New statistic

[ccatman]

I've had a few people who think they're better than me just because their win percentage is higher than mine even though the average amount of people in games i play in is higher than theirs so i thought there should be a more accurate number than the percent of games won as a statistic.
what i came up with is the formula AxB=C A being the average amount of people in your games B being the percent of games you've won C being the new statistic.
so if you played 200 1 on 1 games and won half of them you'd have 2 as your average people per game and 50 as your win percentage meaning 2x.50=1 and 1 would be your score.
1 would be the average score so anything above that would be considered a good player (or at least in my opinion). With this new statistic you can more accurately determine how good a player really is.

[TheForgivenOne]

Ummm... I think the Win percentage should still be in affect, as it does say the average amount of games they win.

But this could be added to the players profiles

[ccatman]

Ummm... I think the Win percentage should still be in affect, as it does say the average amount of games they win.

But this could be added to the players profiles

doesn't matter to me if it replaces win percentage or not that wasnt what i had in mind anyways

[NormalGuy]

This is a good idea if you ask me.

[Hornet95]

How about calling it a Winning Percentage (x.xx):

Games Played 850
Games Won 170 (20%)
Winning Percentage 1.54

I like the idea.

[JoshyBoy]

An interesting idea, although I find it a little bit confusing. I would like to encourage you to keep showing your support and we'll see how this idea develops.

Cheers, JB

[Slaylark]

In my opinion, this idea would help greatly in choosing potential clan members as it immediately points out how good they are.
a win percentage by itself is not accurate to determine strength of player. you need to know whether or not they were a 50% chance game or harder. if a player wins against 6 people at a rate of 50 % in a standard game then he is better than a player who wins 50% of time in team or 1v1 games...

the idea is good, but how do you calculate this properly to assure not only the amount of opponents are considered but also the amount of teammates...?

[ccatman]

In my opinion, this idea would help greatly in choosing potential clan members as it immediately points out how good they are.
a win percentage by itself is not accurate to determine strength of player. you need to know whether or not they were a 50% chance game or harder. if a player wins against 6 people at a rate of 50 % in a standard game then he is better than a player who wins 50% of time in team or 1v1 games...

the idea is good, but how do you calculate this properly to assure not only the amount of opponents are considered but also the amount of teammates...?

a single team would count as 1 person

[Jatekos]

A very good idea.

The current statistic about the win % usually does not really give enough information about any players' ability to win a game (unless it is very high / low). E.g. Is someone doing good if he wins 40% of his games? Without checking the type of games he plays we cannot tell. It could mean different ability if the given player plays only 1 vs 1 games or 8-player games, not to mention the variety of team games.

This new statictic should be added to the scoreboard.

[ljex]

How about calling it a Winning Percentage (x.xx):

Games Played 850
Games Won 170 (20%)
Winning Percentage 1.54

I like the idea.

Please dont tell me you have it titled wining percentage when it is not written as a percentage