Concerns about persistent stats

[VariousNames]

Persistent stats may increase the tendency of some players to ignore team balance for the sake of improving their own "persistent score."

This has two effects,

one, it dilutes the value of persistent stats, making them less an accurate reflection of player skill.

Two, it alters gameplay on a per-game basis by orienting players towards a different objective than making the game at hand more enjoyable to the whole lobby.

In other words, some players may ignore stacked teams (either by skill or player numbers) just to get easy kills instead of playing for challenge and gameplay. Stat tracking emphasizes stats instead of quality of gameplay, and that worries me.

 

[Nicholas]

Everyone would hide and only care about kill death ratio.

Then it would become Heroes of Failingrad.

 

[LJFHutch]

I have my own fears about stat tracking, but as long as the stats aren't public there shouldn't be too many problems.

 

[DiedTrying]

But what are the positives?

Keep users playing longer/more often?

Provide certain specific statistics for clans and teamplayers?

There are always two sides to a coin.

 

[CopperHead]

In some ways, you kinda already see this.

On some of the notoriously stacked maps, you see alot of the more experienced players go on the side that is easier. Like Tcherkassy allies, Basovka allies, and Kauk allies.

 

[VariousNames]

But what are the positives?

Keep users playing longer/more often?

Provide certain specific statistics for clans and teamplayers?

There are always two sides to a coin.

Of course. You do well to point this out.

I just tend to see player stats in a match as more accurate. Persistent stats have so little context. Killing X numbers of nubs (clan players should know especially what I mean by this) really isn't as extraordinary as putting out a sick show in a heated interclan match.

At the very least, they'll hopefully motivate players to perform in whatever game they're in, but then again so do per-match leaderboards. I don't see persistent stats as really being necessary.

 

[Bashenka]

Once I got to about 200/300 K/D ratio in Day of Defeat, I stopped caring about "stat grinding". I was too far in the hole for that.

On a side note, I really like Day of Defeat's individual weapon stats. Hope something like this makes it in.

 

[REZ]

Do I get paid for having better stats than the next guy?

 

[Game-Enthousiast]

I understand the threat of persistent stats tracking and agree in parts with the OPs statements.
Personally I never cared that much about my stats even in games where they are trackable Bf2 BfBC2. I just hate hiding or waiting for my enemy unless it is really necessary and therefore usually engage without regards for my "sacred" KD ratio.
But thats just me and I guess a few people around here. On the other hand I fear that the average gamer in currently popular fps games might not have the same attitude towards his stats and therefore actually might play too defensive.

I did a test a few weeks ago with a mate of mine. I let him have a go at my BfBc2. He automatically hid somewhere with his machine gun and took people out. Explaining his behaviour by trying to get a good KD ratio.

I dont care whether you can see how many areas you took, officers you killed or maps you won. Information that I think is not as sensitive to gaming behaviour as fully see through tables. Therefore a light version with some information on it might be a better way than a fully disclosed detailed descriptive and frequency overview.

 

[Snuffeldjuret]

I hope that the stats tracking is freezed when the teams are too unbalanced.

 

[Apos]

But what are the positives?

Keep users playing longer/more often?

If game is that good, then it doesn't need K/D radio or other statistics. First RO had sweet balance of statistics. I more like to keep like it is, than turn RO into CoD/BF statistic madness.

Provide certain specific statistics for clans and teamplayers?

Clans don't need such things. All what is needed is information when team wins and how many reinforcements left. That's it. K/D doesn't belong to it.

 

[Alvin Fuchs]

Kills and deaths have no place in RO or HoS. Really the only thing you need is hours played, and Steam has that covered.

 

[Actin]

Just have an option (as in almost every other game) to have ranked and unranked servers.

If you don't like it (me including) join the unranked servers.
Everybody wins, easy to include

(Although unranked only is fine by me too)

 

[PUTZ]

Do I get paid for having better stats than the next guy?

I'll give you $5 if you have more stab kills than desch after a week. (post release)

 

[REZ]

Pfft... bring on the stats!

 

[DiedTrying]

If game is that good, then it doesn't need K/D radio or other statistics. First RO had sweet balance of statistics. I more like to keep like it is, than turn RO into CoD/BF statistic madness.

Just because you don't care for k/d doesn't mean other possible customers don't. If the competitive nature of 1,000 players keep them playing the game, I'm all for it! No need to lump RO with COD based on statistics, the gameplay alone makes the game worlds apart regardless of stat tracking.


Clans don't need such things. All what is needed is information when team wins and how many reinforcements left. That's it. K/D doesn't belong to it.

Clans don't need to know who their best cappers are, who their best tankers are, who their best suppression people are, what positions their clanmates spend the most time on a map? Please think outside the K/D box.

 

[Schreq]

Indeed. It's funny how you represent the clan scene, apos.
Can I maybe speak for myself? I'm a clan player, created a gametype to show K/D and would like to have that in HoS as native feature.

 

[Moyako]

We had roscores, and everything was ok

 

[Apos]

Indeed. It's funny how you represent the clan scene, apos.
Can I maybe speak for myself? I'm a clan player, created a gametype to show K/D and would like to have that in HoS as native feature.

I just see how K/P does work for console games like Bad Company 2 or Blops (yes, I have played those). For the first game you have bunch of snipers camping around and working on Kill per Death ratio or medics with M60 who don't try to capture objective, but keep snipers alive and healthy.

In Blops I have noticed campers, who just sit next to objective and wait when enemy comes. Second favorite spot is somewhere behind spawn points. So if you respawn, you die instantly from shoot from back.

For Red Orchestra I would like to see improved teamplay points system, where player gets more information (but no for +100 popping from nowhere in the middle of screen) for what he earns his points. These are: capturing flag, suppressing enemy position and staying together with his fireteam. So player would be aware of fact that K/P is not that important in Red Orchestra game, like teamplay does. Old RO system works like charm, it was very rare to see player who stays behind spawn point and do nothing more but camp. It's very common on BF/CoD servers...

I hope you can see the difference between typical casual games and Red Orchestra, which is PC game: where players more likely play together, create clans or communities and fight in competitive way. My point is: in casual games for playing lonely you still win because after every round you get your points and next level or weapon unlock. RO as far as I know is game where teamplay is the key to winning.
Remember what suppose to be "a carrot" for player, kills or winning battles?

 

[DiedTrying]

the carrot is fun

you can define fun anyway you want.

But your definition is your opinion, not gospel.