MBT K/D ratios

[ShadetheDruid]

Originally Posted by Shamrock

But wait we are going to buff these guys with 25% more HEAT damage so they can farm sundies and outposts even faster, insane.

This has been explained before, this is a buff purely tank vs tank. That 25% is on direct damage only. HEAT already kills infantry in one direct hit, therefore there's going to be no change for them.

Also if we're going to question why a lot of Prowlers run HE when everyone else doesn't, we should extend that questioning to why a lot of Magriders run double AP when everyone else doesn't (and why there's a lot more Magriders in general).

The answer is probably "because it's easier", and that's causing a lot of the balance issues in the game at the minute in my opinion (certain things being easier than others, and those who could be just as good get frustrated before they can get good).

[Stanis]

Originally Posted by Bloodlet

I think this is an overview of all tank kills and tank deaths from all sources across servers during a given time frame. Seems reasonable.

It's perfectly reasonable.
If we just consider what those statistics imply ..
We had 10,000 1v1 fights.. so there were 20,000 tanks involved.

There can only be 20,000 kills
And 20,000 deaths.

At 3.23 : 3
Those statistics imply there were 20,000 deaths and 21,400 kills.
Where did the extra 1,400 tanks come from?



Arguments about Prowler and Vanguard needing a buff. Definitely.
Higby said enforcer wasn't working as intended. Weapon veolicity is now 3x (100m/s to 300m/s). That's a huge change and impact itself!


That's a huge difference to AV capability for secondary weapon.
All the talk about HE on Prowler/Van seem to neglect that the Mag driver runs with HE too .. but probably has a Saron.
Addressing that lack of viable secondary AV is key here.

But quoting statistics that are inconsistent and make no sense to justify a change, let alone discuss the big picture is nonsense.

You see - I usually don't use a tank to kill a tank.
I engage a tank. I kill infantry.

As infantry I expect to either die to the tank or have the right class (HA) gun (Annihilator) and position (high ground) to well, annihilate them.

Tank v Tank balance is important.
So is:
Tank v Infantry
Tank v Air
Tank v Turret
Tank 1v1
Tank 10v10
Tank Platoon v Platoon

Balance is so vastly more complex.
Intentional imbalance leads to diversity in gameplay.

Magrider v. Vanguard / Prowler
ScatMax v. Quasar / Mercy
Mosquito v. Scythe / Reaver

Magrider may have needed a change.
I prefer to think other tanks needed to be 'working as intended' first.

[Assist]

Originally Posted by Hamma

Here are Higby's exact words:

These are also Higby's exact words:

Originally Posted by Higby

Prowlers are only performing very, very slightly below magriders in general right now, so we think they're probably alright, but if anything they might get a minor damage increase to AP and HEAT rounds.

So how do those numbers he posted correlate to 'performing very, very slightly below magriders', when in fact they're performing below even Vanguards?
Sorry, it just doesn't add up. Show us all the numbers rather than just K/D with no information on how that K/D was derived.

[Twido]

Statistics, particularly of the type that is the subject of this thread, can be highly misleading. On the one hand some people will read too much into it and on the other hand, some will disregard it for its failing and miss the big picture.

First in response to the original question as to why the numbers don’t add up; we can’t be sure without knowing exactly how the data was generated. It could be just based on kill shots but it could be more complicated than that. However when dealing with such a complicated statistic, unless one method of gathering the data causes a bias by favouring a specific empire, it doesn’t really matter.

Some people have quite rightly pointed out some (of the many) potential flaws in the data. However, most of them are not empire specific so, unless Vanu players genuinely are just better players, then they can be disregarded without causing a huge error. Unfortunately some of the flaws cannot be easily dismissed, the biggest one being that if one empire has more tanks on the field then it is likely to have a better k/d due to outnumbering (ironically the symptom of a better tank is becoming a cause in the data skew). To a lesser extent, tank load out could be an issue. It has been claimed that TR tanks are likely to be geared for fighting infantry because with two shots it is not bad in this role. I am a little sceptical about this but accept it is possible.
I can see that I am starting to ramble but the point I want to make is that just because the data is not 100% perfect doesn’t make it meaningless. It just means that there is a margin of error and the Vanu tanks are not necessarily 1.71 times better than the other tanks. On the other hand, to look at the data and not see that there is an issue that should be addressed would require gross negligence or some kind of strange partisan thinking.

