Keeping KDR in perspective.

KDR means nothing, you can make insane KDR with any class, in case above you see stupidity of zerg, how the hell they allow me to farm them. See leaderboard 90% of high KDR guys play engi most often... yea and how they play 90% of tanks don't give a sh*t about pushing forward they go behind friendly infantry, where such a thing take place in real world. Where is air support when you need destroy few AA turrets for galaxy to drop infantry? Propably they chasing guy taking trip on flash past desert... Maybe in some cases KDR mean something, but not KDR alone.

Edit: this KDR on picture was archived by shooting some stupid zerglings only as LA

dividing kills by time with give you kills per hour with each gun.

eg: 109 kills per hour with LSW and 179per hour with lightning.

accuracy would be the determining factor in a duel, yes, but thats not planetside, in this its generally about who can get the jump on who, positioning and awareness as you mentioned also matter. You accuracy is better than mine, but i would have to presume my KPH on most of my weapons is higher. (there is obvious issues with some weapons though since how long you have them drawn matters)

u forgot one thing is that every time u have x gun out it counts as time with the gun therefore it wouldn't be right to measure it that way.

Waiting at the warp gate, running around etc... unless you are constantly in a fight the time with gun is not measure u can look at

Edit: ops u already said it, my bad =)

Do people forget it is a computer game? Computer games should be first and foremost fun! I often read about grinding to such and such level etc. at the point you find yourself grinding you should find another game IMO.

K/D ratio is pointless. If 1 guy has a K/D of 0.2 and the other guy 9.0 but the guy with 0.2 has more fun. Mr 0.2 is the winner every time.

In all of your examples, the guy took on 3 players and won, making them all true..contrary to your statement that they would be untrue.

?

Therefore if measuring for game time by KDR is fun for some players ....?

Ahh, thanks for pointing it out. It's supposed to say "...3 players at once and won." Forgot to add that again when editing.

KDR is a very very poor measure of personal skill, and more often than not, it is wrong.

It doesn't say whether you played as an infantry, or in a vehicle.
It doesn't say what the rank of the guy you killed. Killing a veteran is worth just as many kills as a newbie.
It doesn't say if you farmed the kills while in a liberator.

Also, kills are not shared within vehicles, despite certain multi role vehicles such as the Liberator, where both the pilot and the gunner are just as important when obtaining the kills is concerned.

Also, a lot of the best Heavy Assault players I've known have rather ****** KDR, like 1 or even at 0.5, but that's because they're not afraid to clear bases or hold back the enemy tank zerg.
Whenever those guys are on our team, we know that our Sunderer is most likely going to be relatively safe, and the battle most likely won, so their KDR saying they are bad players, when in fact they were some of our most valuable players, is completely dumb.

That is only true with certain individuals.
This discussion is about how KDR affects player as a general rule, and what kind of gameplay it promotes, and if this certain gameplay is a boon to a game such as Planetside 2.

We need to not look for ways to circumvent the problem through individual effort, but whether or not KDR has any positive effects on the game that can outweigh its negative effects.

It's still complete BS since you are assuming that all players are actually playing HA or LA. As I said, a low K/D will say nothing about your shooting skills if you are mainly playing support.

The only time K/D could be meaningful in anyway is if you compare combat with combat. Like if you get a decent K/D in ESF vs. ESF, then you are probably a decent dogfighter. If you get a decent K/D as an ESF pilot, it can either mean you are a decent dog fighter or a lame podder going after easy kills. So K/D could have some value in certain situations but as the stats are presented now, they are complete and utter meaningless.

So, yesterday I played a quick game and before logging off, I actually bothered to check my stats. I had 8 kills and 10 deaths. That mean I'm a bad player according to you that can not be trusted with resistance. I only played HA and in those 8 kills were 3 Reavers and 1 Sunderer. I also had a couple of assists on tanks. All this with my Decimator. I think I managed to get a 1:1 K/D vs. the Reavers which I consider decent since they are aircraft with rocket pods and I'm an infantry with a dumbfire rocket. Shouldn't that mean that I am better at dealing with rather heavy resistance than say a lib gunner with a K/D of 20 who has to trust his pilot doing all the tactical stuff?

So now, please, go be wrong somewhere else.

I try not to pay too much attention to KDR. I play LA mainly (almost exclusively infantry player), and in doing so I tend to do a lot of risky stuff that doesn't always pan out. When it does though, it's glorious.

Anyway, when I started my KDR was abysmal. At one point,my overall was around .25, and stayed there for quite a while until I wrapped my head around the game and actually began improving. At the end of tonight, I am sitting at an overall of .95 or so.

So, while I generally don't stress KDR too much, I do look at it every once in a while, mainly as a gauge as to how I'm improving as a player. As long as it's continuing to go up or staying the same, then I know that I'm doing ok, and honestly, that's enough of a use for me. I don't require my ego to be padded by a random stat in a video game. As long as my skill as a player is progressing on a personal level then to hell with it. .25 or 25, at least I'm contributing.

