I think I’ve found one of those illusive PTFO players u always hear about

«13456
boutneus
2077 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
edited April 14
Thought I was doing allright leading the charge, had a WTF moment though when I took a glance at the scoreboard. I guess it’s one of those PTFO players u always hear about on these forums but are dismissed as an excuse for bad KD.
So they DO exist! Well played sir, whoever u are lol

Comments

  • Monranian
    113 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited April 14
    Yep, they DO exist.

    Just that you don't run into them that often, cuz most "PTFO players" also happen to have good (if not great) KDR...
  • crswipe
    415 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Monranian wrote: »
    Yep, they DO exist.

    Just that you don't run into them that often, cuz most "PTFO players" also happen to have good (if not great) KDR...

    He means the ones that don't have a good kdr, I think....
  • crswipe
    415 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    crswipe wrote: »
    Monranian wrote: »
    Yep, they DO exist.

    Just that you don't run into them that often, cuz most "PTFO players" also happen to have good (if not great) KDR...

    He means the ones that don't have a good kdr, I think....

    I read that wrong. My mistake.
  • WetFishDB
    743 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    boutneus wrote: »
    Thought I was doing allright leading the charge, had a WTF moment though when I took a glance at the scoreboard. I guess it’s one of those PTFO players u always hear about on these forums but are dismissed as an excuse for bad KD.
    So they DO exist! Well played sir, whoever u are lol


    Being top of the leader board doesn’t necessarily mean a PTFO’er. They might have been, but they could just have easily been support and had an ammo crate on C whilst everyone had a stand-off on the flag.

    I’d argue how much of the objective was played if they only got 2 kills. How many flags were captured or defended by the player out of interest?
  • lllPeligrolll
    211 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    boutneus wrote: »
    Thought I was doing allright leading the charge, had a WTF moment though when I took a glance at the scoreboard. I guess it’s one of those PTFO players u always hear about on these forums but are dismissed as an excuse for bad KD.
    So they DO exist! Well played sir, whoever u are lol


    Being top of the leader board doesn’t necessarily mean a PTFO’er. They might have been, but they could just have easily been support and had an ammo crate on C whilst everyone had a stand-off on the flag.

    I’d argue how much of the objective was played if they only got 2 kills. How many flags were captured or defended by the player out of interest?

    That's the thing with stats. You can't really paint a fair and clear picture with it. Might be a PTFO Player, might not be.
  • TEKNOCODE
    6825 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    GRIZZ11283 wrote: »
    The op just wanted to show us his no death game ;)
    But, but, but nobody is good enough to go 22-0! Hax! Dice plz!!!!
  • lllPeligrolll
    211 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    HuwJarz wrote: »

    That's the thing with stats. You can't really paint a fair and clear picture with it. Might be a PTFO Player, might not be.

    There is that BS tenuous argument again.

    Very occassionally, a guy with a score like that can top a leaderboard. It happens. As @WetFishDB said, he probably threw down a load of ammo crates and ran with a squad, constantly resupplying. It does not invalidate statistics. I think you are totally wrong. I think you can infer quite a lot from that scoreboard.

    Over the course of many games, a pattern will appear in his stats. Let's take this guy that topped the board. I bet, before I even looked at his stats that he:

    1. Has a poor K/D overall
    2. Runs a lot with a squad and gets lots of best squads
    3. Have very few MVP's
    4. Has a very poor KPM
    5. Has a low win%
    6. Has low skill
    7. Runs mainly support
    8. Plays mainly operations (more choke points to resupply)


    Andthe results were:

    1. 0.76. Correct
    2. 57/600 games. I was wrong on this one
    3. Only 7 out of 600. Correct
    4. 0.59. Correct
    5. 48.9 - Correct
    6. 225 - Correct
    7. Correct. His most played class is support
    8. Correct

    So there you go. I made 8 predictions about a players stats, just by looking at one scoreboard.....and I was able to get 7 out fo 8 correct. I knew pretty much exactly what I was looking at when I saw that leaderboard. Over the course of many games, his stats are very clear and its is easy to infer player skill and behaviour.

    People that say that stat are useless just don't understands basis statistical concepts like outliers and use them to try to disprove stats. Invariably people that do that have really bad core stats themselves and try to discredit stats to cover up and justify their own poor performance. Stats don't lie when one has strong statistically valid sample sizes (games played) and a large player count (to negate the effect of a small number of boosters that themselves are outliers)

    Let's stop this BS about not being able to trust stats. Over the course of a statistically valid sample, they are very revealing. Occasionally a rare event will happen and a poor player will rack up an MVP. It happens. Rare events do not invalidate statistics. They are just rare events.

