Reposting this:
I like the new system, it's definitely a step in the right direction.
The biggest flaw of the system right now is that overkill damage is calculated. Couches generate insane amounts of points because the score is calculated by the total damage done in a single attack instead of how much hp the other player loses. Fix this and we will see much more accurate scoreboards.
Because horses have a lot of hitpoints, killing a horse from full hp gives you 10 points or more, while killing the rider only gives 6 or something. Horse kills should not give more points than player kills, so please scale the horse hitpoints/points.
Most of your opinions are outdated ;)
check the server and report back
Yeah, noticed that too... horses give often more points than a rider, which is kinda stupid.
Because horses have a lot of hitpoints, killing a horse from full hp gives you 10 points or more, while killing the rider only gives 6 or something. Horse kills should not give more points than player kills, so please scale the horse hitpoints/points.
Could I have option to hide scores and sort players out by kills as it used to be? I dont need any scores and I dont care about it
If you dont care about it and dont need it, just ignore it...
If you dont care about it and dont need it, just ignore it...I can't ignore it because I want to check peoples KDR and now it shows the players in scoreboard in wrong order.
If you dont care about it and dont need it, just ignore it...Really I would like to have these scores instantly removed, but that aint gonna happen. So I only want an visual option for haters
archer scores dont make sense, 12 kills, 58 points? I don 't killsteal the whole time, yet get just 3 poitns per hit?Longbow.
Please fixed the auto couch and revert it back to manual couch please, it's killing all the pro cav players by noobs!
Score system isn't bad but I must request one little tweak. Cavalry usually gets most points,
change it so that proximity kills worth more than cav/ranged kills please.
BUG: Taking fall damage lowers your score.taking falldamage is silly enough to justify -score xD
it counts as team damage, to yourself.
2. Change the multi system
Yes, the multi system is silly. I have no trouble admitting that :]
It makes you stop playing when you drop to x1, and it forces you to continue playing when you have x5.
Therefore, we'll change the system to something that rewards personal skill and risk more. It will be, among other factors, proximity based, as we had in the early versions of cRPG. It will definately not be purely kill based, we don't want to reward fraghunters over teamplayers. It will also not reward proximity leechers. You can expect this change soon.
Why is everyone talking about score points being related to xp/gold gain. Afaik there hasn't been any statement which would justify such a conclusion.
And yes, it would be silly to base that of the score points, I agree. It's nice for all those people who actually shoot at cav or other rangers as a reward in the e-peen contest. To base progression of the character upon this isn't the way to go and I am sure the devs have something else in mind. Something smarter.
Just relax and wait :?
its awesome! I love it. I love how it shows who is the most team playerits awesome, but its not showing who is the best teamplayer :|
now we need a total score counter on the site. and a leader boards for total scores.ranking system ( AKA leader board), yes pls !
Agree. Jarids at medium/long range:
2 Points if I hits the horseman
4 Points if I hits the horse
And, if possible, convert taken damage from teammates into points you earn for the same amount of points deducted from teammater's score.Might lead to griefing.
Raise the point penalty for tw/tking.
This.
I see people with 0 / 0 having 30 score when I with 3 kills / 0 deaths have 10. lol.
Nah, we understand pretty well actually.
It´s just the raw numbers and high difference, how a guy with 0 kills can have double or triple the points of a guy with 3 kills. Just that.
because sometimes its unrealistic. Why can't you grasp that? Lets exagerate so you can understand: Mr J killed 100 people, he has a score of 1000. I kill 20 people, I got a score of 2000. That means that I produced DOUBLE the damage but I killed only a fifth of his kills. Unless I especially aim to NOT kill anyone, this type of score is simply impossible.. This means that damage is not the only main factor, which means that otherMr. J killed 100 unarmoured people, he has a score of 1000. I kill 20 people in armour, I got a score of 2000.
variants are taken in, which means that it will advantage some players over others.
If u wanna put a list of total damage, fine. But dont change the list priority based on that. Leave the kills as the order of the list.
I think the killing blow need to be accorded more importance. Even if the dude was black barred and you ''stole'' the kill as some would say, because in the end, even if i get damaged by some dude for 75%, as long as he dont kill me, i still can kill 2-3 people before i die. Looking at it like that, i think it makes sense that the dude that took the last 25% of my like gets a bit more points because now that i am dead, i cannot go around and still fuck people up.
my 2 cents
I agree killing blow should have some sort of additional point bonus, regardless of how minimal the damage was. An enemy with 1% hp remaining can do just as much damage as an enemy with 100% hp remaining.
