go and get the video out of the temporary folder. But,Player ABC having 22-17, it is safe to assume that he or she actually did go out and hunt people down. The fact is, though, I know Player XYZ did too as the video would show.

Player XYZ used the following load-out:

AR, Surpresssor, Firepower, Frag, AC and ammo.

I can’t say what Player ABC used until I track the video down.

“What if Player ABC was red bar half the match and still pulled down 22 kills but the red bar in lag could of attributed to his 17 deaths.” **<----**good point…while there was no such problem in the game example given, that does often happen, unfortunately and would play a part in the outcome. Thanks for pointing that out.

“See so many other variables have to come into play when determining the so called “better” player.” <— Again, I acknowledge that you are right.

Cheers

10

> Too take it a step further.
>
> Team A plays Team B in 3 matches of CTF.
>
> Team A consistently out kills team B
>
> Team B wins 2 out of 3 matches.
>
> Which team is better?

IMO, Team B, of course!

But,you see,Slayer is all about kills-deaths. On the other hand, objective games about capping the flag, getting more extractions and so on…so,IMO, kills-deaths do not matter hence my negative KDs for objective game types!

11

> > Not enough details to make a conclusion. So many more variables to take account for.
> >
> > Player XYZ could of just sat in a corner and camo/bs’ed his way to a 22-2 game while player ABC was actively hunting down the other team. (just an example)
> >
> > You can not list scores and say who is the better player, because so much more goes into truely determining the better player.
> >
> > What if Player ABC was red bar half the match and still pulled down 22 kills but the red bar in lag could of attributed to his 17 deaths.
> >
> > What if player ABC was the camo/bs camper and player XYZ was the active hunter…
> >
> > See so many other variables have to come into play when determining the so called “better” player.
>
> Thank you for your post.
>
> While Player XYZ actually did get involved in CQC etc, it is unknown how Player ABC played…I’d have to go and get the video out of the temporary folder. But,Player ABC having 22-17, it is safe to assume that he or she actually did go out and hunt people down. The fact is, though, I know Player XYZ did too as the video would show.
>
> Player XYZ used the following load-out:
>
> AR, Surpresssor, Firepower, Frag, AC and ammo.
>
> I can’t say what Player ABC used until I track the video down.
>
> “What if Player ABC was red bar half the match and still pulled down 22 kills but the red bar in lag could of attributed to his 17 deaths.” **<----**good point…while there was no such problem in the game example given, that does often happen, unfortunately and would play a part in the outcome. Thanks for pointing that out.
>
> “See so many other variables have to come into play when determining the so called “better” player.” <— Again, I acknowledge that you are right.
>
> Cheers

:slight_smile:

12

The 21-5-2 player is statistically better. He’s a +19. The other player is statistically worse. He’s a +5.

Who is better? Let’s 1v1

13

If player ABC is willing to sacrifice himself for that one more kill, then ABC deserves that recognition if he did rack up the most kills and points. As for the team, I think its a win win situation if ABC keeps a positive k/d.

14

IMO slayer game leaderboards should be ranked on spread, not just points