    I've actually proven in these forums that MVP's happen incredibly rarely for players with negative K/D's. I think from memory (and I did a proper sampling at the time) that I proved in these forums that you are 23x more likely to get an MVP if you have a positive K/D than if you have a negative K/D in a given game I proved with stats that it was possible, but unlikely.

    Here is the thing. Stats are interesting and useful. People spouting rubbish about things they don't understand are not interesting. They are just ignorant.

    Nothing in your post said if he ptfo or not. I'm afraid your explanation was all for nothing. I don't disagree what's said here. At all. Read the context of what I said and how I said it. I didn't say you can't tollaly trust stats. That's a strawman.
  • WetFishDB
    743 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    HuwJarz wrote: »

    That's the thing with stats. You can't really paint a fair and clear picture with it. Might be a PTFO Player, might not be.

    There is that BS tenuous argument again.

    Very occassionally, a guy with a score like that can top a leaderboard. It happens. As @WetFishDB said, he probably threw down a load of ammo crates and ran with a squad, constantly resupplying. It does not invalidate statistics. I think you are totally wrong. I think you can infer quite a lot from that scoreboard.

    Over the course of many games, a pattern will appear in his stats. Let's take this guy that topped the board. I bet, before I even looked at his stats that he:

    1. Has a poor K/D overall
    2. Runs a lot with a squad and gets lots of best squads
    3. Have very few MVP's
    4. Has a very poor KPM
    5. Has a low win%
    6. Has low skill
    7. Runs mainly support
    8. Plays mainly operations (more choke points to resupply)


    Andthe results were:

    1. 0.76. Correct
    2. 57/600 games. I was wrong on this one
    3. Only 7 out of 600. Correct
    4. 0.59. Correct
    5. 48.9 - Correct
    6. 225 - Correct
    7. Correct. His most played class is support
    8. Correct

    So there you go. I made 8 predictions about a players stats, just by looking at one scoreboard.....and I was able to get 7 out fo 8 correct. I knew pretty much exactly what I was looking at when I saw that leaderboard. Over the course of many games, his stats are very clear and its is easy to infer player skill and behaviour.

    People that say that stat are useless just don't understands basis statistical concepts like outliers and use them to try to disprove stats. Invariably people that do that have really bad core stats themselves and try to discredit stats to cover up and justify their own poor performance. Stats don't lie when one has strong statistically valid sample sizes (games played) and a large player count (to negate the effect of a small number of boosters that themselves are outliers)

    Let's stop this BS about not being able to trust stats. Over the course of a statistically valid sample, they are very revealing. Occasionally a rare event will happen and a poor player will rack up an MVP. It happens. Rare events do not invalidate statistics. They are just rare events.

    I've actually proven in these forums that MVP's happen incredibly rarely for players with negative K/D's. I think from memory (and I did a proper sampling at the time) that I proved in these forums that you are 23x more likely to get an MVP if you have a positive K/D than if you have a negative K/D in a given game I proved with stats that it was possible, but unlikely.

    Here is the thing. Stats are interesting and useful. People spouting rubbish about things they don't understand are not interesting. They are just ignorant.

    Nothing in your post said if he ptfo or not. I'm afraid your explanation was all for nothing. I don't disagree what's said here. At all. Read the context of what I said and how I said it. I didn't say you can't tollaly trust stats. That's a strawman.

    Clearly if he does it isn’t all that successfully. Be interested to know flags captured/defended per game etc.
  • lllPeligrolll
    211 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    edited April 14
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    HuwJarz wrote: »

    That's the thing with stats. You can't really paint a fair and clear picture with it. Might be a PTFO Player, might not be.

    There is that BS tenuous argument again.

    Very occassionally, a guy with a score like that can top a leaderboard. It happens. As @WetFishDB said, he probably threw down a load of ammo crates and ran with a squad, constantly resupplying. It does not invalidate statistics. I think you are totally wrong. I think you can infer quite a lot from that scoreboard.

    Over the course of many games, a pattern will appear in his stats. Let's take this guy that topped the board. I bet, before I even looked at his stats that he:

    1. Has a poor K/D overall
    2. Runs a lot with a squad and gets lots of best squads
    3. Have very few MVP's
    4. Has a very poor KPM
    5. Has a low win%
    6. Has low skill
    7. Runs mainly support
    8. Plays mainly operations (more choke points to resupply)


    Andthe results were:

    1. 0.76. Correct
    2. 57/600 games. I was wrong on this one
    3. Only 7 out of 600. Correct
    4. 0.59. Correct
    5. 48.9 - Correct
    6. 225 - Correct
    7. Correct. His most played class is support
    8. Correct

    So there you go. I made 8 predictions about a players stats, just by looking at one scoreboard.....and I was able to get 7 out fo 8 correct. I knew pretty much exactly what I was looking at when I saw that leaderboard. Over the course of many games, his stats are very clear and its is easy to infer player skill and behaviour.

