Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

"Good" Accuracy


Kuciwalker's Avatar


Kuciwalker
09.09.2014 , 09:00 AM | #21
Quote: Originally Posted by RatPoison View Post
I don't know about the gunship talk of being north of 70%. I know that I take advantage of barrel roll and burst lasers often enough to recognize that there is rarely a match where I use a railgun exclusively. With that said though, here are some stats:

As an average I am likely between 65-70% in most matches where I use a gunship. (Rails + BLC)
I rarely go below 70, and if I do it's usually because I've had a very bad match.

Verain's Avatar


Verain
09.09.2014 , 09:23 AM | #22
Interestingly, I rarely have a great accuracy. On my gunship I often have something good, but that's mostly because I'm very accurate and practiced with it, AND there's no way to just blind fire a railgun. Even then I will take shots that have a really low chance of hitting sometimes (enemy gray at 15,000m, whether that is a hit or not depends on their ACTUAL, not rounded, location).


On anything else, the only thing I am concerned about is my mana pool and the element of surprise. If I think I have enough yellow to go, or the enemy knows I'm there, off we go to the left click races. Much more importantly, I will take shots to try to scare enemies into different trajectories (this can absolutely work), because they don't automatically know whether I'm homed in on them and every quad will hit, or whether I'm at 15 degrees and buying lottery tickets.


So while I don't have the accuracy of a noob, I'm nowhere close to players of similar skill normally. Accuracy is just never on my list of things to care about at all.


The flip side of this is, the game will sometimes credit you for hits that don't even look real. This isn't about the reticule being LOS while the ship isn't (and vice versa), but rather about releasing versus a target that had just barreled away and the server shrugs and is like "close enough, I guess you crit him for 2400". This doesn't happen much- most of the times a bad shot is that, and you know it when you release- but even at a low rate of occurrence I want to friggin fish for it.




Still, accuracy is a decent number to look at. It's probably one of the few that is well correlated, though not absolutely, to player skill.
"The most despicable person on the GSF forum."

Kuciwalker's Avatar


Kuciwalker
09.09.2014 , 09:38 AM | #23
Quote: Originally Posted by Verain View Post
Interestingly, I rarely have a great accuracy.

...

Still, accuracy is a decent number to look at. It's probably one of the few that is well correlated, though not absolutely, to player skill.
Actually past a certain base level of skill it shouldn't be strongly correlated and accuracy should tend to "cap out" at a certain amount. This is because an optimizing player will take more and more marginal shots until the cost of a marginal shot is equal to the expected return. Thus we see that the best predictor of accuracy with a given weapon is neither its base accuracy stat, nor its tracking penalty, but rather the cost of a missed shot. With railguns that cost is extreme - weapon energy is a reasonably strong constraint, and 2.7s of charging is a huge investment.

Similarly we should expect to see high accuracy with quads 'n pods because of the energy/ammo constraints. We should see moderate to high accuracy with BLC because of the energy cost and the low ROF. We should see low accuracy with LLC and RFL, moderate with HLC, low with ion, etc.

With missiles we may see lower accuracy because they still do a sort of damage on a miss - force the enemy to use an engine maneuver.

RatPoison's Avatar


RatPoison
09.09.2014 , 09:40 AM | #24
Quote: Originally Posted by Kuciwalker View Post
I rarely go below 70, and if I do it's usually because I've had a very bad match.
Fair enough... It's likely just a difference in play style.

I wouldn't disagree that 70% is a good average to maintain with a gunship, but I don't think that is an average many people do maintain, myself included... though it's peaked my curiosity enough that I'm going to look at my stats when I log on this evening.

I think I'm fairly deadly in a gunship, and often find that I've no issue in often doubling and sometimes tripling the total damage/dps of the next highest player on the board (especially) in a gunship. As such I don't think that having an accuracy of <70% is the mark for what is good, I think it's the mark for what is either just awesome accuracy or perhaps conservative gameplay. I would be more inclined to opine that if a player is pulling 60-65% accuracy on average in a gunship, that they've achieved a "good" accuracy. There is room to improve on the stat, but obviously objectives, kills vs damage, etc must be weighed against the pursuit of a higher accuracy.

