I think Combat Rating is the most accurate way of measuring a players skill. That and their DTR. Or you can look at a Guardians Medal to Games Played ratio and that will generally give a good idea of how they are throwing down.

No you're wrong. Combat Rating doesn't measure win/loss and K/D. Someone who goes 30 kills 28 deaths and loses the game would have a High combat rating. Combat Rating doesn't account for deaths and a higher score when you lose actually boost your CR. If someone goes 15 kills and 1 death they would have a mediocre combat rating as they are probably im the middle of the leaderboards due to scoring a mid range score. A win or a loss would not change their CR as average. Someone who is going 15-1 is more likely to win a game for the team. CR does not reflect that because it looks for the top of the leaderboards without accounting for death and penalty play. Someone with a high combat rating and high k/d is respectable though. But most likely a aggressive player. [i.e successful with the shotgun] But on average the people with high combat ratings will NOT have high k/d and high win rates because combat ratings do not reward winning impact and it doesn't penalised deaths.

I don't really know what to tell you man. You made some good points as far as yea a person who scores high but also loses will get a high CR. That alone though is a sign of a good player. The fact is you can always adjust how passively you play in order to achieve a higher K/D but you can't always adjust how aggressively you are playing to get a higher score. Score is more important than K/D since the game is not measured in kills but in score. Obviously there are loop holes in the way of measuring stats but in a game the player that scores 5,000 points with a 1.3 K/D is most likley better than the player that scores 2,000 points with a 2.5 K/D. CR carries more weight than you give it I promise.

[quote]You made some good points as far as yea a person who scores high but also loses will get a high CR. That alone though is a sign of a good player. The fact is you can always adjust how passively you play in order to achieve a higher K/D but you can't always adjust how aggressively you are playing to get a higher score. Score is more important than K/D since the game is not measured in kills but in score. .[/quote] I hate to come across as an asshole but again you are so wrong about this. If someone gets a high score and loses then its down to 2 things. 1. The person carried the team hard but the team was un-carryable. As in their rate of death total outweighed your rate of kills 2. The person had a significant amount of kills but at the same time, a significant amount of deaths. i.e 30 kills 28 deaths. High CR would be given out in both cases. However, people [b]always[/b] think they're in the circumstance listed as point 1. But that's the lie they tell themselves because if it was consistent at point 1 it would show in their k/d regardless of win rate performance. Most people are at point 2. Also score is not more important than K/D. The game is based on kills. If you die, you're rewarded the enemy team kills. Without kills on either side the game can't be won. Playstyle is soooo easy to change at the moment of gameplay because its players choice. The pace of combat generally only slows down near the end of a close game or when one team decides to play defensively. This is choice. Anyone who is good or bad can change at a moment s notice to be more aggressive or not. Lastly, I can't take your promise that CR accounts for more than what I actually identify it on the basis that you have no legit argument and we obviously see how the scoring system works differently. I would argue I have a far better understanding of it, but again I would and I am, coming across as an asshole for telling you that. You don't understand that someone who has a higher score but effectively a higher death count is essentially robbing his team of time, (as the enemy team are scoring faster). That person is especially robbing his good teammate of time to perform with a higher rate of kills whilst at the same time a lower rate of deaths. This isn't rumble pit. CR would only perfectly capture lone wolves games where there is no team.

Good argument. I would only say that I believe there is a point that your CR will also account for a good K/D while also accounting for scoring high. For example, lets say that at a 150 CR you are scoring on average 2,000 more points than the next best on your team (I doubt that is an accurate representation but lets just use it for the sake of making my one and only standing point), at this point the number of deaths related to your kills will start to decline. ex. At 150 CR the player holds an average 1.8 K/D as he moves to 160 CR his K/D moves to 2.0. I say this not because CR takes into account K/D but because there comes a point when you can not score higher while maintaining the same number of deaths. Deaths take away from possible time spent killing others thus improving your CR while maintaining the same number of deaths becomes very difficult. You have intelligent responses and this conversation has been nice.

well if you only count the past couple months my k.d is def over 3!