    People that say that stat are useless just don't understands basis statistical concepts like outliers and use them to try to disprove stats. Invariably people that do that have really bad core stats themselves and try to discredit stats to cover up and justify their own poor performance. Stats don't lie when one has strong statistically valid sample sizes (games played) and a large player count (to negate the effect of a small number of boosters that themselves are outliers)

    Let's stop this BS about not being able to trust stats. Over the course of a statistically valid sample, they are very revealing. Occasionally a rare event will happen and a poor player will rack up an MVP. It happens. Rare events do not invalidate statistics. They are just rare events.

    I've actually proven in these forums that MVP's happen incredibly rarely for players with negative K/D's. I think from memory (and I did a proper sampling at the time) that I proved in these forums that you are 23x more likely to get an MVP if you have a positive K/D than if you have a negative K/D in a given game I proved with stats that it was possible, but unlikely.

    Here is the thing. Stats are interesting and useful. People spouting rubbish about things they don't understand are not interesting. They are just ignorant.

    Nothing in your post said if he ptfo or not. I'm afraid your explanation was all for nothing. I don't disagree what's said here. At all. Read the context of what I said and how I said it. I didn't say you can't tollaly trust stats. That's a strawman.

    Clearly if he does it isn’t all that successfully. Be interested to know flags captured/defended per game etc.

    Just look up his stats on the battlefield tracker

    That's what I'm trying to say is you can't derive that he played the objective from reading his stats. He could have done other things to help his score and supply his teammates but it doesn't mean he played the objective. Attackers get more points and more tries. 15k can either be a really high score so for a short order of work or 3 battalions and that's all they got.

    There are people who sit in the back with a friendly shoot their guns and resupply created and easily get 10k points doing that the whole game.

    So no it's not fair to say if he's ptfoing it or not based on stats. It doesn't paint the clearest picture.

    This is just based on the ptfo context, not if he's a good player or bad player. Clearly he's not the most skilled. only 7days playing time. He's not going to be.

    I didn't say stats were totally useless or you can't get anything from them. Don't know where your clan mate got that from.
  • WetFishDB
    743 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    HuwJarz wrote: »

    That's the thing with stats. You can't really paint a fair and clear picture with it. Might be a PTFO Player, might not be.

    There is that BS tenuous argument again.

    Very occassionally, a guy with a score like that can top a leaderboard. It happens. As @WetFishDB said, he probably threw down a load of ammo crates and ran with a squad, constantly resupplying. It does not invalidate statistics. I think you are totally wrong. I think you can infer quite a lot from that scoreboard.

    Over the course of many games, a pattern will appear in his stats. Let's take this guy that topped the board. I bet, before I even looked at his stats that he:

    1. Has a poor K/D overall
    2. Runs a lot with a squad and gets lots of best squads
    3. Have very few MVP's
    4. Has a very poor KPM
    5. Has a low win%
    6. Has low skill
    7. Runs mainly support
    8. Plays mainly operations (more choke points to resupply)


    Andthe results were:

    1. 0.76. Correct
    2. 57/600 games. I was wrong on this one
    3. Only 7 out of 600. Correct
    4. 0.59. Correct
    5. 48.9 - Correct
    6. 225 - Correct
    7. Correct. His most played class is support
    8. Correct

    So there you go. I made 8 predictions about a players stats, just by looking at one scoreboard.....and I was able to get 7 out fo 8 correct. I knew pretty much exactly what I was looking at when I saw that leaderboard. Over the course of many games, his stats are very clear and its is easy to infer player skill and behaviour.

    People that say that stat are useless just don't understands basis statistical concepts like outliers and use them to try to disprove stats. Invariably people that do that have really bad core stats themselves and try to discredit stats to cover up and justify their own poor performance. Stats don't lie when one has strong statistically valid sample sizes (games played) and a large player count (to negate the effect of a small number of boosters that themselves are outliers)

    Let's stop this BS about not being able to trust stats. Over the course of a statistically valid sample, they are very revealing. Occasionally a rare event will happen and a poor player will rack up an MVP. It happens. Rare events do not invalidate statistics. They are just rare events.

    I've actually proven in these forums that MVP's happen incredibly rarely for players with negative K/D's. I think from memory (and I did a proper sampling at the time) that I proved in these forums that you are 23x more likely to get an MVP if you have a positive K/D than if you have a negative K/D in a given game I proved with stats that it was possible, but unlikely.

