[QUOTE=fearlessfox;332489]Don’t confuse respawning together once your team has been expertly taken to pieces bit by bit and collecting your wits before you move back in with killing yourself just because a couple of your team mates died and you’ve only a few pips left.
Your muddling the points I made to make your own seem more weighty. Please stop that.
[/QUOTE]
Youre basically arguing that all other things equal, killing is good and dying is bad. This is obvious.
Because that’s true you are arguing that the ratio is important, but shouldn’t be shown to players. It then becomes a completely academic thing.
You then say that the ratio itself is a supremely important thing, this is where i start to disagree. All I have done is cited examples where its not supreme. You exaggerated my examples, turning “last one standing” to “a couple teammates died”.
Your main argument was based in your strategy which called for designated attackers and supporters. This is also where i disagree. In the BrinkTV Release Cup, none of the winning teams had designated attackers, they all rushed at once, attacked together, and often died trying to complete the objective. The teams that played less aggressively like you suggest, with only certain members delegated to buffing the team and doing objectives, did not do as well. Your theory crafting does not match up with what won in actuality.
By pointing out opposition to your strategy, I debunk the main part of your argument, I fail to see how this is muddling.
Yes, all other things equal, with players playing identical methods; the one with the higher K/D is generally the better player. Comparing different players, teams, strategies, or classes with K/D quickly becomes pointless, however. In an objective based game, the important stat, if there is one, is W/L.
