Winning KDA?

Silent Bob US·Oct 13, 2014·1 votes·817 views

Is it possible to look at a KDA and determine whether the person should have a winning record?

For example, I am in Silver IV now (I got placed into Silver III) and I play Jungle Warwick for 75% of my games. My KDA with Warwick in Ranked play is 7.5/6.5/8.3, which strikes me as something which would have to be a winning KDA, because I have both more kills than deaths and more assists than deaths. And yet I am only winning around 44% of my games with Warwick.

Is there a calculator to say how many games you should be winning at a given position with a given KDA?

Is it just that Junglers have very good KDAs compared to laners? Perhaps if other people shared their KDAs, lanes, win rates and divisional rankings I can figure this out.

6 Comments

JubbinautOct 13, 20142 votes

I don't like KDA as a measurement of anything. I think it's a silly statistic to pay attention to when determining how effective a player is being.

See, kills don't win games. Objectives do. Suicide Singed is actually a really good example of that, with a typically low KDA (rare kills, few assists, and relatively high number of deaths), but his ability to pressure objectives allows his team to make successful pushes and force unfavorable fights and trades.

Also, don't take my word for it, because I'm no expert, but averaging only 1 more kill than your deaths is not what I would consider a good KDA.

Silent Bob USOct 13, 20141 votes

I understand that objectives can be a better measure than KDA, but as a Jungler I'm getting the majority of those as well. I'm also averaging first place on my teams in terms of gold and experience. I know that getting one more kill than death doesn't sound great, but getting twice as many combined kills and assists as deaths, does. At least it makes me think I should have won more often than 44% of the time.

JubbinautOct 13, 20141 votes

<shrug> All I'm saying is, don't focus on KDA. In the long run, KDA isn't especially relevant to victory. Focus on your objective play, especially towers (since they never respawn).

I just took a look over your Match History, and I'd like to add this: Looking at your average KDA won't do you much good at determining much, anyway. You seem to be very feast-or-famine on your KDA. It's very inconsistent. The closest I saw that relates to a pattern is a tendency towards high deaths/low assists on losses.

I think you could also gain from varying your build/build order. Your Warwick games seem to have the same items in the same order across the board. They aren't bad items, by any means, but some of them are fairly situational, and build order should always be based on what's happening in the game in question.

SammanderOct 13, 20141 votes

Don't focus on KDA, it's a waste of time. Focusing on just about any other aspect of your game play would be better...

Tooth BurglarOct 13, 20141 votes

2.4 isn't god awful but it certainly doesn't mean you're solo carrying and deserve wins because of that kda. The people that have already have posted are sort of right about kda not mattering because in the end all you need to do is kill the nexus.

However, limiting your deaths and maxing your kills and assists makes it a lot easier to win games.

Silent Bob USOct 13, 20141 votes

Yeah, apparently 2.4 isn't as good as I thought. I thought that by definition anything over 2 would have to be good. Or at least anything over 2 that was balanced between kills and assists. Or at the very least teams with team KDAs over 2 would be winning teams.