    Here is the thing. Stats are interesting and useful. People spouting rubbish about things they don't understand are not interesting. They are just ignorant.

    Nothing in your post said if he ptfo or not. I'm afraid your explanation was all for nothing. I don't disagree what's said here. At all. Read the context of what I said and how I said it. I didn't say you can't tollaly trust stats. That's a strawman.

    Clearly if he does it isn’t all that successfully. Be interested to know flags captured/defended per game etc.

    Just look up his stats on the battlefield tracker

    Whilst interested, I’m not THAT interested.
  • lllPeligrolll
    211 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    HuwJarz wrote: »

    That's the thing with stats. You can't really paint a fair and clear picture with it. Might be a PTFO Player, might not be.

    There is that BS tenuous argument again.

    Very occassionally, a guy with a score like that can top a leaderboard. It happens. As @WetFishDB said, he probably threw down a load of ammo crates and ran with a squad, constantly resupplying. It does not invalidate statistics. I think you are totally wrong. I think you can infer quite a lot from that scoreboard.

    Over the course of many games, a pattern will appear in his stats. Let's take this guy that topped the board. I bet, before I even looked at his stats that he:

    1. Has a poor K/D overall
    2. Runs a lot with a squad and gets lots of best squads
    3. Have very few MVP's
    4. Has a very poor KPM
    5. Has a low win%
    6. Has low skill
    7. Runs mainly support
    8. Plays mainly operations (more choke points to resupply)


    Andthe results were:

    1. 0.76. Correct
    2. 57/600 games. I was wrong on this one
    3. Only 7 out of 600. Correct
    4. 0.59. Correct
    5. 48.9 - Correct
    6. 225 - Correct
    7. Correct. His most played class is support
    8. Correct

    So there you go. I made 8 predictions about a players stats, just by looking at one scoreboard.....and I was able to get 7 out fo 8 correct. I knew pretty much exactly what I was looking at when I saw that leaderboard. Over the course of many games, his stats are very clear and its is easy to infer player skill and behaviour.

    People that say that stat are useless just don't understands basis statistical concepts like outliers and use them to try to disprove stats. Invariably people that do that have really bad core stats themselves and try to discredit stats to cover up and justify their own poor performance. Stats don't lie when one has strong statistically valid sample sizes (games played) and a large player count (to negate the effect of a small number of boosters that themselves are outliers)

    Let's stop this BS about not being able to trust stats. Over the course of a statistically valid sample, they are very revealing. Occasionally a rare event will happen and a poor player will rack up an MVP. It happens. Rare events do not invalidate statistics. They are just rare events.

    I've actually proven in these forums that MVP's happen incredibly rarely for players with negative K/D's. I think from memory (and I did a proper sampling at the time) that I proved in these forums that you are 23x more likely to get an MVP if you have a positive K/D than if you have a negative K/D in a given game I proved with stats that it was possible, but unlikely.

    Here is the thing. Stats are interesting and useful. People spouting rubbish about things they don't understand are not interesting. They are just ignorant.

    Nothing in your post said if he ptfo or not. I'm afraid your explanation was all for nothing. I don't disagree what's said here. At all. Read the context of what I said and how I said it. I didn't say you can't tollaly trust stats. That's a strawman.

    Clearly if he does it isn’t all that successfully. Be interested to know flags captured/defended per game etc.

    Just look up his stats on the battlefield tracker

    Whilst interested, I’m not THAT interested.

    I edited my prior post to further elaborate my stance.
  • WetFishDB
    743 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    HuwJarz wrote: »

    That's the thing with stats. You can't really paint a fair and clear picture with it. Might be a PTFO Player, might not be.

    There is that BS tenuous argument again.

    Very occassionally, a guy with a score like that can top a leaderboard. It happens. As @WetFishDB said, he probably threw down a load of ammo crates and ran with a squad, constantly resupplying. It does not invalidate statistics. I think you are totally wrong. I think you can infer quite a lot from that scoreboard.

    Over the course of many games, a pattern will appear in his stats. Let's take this guy that topped the board. I bet, before I even looked at his stats that he:

    1. Has a poor K/D overall
    2. Runs a lot with a squad and gets lots of best squads
    3. Have very few MVP's
    4. Has a very poor KPM
    5. Has a low win%
    6. Has low skill
    7. Runs mainly support
    8. Plays mainly operations (more choke points to resupply)


    Andthe results were:

    1. 0.76. Correct
    2. 57/600 games. I was wrong on this one
    3. Only 7 out of 600. Correct
    4. 0.59. Correct
    5. 48.9 - Correct
    6. 225 - Correct
    7. Correct. His most played class is support
    8. Correct

    So there you go. I made 8 predictions about a players stats, just by looking at one scoreboard.....and I was able to get 7 out fo 8 correct. I knew pretty much exactly what I was looking at when I saw that leaderboard. Over the course of many games, his stats are very clear and its is easy to infer player skill and behaviour.

