Multiplayer shooters. Does K/D always define the better player?

Eshelmen

Eshelmen

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 3, 2004
Messages
6,651
Well?

In games such as Counter-Strike, Battlefield and all the other popular shooters, does K/D always define the better player?
Is it more likely a team does better with a player who focuses solely on their K/D over team work?

This question can relate to any type of matches.
(Pub, tournies, objective scoring etc...)
 
K/D can be a nice indicator of overall performance, but it can easily be skewed and not representative of anything at all. In a pure deathmatch scenario K/D is kinda the only thing to go on because your deaths essentially mean your opponents have scored, but in team-based and objective-based games those deaths could mean very little and simply be the result of aggressive play (playing to win).

TF2, for example, tracks your kills and deaths, yet technically a player could push the payload, capture points, and steal the intelligence (flag), get no kills, die 30 times, and still be an important team player: their deaths don't hurt the team and their aggressive play led them to spots that would naturally be camped by defenders (high risk). A sniper with 10:2 K/D might have a nice ratio, but may not actually be doing anything that advances the cause of the team. A spy might have a low K/D, but also might make a key play that destroys a sentry nest and allows a team to advance.

In BF4, for example, player deaths cost your team a ticket of which there are a limited amount before the team loses. If a player is dying a lot and not getting kills then they could be seen as a drag on the team, but again there are other ways for players to contribute (objectives, support roles, etc.). If you finish 46:10 K/D because you sat in a vehicle all game, but didn't help the team capture/hold points or arm/disarm objectives and your team loses, then it's tough to argue that you were a skilled player even though your K/D makes you look like one.

There are many players that will avoid pushing objectives because they would rather maintain their K/D ratio: they would rather lose the game than have a death on their stats. They're essentially the kids on the sports team that hog the ball/puck simply because they think they're the best...but to no greater good of the team, and they're often the first ones to start berating and blaming teammates. Personal skills and scores don't matter if you don't understand the team game and don't contribute.

Edited because K : D apparently turns into this: K:D !
 
I don't think so.
Back in Battlefield 3, there were Metro 24/7 servers where people go to raise their K/D easily due to the nature of the map.

Of course that game could be an exception, as I don't play that many multiplayer anyway
 
Overall, not really. In a specific instance sure. My wife and I usually play casual pub games in CS:GO, and wreck it. I bet if we went into competitive, we wouldn't do nearly as well.
 
No not really, but it really depends on how you measure "best player" and what game you play. If we're talking about strictly a team deathmatch call of duty style, then sure, k/d might measure the best player (in the least competitive game mode). If it's more of a one on one arena style then it means quite a bit because you don't want to die and give up points or control (quake). If it's a real team style game like CS it doesn't mean as much and your stats really depend on your role for the team.
 
Everything being equal in CSGO teamwork work is always better. Even in pub Ive had numerous occasions where I'm on a team and most of our guys are barely positive K/D but I manage to rally them all to one site or another behind me and we squeak out a win against a group of 3 or 4 guys walling or on vent. Even an aimbot.
I consistently end up being stuck as carry in pubs, if I can get the team to listen to me even if they suck we can get there. If they don't listen, even if I'm doing well like 2-1 but I'm getting choked by the other teams smurfs I'll just leave. I don't have any fun if my team isn't trying.

This is true of Battlefield and TF2 as well honestly. The only games that come to mind that are purely KD dependent are COD and Battlefront. Theres teamwork that assists in better KD but its still KD reliant at the end of the day because theres very little real objective in those. BF CSGO and TF2 are objective heavy.
 
No. In most team style games it matters more if you are a team player and cooperate to complete the objective of the game rather then be a lone wolf sniper or vehicle hog that only cares about their K/D ratio.
 
K/D cannot give you any sort of an idea of someones skill. You could be a really good player, entry fragging, getting tons of kills but dying a lot. Then you have the guy that sits back, baits everyone, hides, if hes out numbered or the last one alive he tries to survive that would probably end up having a better K/D since he gets MAYBE 12 kills and dies once or twice. As far as CSGO goes, there really isnt a way to tell someones skill without playing against them in a competitive environment and having that environment log a couple different stats, like how much they contributed to winning the round, how much damage they do per round, how many frags they get per round, can they clutch? Stuff like that. People can have amazing aim, but suck because they're not smart. I think I am somewhere in between :).
 
As someone who mostly likes to play support type classes I'd hope there be more to it than K/D. One reason I don't like Call of Duty. Not only K/D matters but you're rewarded with kill streaks and stuff.
 
Okay, so you guys are saying for objective based games, the top player won't usually have the best K/D?
 
Eshelmen said:
Okay, so you guys are saying for objective based games, the top player won't usually have the best K/D?
Click to expand...

top player as in leaderboard?

usually has a high rate of K/D.

doesn't make them the person who wins the game for the team, but it's usually good, unless he's sniping, missing 80% of their shots and running away when he sees anyone. I'd rather have someone with 30 kills 12 deaths compared to 12 kills 0 deaths
 
Last edited:
You'd need to use personal scouting and advanced analytics to really determine with precision who the best player is, similair to how it is actually done in professional sports.

