I think the race to win on the end game leader board is negatively affecting the co-operation found in the first game. People see the stats as the primary method of achievement to the detriment of long term success of the team as a whole. I don’t think the players are dumb however, I just feel like the board is encouraging people (especially newer players) to see the score as a measurement of their contribution to the team.
I do think the stats are interesting though and I think people should have access to that information. To that end, I posit that the leader board be changed to show the team total for combined stats and let the player see detailed information about their own performance (maybe deeper than what we see on the screen already).
This compromise allows people to keep track of their own performance and also builds a sense of team camaraderie after the match. Instead of “wow, I killed so much” it becomes “wow we killed so much.”
hah! this is a novel proposition. very interesting. i for one like to see how my build compares with other builds. to me, it definitely IS a measure of how much a player has contributed to the team.
it doesn’t mean that players lower on scores are useless, but it just means that they don’t have the uptime of the players that’s driving the team. big difference btw two skilled players when one is trying to take it easy while the other is trying to speedrun.
there are people who love seeing themselves to have all the little green circles for validation, as evidenced by people posting screenshots all the time, so i’m quite sure a change like this would affect them negatively. you might be taking away their motivation to play the game, and that’s not what fatshark wants tho!
well loosing those might be better than loosing all the people they put off playing. and it would make the game a nicer place to be
I’m not in the least bit sure that’s true, i had a run yester with a real pro pyro sienna , pretty much no one else got a single special or elite kill. He had more kills than the rest of us combined infact he was over 4X the guy who came second. now this guy was really skilled im sure in deathmatch games hes a proper champ i have no issue saying that or that it was impressive.
but he was a liability in a team , i as kruber spent pretty much the entire match just walking behind him watching how he played. it was simply too dangerous to be infront of him and his constant bunny hoping blocked everyone else from shooting.
we had multiple deaths, he would spam his ult on any single clan rat that anyone looked like they were getting close enough to to hit themselves, never having it when we needed it but this way got the most kills. With his run speed trinks no one could keep up so when he pulled the stormvermin packs and trained them back through the group using us as a meatshield so he could sustain his dps , there were of course several deaths. and he would never stoop to equipping his melee weapon and pushing or stopping dps long enough to pick someone up. and i will avoid him like the plague in the future.
the problem is because of the scoreboard he left that game thinking he carried hard. truth is we would of done better without him. he didn’t carry because we couldn’t do it he carried because he made it impossible for us to do it.
i really don’t get this argument. each map is different each run through is different , each player is different each run they perform differently their builds and equipment and results vary.
and against all this fluctuation your end game score is meant to be a significant help in evaluating a build?
how?
when you benchmark a graphics card you do it against the same run each and every time thats how you have to do it. you can only have one thing changing in a benchmark and there is no way to do that in this game. not even close
I’m not roleplaying. I like to optimize my builds.
No 2 champions can play on the same game. So ultimately it’s about how well is X champion build doing in a WYZ team.
Is the glaive better than the spear? Perhaps. Would I take the glaive in a team w/ Mercenary, IB and BH? Probably not, because the team doesn’t seem to lack anti-armor or shield-breaking.
Comparing builds requires context. Metrics could be better? Yes. But please, don’t make them worse.
i do benchmarking too but it’s based on my personal feel. whether my build can take care of multiple combat scenarios comfortably, vs other class builds. i disagree that you can’t compare, because i can tell how a sienna is performing by observation. i always compare to what I would do vs what i see the person doing. Is he reacting to that packmaster coming up behind? does he attempt to dodge and fire at the teleporting leech? why is he meleeing a horde instead of blasting it with his beam staff etc etc etc.
i can take all this information and correlate it with how i feel i performed in the map: eg. if i feel this sienna has underperformed, but my build has somehow only overtaken her in damage slightly, and i felt that i wasn’t very effective in boss dps or horde killing in that attempt, then i can reevaluate my playstyle to see what areas i can improve in.
especially since now that they included the ‘damage taken’ score, it’s a mark of personal pride to myself if i can get below 50 in a champion run.
I really like this Team scoreboard idea
And maybe, as GW2 pvp scoreboard does, just add percentage of your participation in it.
Like Damage dealt
Team : Number
You : 28%
This way you know that if you’re above 25% you done well, under you didn’t. And there is no race to be first, because having 30% doesn’t exclude to possibility of having a mate with 35%
I think this is a very good idea! It is very frustrating to play with people like @Padds described. In my group of friends we have a pyro that behaves similarly. He just cares about the damage and runs around carelessly hitting all specials. Two of us are on duty to save him from all the aggro he pulls (the meat shields). At the end of the game he always boasts about being the most important player because of the damage and kills.
A team score would help new players to see that this is in fact a co-op game!
This reminds me of the stats in L4D where they would say “XYZ zombies have been killed.”
I guess it would be fun to see what a group accomplished in a run.
They should add a “time spent doing nothing” counter, because I find that often the most valuable member to the team is the one “doing nothing”. In other words checking the surroundings (eg. backside) while the rest of the team is blasting away the incoming horde in a choke, when just 1 or 2 guys would be enough.
Win screen toxicity comes from the fact that most of the end-game tallies are kill-based. Damage to boss, total damage dealt, kills, ranged kills, elite kills, etc. There’s only a handful of ‘team-based’ counts: revives and saves.
I think they should add more counts for the more supportive roles that some of the classes perform. Things like ‘enemies knocked back’, ‘allied health restored’, and ‘friendly fire’. Things that might encourage more teamplay instead of a mad race to get the most kills, shooting through allies if need be.
Any stat should be taken with a grain of salt. As easy as it can be to "game"damage stats it also would be easy to do so for newly created ones.
It isn’t like someone gets crowned king when the game ends. If you think that 8k wasn’t all that helpful, maybe she wasn’t. Stats are only a few facts. Even with dozens of them you won’t reconstruct a 30min game.
It’s also OK to deny facts. It’s a game after all.
yes, if we want to add stats to the stats screen, the list is endless.
the only way to tell of performance is to have the 4 players record/stream their plays at the same time to a panel of extremely hypocritical, prejudiced and judgemental stream commentors for maximum drama!
