So you are not replying to what I wrote. Do you remember what you are commenting on as that is not what was being said.
It is your opinion, you are wrong in your reply and failed to back it up.
I said prove it. So prove it, you are the one making claims by putting forward your opinion…
One team full of players with 0.x KDR on all their vehicles, and one team full of players with ULQ’s capability with some of their vehicles having 9.0 KDR, which team has a higher probability of winning, bro?
Indeed, he is just trolling here by miscommunicating what you and I were saying.
You get to see why TO posts get dragged out with no progress AT ALL but try to divide players rather than get us supporting one another.
ULQ_LOVER argues on semantics, just to be pedantic and pontificate. Which is all unnecessary and the place would be much more constructive.
Same with O_OHgameplay, just dragging out for the sake of it.
Yes, in a vacuum, a player regularly getting killed all the time with nothing to show for it (hard since stats fail on many areas) are more likely a burden. But since you were talking of things in games to assist your team that are not just the killing of enemy vehicles we know that there is a more complex situation.
He just wants to be super pedantic and you can tell from the over posting on all the similar topics.
Effectively two (or three) forum members not quite talking of exactly the same issue/point but someone being a plum about it.
Sure, let’s talk about the effectiveness
Maybe you can answer me, killing the enemy is more effective, or critically wounding an enemy is more effective?
You can do that, but if You die more than You kill, You are a burden to the team.
Sorry but game is proving it.
If player is dying more than he kills, he is a burden to his team.
So, let’s say we have a RB match with 32 players and three caps. 31 players go only for the kills while one takes all the caps and just as he takes the last cap he is killed and then respawns with a kd of 0 and decides to just sit in his spawn idling, while nobody bothers taking any of the zones and the ticket bleed ends the match; was he a burden to the team? After all, he won the match for his team.
You play in a team so yes killing one is more impactful than damaging one but what about damaging three tank who get killed by your teammates? What about distracting the enemy team so your team can push? What about capping a point and splitting the enemy team? All this is more impactful than a kill.
If the team consists of players who kill more than they die, they are able to defeat the enemy team without the need of capping.
He died to the enemy while doing something that was not needed and allowed enemy player for further respawns, so burden.
Your action either ends up in one of these categories
Ineffective
Less effective
Effective
More effective
Most effective
Of course, it all depends on the player’s overall capabilities, injuring the enemy is not intentional, it’s considered a failure, why distract or injure the enemy when you can kill them right away? you either do big things or little things and stats tells everyone exactly how you perform bro
The hypothetical game came to a point, where everyone was dug in and only the ticket bleed tipped the scale.
A player needs to drain more tickets from the enemy than he is costing his own team. Getting more kills than deaths is just one way to do that.
You state that there’s many levels of effectiveness, yet say it’s a do or don’t situation.
The leaning to the ‘effectiveness’ stems from the argument I posed to ULQ from the start about the effectiveness of SPAA in even being used in the first place, either as a deterrent or as an offenive weapon.
The issue is, that the stats don’t show the true usage or effectiveness of the vehicle as you don’t track assists, or kills where they crash because of you using your vehicle in a manner where the kills and deaths genuinely don’t matter because you are A) Doing something to protect and support your team, from either using the role, or putting out artillery and supporting fire, and B) Playing a game and genuinely enjoying it because you aren’t that hooked up on the stats and crap that you assume that everyone is inferior and deserve to be crapped on at the slightest whim.
This was due to Gaijin being unable to figure out how to fix it due to SPAA’s being hard coated as if it was hitscan. In Reality, the way they can bring it back would involve proper SPAA turrets that can miss which gives planes a chance and would be nothing compared to the “Hitscan?” SPAA cannons used on airstrips.
If team consists of a players that kill more than they die, they are able to destroy the team.
A hypothetical player wouldn’t be able to hold the points without the enemy not being around due to team destroying them.
You can cap all You want but if You die more than You kill then there is more enemies already decaping the zones.
The stats show a lot of significant stuff, it tell you what they do in a match on average and at what expenses, and then there come hidden expenses after they are killed off. For example, the number of kills and the number of deaths indicates how much the player spent their own team’s tickets and how much they drained the enemy’s on average, having 1:1 means they do the bare minimum for the team by trading an equal amount of team’s ticket with the enemy’s. Having a lot of kill assists is also a clear indicator of a player’s inability to deal with a situation independently.
Those that were left out of the stat card IMO are less significant than what is already shown, you wouldn’t find a player with low KDR and a high winning rate, because those two just don’t add up. If you were to setup a squad to win a tournament, the winning team would receive a Mercedes Benz and get a one-night stand with supermodels of their choice on a private yacht hosted by Gaijin’s Boss, who would you pick? someone the likes of Coffee or ULQ if you look at their stat?
But what if they don’t decap? What if they are in it only for the kills, but one last enemy manages to remain hidden, while they ignore the caps.
Overall, as I said, a good player is one who takes more tickets from the enemy team than he costs his own team, how he does it is up to him. Killing enemies obviously is one very effective way to achieve that.
Still doesn’t change the fact that a player who dies more than he kills is a burden to his team.
Unless he costs the enemy team more tickets in another way or prevents his teammates from losing tickets.
He is unable to do that if he dies more than he kills.
We are not talking about one game but overall statistics. If a player has K/D lower than 1, then he is going to be burden to the team. We can try to find excuses how he manages to avoid all the enemy players and cap all zones but still, if he dies more than he kills then his efforts are futile.
But that’s simply not true.
Effectiveness is a binary, either yes or no.
It’s deffined as “capable of producing a desired result” it’s either yes you are capable or no.
If you want to put it on a gradient it is called efficiency, becauce how efficient you are is defined by how many recources you need to get to the desired result.
For example, ramming a plane is effective and so is shooting a plane with your guns. They are the same in terms of effectiveness.
But Shooting a plane is far more efficient than ramming it.
So, if a player takes 1000 tickets from the enemy team in a match and he costs his own team 200 tickets, he is a burden to the team?