I disagree completely, and while proximity is a factor I think that your issue largely comes from the different styles of NA and EU.
In NA, especially in sieges where new valor has been implimented, Strength builds still are the end game. The point system has to do with the amount of damage you can do on a single life. Strength builds go around 1shotting people doing tons of damage (points) in one hit. Shielders get proximity bonus and can survive in clusterfuck situations longer while still dishing out hits.
I don't see how hoplites are getting any benefits? In close range they are still fucked most times, and they hit teammates a lot on accident. Not to mention they are so easily countered.
My issue? I never said it was an issue, in fact I'd be fine if things remained unchanged. I am only posting this thread to stimulate discussion about different ways to improve on this already ingenious scoring system. And for that, you need to problematize. So yes, the points I brought up are issues, but not necessarily my own.
I don't really care much for refuting the remainder of your post, it's pretty much uninteresting.
Anyhow, the score making formula at the moment is not very accurate and not very fair. Classes with shields are for some reason score magnets. Leshma stated in a previous thread that it might be due to that shields, upon receiving damage, activate proximity based scoring. If this is true, then I think the same should be made for manual blocks, as it requires way more skill than simply holding RMB.
And lastly, still regarding the score system: Kills. I feel they are not rewarded enough. 2 points for killing a guy is just a plain "Fuck you."
Really well said.
You could poke this someone with whatever and prevent this someone killing bunch of your allies. One can kill many people with 1 hp even.
Getting the kill means nothing. Dealing lots of damage does.
Getting the kill means nothing. Dealing lots of damage does.
Bjord, tell me which useless shielders are score magnets ? Me ? Quatal ? Evo ? When i play on siege, and i play it almost exclusively, 2h heroes who know how to play have usually better score than shielders. For example Lux, Rufio, Kulin, Rantrex (when not leching) all get awesome score thanks to rounding down formula which favor heavy hitting classes (military pick, 2h, poles). I can assure you that without that rounding down (using for example floats instead of integers, or just reduce rounding down in formula by doubling/tripling points awarded) those heavy hitting classes would have relatively less points compared to low-damage weapons.
Okay, sorry. They're not *YOUR* issues. They're *issues in general* according to you. My bad!
That being said, the rest of what I said directly addressed *the issues*. Hoplites are easily killed and countered, and I don't see them stacking scores. One handers are also pretty much universally outscored by str stacking 2handers and polearms. I think the point stacking simply comes down to a ratio of who can survive the most in battle and do decent damage. You're not going to see agi 1handers or even archers doing a ton of damage while surviving for extended periods in most cases.
Facts, dood. Cut out some of the nerd rage, I wrote well thought out responses to your points and instead of getting a reply I got dismissed. Kind of contrary to what you said about proposing a discussion? Or do you only want a discussion where people agree with you?
Getting the kill means nothing. Dealing lots of damage does.
Bjord, tell me which useless shielders are score magnets ? Me ? Quatal ? Evo ? When i play on siege, and i play it almost exclusively, 2h heroes who know how to play have usually better score than shielders. For example Lux, Rufio, Kulin, Rantrex (when not leching) all get awesome score thanks to rounding down formula which favor heavy hitting classes (military pick, 2h, poles). I can assure you that without that rounding down (using for example floats instead of integers, or just reduce rounding down in formula by doubling/tripling points awarded) those heavy hitting classes would have relatively less points compared to low-damage weapons.
The "*problem*" are not hoplites, I never said that. I was saying that they are enjoying benefits due to this new scoring system. A lot of known hoplite players on EU are often getting valour and 100+ scores. They are not that "easily countered", because they have tough shields that don't break together with either high agi and thus high shield skill(Gravoth), or high STR, board shield and lots of armour(Sultan Eren). If you ever muster the courage to play on EU(joke :wink:), keep an eye out for those two and watch them impact on outcome of round.
This is all due to the fact that when team play due to slowness is a deciding factor for the outcome of rounds, which spears naturally excel at, hoplites will reap the benefit twofold with their amazing survivability and support capability. A shield, to counter archers(more or less), a long spear, to counter cavalry and disrupt 2h heroes. It is pretty much a cakewalk, if played properly.
Anyway, this thread is not about hoplites or any other class but the point system. I was just including some related thoughts as examples.
Please don't wet your pants if I choose not to discuss with you about things I feel belong in another thread, calling it nerdrage is just projecting your own frustrations on me even more.
Back on-topic please.