Not sure if the scoreboard adds additional points for rearing a horse, rather than just killing it, but it should, especially if the rider or the horse itself dies because of it. Same with chain hitting an enemy to directly cause his death. If you're the first to hit in a chain of hits that causes the enemies death, you should get additional points as without your hit, he likely would have died in a completely different way. The first hit is the most important in many situations like these two, but it is the least beneficial, score-wise it seems.
because sometimes its unrealistic. Why can't you grasp that? Lets exagerate so you can understand: Mr J killed 100 people, he has a score of 1000. I kill 20 people, I got a score of 2000. That means that I produced DOUBLE the damage but I killed only a fifth of his kills. Unless I especially aim to NOT kill anyone, this type of score is simply impossible.. This means that damage is not the only main factor, which means that other
variants are taken in, which means that it will advantage some players over others.
Also I thinkt aht archers should be penalized extra for hitting team mates, and get a few more points for hitting enemies. Hitting enemies with arrows is extremely useful and since they wont get proximity bonus they need some sort of incentive. Also hitting allies most times is a result of simple greed and bad choices.
The system is fine, it just needs some finetuning. I do heavy damage to enemies, esp. to cav by downing their horses and hitting the rider on the ground but often I don't get the final blow on them because if they have a shield my lance is almost useless against them. So if someone kills them after he does get only a small reward because most of the work was done by me. And my work is shown on the board. If I kill some enemy from behind, that was pinned down by a few of my teammates for some time already, I only get a small reward because they did most of the work already. I find that fair.Yea, Shokothing (can't remember the name completely) is a really hard hitting archer and when spectating him, you'll see that he isnt desperately going for the kill but shoots at the best opportunity, hitting a lot of different people. Wonder if all the 2h-heroes realize that it's not them being uber-stronk but it's due to a lot of team support that they're 1-hitting their targets...
Also archers are rewarded now. I wasn't surprised to see Tiborur (or some similar name) on top of the board even higher than Chase. I watched him a few times in the past and he did much damage to different target while getting only few kills. He (and others ofc) deserve it.
because sometimes its unrealistic. Why can't you grasp that? Lets exagerate so you can understand: Mr J killed 100 people, he has a score of 1000. I kill 20 people, I got a score of 2000. That means that I produced DOUBLE the damage but I killed only a fifth of his kills. Unless I especially aim to NOT kill anyone, this type of score is simply impossible.. This means that damage is not the only main factor, which means that other
variants are taken in, which means that it will advantage some players over others.
it's funny to see that person who kills me when im on full hp gets only 1 point lol
Nah, we understand pretty well actually.
It´s just the raw numbers and high difference, how a guy with 0 kills can have double or triple the points of a guy with 3 kills. Just that.
Headshots should give some bonuses, 2 points for a headshot is a small gift but it motivates to aim better.
No! Headshots are oneshots with a bonus damage most of the time already. They shouldn't give extra points.
4 points for a kill seems way too much. Most have around 60-70 health, so you would get 6 or 7 points if you kill them alone. The guy who kills someone with only 1 health left shouldnt get so many points. I would give 1-2 point for a kill and maybe 1 for a horse kill as additional bonus. That should be enough.
I believe I got around 4-6 points for a killing blow (inf, polearm).
It doesn't matter for my crossbow: 1 hp or 50. Kills should be rewarded. I.e. I have 2 targets: archer who has no hp, he's kiting far away from me and killing my teammates one by one and a peasant with full hp at 10 meters. This system forces me to kill a peasant for a better reward rather than save my team. Do you find fair that I make a headshot to a tincan who had 9 hp and I get 0 points?If you feel forced to go for a kill instead of helping your team just by a score, you are an idiot anyway.
If you feel forced to go for a kill instead of helping your team just by a score, you are an idiot anyway.
Hitting destructible doors and gates in siege should give a (small) reward as well as capping the flag.
QUESTION DEVS:
Is it intentional or unintentional that after the round tks/tws are counted in the score?
If its not, can it be fixed? (yea i know, realllllly low priority item)
Wow. You're needlessly offensive; and not worth my time.