I've no issue in admitting that occasionally I'll have a match with a gunship where my accuracy dips below even 60%. I think I had a match last night in a lop-sided TDM, the score ended something in the neighborhood of 30-45ish (my loss). I pulled in 18 kills with something like 2 deaths in a T1 gunship with around 90k total damage with only an accuracy of around 56%. I was disheartened by the accuracy stat, but I spent a lot of time getting chased, relying on my burst cannons, and stopping to take quick pot shots at other ships when evading pursuers allowed me to line up a shot on a distant ship.

I guess my point is that there are scenarios that can change the range of expectations for a pilots performance and in an attempt to be accurate and honest about what a "good" number is for a particular stat, we must consider how often we fly a load out, our play style, and what stats we had when we were most effective.

That's just my thoughts, but I'm definitely curious and will be checking out my stats on my toons that GSF.
Saevius : Marauder
- T o r v a N e x -
Referral Link for Free Stuff
7 Days Subscription for Previous Subscribers

Ymris's Avatar


Ymris
09.09.2014 , 12:05 PM | #25
Numbers. End-of-match rankings.

I don't put much stock into these things, particularly in domination matches.

At the end of the match, you know whether you did well or not. Besides, more important than comparing yourself to other pilots is whether or not you and your team--and the opposing team--had fun.
Harbinger [US West Coast]: Strx
The Ebon Hawk [US East Coast]: Strx

Tensoring straight to hell!

RatPoison's Avatar


RatPoison
09.09.2014 , 12:17 PM | #26
Quote: Originally Posted by Ymris View Post
Numbers. End-of-match rankings.

I don't put much stock into these things, particularly in domination matches.

At the end of the match, you know whether you did well or not. Besides, more important than comparing yourself to other pilots is whether or not you and your team--and the opposing team--had fun.
To each their own. For some folks the comparison or rather the competition of pushing the statistical extremes is "fun".

I've known a handful of pilots who didn't care if they won or lost, so long as they were deadliest flier in the match; that was how they had fun. Personally, I'd much rather have the 'W' and will sacrifice my stats and fly a less fun ship for victories when warranted because helping secure a W is my goal and the best thing I can do for my fellow fliers.
Saevius : Marauder
- T o r v a N e x -
Referral Link for Free Stuff
7 Days Subscription for Previous Subscribers

tommmsunb's Avatar


tommmsunb
09.10.2014 , 01:00 AM | #27
Quote: Originally Posted by Ymris View Post
Numbers. End-of-match rankings.

I don't put much stock into these things, particularly in domination matches.

At the end of the match, you know whether you did well or not. Besides, more important than comparing yourself to other pilots is whether or not you and your team--and the opposing team--had fun.
This is very untrue for Scout pilots, Scouts should not be sitting under nodes being useless. In a class heavily oriented on DPS, your DPS and your accuracy are very important statistics.

I know I'm not having a good match if I don't get my 30k medal before the clock says 11:30 minutes for instance. (Really its more 2:30 minutes into the game (~200 DPS), this DPS doesn't usually hold for the whole match because sooner or later they notice me. If my opening is particularly good I'll have it when the clock says 12 minutes.
(About 270DPS) (The depending factor is usually how many pods I can get to hit.)
It's not about farming damage, it's about doing my role and not stealing kills while doing it.
Basically if you have high kills but low damage it doesn't mean you're good, it means you can last hit.
twitch.tv/tomeateejedota
Xi'ao'prime - Ebon Hawk / Bastion, Tomoya - Jung Ma
Otoshimono - Shadowlands/Progenitor formerly known as: Tomeateeje/Yuuko-San/Rumina/Friendlygurl/Tensai-Hikoushi/Taisetsuna/Yorimoyoi

Fractalsponge's Avatar


Fractalsponge
09.10.2014 , 09:37 AM | #28
Quote: Originally Posted by tommmsunb View Post
Basically if you have high kills but low damage it doesn't mean you're good, it means you can last hit.
I absolutely disagree with this. You win by putting the enemy ships down as quickly as possible. If you have the skill to keep many targets in play and pick them off efficiently when they're vulnerable, then I think that's a more valuable contribution than solo killing enemy ships in sequence. I'd rather have my team take "my" kill than wasting time getting that final shot on a target that is going full evasive because it's one hit away from respawn.