Yes, I agree somewhat. I am not saying kills should be in any way superior to dealing damage score wise. But I've one hit riders a countless times with a headshot from a thrust and all I got was a lousy 4-5 points. Pretty early in the round too so don't think they were low on health.
However, _killing_ a player means you boot him out for the duration of that round. Regardless if he was on low health, this is very helpful to your team. With this in mind, some tweaks could be made for when you score a kill.
By the way, question to you cmp. Is score based on damage accumulative or arbitrary? As in, does my total damage count in the score or only for every hit dealt on enemies? For example, if I deal 19 dmg first I get 1 score, if I deal 21 next time, do I get another 3 points? Excluding overkill dmg.
Well, one shielder from the top of my head, Yanicar. Pretty lousy player, but I regularly see him getting valour while he has 2:9 score. I get that damage is more important, but seriously. If I have 130 points, I'll have killed more than 2 people.
And agreed, 2h are also enjoying the new score system, especially great maulers or any mauler really, thanks to the high dmg output.
From the way you talk it seems every class is enjoying new score system.
A kill should not give bonus points at all, I don't see how getting the last hit should be rewarded anymore than doing a hit earlier.
Getting the kill means nothing.
A kill should not give bonus points at all, I don't see how getting the last hit should be rewarded anymore than doing the hit before the last hit.
I find that it is an incentive to use a strength build over a balanced or agility build.
I 'll tell you one thing, new system seems to hate xbow. It makes sense, because two hander can deal 5 times 30 dmg in five seconds, to xbowman to fire five shots it takes a minute or so.
But it is not fair. Today at Strat battle, I was checking to see peoples scores. At one moment I notice a score of DaveUKR, which was 35:3 at that time. With 35 kills and only three deaths he was at the middle of the scoreboard, while there were only two guys in the whole team with more kills than him. But, if this was a regular battle, he wouldn't be getting valor. That doesn't sound right to me, I think additional bonuses for kills should be introduced.
I like the idea of killing very valuable players(highscoring? high kills? both? idk) of the opposite team gaining you more score. even if it's just a 1hp glance from a long spear after being in the middle of a gank squad at the end. Sometimes those little things save a bunch of your team mates depending on who it is you're bringing down.
(maybe make the score given proximity based, so all those guys ganging up on the MVP get a bonus for doing the right thing and focusing on a dangerous target)
Maybe even add getting the last hit on low-low levels doesn't give score or gives less score, since ganking peasants isn't the best way to go about winning, might see more groups letting just one guy handle a peasant instead of all chasing after him like an angry mob. Just my thoughts atm.
Argument would not be making sense if the actual damage would be wounding(reducing capabilities to fight).
In cRPG damage dealt does nothing except lower HP, and, like I said, someone with 1% HP left can kill many.
because an enemy with 1hp can still kill people, someone with 0hp cannot.It's not like you know the hp of your enemies. You should be rewarded for what you accomplished, getting a hit. Whether it's a kill or not is not something you accomplish or something that is up to your skill, that is basically down to luck. Your teammate does 20 damage and gets him to 1 hp, you do 20 damage and get the last hit. Your teammate did exactly the same thing as you did, so the reward should be the same.
I'm ok with a tiny small bonus for the last hit but not more. Otherwise it will go back to kill whoring again :wink:
Headshot kills still only give 2 points regardless of damage done. It is bugged, please fix. Due to this, point system actively nerfs skillful shots.If this is true this needs a fix asap. If killing someone with 3 hits gives you 10 points than getting a headshot kill should also give ten points. Perhaps this might fix the lower ranged points a bit.
If i bodyshot the same person twice I'd get 6 to 9 points for my damage done.
First of all, I don't know anybody who needs to hit someone 10 times to kill, unless they aren't a melee class.
In that context, people usually die in 3-4 hits, and that is why I believe that disabling the player altogether is much more important than just taking off the damage from him, where he still poses threat to your team.
you never have an indication on how wounded someone is
Sorry Dave its still guesswork to a degree.Sorry Laconicus, it is not. It is VERY obvious to see who had some love from enemies, and who didn't. Exceptions are the "falling" victims, but... fukit 8-)
Sorry Laconicus, it is not. It is VERY obvious to see who had some love from enemies, and who didn't. Exceptions are the "falling" victims, but... fukit 8-)
Ah ok my fail sorry that im a Archer. I respec to 2 hand sword swinging Hero cos its so cool and i feel like a boss.(click to show/hide)
My personal thoughts and observations:
1) Horses still give too much points. I don't like it because in any possible way horsemen should give more points than a horse. It's the same as if it would give points for breaking a shield more than for killing a shielder. I like the idea of giving points for damage to horses but it should be lowered.
