Arqade is a question and answer site for passionate videogamers on all platforms. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I want to get better at the multiplayer in Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2? What is a good kill to death ratio?

Right now for every kill I get I die about 10 times. What should I be shooting for?

share|improve this question

closed as primarily opinion-based by Robotnik, Kappei, Studoku, Billy Mailman, 5pike Nov 17 '14 at 12:50

Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

Voted to close for lack of substance. "As high as possible" is the common sense answer here. Any determination of "good" is purely subjective. – hobodave Jul 8 '10 at 18:14
@hobodave - I agree that it's a gray area, but I don't think it's a purely subjective one. As I mention in my answer, >1 contributes to your team faster than to the other team, which means that it's at least "better" than a <1 ratio, even if you can't label it as definitively "good". – Jeromy Irvine Jul 15 '10 at 17:41
A 1:1 ratio is, by definition, the average (if you don't count suicides). Anything higher than that could be considered "good". – Studoku Nov 17 '14 at 11:09
up vote 4 down vote accepted

Kill / Death ratio isn't that important really. For example, mine is about 0.7, but I regularly top the scoreboard.

Just focus on getting a weapon / perk setup that works for your play-style and have fun with that.

share|improve this answer
If you're playing TD, that means you're helping your team lose more often than not. – kamens Jul 15 '10 at 22:56
Hm, that's true. I only ever play the objective based games like HQ Pro and Domination, but you're right - a low K/D ratio in Team Deathmatch is a bad thing - it means your performance is a net loss for the team score (unless all your deaths are self-induced!) – C.McAtackney Jul 16 '10 at 8:08

Anything greater than 1 is "good". More kills than deaths. Really good players do better than that. But more kills than deaths is probably a good starting point.

share|improve this answer

This really depends on what game type you play. On objective games (like domination / ctf / hq) the objective is the point. Dying less is probably still something to strive for, but if you're helping your team, good for you.

If you're playing kill-based games (free for all, team death match) your KD matters above everything else. It doesn't matter if you get 30 kills if you've died 40 times. Thats a net -10 affect for your team. Going 10-5 is way better than 20-25 or the like since its a race to most kills and every death gives your opponent a point.

share|improve this answer
Nitpick: it's actually the spread that matters on TDM, not the KD. Someone who goes 30-20 just put the team ahead by 10 with a 1.5 KD. Someone who goes 7-1 put the team ahead by 6 with a 7.0 KD. If we assume your team is going to win, then higher KDs result in a larger margin of victory, but you've already won, so whatever. – DCShannon Jul 20 at 0:03

K/D ratio of 1 is very good, because the median is probably about 0.7. Anything over 0.7 is good.

share|improve this answer
After playing CoD for nearly 10 years, I suspect this is the case. The arithmetic mean would be 1, of course, but the median is likely less than 1. My core team of friends have KDs over 2, but we're perfectly happy to play with anybody with a KD over 0.9 or so. – DCShannon Jul 20 at 0:05

The obvious answer is that higher is always better, so there is no definitive "good" K/D ratio.

That being said, if the winning condition is based on kills, then a KDR greater than 1 is "good", because it means that you are contributing kills to your team's victory faster than you're supplying them to the opponents.

share|improve this answer

It also depends on the game type your are playing. If you choose something objective-based like Headquarters or Domination you will die a lot just by random grenade spam and things like that because everybody knows where you are.

For TD I would go for 1 and above.

I noticed in my own matches that the mindset you're playing in is the key to a good K/D. Find a stick sensitivity you like and just play like you don't care about anything. Try mixing up your playstyle by being overly aggressive in some games (Marathon plus Lightweight to sprint the whole time and run directly at choke points where you know people are normally sitting or running by) and then play some very cautiously with Ninja and Cold-Blooded.

And the most important point, I hinted at in the paragraph above, learn the maps! Knowing where you will meet people after starting the match and running a certain route and just knowing camping places and choke points in general is the biggest advantage you can have, cause you will be able to run around groups and kill 2 or 3 players before they even know whats up.

well, and quick reflexes help too :)

share|improve this answer

Who cares about K/D ratio as long as YOU ARE HAVING FUN. It's a game.

share|improve this answer

As has been pointed out, it depends on the game type.

  • In all team deathmatch games, what really counts is the kill-death-spread (KDS) (ie. kills - deaths), since every death for you is a kill to the other team

  • In objective-based games, it matters, but not very much, as objectives score more points. To be precise, the significance of your KDS is (points per kill) / (points per objective) (i forget the figures, being a TDM player myself)

  • In free-for-all, all that matters is the number of kills

However, the way I read your question, you'd really like to know what KDR is "OK" - that you can feel good about. The only objective answer to that would have to be unity (1) - meaning you give as good as you get. Myself, I'm slightly below in my totals (about 18000 to 22000), and I'm perfectly happy with that.

As a caveat to all this - when it comes to team deathmatch games, I have always felt that a more accurate and fair ranking in the game would be by KDS (rather than simply kills). It doesn't look right when a reckless player with, say, 30 kills and 40 deaths rank on top, while the one with 9 kills and 4 deaths end up last (that tends to be me ;-).

share|improve this answer
+1, but another objective measure would be "above average", which I would think would make the most sense as "above the median", which is probably less than 1.0. – DCShannon Jul 20 at 0:07

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.