Of course this is rather silly to apply to people playing for fun in pub games.
 
Eshelmen said:
Okay, so you guys are saying for objective based games, the top player won't usually have the best K/D?
Click to expand...

No not necessarily. Just played a round of hardline (conquest) a few nights ago and i was the top player (50-39), kd barely above 1.2. Many people had better kds than me, but i was top of the leaderboard on my team and like #2 overall (my homie was on the other team is a beast). But to counter kills and deaths, i grab flags, and assist my squad as much as possible.
If you are not helping the team attacking objectives, you better be killing a ton of the enemies to be useful. Which is why i hate snipers who camp in hard to reach places. Thats the most selfish class there is in battlefield games. Their only points come from kills and maybe spots (if they do that though).

I think in battlefield games, your KD and score per minute is a good indication of your skill, but cannot be the defining factor.
 
If you're talking Quake 3 Arena type game, in TDM or FFA, then I would say:

Yes, most definitely.

If you're talking CoD? (past the first one anyway) I would say:

Not a chance.
 
BF3/4 Conquest Perspective

KDR means close to nothing, SPM is a better indication of skill but even that can be inflated if you play 24/7 Locker/Metro. As long as your over 1.5 or 2.0 your at least team effective. The Leaderboards have been fucked up since Day-1 and once you play enough BF4 at a elevated level you can see the goods from the bads pretty quick.

Vehicle Heroes with ~6KDR only exist because no one bothers to focus on killing them when you have a standoff AA-Tank or MBT just let them do their thing, Vehicle heroes are a meta-game within in the BF franchise let them have their fun while their tickets melt.

If you have a focused 5 man squad just dedicated to taking out the Scout Helo or AA-Tank/MBT they usually leave the server. Most Scout Helo players wont even play any map other then Hainan/Floodzone care-bears mostly.

Attack/Scout Helos can't really Cap or Control CP's in maps like Hainan/Lancang/Floodzone they can just be avoided and go on with your business.

Look for +1K SPM and Over 2.0KDR and your have a solid core player of BF
 
in TDM, K/D is king. I can easily judge people by their K/D in any team deathmatch based game.

And I disagree with chockomonkey. In TDM CoD, I have yet to lose to anyone with an overall KD better than mine unless they are a 5-6 man team.
 
Games like domination in COD series you can have a horrible K/D and still come out on top for points.

Any kind of team death match game you need high k/d ratio to help ur team win no matter how you get it done
 
refraxion said:
in TDM, K/D is king. I can easily judge people by their K/D in any team deathmatch based game.

And I disagree with chockomonkey. In TDM CoD, I have yet to lose to anyone with an overall KD better than mine unless they are a 5-6 man team.
Click to expand...

That's a good point. I guess I was just thinking about all the crazy streak rewards you can get which will skew your ratio. But i reckon since everyone has the same access to those things, everyone's ratio will be skewed the same.
 
In the long-term, K/D and K-D are pretty good indicators of player efficiency in FPS. If you're not shooting and taking out the other guys, it doesn't matter how well you're working together because in a game(mode) with parity the other team is eliminating your players, for the duration or temporarily.
 
dmonkey said:
In the long-term, K/D and K-D are pretty good indicators of player efficiency in FPS. If you're not shooting and taking out the other guys, it doesn't matter how well you're working together because in a game(mode) with parity the other team is eliminating your players, for the duration or temporarily.
Click to expand...

An argument can certainly be made for K/D in that, in theory, the more time you spend alive, the more effective you will be. Of course, that argument also assumes that the player is playing the game in an effective manner in the first place.

If you have two model players who are doing everything right then the player with the better K/D is likely the more effective player, since they are making the most effective use of their uptime.

All that said, there are pretty much no at-a-glance scenarios where we can analyze players in such a clean way. If you play the game a certain way and find that your K/D is improving over time, you could certainly judge your own ability and/or effectiveness based on that, but comparing yourself with someone else based on K/D would introduce too many other variables, especially so if we're talking about a round-end scoreboard.

Then again, there are games (TF2 for example) where players sacrificing themselves on the objective is the far better play then trying to make additional kills, and that undermines the entire K/D argument.
 
Like I said, it's a good statistic overall with a lot of long-term reliability. There are always outliers, but the primary mechanic in most FPS games is still to shoot the other guys dead before they can do the same to you, with objective-based play being contingent on your being alive to secure the objective or otherwise prevent the enemy players from doing so. If you're spending most of your time in the respawn screen or spectating, you're not going to be doing any of the above very well. So setting aside specific instances in specific games where you can perform saving plays by sacrificing yourself, I'd say overall it's very important to be able to put your cross-hair in the proper place and click the proper keys/buttons at a better rate than your opponents.
 
I always felt the points defined a better player. I'd rather have a guy with 800pts and be 5-10 K/D wise, unless of course it is team deathmatch.

I also think that FPSs tend to give too many points for kills versus objectives. A kill should be 25% to 50% of the objectives. Not equal to it. Unless of course the kill occurs during the objective, which should get a bonus.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top