I have to admit that I am genuinely surprised by the numbers, I expected the magrider to be better but not by that much (even when accounting for errors in the data). I am also a little concerned about a potential over buff to the prowler that leaves the vanguard as the worst MBT by some distance. However, we should show a little patience and see how it plays out. Personally I don’t think perfect balance is needed in this game and in general (despite many heated forum posts) the balance isn’t too far away from where it needs to be.

[EVILPIG]

Originally Posted by Stanis

I'm struggling with this

https://twitter.com/Staniskal/status/297299016759255041


We have three tanks with a KD ratio.
We know they died on average 1 time each to get that D statistics.

Problem is we don't have have 3 Kills.

The MBT stats Magrider: 1.71 Vanguard: 0.87 Prowler: 0.63

1.71 + 0.87 + 0.63 = 3.21 kills

1.17:1
0.87:1
0.63:1
---
3.21:3

so .. where did the extra 0.21 tank to get killed come from?

You're doing it wrong.

[Stanis]

Originally Posted by EVILPIG

You're doing it wrong.

Probably.

I was waiting for someone to point out that the other option is that out of our 10,000 encounters it means all the enemy tanks died and there could be 1,308 magriders left alive at the end of the window.

No context.

[Bags]

How can anyone say mag isn't op? lol

[MrBloodworth]

Originally Posted by Bags

How can anyone say mag isn't op? lol

By saying while sitting in a Magrider.

[moosepoop]

Originally Posted by Bags

How can anyone say mag isn't op? lol

mag isnt op. sauron is op.

Originally Posted by Shamrock

But wait we are going to buff these guys with 25% more HEAT damage so they can farm sundies and outposts even faster, insane.

vulcan is nerfed. total dmg output is the same. pull up your panties.

[Beerbeer]

That's besides the point; they don't need to justify it to us if they think things are out of whack. Releasing half-ass data makes them look twice as dumb, by first letting everyone know (with numbers) they designed and built this imbalance to begin with and second, looking for reassurance.

Thirdly, the data they do release makes a lot of people nervous about what they're really looking at in regards to "balance." It doesn't help one iota. Make the changes and do so with confidence.

[Higby]

That data was MBT killing shots against other MBTs in real combat. It isn't in a vacuum of purely tank vs tank encounters, it's in real battles involving AV infantry, aircraft, etc., that's why it's not 1:1. All things being equal (which they rarely are, and we do consider that) those additional factors should be equally affecting each empire, since they all have aircraft, AV infantry, etc. However, we do see some interesting statistics external to MBT vs MBT fights, for instance, Magriders are killed by AV infantry about twice as much as Prowlers and Vanguards are (those get killed by Magriders, primarily). TR and NC AV weapons aren't juiced compared to VS, this is purely a factor of there being a lot more Magriders and the TR and NC tanks not being able to match them (both in numbers as well as capability) so they have to rely more on AV infantry. AV Infantry being used to effectively counter tanks isn't a bad thing in general, but when it's as skewed as it is right now it is.

Long story short: that K stat is just a simple way to frame the problem, but it's not meant to tell the whole story and certainly NOT the sole data point we're looking at for balance. We're also looking at # of tanks fielded, # of damage sources, shots fired, damage done, common loadouts, lifespan, damage done over lifespan, etc etc.

Also worth noting, this isn't a problem we can solve by tuning to data points, the data is just a symptom. Saying "they get twice as many kills on average so lets cut their damage by half" doesn't ever work. We've got to make changes that we think will help balance the scales a bit and then watch the instruments to make sure it aligns. It is not my expectation that this change will "nail it" and make tank balance perfect, these will continue to be tweaked and tuned for the lifetime of the game.

[Assist]

Originally Posted by Higby

That data was MBT killing shots against other MBTs in real combat. It isn't in a vacuum of purely tank vs tank encounters, it's in real battles involving AV infantry, aircraft, etc., that's why it's not 1:1. All things being equal (which they rarely are, and we do consider that) those additional factors should be equally affecting each empire, since they all have aircraft, AV infantry, etc. However, we do see some interesting statistics external to MBT vs MBT fights, for instance, Magriders are killed by AV infantry about twice as much as Prowlers and Vanguards are (those get killed by Magriders, primarily). TR and NC AV weapons aren't juiced compared to VS, this is purely a factor of there being a lot more Magriders and the TR and NC tanks not being able to match them (both in numbers as well as capability) so they have to rely more on AV infantry. AV Infantry being used to effectively counter tanks isn't a bad thing in general, but when it's as skewed as it is right now it is.