    People that say that stat are useless just don't understands basis statistical concepts like outliers and use them to try to disprove stats. Invariably people that do that have really bad core stats themselves and try to discredit stats to cover up and justify their own poor performance. Stats don't lie when one has strong statistically valid sample sizes (games played) and a large player count (to negate the effect of a small number of boosters that themselves are outliers)

    Let's stop this BS about not being able to trust stats. Over the course of a statistically valid sample, they are very revealing. Occasionally a rare event will happen and a poor player will rack up an MVP. It happens. Rare events do not invalidate statistics. They are just rare events.

    I've actually proven in these forums that MVP's happen incredibly rarely for players with negative K/D's. I think from memory (and I did a proper sampling at the time) that I proved in these forums that you are 23x more likely to get an MVP if you have a positive K/D than if you have a negative K/D in a given game I proved with stats that it was possible, but unlikely.

    Here is the thing. Stats are interesting and useful. People spouting rubbish about things they don't understand are not interesting. They are just ignorant.

    Nothing in your post said if he ptfo or not. I'm afraid your explanation was all for nothing. I don't disagree what's said here. At all. Read the context of what I said and how I said it. I didn't say you can't tollaly trust stats. That's a strawman.

    Clearly if he does it isn’t all that successfully. Be interested to know flags captured/defended per game etc.

    Just look up his stats on the battlefield tracker

    Whilst interested, I’m not THAT interested.

    I edited my prior post to further elaborate my stance.

    Looks like you were agreeing with me, but worded in a way that I’m guessing Huw interpreted as disagreeing. What we can all agree on is you can’t say they were PTFO’ing or not based on one leaderboard. At least, I hope we all agree.
  • lllPeligrolll
    211 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    edited April 14
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    HuwJarz wrote: »

    That's the thing with stats. You can't really paint a fair and clear picture with it. Might be a PTFO Player, might not be.

    There is that BS tenuous argument again.

    Very occassionally, a guy with a score like that can top a leaderboard. It happens. As @WetFishDB said, he probably threw down a load of ammo crates and ran with a squad, constantly resupplying. It does not invalidate statistics. I think you are totally wrong. I think you can infer quite a lot from that scoreboard.

    Over the course of many games, a pattern will appear in his stats. Let's take this guy that topped the board. I bet, before I even looked at his stats that he:

    1. Has a poor K/D overall
    2. Runs a lot with a squad and gets lots of best squads
    3. Have very few MVP's
    4. Has a very poor KPM
    5. Has a low win%
    6. Has low skill
    7. Runs mainly support
    8. Plays mainly operations (more choke points to resupply)


    Andthe results were:

    1. 0.76. Correct
    2. 57/600 games. I was wrong on this one
    3. Only 7 out of 600. Correct
    4. 0.59. Correct
    5. 48.9 - Correct
    6. 225 - Correct
    7. Correct. His most played class is support
    8. Correct

    So there you go. I made 8 predictions about a players stats, just by looking at one scoreboard.....and I was able to get 7 out fo 8 correct. I knew pretty much exactly what I was looking at when I saw that leaderboard. Over the course of many games, his stats are very clear and its is easy to infer player skill and behaviour.

    People that say that stat are useless just don't understands basis statistical concepts like outliers and use them to try to disprove stats. Invariably people that do that have really bad core stats themselves and try to discredit stats to cover up and justify their own poor performance. Stats don't lie when one has strong statistically valid sample sizes (games played) and a large player count (to negate the effect of a small number of boosters that themselves are outliers)

    Let's stop this BS about not being able to trust stats. Over the course of a statistically valid sample, they are very revealing. Occasionally a rare event will happen and a poor player will rack up an MVP. It happens. Rare events do not invalidate statistics. They are just rare events.

    I've actually proven in these forums that MVP's happen incredibly rarely for players with negative K/D's. I think from memory (and I did a proper sampling at the time) that I proved in these forums that you are 23x more likely to get an MVP if you have a positive K/D than if you have a negative K/D in a given game I proved with stats that it was possible, but unlikely.

    Here is the thing. Stats are interesting and useful. People spouting rubbish about things they don't understand are not interesting. They are just ignorant.

    Nothing in your post said if he ptfo or not. I'm afraid your explanation was all for nothing. I don't disagree what's said here. At all. Read the context of what I said and how I said it. I didn't say you can't tollaly trust stats. That's a strawman.