So, in the great scheme of things does that make me a reliable player or one who is unreliable? Does my overall sub 1 KDR really tell the entire story of my skill as a player at this point in the game?

I just can't understand a persons mentality that they would adjust there play style to get a better K/D ratio. It is a totally pointless number in a fictional computer game. Show me your companies balance sheet in real life and how many people you employ and I will be impressed. Show me how long you served in the armed forces, show me your medical certificate and tell me about your intention to save people lives and I will be impressed.

It is a stat in a computer game and has no real worth at all.

What you do in a computer game will not echo in eternity!

How about we remove all stats so you all don't feel the need to come on the forums and justify your garbage ratios.

As far as I'm aware, PS2 has no DM or TDM feature... Therefore KDR is only really relevant in minimal instances.

It's a diverse game, that allows you to take various roles. For instance, if you are not particularly good at aiming, you can go as a Medic or Engineer and support your Team.

At the end of the day, your KDR is irrelevent in my eyes. As long as your fulfilling the role that you have taken, I couldn't care less about whether you have a godlike or terribad KDR.

Higher KDR can be better in the sense that if two equal sized squads of infantry meet the team with the higher KDR players will tend to have more people alive at any single point in time and therefore might have an easier time attacking or defending a base.

But higher KDR can be very misleading as well since a lot of the time the type of player that plays to max his KDR isn't the least bit interested in playing objectives and couldn't care less if their team takes or loses a base.

In Planetside 2 it doesn't matter much at all mostly because there are so many people, and battles are decided mostly on two factors: 1) sheer numbers and 2) composition. Sheer numbers will overwhelm an opposing force regardless of whether the opposing force has "better" players that are able to maintain higher KDRs. And the composition of the forces in terms of vehicle types brought to the fight will determine who has the advantage if both forces are roughly equal in pure numbers. Given large enough forces facing each other the skill levels of the individual players become irrelevant.

If this happens the magrider wont be effective anymore though, as its fueled on tears, you can see why its so OP right now.

you should really attempt reading comprehension... maybe go back to school. if i had a crayon i'd write it in letters you might would understand...

i said if your killing and not capping your being useless didn' say anything about killing while taking territory, before you call people ignorant, you might want to make sure your not the one doing exactly that. i only have a problem with people that only worry about their K/D and don't bother trying to help their faction take territory... the people that get pissed off when you and your platoon come into the crown and just take it instead of farm it. the people that will sit at the crown and stay there while every single other territory and continent gets taken... people that have a great K/D and are on the front lines kicking **** and taking names... got no problem with.

What you do in life will not echo for eternity either, even if you are the US president or a famous doctor, dust will claim it all, so that arguement doesn't really make any sense

Also, I'm not quite sure where you're going with those real life examples.
You do realize we are talking about the behavioral impact of an ingame system? And you do know that is the Developer, not the Gamer, who decides how the game will ultimately be played?

Ahh you calling me a crown kd farmer must have skewed my judgment or something lol cos I read back what you wrote and yes you're right. I take back the naive and ignorant comment then. As long as you know that kills definitely matter in a game of combined arms, whether objective are the focus or not, we're on the same page.

KD is useless without context.

If two people are playing heavy assaults and slugging it out with some enemys, then yes, KD comparison between the two of them is a reasonable metric of performance and the one with the higher KD is probably doing the better job. However, consider the following:

Two players are trying to stop a few enemys from capping a base.

Player A is a sniper and is killing enemys as they run from their sunderer toward the objective. He gets 8 kills and 1 death netting him an 8.0 kdr. Obviously he is doing a good job helping prevent the base cap.

Player B is an engineer and runs for the sunderer trying to tank mine it. He dies three times, then finally makes it and blows up the sunderer up, netting him 3 deaths and no kills for a 0 kdr (if i remember correctly, unoccupied vehicles give exp but dont count towards KD).

Obviously the engineer destroying the sunderer either severely hampers the base attack, or in some cases ends it. But the engineers KD doesn't reflect his contribution to the base defense.

Context is everything.

KDR is unreliable at best

Just because you have fought the enemy from the remote outpost all the way to the cap point of the tech plant in a single life, doesn't mean that your kdr shows this.

it could just show that you arrived late and proceeded to spawn camp the enemy while tk people for trying to destroy the SCU

KDR only tell how many deaths to kills you have had. it doesn't say how may kills you have. it shore doesn't say if they where cheap kills. and it doesn't say you helped your team.

why is it that the people defending 'KDR' will then berate people with higher ones for being a 'lib farmer'


I'm not going to say KDR is only for 'losers' because if you have fought all the way without dieing once you are awesome.
but because KDR can be manipulated how do I know that your KDR has not?


EDIT: also the penalty for death in this game is less then any other game I know