Gold user or ridiculously good player?

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • They could of played a lot of matches with hardly any or no players at all. For instance I do regular matches with alliance mates on big maps with 2 or 3 other players. We have a few weeks of build up, killing AI, until we have a big show down between the players.

      Forum Gang Divine Entity :00000156:

      Taking over the Forum 1 post at a time.

    • murb09 wrote:

      Having a hard time figuring this out haha,
      Sure does make playing this specific match disheartening
      Don't really think you need to be disheartened.

      The total number of units killed and the high Level are just a function of time. If you have played for a long time, or if you have a lot of free time on your hands, then you can join a lot of matches and tot up a very large total. So, having killed 22,000 units so far could just mean you have played a lot of matches.

      What really counts is the K/D ratio, and 3.68 is really nothing to be whistling dixie about. My current opponent has a K/D ratio of 4-plus, and I am beating the living daylights out of him.

    • MLG dawg wrote:

      Its easy to get that K/D high if you often appear in matches where most players are inactive and you spam lots of tactical bombers and artillery.
      This is exactly right. The K/D ratio is not the ratio of kills to deaths against an active and competent player. It is the total number of kills to deaths against all players over time.

      In most games, the majority of players will be new and inexperienced, or just not active. Some players may even organise things so that they are always going to be crushing weaker countries and that will skew their K/D ratio even further, but even if you just sign up randomly on the 'New Games' tab, you will still mostly be playing against inexperienced players.

      For example, in my current game, I fought against a coalition of three countries. However, only one of those three was a half-decent opponent (half-decent because he was very active, but not very competent). The other two were total noobs who had no idea how to defend themselves (e.g. they kept recruiting artillery units and sending them one by one to the frontline for my air force to pick off). So, although my K/D ratio for this round alone would have been roughly 4:1, that does not mean that I am good enough to get a 4:1 kill to death ratio against an active and competent opponent.

      So basically, a K/D ratio of 3.68 is really nothing to be disheartened about. It does not mean your opponent is so good that he will kill 3 or 4 of your units for each one he loses. I reckon that your opponent would probably get a K/D ratio of around 1:1 against an active competent player, so you should have a fair chance against him or her.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by MartinB ().

    • MartinB wrote:

      The K/D ratio is not the ratio of kills to deaths against an active and competent player. It is the total number of kills to deaths against all players over time.
      Actually, gentlemen, there are two different kills-to-losses ratios: one for kills and losses vs. human players (not inactives), and another for kills and losses vs. AI countries (including inactive human players). Once a human player becomes inactive in a particular game, any losses and/or kills in that game no longer accrue to the human player.

      In the new stats table, there is an icon/toggle button next to the K/D ratio which permits you to flip between "PvP statistics" and "AI statistics."

      I hope this helps.

      And for the record, a 3.69 kills-to-losses ratio vs. human players doesn't tell you much without getting some sense of the caliber of the player's human competition. If the human player has a 3.69 ratio against Players League competition, that would be excellent. If he's racking up kills against a bunch of L1 through L20 rookies on the small maps, that's not so impressive. You should also check his kills with tactical bombers, his ratio of tactical bomber kills to losses, his kills with artillery, and his kills with submarines. Those and a few other stats will tell you a lot about a given player's style of play. When I join a game with one or more highly experienced players, and/or players with very high winning percentages, I usually spend a fair amount of time at the beginning of the game analyzing their battle stats to discern such patterns and likely tactics ---- and I plan accordingly. I also monitor their progress on the map carefully, and read the newspaper accounts to glean what I can of their likely tactics.

    • MontanaBB wrote:


      And for the record, a 3.69 kills-to-losses ratio vs. human players doesn't tell you much without getting some sense of the caliber of the player's human competition. If the human player has a 3.69 ratio against Players League competition, that would be excellent.
      I seriously doubt there are going to be very many players out there who are playing exclusively, or even most of the time, in the Players League. Maybe you, Vorlon and a few other hard-core types, but have never really encountered anyone like that before in a game. The ones that I have encountered with some League exposure have played on it but not the majority of the time. So I figure it is a good bet that a K/D ratio of 3.69 probably means an average player.

      As for the bit about the toggle, I just assumed what the OP posted was the human version. A player getting a 3.69 ratio against the AI is really not going to be much of a threat, and certainly not an opponent to be disheartened about.

    • MontanaBB wrote:

      You should also check his kills with tactical bombers, his ratio of tactical bomber kills to losses, his kills with artillery, and his kills with submarines. Those and a few other stats will tell you a lot about a given player's style of play.
      Thanks this is a great suggestion and had never thought of doing this before. Just been checking out my current opponent on this.

      Wonder if checking his battleship kill to death ratio would also be useful, as it would be a measure of your opponent's skill in naval warfare (which is really quite different to land warfare, I can imagine a guy who is good in land combat might not be that good in naval battles).

    • MontanaBB wrote:

      MartinB wrote:

      The K/D ratio is not the ratio of kills to deaths against an active and competent player. It is the total number of kills to deaths against all players over time.
      Actually, gentlemen, there are two different kills-to-losses ratios: one for kills and losses vs. human players (not inactives), and another for kills and losses vs. AI countries (including inactive human players). Once a human player becomes inactive in a particular game, any losses and/or kills in that game no longer accrue to the human player.
      In the new stats table, there is an icon/toggle button next to the K/D ratio which permits you to flip between "PvP statistics" and "AI statistics."

      I hope this helps.

      And for the record, a 3.69 kills-to-losses ratio vs. human players doesn't tell you much without getting some sense of the caliber of the player's human competition. If the human player has a 3.69 ratio against Players League competition, that would be excellent. If he's racking up kills against a bunch of L1 through L20 rookies on the small maps, that's not so impressive. You should also check his kills with tactical bombers, his ratio of tactical bomber kills to losses, his kills with artillery, and his kills with submarines. Those and a few other stats will tell you a lot about a given player's style of play. When I join a game with one or more highly experienced players, and/or players with very high winning percentages, I usually spend a fair amount of time at the beginning of the game analyzing their battle stats to discern such patterns and likely tactics ---- and I plan accordingly. I also monitor their progress on the map carefully, and read the newspaper accounts to glean what I can of their likely tactics.
      these are his stats, pretty one sided so I guess that says something
      Images

      • 5567085D-D7B9-4950-9975-31D1AD27CAD1.png

        1.29 MB, 750×1,334, viewed 50 times

      • 975DA42A-3D90-4D61-98EB-C1B67CBCBB77.png

        1.22 MB, 750×1,334, viewed 44 times

      • FABB20A5-A899-4C52-8F9E-1A4B3EE0F23E.png

        1.27 MB, 750×1,334, viewed 37 times

    • murb09 wrote:

      1.4k killed, around 650 casualties. (Tac Bombers) So yeah, seems like he’s a smart player
      Don't get intimidated by the total numbers involved. If you look at the ratio of kills to losses of Tac Bombers, it is just over about 2.

      He seems to have lost quite a large number of Tac Bombers, so this is a player who uses tactical bombers, but also loses quite a few of them. Remember, a tactical bomber is a very valuable unit, and also, in the early game, precious because you need Level 2 Airbases to build them in, and you will probably only have one or two of those available.

      So I would say, probably an above average player, who is high level because he has been in a lot of games. Or, if he is one of those players who goes into a lot of 'fixed' matches (like what Ellio_98 was talking about), maybe just about average. In any case, no reason to be disheartened. If you can be active and online and you both start off with roughly the same strength (i.e. you are not Romania or Poland fighting against the Soviet Union on the 25 player map), you should be able to give him a good run for his money.