    Clearly if he does it isn’t all that successfully. Be interested to know flags captured/defended per game etc.

    Just look up his stats on the battlefield tracker

    Whilst interested, I’m not THAT interested.

    I edited my prior post to further elaborate my stance.

    Looks like you were agreeing with me, but worded in a way that I’m guessing Huw interpreted as disagreeing. What we can all agree on is you can’t say they were PTFO’ing or not based on one leaderboard. At least, I hope we all agree.

    Correct. If (s)he did though, hats off to him/her
  • shaunlake1344
    191 postsMember, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    HuwJarz wrote: »

    That's the thing with stats. You can't really paint a fair and clear picture with it. Might be a PTFO Player, might not be.

    There is that BS tenuous argument again.

    Very occassionally, a guy with a score like that can top a leaderboard. It happens. As @WetFishDB said, he probably threw down a load of ammo crates and ran with a squad, constantly resupplying. It does not invalidate statistics. I think you are totally wrong. I think you can infer quite a lot from that scoreboard.

    Over the course of many games, a pattern will appear in his stats. Let's take this guy that topped the board. I bet, before I even looked at his stats that he:

    1. Has a poor K/D overall
    2. Runs a lot with a squad and gets lots of best squads
    3. Have very few MVP's
    4. Has a very poor KPM
    5. Has a low win%
    6. Has low skill
    7. Runs mainly support
    8. Plays mainly operations (more choke points to resupply)


    Andthe results were:

    1. 0.76. Correct
    2. 57/600 games. I was wrong on this one
    3. Only 7 out of 600. Correct
    4. 0.59. Correct
    5. 48.9 - Correct
    6. 225 - Correct
    7. Correct. His most played class is support
    8. Correct

    So there you go. I made 8 predictions about a players stats, just by looking at one scoreboard.....and I was able to get 7 out fo 8 correct. I knew pretty much exactly what I was looking at when I saw that leaderboard. Over the course of many games, his stats are very clear and its is easy to infer player skill and behaviour.

    People that say that stat are useless just don't understands basis statistical concepts like outliers and use them to try to disprove stats. Invariably people that do that have really bad core stats themselves and try to discredit stats to cover up and justify their own poor performance. Stats don't lie when one has strong statistically valid sample sizes (games played) and a large player count (to negate the effect of a small number of boosters that themselves are outliers)

    Let's stop this BS about not being able to trust stats. Over the course of a statistically valid sample, they are very revealing. Occasionally a rare event will happen and a poor player will rack up an MVP. It happens. Rare events do not invalidate statistics. They are just rare events.

    I've actually proven in these forums that MVP's happen incredibly rarely for players with negative K/D's. I think from memory (and I did a proper sampling at the time) that I proved in these forums that you are 23x more likely to get an MVP if you have a positive K/D than if you have a negative K/D in a given game I proved with stats that it was possible, but unlikely.

    Here is the thing. Stats are interesting and useful. People spouting rubbish about things they don't understand are not interesting. They are just ignorant.

    Something that struck me recently about stats (and I may well be entirely wrong here) is that as far as I can tell there's no way to tell if the player plays with his buddies or alone.
    I play tdm and my general tactics are to camp in the centre of the map or edge run trying to get behind the other team. A tactic I'll often encounter is medic blood brothers (I can't post what I actually call them but it also abbreviates to bb) coming the other way. If you're a massive **** like me and you haven't got any friends not only do you have to kill both but you have to kill both before they can revive each other to full health, more often than not to stay alive you have to kill three medics each time.
    I feel like this is a massive design flaw in the game that punishes friendless people unfairly. I know my view will receive little sympathy. I know I could overcome the problem by gitting gud but I'd rather just leave the server and leave the medic bbs to their joy.
    I think if I was playing with just one friend, we employed the medic bbs tactics and I got a needle shoved in my bum most times I bit the dust I'd double my kd and maybe add 0.5 to 1 to my kpm (because I'd be closer to the action). When I fall into a good squad with proper medics my kd is always much better in these sessions and that's without actively trying to stay close to them.
    Over to you badger, do stats account for solo play vs teamplay?
  • WetFishDB
    743 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    I guess the challenge is this is a team game. If you want to play solo and not with the team (regardless of being friends with them) then you’ll likely struggle a bit more.

    Their tactics are fine, and legitimate.

    Do you mean play with friends or use teamwork - the two are different things. Stats don’t indicate whether you play with friends or not. They can show teamwork in some modes. Things like orders followed, resupplies, revives/heals, vehicles destroyed, spots etc.

