I have a question for you guys, I know gauging a player for his/her skill in game is important for waging war with them can either turn to victory or defeat. In picking an enemy or prey, how do you gauge the ability of a player and know how much percentage of your success in defeating them?
Please log in to post a reply.
Solo victory & Coalition victory vs games joined
I should have placead that option...Agent Orange wrote:
Solo victory & Coalition victory vs games joined
check if the player is named Karl....
on a serious note here is how to gauge a player's threat
1. performance against his enemies in the game
2. if there are other players in the same alliance
3. economy size
4. whether the player declares, embargoes then declares or suddenly attacks.
on a side note, stats lie, just recently, a player complained to me about 3 of my alliance members and that they were new yet they thrashed him around (accused them of multi) , a nice enlightening discussion with my alliance members revealed that the guy could be destroyed just by 1 of them aka not exactly skilled.
the guy joined 110 games and won more than 50% with 43 solo victories
in essence nothing on the poll are telltale signs, aside from army compositions
KD ratio doesn't make sense, only solo wins do matter, but sometimes they farm in clash of nation. So nothing matters anyway. Just find something and kill it.
K/D can be misleading. I have a terrible K/D but only because thats my style, im very good.
@GrandEmpire same thing
Its based on a combination of k/d, army composition, and solo/coalition wins. If the person won most of his games solo and has a high k/d. He is most likely a dangerous player. Someone who only has tanks is probably new to the game. If a person has a mix of infantry, artillery, tanks, and planes he is a pretty capable and dangerous player.
Correction: Someone who only uses militia is probably new to the game.vietcong2005 wrote:
Someone who only has tanks is probably new to the game.
Correction: someone who uses only their starting units is probably new to the game.
Definitely missing the win/loss ration towards games joined. Especially solo victories. That is the most intimidating to me all the other stats just look pretty.
Anyone someone who only uses one type of unit is probably new.RBoi200 wrote:
Correction: Someone who only uses militia is probably new to the game.vietcong2005 wrote:
Someone who only has tanks is probably new to the game.
These are my thoughts about the matter
K/D ratio - They are good at killing units which make them dangerous. They can foil plans easily and could counter most unit builds. These players make good tacticians and if paired with good strategy they are very dangerous.
Province won/lost - In my analysis these players could be good at attrition. They can put your efforst to a halt and could grind you slowly and painfully to your defeat. Unit kills does not matter mostly them and depending on their strategy as well. They would strike at you unknowingly and are good at maneuvering their forces in their and outside their territories.
Unit kills are the same in K/D ratio I would not expound them any further.
Army Composition - These players are tricky to deal with. They stack different units to deal with any threats their army faces. These players are mostly good at holding ground and are almost unstoppable in their advances.
That's all for my thoughts...
I do find high ratios intimidating but just because a player doesn't have high rations doesn't make them a bad player. I have won the past 10ish games I've joined but I still only have a win rate of roughly 1/4.
1) have they got an insane amount of land in a short amount of time? yes
2) that means they are using insane amounts of gold right? yep
3) then they are dangerous right? definitely
That and if they are really good at resource management too...Scrappy_ wrote:
1) have they got an insane amount of land in a short amount of time? yes2) that means they are using insane amounts of gold right? yep
3) then they are dangerous right? definitely
Also, I would like to have a word about army composition...
I find it more noobish to mix units that have no range correlation. I mean, in sea I find it far stupid to mix destroyers with battleships. By doing so you would negate the advantages of a destroyer. In my observation, stacking 5 destroyers with 3 battleships would negate the destroyer's capability of attacking. The stack may have more HP but the problem is "damage output". That's why I seggregate ships as far as possible. Same with other units as well... Artillery will be different and will always be at the back of the forward units. If possible I will only mix artillery with SPAAs and that is it.
ik, some guy with 40 something solo wins was easily rekt by 3 of my alliance buddies, total games played being 17, he later sent me a message saying they are susTribunate wrote:
Definitely missing the win/loss ration towards games joined. Especially solo victories. That is the most intimidating to me all the other stats just look pretty.
wins and kd radio really mostly solo wins becuase they could of Ben carried in a colliton win.
lots of coalition wins tho indicates that they were not probably carried
Lots of coalition wins indicate that they are good at diplomacy and help newer players.Larry is god lol lol wrote:
wins and kd radio really mostly solo wins becuase they could of Ben carried in a colliton win.
Please log in to post a reply.
