When I play BO2 I could care less about my Win/Loss ratio. For me and I think a lot of other people it’s about the K/D ratio for them. I was heavily disappointed by the fact that the new league play stuff is based on win/loss. Does anyone else wish this was based on a K/D scale.

For example 1.0+ K/D and that K/Dx10 = your score. So like a 2.34 x 10 would be 234 rank points for that match.

Anything below 1.0 would be x10 and subtracted from your rank points.

@Phyrlord:

I thank you greatly for illustrating precisely why the COD community is simply terrible. Why wouldn't it based off win/loss? If Kobe Bryant leads the NBA in points per game but the Lakers win only 40% of their games, they are a losing team. That was the great thing about Halo 2 online and why it is my favorite online game of all time. It didn't even surface the K/D ratio, all the mattered was contributing to your team's victory.

@ll_Exile_ll:

I do see what you mean. I also play league of legends and in that game for me it's more about the win then kills.

I used to play CS a lot in the early 2000's and that was more about the K/D.

I also play TDM mainly, TDM and Free for all would be the only place for a K/D based system I guess. as other gametypes are based on team work.

@ll_Exile_ll: But then it makes it unplayable for people looking to play League Play solo. Because then its mostly based on luck and how well or badly you're gonna be matched with competent people. For example, I lost 4 of my 5 placement games, even though in each games I was at the top of the leaderboard contributing both objective wise and kill wise, I was doing well at an individual level. But because my team would suck most of the time, I got placed in the Iron league. It makes luck way too much of a factor. So thats why I stick to public matches.

@ll_Exile_ll said:

Why wouldn't it based off win/loss? If Kobe Bryant leads the NBA in points per game but the Lakers win only 40% of their games, they are a losing team.

For solo play, two reasons;

1. Because Win/Loss ratio is based to a higher degree on the other team members and not just you. If a ladder is supposed to rank my skill-level, it is supposed to measure my skill, not that of me and whoever I happen to play with as those people may not actually be my skill level at all. Even make it the other way around, if I suck ass in all my matches and my team wipes the floor with the other team, should my rank be high just because I happen to be on the winning team even though I completely blew it?

2. If Kobe Bryant lead the NBA in points and the Lakers only won 40% of the matches, they may be a losing team but Kobe wouldn't be ranked a bench warmer in the league in general. Likewise, just because you're sitting on the side-lines of the top NBA team, doesn't make you a high ranking NBA player.

Now, if you go in as a team and you rock and your teammates suck, that's an entirely different story.

I guess I never even knew what they were basing it off of but that is really dumb. Especially because I play tons of party games just for fun. And I rarely end up at the very top. Seems a bit strange, I mean it would make sense for FFA but for any other mode just seems strange to me.

I think you greatly misunderstand the point of league play, and the competitive scene it was made for.