    TDM is probably the hardest to identify teamwork - I suspect relative K/D and KPM are probably the best measures - but no way to differentiate from a great solo player and some average team players etc.
  • NLBartmaN
    485 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member

    Something that struck me recently about stats (and I may well be entirely wrong here) is that as far as I can tell there's no way to tell if the player plays with his buddies or alone.
    I play tdm and my general tactics are to camp in the centre of the map or edge run trying to get behind the other team. A tactic I'll often encounter is medic blood brothers (I can't post what I actually call them but it also abbreviates to bb) coming the other way. If you're a massive **** like me and you haven't got any friends not only do you have to kill both but you have to kill both before they can revive each other to full health, more often than not to stay alive you have to kill three medics each time.
    I feel like this is a massive design flaw in the game that punishes friendless people unfairly. I know my view will receive little sympathy. I know I could overcome the problem by gitting gud but I'd rather just leave the server and leave the medic bbs to their joy.
    I think if I was playing with just one friend, we employed the medic bbs tactics and I got a needle shoved in my bum most times I bit the dust I'd double my kd and maybe add 0.5 to 1 to my kpm (because I'd be closer to the action). When I fall into a good squad with proper medics my kd is always much better in these sessions and that's without actively trying to stay close to them.
    Over to you badger, do stats account for solo play vs teamplay?

    Just ignore stats, do what needs to be done to win and have fun ..

    Stats can be manipulated is so many ways in this game, they are just useless in a game like BF1.

    Solo or platoon/clan stats are only useful in games competitions on local networks (or with ping limits) were all circumstances are equal for every player/team. Basic statistics..

    But this subject will keep coming back, because we do not all agree on this statement, so some will keep saying that BF1 stats say anything about someones individual overall BF1 "skill" ..
  • shaunlake1344
    191 postsMember, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    But you play with your friends right? Don't you see how my perspective is different to yours? Do you think a solo players stats can be compared to someone who always plays in a 5 man squad with their friends?

    No way to tell if the player plays with friends (in a team). No way to tell if the player uses a controller or keyboard and mouse (which I've got nothing against). Imo stats are a very good way to monitor one's own progress in the game and seeing the little quirks of their playstlye. Comparing them to other's is pointless, you just don't know who or what they're playing with.

  • HuwJarz
    3124 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    HuwJarz wrote: »

    That's the thing with stats. You can't really paint a fair and clear picture with it. Might be a PTFO Player, might not be.

    There is that BS tenuous argument again.

    Very occassionally, a guy with a score like that can top a leaderboard. It happens. As @WetFishDB said, he probably threw down a load of ammo crates and ran with a squad, constantly resupplying. It does not invalidate statistics. I think you are totally wrong. I think you can infer quite a lot from that scoreboard.

    Over the course of many games, a pattern will appear in his stats. Let's take this guy that topped the board. I bet, before I even looked at his stats that he:

    1. Has a poor K/D overall
    2. Runs a lot with a squad and gets lots of best squads
    3. Have very few MVP's
    4. Has a very poor KPM
    5. Has a low win%
    6. Has low skill
    7. Runs mainly support
    8. Plays mainly operations (more choke points to resupply)


    Andthe results were:

    1. 0.76. Correct
    2. 57/600 games. I was wrong on this one
    3. Only 7 out of 600. Correct
    4. 0.59. Correct
    5. 48.9 - Correct
    6. 225 - Correct
    7. Correct. His most played class is support
    8. Correct

    So there you go. I made 8 predictions about a players stats, just by looking at one scoreboard.....and I was able to get 7 out fo 8 correct. I knew pretty much exactly what I was looking at when I saw that leaderboard. Over the course of many games, his stats are very clear and its is easy to infer player skill and behaviour.

    People that say that stat are useless just don't understands basis statistical concepts like outliers and use them to try to disprove stats. Invariably people that do that have really bad core stats themselves and try to discredit stats to cover up and justify their own poor performance. Stats don't lie when one has strong statistically valid sample sizes (games played) and a large player count (to negate the effect of a small number of boosters that themselves are outliers)

    Let's stop this BS about not being able to trust stats. Over the course of a statistically valid sample, they are very revealing. Occasionally a rare event will happen and a poor player will rack up an MVP. It happens. Rare events do not invalidate statistics. They are just rare events.

    I've actually proven in these forums that MVP's happen incredibly rarely for players with negative K/D's. I think from memory (and I did a proper sampling at the time) that I proved in these forums that you are 23x more likely to get an MVP if you have a positive K/D than if you have a negative K/D in a given game I proved with stats that it was possible, but unlikely.

    Here is the thing. Stats are interesting and useful. People spouting rubbish about things they don't understand are not interesting. They are just ignorant.

    Nothing in your post said if he ptfo or not. I'm afraid your explanation was all for nothing. I don't disagree what's said here. At all. Read the context of what I said and how I said it. I didn't say you can't tollaly trust stats. That's a strawman.

