{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
1/13/2016 12:27:36 PM
35
I put this in response to another post but I will put it in the main thread too.
The term "average K/D" is ambiguous since there are different kinds of averages (in common parlance, average typically refers to an arithmetic mean). If you take the total number of kills and divide it by the total number of deaths that is, technically an average. But it is useless as a metric of player performance, because it does not in any way include the per-player distribution (i.e. player performance). It is a measure of the expected number of kills generated by each death. It is like trying to represent duck hunter performance by calculating the average number of dead ducks per dead duck and then saying anyone who kills more than 1 duck is above average. They are 2 different metrics (ducks/hunter vs ducks/duck).
In a similar example, consider a group of people with cars. If you take the total miles driven by all of them, and divide by the total amount of gas used by all of them, you get an average MPG. If you calculate the individual MPG of each car and then the mean of those values, you get another (different) average MPG. Which one would you use to determine if one person's car was above average at fuel conservation? Not the first number, which ignores the cars entirely to determine the mileage produced by an average gallon of gas consumed. The latter number is a per-vehicle representation of fuel consumption.
All kills divided by all deaths is a metric of how many kills a single death is expected to result in, but has nothing to do with player performance. The mean player K/D, on the other hand, is a metric of typical performance of an individual player.
So having a 1.0 K/D does not make you average unless you are a death, rather than a player.
English
-
I can see your point in the fact that I am speaking of global deaths per kill, I agree that doesn't show the actual skill level of a particular player, or how well they do in a team setting but if you take every players average kdr across all players, and all platforms, explain to me how that would come up with a larger number than 1.0. I know you're trying to explain something with the car analogy, but that has nothing to do with this situation unless you were looking at the method used to obtain kills, and the kd for that particular method. If you were to take every single drivers mpg worldwide and then look at the average you could see the global average mpg, if you take the mean average looking at the cars used you could determine which car has the best mpg. In the same way if you looked at the kdr of each player, and then the weapon used you would see the mean average kdr per weapon type. That's basically what your car analogy amounts to, and that's not the intent of my post
-
When you add up all the kills and divide by all the deaths, the thing that you are averaging is "kills" and you are calculating it on a per-death basis. (Per the analogy dividing total miles driven by total gallons consumed is averaging "miles" on a per-gallon basis). When you add up KD ratio for each player and divide by all players, the thing you are averaging is "KD ratio" and you are averaging on a per-player basis. (Like averaging MPG on a per-car basis.) When you compare an individual player's KD to the first example, there are 2 problems. (1) you are comparing a "K/D ratio" to an average of "kills" (hopefully you can understand that a kills and KD ratios are not the same metrics) and (2) you are comparing a player to per-death statistics (surely you can understand that a player and a death are not the same thing and there is no value in comparing the statistics of the two). When you compare a player's KD ratio to the second example, you are comparing a player's KD against an average KD (comparing like for like) and the comparison you are making is of one player against per-player statistics. If you calculate KD ratio for individual weapons and average those you'd get something else. You'd get per-weapon statistics. It would make sense to compare individual weapons to this average. It would *not* make sense to compare players (KD per player) to this average (KD per weapon). It would also *not* make sense to compare one player's KD ratio with one weapon (KD per weapon per player) to this value (KD per weapon).
-
I understand that. But if you were to take every players kdr, across all platforms and average that, I still don't see how that could be above 1.0, in any case. For every player that has a high kd there had to be players with kdr that was lowered totaling the same amount his was raised. The deaths have to go somewhere, you don't just raise your kd without effecting someone else's
-
A number of other posts, including one of mine, have examples. Imagine if one player had every single death. He would have a KD of 0 and everyone else would have an infinite KD. The average KD would be infinite. Really bad players can't get a KD less than 0 and thus are limited in the negative impact they can have on the average. Really good players can have KD much higher than 1. The existence of very good players together skews the average greater than 1. If all deaths are credited to someone as kills, it is impossible for this average to be less than 1.
-
All deaths are not credited as kills, as there are suicides in the game that aren't attributed to anyone. I can see what you're saying about the average individual kd being above 1, I would be interested in seeing the actual statistic
-
Your analogies make no sense
-
My point is the OP's "average" is measuring something meaningless (the number of kills attributable to a death). Since kills and deaths are interchangeable when you ignore how they are distributed among players, he is calculating the number of deaths per death. It is literally a calculation of "the average value of 1" which anyone can plainly see is 1. The average value of 1 has nothing to do with how well or poorly any player plays the game.
-
no one asked you to show off your math skills, k?
-
-
Look at the big brain on brad
-
Just nod and say yes :)
-
cut the scientific bull. KDR = Kill Death Ratio. If it's 1.0 that means you killed 1 player for each time you get killed (not with a car) OP means that there are suicides involved making this slightly above average.
-
Comparing your individual 1.0 to (total number of all player kills) divided by (total number of all player deaths) says that your deaths are average as compared to all deaths. It is not a measurement of player performance and can not be used to determine whether any individual player is average (or above or below average). It is a metric of deaths, not players. I'm sorry if you can't understand that but I can't think of a better way to explain it.
-
If I kill more than I get killed, I'm usually happy playing a FPS. That's my math.
-
I am not arguing for or against KD as a measure of player skill, just the OP's terrible understanding of averages.
-
so if i got this correctly i am the hunter if i am above 1 KD and a duck if i am below? but i play all characters not only hunter. I understand there is a logic behind your post that i/we failed to understand, thats why i cant make an established argument except that we are (most of the times) 6vs6 or 3vs3 on pvp. All "ducks" carry guns so therefore im a "hunter"= your "ducks" Your logic only applies in rumble where is 1 VS all If you are a god tier player="hunter" against the world of "ducks" Ps i stopped after the duck comments cause i was confused and in case there is an explanation after that part, i apologize.
-
No forget about the hunter/duck thing. My point is the OP's "average" is measuring something meaningless (the number of kills attributable to a death). Since kills and deaths are interchangeable when you ignore how they are distributed among players, he is calculating the number of deaths per death. It is literally a calculation of "the average value of 1" which anyone can plainly see is 1. The average value of 1 has nothing to do with how well or poorly any player plays the game.
-
You broke my brain o.o
-
me > nonsense [spoiler]its a habit[/spoiler]
-
I guess so....
-
Please help me to understand....what the hell you just said.
-
My point is the OP's "average" is measuring something meaningless (the number of kills attributable to a death). Since kills and deaths are interchangeable when you ignore how they are distributed among players, he is calculating the number of deaths per death. It is literally a calculation of "the average value of 1" which anyone can plainly see is 1. The average value of 1 has nothing to do with how well or poorly any player plays the game.
-
Use the force wisely
-
Nice post, but it makes me want to shoot ducks.
-
Just be sure to abide by your local regulations. I believe if you are in reasonable fear for your safety you are justified in shooting a duck. Maybe if you get diagnosed as anatidaephobic you can shoot all the ducks you want.