Long story short: that K stat is just a simple way to frame the problem, but it's not meant to tell the whole story and certainly NOT the sole data point we're looking at for balance. We're also looking at # of tanks fielded, # of damage sources, shots fired, damage done, common loadouts, lifespan, damage done over lifespan, etc etc.

Also worth noting, this isn't a problem we can solve by tuning to data points, the data is just a symptom. Saying "they get twice as many kills on average so lets cut their damage by half" doesn't ever work. We've got to make changes that we think will help balance the scales a bit and then watch the instruments to make sure it aligns. It is not my expectation that this change will "nail it" and make tank balance perfect, these will continue to be tweaked and tuned for the lifetime of the game.

Any chance you can post the data for the number of Magriders spawned compared to the TR/NC for a given week? I'm simply curious about it.
Thanks for some sort of reply. I don't think you guys are balancing solely on the k/d stat, but it seems that you've empowered some of the community to use that stat as justification even though as you just stated it shouldn't be used that way.

edit: Also, I agree. Infantry kill my Magrider far too much. I think we deserve the NC shield.

[Rockit]

Originally Posted by Higby

That data was MBT killing shots against other MBTs in real combat. It isn't in a vacuum of purely tank vs tank encounters, it's in real battles involving AV infantry, aircraft, etc., that's why it's not 1:1. All things being equal (which they rarely are, and we do consider that) those additional factors should be equally affecting each empire, since they all have aircraft, AV infantry, etc. However, we do see some interesting statistics external to MBT vs MBT fights, for instance, Magriders are killed by AV infantry about twice as much as Prowlers and Vanguards are (those get killed by Magriders, primarily). TR and NC AV weapons aren't juiced compared to VS, this is purely a factor of there being a lot more Magriders and the TR and NC tanks not being able to match them (both in numbers as well as capability) so they have to rely more on AV infantry. AV Infantry being used to effectively counter tanks isn't a bad thing in general, but when it's as skewed as it is right now it is.

Long story short: that K stat is just a simple way to frame the problem, but it's not meant to tell the whole story and certainly NOT the sole data point we're looking at for balance. We're also looking at # of tanks fielded, # of damage sources, shots fired, damage done, common loadouts, lifespan, damage done over lifespan, etc etc.

Also worth noting, this isn't a problem we can solve by tuning to data points, the data is just a symptom. Saying "they get twice as many kills on average so lets cut their damage by half" doesn't ever work. We've got to make changes that we think will help balance the scales a bit and then watch the instruments to make sure it aligns. It is not my expectation that this change will "nail it" and make tank balance perfect, these will continue to be tweaked and tuned for the lifetime of the game.

Tank balance is one thing but how are you planning to counter the hordes of infantry using lock-ons making tanks and air pretty much useless? You can nerf them but that puts smaller sized infantry at a disadvantage. In short, how are you planning to make smaller outfits and tactics a more viable option? I am not complaining about anyone using all available tactics at hand to accomplish objectives but the aggregate damage of the larger FAR outweigh the few.

[Hamma]

That would be an interesting stat - I bet there is a shit-ton more magriders spawned

[Tatwi]

Originally Posted by Higby

Magriders are killed by AV infantry about twice as much as Prowlers and Vanguards are (those get killed by Magriders, primarily). TR and NC AV weapons aren't juiced compared to VS, this is purely a factor of there being a lot more Magriders and the TR and NC tanks not being able to match them (both in numbers as well as capability) so they have to rely more on AV infantry.

Precisely this.

We're not stupid ("we" being everyone who is not a VS in a Magrider). Why waste the resources on a tank that's just going to get slaughtered by Magriders in an instant, when you can cert into extra HA rockets and actually have a chance to destroy a few of the million Mags out there?

Reasons why HA rockets (of any kind) are superior than the Prowler against Magriders:

1. It's easier to hide.
2. It's possible to make a surprise attack.
3. It's possible to dodge incoming fire.

Keep in mind that running around as HA makes you an insta-gib for the Magrider gunners, yet doing this is still more successful than going up against a Magrider in a different tank.

Magrider: Just a tad over powered.