I look at scoreboards the other way - if someone has low kills and high damage then they probably could've been better using their time in the match (exceptions are mine clearing, drone/mine assists while node defending, etc.).
http://fractalsponge.net
Xi'ao - The Shadowlands

Ymris's Avatar


Ymris
09.10.2014 , 10:48 AM | #29
Quote: Originally Posted by tommmsunb View Post
This is very untrue for Scout pilots, Scouts should not be sitting under nodes being useless. In a class heavily oriented on DPS, your DPS and your accuracy are very important statistics.
Well... since it's my personal opinion, it's true for THIS scout pilot. I never suggested that scouts should be "sitting under nodes being useless". I just said I don't put much stock in the end-of-match rankings and suggested that you (that's you in the general sense) know at the end of the match whether you did well or poorly without needing to be told that by numbers.

Here's an example... a few nights ago, in a domination match, I destroyed 12 defense turrets and captured 5 satellites (two of which we ended up losing). Died twice, killed a few ships that were keeping me from capping. I was still on the bottom of the ranking list at the end of the match. However, I knew that my actions were definitely instrumental in our team winning the match. I knew I did well, even though a brief glance at the rankings might suggest otherwise.

Also, I disagree that my scout MUST be doing X amount of damage in a domination match. Scouts, to me, are also about agility and the ability to out-maneuver your opponent. There have been many times when I have held a satellite by flying circles around it when upwards of 3 ships are trying to shoot me down. I'm not doing any damage, but I'm keeping a node AND keeping half the enemy team tied up trying to peel me off the satellite. Don't know about you, but I think that's pretty useful in a domination match.
Harbinger [US West Coast]: Strx
The Ebon Hawk [US East Coast]: Strx

Tensoring straight to hell!

Ryuku-sama's Avatar


Ryuku-sama
09.10.2014 , 10:58 AM | #30
Quote: Originally Posted by Ymris View Post
Well... since it's my personal opinion, it's true for THIS scout pilot. I never suggested that scouts should be "sitting under nodes being useless". I just said I don't put much stock in the end-of-match rankings and suggested that you (that's you in the general sense) know at the end of the match whether you did well or poorly without needing to be told that by numbers.

Here's an example... a few nights ago, in a domination match, I destroyed 12 defense turrets and captured 5 satellites (two of which we ended up losing). Died twice, killed a few ships that were keeping me from capping. I was still on the bottom of the ranking list at the end of the match. However, I knew that my actions were definitely instrumental in our team winning the match. I knew I did well, even though a brief glance at the rankings might suggest otherwise.

Also, I disagree that my scout MUST be doing X amount of damage in a domination match. Scouts, to me, are also about agility and the ability to out-maneuver your opponent. There have been many times when I have held a satellite by flying circles around it when upwards of 3 ships are trying to shoot me down. I'm not doing any damage, but I'm keeping a node AND keeping half the enemy team tied up trying to peel me off the satellite. Don't know about you, but I think that's pretty useful in a domination match.
You're right. But accuracy doesn't mean that. Acuracy simply correlate how much one know and has mastered his load out (skill not upgrades). Basicly simply from looking up my accuracy scores, I can say I'm far from being an efficient gunship whle I'm between the best LLC and HLC users. It doesn't correlate to how instrumental one was to his team victory.
"If it wasn't broken, we shall break it. If it is balanced, we shall beat it until slow and painful death follows. If it is overpowered, it is working as intended." - Bioware 2015