Also bashing on shields should give some points too. Killing kinngrimm isn't that easy, if I manage to break his shield I deserve some award for it.
As a regular thrower, I kill a lot of horses. It's nice to have some rewards for my little contribution to victory. But I use to play only to makes my team win and to get a good multiplier. I do not specially look for glory or to grow my e-penis.You, good Sir, are probably one of the few exceptions.
So, actually, scoring is cool but not my goal. It won't change my gameplay.
Example: Guy1 fights against an enemy1 for an amount of time, hits him a few times and hurts him severly (10% hp left). Guy2 jumps in from the back, hits enemy1 and kills him. Why should Guy2 get many points for this? All the work was done by Guy1.
- opponent players score(click to show/hide)
I want to +100 you but i cant :((click to show/hide)
Let's say guy 2 didn't come to help. Enemy has 10 % left, kills guy 1, and then move on to kill 4 more people on the other team before finally going down, turning the battle in their favour.
So, how much those 90 % help when there was still 10 % missing?
- opponent players score
At first I was thinking how it would hurt me but then I thought about it and I came to conclusion that at 200 million XP and 8 million gold in bank I really shouldn't care about gold or XP.
I won't give anything to anyone anymore.
Where does that score come from? From the current scoreboard? So if you kill Chase in the first round, you get 10 points, if you kill him in the 5. round you get 100 points? No!I didnt get your argument if there was any, sorry.
I won't give anything to anyone anymore. Earn it yourself.
- opponent players score
I didnt get your argument if there was any, sorry.
I was just kidding, I don't need your money, earned enough on my own 8-)
Seems that this community thinks I'm a genuine asshole so maybe it's time to start acting like one.
Example: Guy1 fights against an enemy1 for an amount of time, hits him a few times and hurts him severly (10% hp left). Guy2 jumps in from the back, hits enemy1 and kills him. Why should Guy2 get many points for this? All the work was done by Guy1.
Watching some of the top scores over time you'll notice thats exactly what they do. Let the battle run for a while and come to the battle when all enemies are hurt by the teammates that hit them in first place to get easy kills.
If guy1 had the enemy1 down to 10%, he would have already picked up 5-7 points during the fight. One of the glitches right now is that a finishing blow seems to be calculated on raw damage, it's not capped by the target's actual HP, so guy2 would get like 5 points for landing a big blow, when he really should just be getting 1-2 points for finishing the remaining HP, and then maybe another 1-2 points for a kill bonus (This is why lancers get so many points still, cuz they get massive scores for doing a 150hp damage couch attack on an archer). So guy1 picks up 5-7 for doing the hard work, and guy2 picks up 2-4 points for the important kill blow.
I'd rather we had less emphasis on personal score and more on simply rewarding the team as a whole. Its nice to pick some people out as good performers, but I don't think it should go into too much detail. The more detail we add the more we will see how much is still missing. I say keep it simple and reward team players as a whole by rewarding the whole team for a win. Then maybe have some MVP's, or something similar to the valour system for good performers.+1
Team work is a very dynamic concept, you can't really account for even 1% of it with some score system. The more its developed, the more emphasis is put on it the more people will just find different ways to farm points rather than do whats actually in the team's best interests.
This actually sounds like a bug, maybe the last blow doesn't count at all. Would also explain some other strange results. Can someone test?
Oh and the formula is no secret, will post it soon.
- opponent players score
I want to +100 you but i cant :(
Good teamplay is often to NOT deal most damage or any at allReal good battle behavior and teamplay can never be rewarded by points ...(click to show/hide)
but will forever stay in the memory of the other players you helped (hopefully) - and the memory of the tricked opponent ofc xD
Score should never direct playstyle !!!because it is not able to!!! , just being a little rewarding at times is the only thing it can be good for. To many players tend to play for score which is silly in many ways .
Score system is OK but damaging horses should award less points than hitting players.if horses would deal less damage this might be reasonable...
Honestly I don't care about scoreboard, other than to see if any clan mate is online too.Lies!
What scares me the most, is the upcoming shitstorm if the xp / gold gain will be related to this system.True
Few things the scoring system should consider:
- level difference
- gear difference (killing a can in peasant gear = more points)
- killing blows should grant an extra point(s), it still is better than just damaging
Seems that this community thinks I'm a genuine asshole so maybe it's time to start acting like one. That will include everything that's not against the rules.