Nerd sheets are back!

[MHz]

I never thought about putting range of kills into the equation, R4 are generally strays and not a bad idea to give lesser or even no points for. R1 could be considered pushing, but an argument can be made some of them are considered suicide kills. It's a good idea, I will certainly put range into the equation when I rework the ratings.

R1s are more likely to be suicides, but that's punished in the formula because deaths are -1. A clean R1 is thus worth 2, a suicide R1 is thus worth 1.

7 points for a win being too high: My thought process on that is, in the end winning really is all that matters, and this avoids people just playing for rec, since they will not likely win as much. You are probably right here as well though, 7 is too high, I was already planning on nerfing this to 5, it still might be too high though.

You're right, winning is all that matters in the end - for the team. Individual performance sits separately to that. Under your formula going 10-9 on the winning team makes you a better player than going 17-10 on the losing team. Considering that the best players average around 12 kills per round, the winning bonus of +7 is a tad rich. +4 would be better.

[Tiny]

R1s are more likely to be suicides, but that's punished in the formula because deaths are -1. A clean R1 is thus worth 2, a suicide R1 is thus worth 1.

Impossible to tell what is or isnt a suicide, and r1s might be considered harder than r2 or r3s imo. Not many good players let you get right next to them, and you can stray all day. Getting next to someone and not dying and killing them is harder than r3'ing behind walls. Then yes, there's the suicide option, but you can't tell from sheets and would not be fair to assume when calculating. Could go deep down the rabbit hole with this one.

[zidane]

i have the most r4s in jav and most tks in shark, unheard of production and season so far

[MHz]

Impossible to tell what is or isnt a suicide, and r1s might be considered harder than r2 or r3s imo. Not many good players let you get right next to them, and you can stray all day. Getting next to someone and not dying and killing them is harder than r3'ing behind walls. Then yes, there's the suicide option, but you can't tell from sheets and would not be fair to assume when calculating. Could go deep down the rabbit hole with this one.

True.

Though I contend that R1,R2,R3 kills should all be weighted 2, and R4 kills 1. Point being is that even R2+R3 require presence in the game. Presence in the game allows for 1) discernment of opportunity and 2) a latent positional threat. If you are consistently firing at R4 you carry no threat to an advanced player. R4 shots are either misses or so speculative/low % as to be functionally useless/harmful. High R4 kills are also loosely correllated to high team kills: you're likely to be hurting your own team lobbing those kind of bombs. If you had a team composed completely of players who fired low %/R4 shots constantly, they would be highly exploitable. Now it's possible that some elite players who also have high R4s, like Turban/Stayon/Zidane, are doing so in positions which aren't actually costly - my hunch is they probably launch bombs into base from spawn, which collects them a kill every game on average. I believe there is an opportunity cost to this, because of the fractional time in which they are outside base/recharging will occasionally cost their team a life, but it isn't severe enough to reflect in game outcomes.

[Nipple Nibbler]

R1s are more likely to be suicides, but that's punished in the formula because deaths are -1. A clean R1 is thus worth 2, a suicide R1 is thus worth 1.

Makes a lot more sense when you put it that way.

You're right, winning is all that matters in the end - for the team. Individual performance sits separately to that. Under your formula going 10-9 on the winning team makes you a better player than going 17-10 on the losing team. Considering that the best players average around 12 kills per round, the winning bonus of +7 is a tad rich. +4 would be better.

True but the goal should still be for the player to win, not play for rec. Jessup (sorry Jessie not meaning to single you out here) for example is notorious for going + while losing because he plays for rec and not for team. Another example is spookedone, warping to spawn because he cares more about his rec than winning. Stats will never tell the whole story and some players win consistently without getting amazing recs. I think we can all agree 7 is too high for dueling leagues though.

I am going to increase all the points for each rating, larger numbers will be easier to work with. I have a small collection of names I am planning on reaching out to and hopefully as a group we can come up with something together while still keeping it simple for people to follow. I am fully aware we won't be able to make everyone happy, but I'm sure if people are willing to help we can do better. I will update any sheets I have done with any ratings changes we end up with.

[Nipple Nibbler]

~updated for week 5~

Season finished, congrats to those moving on to playoffs.

Shame for those not even bothering to show up in the two forfeits, Lose with some dignity!

[renzi]

Shouldn’t dreamwin be in there for MVPs in spider with 15? Got me and wbm tied at 4 lol

edit: ok nvm I’m stoned as hell atm, that’s 15 teks not mvp I see that now lmao

[Nipple Nibbler]

renzi All good.