Sadly we don’t have a shield damage stat. It would be nice to see how much damage you contribue that is mitigated by the enemy. Or forcing a shield open to make oppurtunity windows to kill people.
Many people see damage and that’s purely hero damage.
The different damage stats have different usefullness. But an effective damage stat would also be nice to see how much trash damage you didn’t do for each kill. Certain heroes have different damage profiles that suit effective damage better, some heroes come with more trash damage built in.
Yes you can, if you understand probability, if someone is an idiot most of the time, then they are not an idiot some of the time… A broken clock is right twice a day, more damage = more twice a days… That’s my point
The problem is that trash damage, like most concepts, is context dependant. Like, would you say it’s trash-damage to bodyshot someone with Widow pre-fight, they unpeek and are immediately healed? Well while they’re in cover they’re doing nothing. That’s value. Not as much value as you’d have from a kill, but still value. Now if that same body-shot is on a tank with natural mitigation, and a main healer pocket it will be insta-healed and won’t even stop them taking space.
Actually, i’m not saying I cant apply context to the numbers, its that nobody can. If you think you’re able to use those numbers to distinguish good players from bad players, you’re fooling yourself.
Lets say Ana sleep darts a nano-genji. Where’s that shown on the scoreboard? Or she’s doing low damage/healing because she’s hiding, but her other actions are of huge value?
Sure, in extreme cases the DPS that dies a lot can be easy to interpret. This is NOT always the case and you should never assuming it is. They could be just be suffering from unfortunate bad luck or being hard focused and counterpicked (including enemies switching when they switch) - it doesnt mean they’re BAD.
Trash damage is a real thing. Arguing that it MIGHT NOT be a real thing shows the exact problem. PROBABLY doing well doesnt mean they ARE doing well.
Its a terrible tool for actually giving clear data. It doesnt work. It doesnt give you clear information but people THINK it does. People THINK it has meaning, so it justifies and triggers them into blaming others and getting toxic.
Even best case scenario, the scoreboard should be used with the mistrust it deserves.
I agree, but partially. Example : a support has less heal but has more deaths than the other, you have several options but it seems he has a bad positioning, or he is too offensive for a support, or tank and DPS don’t protect him enough, or all of that. Anyway, when a support has to walk from spawn to team many times, he’s obviously less effective (as anyone else) and this is just an example. So I agree that just focusing on numbers means nothing, but in the game you can easily interpret it (which many players don’t do).
Personal incredulity doing it’s work. “I can’t figure it out therefore nobody can” is literally what you’re saying.
Nothing you said actually supports your point. All you’re saying is that because there exists information that you can’t get out of the scoreboard, it is therefore useless. But then again, it seems you’re unable to apply context to literally anything, not just the scoreboard. And trying to argue that a player with double the deaths of everybody else in the lobby isn’t underperforming is just… wow.
I can’t imagine how much you have to gaslight yourself into thinking you’re playing well despite dying every 30 seconds. And if they’re getting focused, counterpicked, outplayed and they’re constantly dead as a result, well then they are by definition underperforming if they can’t adapt accordingly and avoid being constantly dead.
My statement wasnt “i cant figure it out therefore nobody can” it was “there is not enough data for anyone to possibly figure it out”. Accusing me of being stupid doesnt make a great argument and neither does it change my point.
Note: I actually agreed with you that in some cases you may be correct about the issue - the point is, that only happens in extreme cases and even then you dont know the whole story. The data you’re provided with and the conclusions you make are unreliable.
What i said perfectly supports and highlights the issue with the scoreboard - it cannot possibly assess or differentiate good from bad, yet that’s exactly what players try to use it to do. It fails to do what players want it to do and what they use it for.
Please address my points and hold off on the personal attacks. Attacking me personally just makes you look bad.
Damage is not the only thing that the scoreboard shows. The most important factor to analyze on the scoreboard is deaths, if you have 20 deaths but everyone else in the lobby has between 5-10 then you are feeding. People will try to rebuke this by saying that it’s an objective based game mode and not a death match but this is an incredibly futile argument since you cannot win the team fight in order to contest/push the objective if you are dead.
There are many other important factors to analyze on the scoreboard and people who hate on it need to learn to accept transparency and accountability as that is the only way to improve.
Deaths can be compensated by effectively doing the objective. If you make the deaths worth it in a match and not playing too safe and end up winning you end up bringing value in your pushes, vs people playing too safe and not wanting to die.
In an objective based game with a simple yes or no win condition in the end all that matters is the results.
I see some people so scared of deaths that they actively don’t push the point or make riskier plays that could end them winning a nice fight.
