1.2rating相当于多少acs

咱们上期讲了 rws， 今天讲 adr 和威挺， adr 也是一个缩写， frigdamagpran 就是你平均每回合打的伤害啊，很好理解，如果你整个赛季的 adr 不到八十的话呢，你在你的分段打的会比较吃力，如果 adr 超过了一百甚至一百一啊，说明你真实水平呢，肯定是不止这个分段。而 瑞挺呢，就是你的技术得分，他的计算方法特别的复杂，你的击杀能力，存活能力、残局能力等等因素都会计算在内。如果你一场比赛的瑞挺不到一的话呢，你会发现他是红色的啊，说明你这一把坑。 如果你整个赛季的平均锐挺都不到一呢，你想再升段是比较困难的一点一一点二的话呢，在努努力是可以升段的，如果超过了一点五，那不用说了，臭炸鱼的。

are some of the best cs go players in the world， but how can we accurately compare them when we play matchmaking most of us calculate our kills to deaths or kd ratio to somewhat understand our performance， but when talking about pro players most of the time we talk about a very different and particular number rating two point o rating two point o is a number calculated by hltv org to evaluate a player's performance on a map we can also take someone's ratings from multiple maps over a period of time like a whole best of three a whole tournament or even a whole year and use the average to judge performance over a longer term， but how does rating two point o work and how is it any different from kd ratio first of all kd ratio can have absurdly high and low values in some games making it basically useless for example in a sixteen one victory over complexity at the pgl major antwerp， zyu had zero deaths making his kd ratio infinite zyu is pretty good， but not quite infinitely good， but what about a closer game let's take a look at the performance of brokey in phase versus， astrolos at iem cologne twenty twenty two on the first map brokey led the scoreboard with twenty eight kills in eighteen deaths giving him a one point five six kd ratio on the second map he had eighteen kills and twelve deaths giving him a similar one point five kd， but ultimately he was not as noticeable or impactful there has to be a better more universal way to evaluate brokey's performances on these two maps in twenty ten when cs one point six was still being played hedge l tv came up with rating one point o to address the problems of just looking at kd seven years later， hltv introduced rating two point o with an improved formula think of it as the hltv secret source， so how does it all work first of all rating two point o is not an absolute measure of a player's skill what it shows is how much better or worse a player is compared to the average of one for example in the phase versus australismatch， we mentioned earlier on map one broke， he had a rating of one point four one meaning he had a great match as he performed much above the average whilst his rating in map two was only one point o nine close to the average despite his kd being similar， we can tell he played much better in map one so how do we come up with this number rating two point o consists of five sub ratings for the most part they are pretty self explanatory first， we have kills survivals and damage you also have impact rating which includes multi kills， opening kills， clutch winds and a few additional factors and kast rating which includes kills assists， traded deaths and surviving all of these ratings impact rating to point o， but they also exist on their own and you can check them out on hltv dot org separately for each player all of the sub rating values are calculated on a per round basis what this means is that if you had thirty actions in twenty rounds that rating will be one point five you might have noticed that multiple factors are accounted for several times in rating two point o all of the components are weighted differently in the calculations so that we have a balance between stats that lead directly to winning rounds like kills and damage and stats that have a less impactful， but still consistent contribution like kast now let's take a look at the pgl major antwerp final and compare kd to rating as we can see in some cases rating two point o is barely different from kd， but in some cases it flips the assessment of someone's performance from negative to positive despite carrigan's worst kd he had a higher rating than robs because he had a higher adr and impact another example is boomage who had a poor game and his kd ratio was much worse than simples， but thanks to his kast being on par his rating was just not point one six below， but the most telling example is rain versus brokey their fragging performance was similar， but if we look at sub ratings we'll see that rain was superior in terms of impact and damage these are the markers of the incredible performance he put in which earned him the major mvp so what rating value is good and what rating value is bad the higher the better is the core principle of rating two point o， but the judgment on every value is contextual the very basic context is sample size a rating of one point two two for a map is decent， but nothing special whereas averaging the same rating for a whole event or even a year is much more impressive the competition in which someone played should be taken into perspective as well in twenty twenty one while participating in the academy league monacy had an incredible rating of one point three six even higher than simples in that year， but in twenty twenty two after joining g two monacy's rating dropped to one point one two it's the strength of the opposition that made the biggest difference there are things that the haychel tv rating doesn't take into account for example three frags in a gun round and three frags in an anti eco round would have the same value to someone's rating rating two point o is not intended to be the ultimate evaluation of a player's performance it's just intended to be comprehensive enough， so that we can get a better idea of how pro players perform map to map we believe it's always best to watch the matches for yourself to get the best assessment of。