And I agree, I think shrap is a central element of the game, and even as random as some might infer, to me it adds a level of skill that isn't immediately obvious. The 'perfect shot' situation presented is not always synonymous with 'direct hit'. Sometimes the perfect shot takes shrap into account and is not a direct hit.
My point is that data set comparisons shouldn't be the end-all determination of what should and shouldn't be, and that even a data set will be subject to difference interpretations. There needs to be some level of human experience and logic in order to keep it skillful. 20 damage as a difference from shrap and a bullet, or a single random shrap that gets a kill are not game changers. The general response to those situations is that the target was playing too risky, putting themselves in a bad position, or was going to die regardless. I would expect someone to respond with 'learn to play better' in those cases.
My point is that data set comparisons shouldn't be the end-all determination of what should and shouldn't be, and that even a data set will be subject to difference interpretations. There needs to be some level of human experience and logic in order to keep it skillful. 20 damage as a difference from shrap and a bullet, or a single random shrap that gets a kill are not game changers. The general response to those situations is that the target was playing too risky, putting themselves in a bad position, or was going to die regardless. I would expect someone to respond with 'learn to play better' in those cases.