If a surrender ends the game (i.e. in a 2-player game or with the last two players left), it would makes sense for a surrender to count as an elimination for the winner.  The elimination stat is starting to become less meaningful since a majority of players will surrender in that situation.

+1 (for 2-player games).

i believe it does doesnt it?

i know in the game re-cap when its over it says 'you eliminated x players' after ive surrenderd... i should know ive had to do it enough...

Yes, it does already.

Thingol wrote:

+1 (for 2-player games).

In 3 or more player games, shouldn't it be the same ? The surrender of a player would then be given to the winner.

What about booted players ? Some just let themselves booted when they know they will lose.

There's also glitches with Simulgear - often times other people get credit for eliminations that are made in a simulgear game (even a 2-player game - the loser sometimes gets the elimination!).

Toto wrote:

In 3 or more player games, shouldn't it be the same ? The surrender of a player would then be given to the winner.

In a 3 player game, its entirely possible that the non-winning player who did not get booted would have eliminated the booted player.

What about booted players ? Some just let themselves booted when they know they will lose.

In a 2-player game -- sure.

Personally, I don't see what the big deal is.  What do you all think eliminations prove ..or suggest about players?

That they are aggressive?  ..Not necessarily.  Could mean just the opposite. I.e., that they are defensively minded and crafty enough to know how to wait out a board until it can be run.

Is a high ratio of eliminations to wins or opponents played an indicator of player ability or strength?  ..Nope. Some players go after eliminations prematurely, which might give them a higher ratio of eliminations to opponents, but poor win loss records.

About a year or so ago I did a rather informal statistical analysis and was unable to find a correlation between eliminations and Global Ranking.  Granted the sample group was probably pretty small, but nonetheless..

Same thing interests me too. What's the difference if you eliminate player in relation to his surrender or boot? Don't you always get the same number of points?

M57 wrote:

Personally, I don't see what the big deal is.  What do you all think eliminations prove ..or suggest about players?

...

If folks don't value the eliminations statistic, then let's get rid of it and simplify the stats page.

However, if it has value, then let's do the due diligence to make the statistic meaningful (i.e. having boots/surrenders in 2-player games count as eliminations, etc.).

Personally, I find the eliminations stat as a useful data point along with games played, Tourney score, GRS, CP, etc. to evaluate overall experience/skill and what I might expect from an opponent.

Perhaps it would be more useful to have a volume-weighted eliminated stat to account for the fact that some players have hundreds/thousands more games than others.

AttilaTheHun wrote:

Personally, I find the eliminations stat as a useful data point along with games played, Tourney score, GRS, CP, etc. to evaluate overall experience/skill and what I might expect from an opponent.

Perhaps it would be more useful to have a volume-weighted eliminated stat to account for the fact that some players have hundreds/thousands more games than others.

Then would you agree that the number alone is pretty worthless?

Lets say there's a a player with a higher than average eliminations/opponents stat.  What would that tell you about them?

Maybe in conjunction with their overall rating it would tell you something.  If their overall rating is high also, then it shows they are very good at telling when someone is weak enough to take out and can use that to their advantage to propel them to victory.  If their overall rating is not so good, it can show you that they put too much weight in eliminations and sometimes overextend themselves to get an elimination even when it is not in their best interest.

Ozyman wrote:

Maybe in conjunction with their overall rating it would tell you something.  If their overall rating is high also, then it shows they are very good at telling when someone is weak enough to take out and can use that to their advantage to propel them to victory.  If their overall rating is not so good, it can show you that they put too much weight in eliminations and sometimes overextend themselves to get an elimination even when it is not in their best interest.

Fair enough.. But the stat by itself is meaningless..   It needs context.  Elim/#games doesn't tell us much.  Elim/#opps is the only thing that makes sense to me.  So the stat would be called something like an E-Ratio?

Can't it just be a fun stat rather than have to tell you something super-duper-significant and have some weird acronym?

When the stat came out, it was understood that it was just a fun stat, McDonald's 50 billion served style. Gimli use to keep track of this stat on ToS back in the day (if we were to believe his profile).

(Agreed BTW on surrenders. Surrenders are primarily used in 2-player, usually an elimination.)

On the other hand - we were hopeful at one time for constructing a meaningful aggressiveness stat based on eliminations and game data. Various complicated ideas were thrown around...a good time was had by all.

Yertle wrote:

Can't it just be a fun stat rather than have to tell you something super-duper-significant and have some weird acronym?

Fun?  ..Fun!??

You'd think this was a gaming site or something.

Way back when we had a discussion about an aggression stat which I hoped to base on the elimination count.

http://www.wargear.net/forum/showthread/396p3/Aggressiveness_stat__-_Maths_gurus_needed

I didn't get around to implementing it as the complexity of coding it put me off.