Wut. Out of the 5 or so people that I've cherrypicked from that list, not a single one of them had noteworthy IvI stats. A couple of them didn't even have IvI scores. You talkin' DA k/d, or PS2 Players Site k/d?
It's also worth pointing out that there are probably of people like me who spent the first 6-12 months of the game playing really badly and then learned to play and their infantry K/Ds skyrocketed. I would consider top level infantry play as getting 8-10+ consistently.
I think Shark forgot that a lot of those people played while the API didn't track weapon deaths for the first few months. (As Possee pointed out earlier to me today) So you see a lot of those people with so so iVi stats but 20 to 40 weapon K/D's because they stopped playing or stopped using the weapon by the time the API was updated. My TR alt (that I started playing on from day 1) has some weapons with 20+ K/D's and I can assure I was never that good nor will I ever be that good. It is pretty easy to place people in tiers when it comes to the DA stat site because the grades are spelled out pretty clearly with how many standard deviations they are above the average, and they are even broken down into things like top 5% of all players, top 1 %, top 0.5% even as far up as top 0.025%. So if you are talking about the top 0.5 to 0.025% of all players having a 5+ infantry K/D that makes sense and is backed up by the playerbase as a whole.
Ah my bad, I just set it to check IVI K/D only, noticed that all the expected "good players" were there and figured it worked. Looks like the guy I was responding to was correct.
The reason wasnt that. It was because something I did fair n square...but you got all ******** about it. I felt kind of good about it after people said you are a good player lol. ooo and I play this game with 30fps or even worst in big fights...in small fights I stay around 40-56fps
I was wondering why my KDR with the mercenary was 277. I kid you not. According to DA website I have a 277 KDR with that gun. And I remember using it at the beginning and then switching to the Gauss compact S. What does the Grade U stand for than. Unmistakably cheating? Never mind. I fail at reading. It's explained at the top of the grades side. Can you explain the delta thing to me? Like how mucht better am I than the average player with a B++ rating for example?
U is pretty much unranked, it can be from not enough data or that it exists so far outside the normal distribution of players. It is actually possible to get a U rank through normal playing, just very rare. The way grades work is you take the data for all players in the system, from there you end up with an "average" value (whether it is KDR, accuracy, KPH, etc and it will vary from weapon to weapon) This value will fall between C+ and C++. This represents a pretty standard bell curve. A majority (68%) of all players have scores that fall in that large chunk in the middle whether they are above it or below it. If you have a C- to B rating, you fall somewhere in that group. The next portion of the population will fall in that 13% above or below average and they will have B++ to A+ or C-- to D** grades. (B++ lands you in the top 15 % of all players, but near the bottom of that particular pool) From rank A++ to M+ you fall into the third section away from the center and represent about 2% of the population who can play at that level. M++ to S is basically that tiny portion to the right of +3 and are in the top one tenth of a percent of players. Basically, the best of the best. *Note* This is probably oversimplified and I don't personally mess with the Database, that is all 50ShadesofPurple he'd be able to answer you much better. Plus I haven't looked at a calculus book in over a decade, so there is that. Someone can feel free to correct me if I messed up. *edit* The delta values are how many standard deviations away from the "average" a player falls. e.g. B** is 1 A* is 2 and M++ is 3.
The annoying problem I have is it is extremely hard for me to get my stats to move. I bascially have to play EXTREMELY well a lot of them to move (barely). My Infantry K/D seems to have a mind of its owndespite me going on 3 - 10+ kill sprees constantly it likes to go down. I'm bascially reserved to the fact my stats are fubar due to large periods of bad play and that I can't "fix them."
Kill streaks really have no effect on your K/D, if you are looking to improve you need to find a way to steadily improve your session K/D. That will likely give you a decent picture as to why it really hasn't gone anywhere. From July to December it went from a 2.58 to a 2.71 and while you did start to improve Jan / Feb after a months break you were back where you started. Kill streaks are great when they happen, but a reflection of your consistency will be what happens when you aren't on a kill streak. In this case, if you can consistently get 3 - 10+ kill streaks, that means you are going ~30 and 3. In between those streaks it means you are dying 2 to 3 times without any kills to even it out to ~ a 3 K/D for your session. *note* This is overall K/D, not infantry K/D.
Yeah...gotta love breaks >_< Everything was going up in Dec to Feb but then I took a break and started to play badly again, I am kind of getting back into the groove...as you can see from April to now. All the bad play inbetween it all has royally screwed up my stats.
It's statistics, not calculus. The only problem with the grades is that it assumes all those variables follow a normal distribution, I'd say it's more likely that it follows a log-normal distribution (especially because you can't go below zero), but I can't really say what are the implications of that for estimating the percentile you're at, I don't know that much about statistics So from that, I'd say that grades would be more accurate if the site internally used the logarithm of the distribution, calculated the standard deviations of that distribution, and applied percentiles from the logarithms, someone who knows more about statistics can confirm/deny, but it's probably too much of a hassle for 50 to do that at this poitn