    Clearly if he does it isn’t all that successfully. Be interested to know flags captured/defended per game etc.

    Just look up his stats on the battlefield tracker

    That's what I'm trying to say is you can't derive that he played the objective from reading his stats. He could have done other things to help his score and supply his teammates but it doesn't mean he played the objective. Attackers get more points and more tries. 15k can either be a really high score so for a short order of work or 3 battalions and that's all they got.

    There are people who sit in the back with a friendly shoot their guns and resupply created and easily get 10k points doing that the whole game.

    So no it's not fair to say if he's ptfoing it or not based on stats. It doesn't paint the clearest picture.

    This is just based on the ptfo context, not if he's a good player or bad player. Clearly he's not the most skilled. only 7days playing time. He's not going to be.

    I didn't say stats were totally useless or you can't get anything from them. Don't know where your clan mate got that from.

    What nonsense.

    A scoreboard was posted. To top a leaderboard in a game you have to PTFO. Otherwise you can’t amass enough points. He did that to the detriment of Boutneus. I assumed, (because I thought I was dealing with at least a basic level of intelligence, I was wrong) that we could all agree that in this game the guy PTFO’d.

    Next time I’ll slay out every base assumption to make my point a little clearer.
    HuwJarz wrote: »

    That's the thing with stats. You can't really paint a fair and clear picture with it. Might be a PTFO Player, might not be.

    There is that BS tenuous argument again.

    Very occassionally, a guy with a score like that can top a leaderboard. It happens. As @WetFishDB said, he probably threw down a load of ammo crates and ran with a squad, constantly resupplying. It does not invalidate statistics. I think you are totally wrong. I think you can infer quite a lot from that scoreboard.

    Over the course of many games, a pattern will appear in his stats. Let's take this guy that topped the board. I bet, before I even looked at his stats that he:

    1. Has a poor K/D overall
    2. Runs a lot with a squad and gets lots of best squads
    3. Have very few MVP's
    4. Has a very poor KPM
    5. Has a low win%
    6. Has low skill
    7. Runs mainly support
    8. Plays mainly operations (more choke points to resupply)


    Andthe results were:

    1. 0.76. Correct
    2. 57/600 games. I was wrong on this one
    3. Only 7 out of 600. Correct
    4. 0.59. Correct
    5. 48.9 - Correct
    6. 225 - Correct
    7. Correct. His most played class is support
    8. Correct

    So there you go. I made 8 predictions about a players stats, just by looking at one scoreboard.....and I was able to get 7 out fo 8 correct. I knew pretty much exactly what I was looking at when I saw that leaderboard. Over the course of many games, his stats are very clear and its is easy to infer player skill and behaviour.

    People that say that stat are useless just don't understands basis statistical concepts like outliers and use them to try to disprove stats. Invariably people that do that have really bad core stats themselves and try to discredit stats to cover up and justify their own poor performance. Stats don't lie when one has strong statistically valid sample sizes (games played) and a large player count (to negate the effect of a small number of boosters that themselves are outliers)

    Let's stop this BS about not being able to trust stats. Over the course of a statistically valid sample, they are very revealing. Occasionally a rare event will happen and a poor player will rack up an MVP. It happens. Rare events do not invalidate statistics. They are just rare events.

    I've actually proven in these forums that MVP's happen incredibly rarely for players with negative K/D's. I think from memory (and I did a proper sampling at the time) that I proved in these forums that you are 23x more likely to get an MVP if you have a positive K/D than if you have a negative K/D in a given game I proved with stats that it was possible, but unlikely.

    Here is the thing. Stats are interesting and useful. People spouting rubbish about things they don't understand are not interesting. They are just ignorant.

    Nothing in your post said if he ptfo or not. I'm afraid your explanation was all for nothing. I don't disagree what's said here. At all. Read the context of what I said and how I said it. I didn't say you can't tollaly trust stats. That's a strawman.

    What nonsense.

    A scoreboard was posted. To top a leaderboard in a game you have to PTFO. I think that that is a reasonable assumption. Otherwise you can’t amass enough points. He did that to the detriment of Boutneus. I assumed, (because I thought I was dealing with at least a basic level of intelligence) that we could all agree that in this specific game the guy PTFO’d.

    Next time I’ll slay out every base assumption to make my point a little clearer.

    I was able to infer a lot about the player with only one leaderboard. That is my point 1. I also argue that his overall stats paint a clear picture of skill and ability. That is really the main point.

    And the fact that others here are making qualitative judgments about the players ability shows that as per usual, I am right. ;-)
Sign In or Register to comment.