I don't care how much someone has killed, only what they've killed. If I have a Rifleman on my team who gets 10 kills off of some enemy infantryman who keeps respawning out of a nearby rax and running senselessly towards my Rifleman, then I feel that Rifleman is useless and needs more people with him or needs to be elsewhere on the map. Sure, he may cause that enemy infantry to waste 10 tickets, but meh... the round may not even be a ticket war until the bitter end, I'd take my chances with that Rifleman working in a different capacity. On the other hand, if that Rifleman is stickying incoming APCs & popping off Engineers who are building enemy lvl 3 turrets or buildings, he may get less kills but the targets he neutralizes are far more valuable to me than Respawn-O-Man. There is something to be said for an Engineer getting 1 measly rank point for taking out an enemy rax, while the Rifleman beside him may have gotten 10 times as many for simply killing 10 infantry who spawned out of that rax and ran around like chickens with their heads cut off (perhaps some Squad points if the Engineer has been shooting them too). For me it has always been about "what" you kill, rather than "how much."
it's easiest to see this at the start, kill a whole bunch of people as rifleman and you will capture an area, while their men are spawning yours are building refs. kills >>>> points
Wait, are we talking about only killing people or buildings aswell? Because only killing people and not building, reviving or sabotaging will ensure your loss, your team will have no forward raxs and will just be killing the people who spawn in the rax but not able to kill it and push the enemy back. It is rare that a commander match will go down to tickets so the killed them all victory rarely occurs, while the destruction of the command vehicle usually occurs because one side has managed to push the other side back, something which is only possible with a variety of skills instead of just killing. If you are talking about killing buildings and vehicles then you have changed your definition of killing halfway through your argument.
This pretty much sums it up. A person who goes 0/50 in K/D but kills the CV is better than the 50/0 roflwhore who HMGs people coming out of the barracks. That's why I can join a losing team, organize an APC rush, and win.
no, that's not actually true. i'm sure the roflwhore enabled victory for the useless 0/50 faggot who swept in at the end and stole the cv kill.
You cannot have a negative kill to death ratio. Say if you get 10 kills and 4 deaths thats a 10/4 kill to death ratio now if you get say 8 kills and 10 deaths thats a 8/10 kill to death ratio. Which if you divide that its a decimal not a negative number.