Nope not true at all. IF you are a widow and aren’t playing point. Then you can not contest therefore lose to not being able to play objective for example. Deaths do not indicate such things. Widow can kill easily and not die alot for example. But can’t contest objective. If you can’t play the objective you end up losing anyway. So as you can say you can be “feeding” and still win with this logic. Because “feeding” can be effective if you are playing the objective. High deaths in a game can lead to a win if you are effectively dealing with fights and the right strats and denying enemy objective progress.
I think the scoreboard is fine. Not understanding the difference between trash damage or trash healing or whatever to me is just a skill issue. Me understanding that is going to help me climb while people who stat farm (on purpose or not) are going to stay in that rank or drop unless they learn.
My problem with the scoreboard is I think it’s a little annoying to read. It’s not super obvious at a quick glance to see who has ult as opposed to before. I also dislike that a lot of our personal stats are just gone in OW2. Like why can’t I see objective time in game unless I pick a certain hero ? It’s not a huge deal but less stats is worse than more stats. I do like being able to compare my stats to the enemy and my own team and I do like being able to use the scoreboard for ult tracking. There are good things about it but it’s not where I’d like it to be personally.
As far as toxicity goes, that isn’t going to change regardless what you do. It’s hard to rid toxicity out of a multiplayer online game where its easy to hide behind a screen along with people expressing frustrations (whether its intentionally being a jerk or not). I personally try to ignore it if I run into it and if it gets to me I take a break and regroup.
The issue with this point, is that more often than not. More damage doesn’t reflect on kills and assists.
Due, most of the playerbase are on lower end brackets and in there higher damage reflects lower performance.
I get what you’re trying to say, but at same time you fail to realize that damage is pointless metric to begin with. Damage should be considered after K/A and the objective. Not prior to it, there are several cases that high damage in fact are worse than actually helps.
I understand probability. To the point of, the majority of the playerbase who actually have high damage per K/A are bad at the game. While a small portion of it will have several kills and that would reflect more damage as consequence, those cases often would be lower than the cases of high damage low k/a.
So, in that regard. The majority of the time or the biggest probability is that high damage equals to poor performance.
Which is why I said this:
Those are truthful from the majority of the time. High damage, on the majority of the time, will not reflect on kills and assists. Otherwise the majority of the playerbase would be on higher brackets.
So, even if a broken clock can be right twice a day. Was wrong for several times already. Meaning, that the majority of the time more damage is pointless if not tied to another metric that would make it useful, which in case of playerbase and overwatch, is a cold hard truth that folks don’t know when and how to do damage, otherwise most folks wouldn’t be on the lower brackets in a system that actually helps folks to “climb” through more rewards than penalty.
I never stated that are scenarios that “high damage” wouldn’t reflect in a good result. Just said that the majority of it will lean towards a bad performers. Due, more often than not will not reflect on K/A but support ult charge instead.
In that regard you just reinforced that damage reflects on feed more often than not. If you apply Pareto’s, meaning that to solve that, you shouldn’t pay attention to damage at all, but either a combination of other metrics or simply do you.
Most folks are in the lower brackets, where the time to kill is higher and the K/A is lower, but doesn’t reflect on overall damage being smaller. In fact, more often than not the damage in there is higher, similarly to MIT and healing.
Using Pareto’s, that would mean that all those 3 metrics are pointless to tackle down, at least in a vaccum. While associating K/A and each one of them you can create tendency and come up with conclusions based on heroes pick, maps and opposite team formation.
Sombra annoys orisa, sigma and wreckingball. Beams annoys genji, sym thrives on lack of coordination and teamwork, widow thrives if has space, high ground gives terrain advantage. All those are “things” that more often than not reflects on better results.
Pareto’s principle aren’t the exactly the ideal inference, in that regard because isn’t only one metric but the combination of some. Which is why, more damage more often than not is a net negative.
Trash dmg is a term used by bad players maybe who dont understand the big picture & overall game. Doing dmg is always good even WITHOUT a kill. Keeping a rein shield down, keeping pressure on a widow whos got a high ground, forcing a support to pop an alt so you can then pop ur own when on cd, forcing a support pocket to swap then switching kill target when support leaves ect… High damage keeps pressure and keeps the enemy team from keeping advantagious positions as much. If anything it should be refered to as tactical dmg. And what is FAR WORSE. Not going ENOUGH dmg. Also a scoreboard is simply relaying information. MORE information is ALWAYS better than not enough for any reason. Removing info is another thing bad players want. Instead it can be used as a tool to see where improvements or swaps can be made in the game ect