2) Proximity based points. As far as I can understand it gives points in 3m radius of that who was attacked not who dealt damage. If it is so - then it makes no sense at all. I can just do nothing and stand close to enemies who got shot by ranged and get points. You should make it so that points are given to those who are in 3m radius of that who dealt damage. This will encourage archers to stay closer and give them some bonuses on strat while standing in formation. This will also encourage shielders and pikemen to protect archers against enemies. Charging horde has nothing common to teamplay, remember this.
3) Ranged is inferior scorewise. I understand that ranged should be given a smaller amount of points but archers suffer from this new score system, especially on open field as their team charges and they have only 2 options - follow the crowd or die from cav because nobody stays to defend them. The situation is even worse for crossbowmen (probably the worst class scorewise atm) since DPM of crossbowman is much lower than archer and drastically lower than melee player. According to the fact that you can make only 6 shots per minute with 180 wpf using your Arbalest makes it sad. The real situation demands movement and aiming from crossbowmen (amount of open maps is frustrating, there is only 1 city map without huge open spaces - Riot in Swadian city) and I get most of my points by killing player in melee fights. So it's impossible in most cases to make even these 6 shots.
4) Points for kills. Yes, I understand the statement that damage is everything, kills are nothing. But I kindly disagree. I'll mention some situations where damage means nothing and kills mean everything.
1. Horse Archer or Horse Crossbowman riding around and killing players. Damage doesn't mean anything at all since it doesn't affect him. He will do the same thing in the same way until he gets killed. And it's kind of frustrating when I'm making a perfect shot killing a rider in 50 meters who killed 6 our players and I get only a couple of points.
2. Hero who is killing my teammates all around. This is the most common case: a hero with great fighting skills eliminates the half of my team, he received a random ranged damage from my teammates so he has low HP but keeps killing my teammates one by one. I make a headshot and take almost nothing.
3. Rider who got his horse damaged to 1 HP but still he can ride, he will stop and change his horse to the one which has full hp.
I think this system needs some kind of tweaking.
110% agree with points 2-5 (especially #2 for ranged class...it should be how close you are to the person dealing damage, not to the enemy receiving damage). I also whole heartedly agree with the killing blow sentiment. Damage dealt is very important, but I've seen many str-heavy builds (or horse xbow and other classes) who are eventually killed with a glancing or light blow, but were able to go on a rampage before dying. If you have 1 health and are still alive, you can still deal a lot of damage to the enemy team.
Your first point however is slightly different than shielders. Horsemen rely on their horse for transportation. I'm not nearly as efficient at picking my engagements, or my targets if I'm on foot, rather than on horse. If I dismount a fellow cavalry lancer, I am satisfied that I neutralized a major threat to our team for that round (unless he finds another horse).
The best cavalry lancers are the most deadly on horse, you dismount them, and you have taken away their main source of killing your team.
So the system rewards you for staying in the heat of battle and working for the team.
It doesnt reward lone heroes, it doesnt reward frag hunters, it doesnt reward ranged.
Is it really a bad thing? Alot of people clamor for more teamplay and more tactics and formations etc.
This could be good, this could steer people toward a playstyle that is more about mutual support and staying with the team.
Im not sure myself yet, i want to give it more time and see how it works. But so far it looks like you are really rewarded for contributing, with valor being given too people who actually was in the SHIT.
Getting the kill means nothing. Dealing lots of damage does.
I dont think the system is that flawed just needs a bit of tweaking. As mainly support class on my alts and my mains, i can regularly top the charts in whichever role it is. Really though as an ranged unit or skirmisher you cant expect to have the same amount of points as an infantry support or cav support in the main melee. They are down there in the thick of it getting kills and assisting teammates. While ranged units in the back can pick off 1-3 targets a round and hit a few more than that, your not going to be dealing near as much damage as the 2h or shield heroes up front nor should you.
Really the simple fact is: the more damage you deal the more points your gonna get.
Mainly this, though headshots need to be fixed (2 points for a HS is bullcrap if I am slamming a MW Rus MW Bod into you with 170wpf and 8PD from a mere 6 meter distance, that DOES do damage, proof is in the dead dude on the ground, yet 2 points meant it thinks I did just 20...). I also think the proximity bonus is set a smidge too high.
Im not heavy armor. Im not a shielder. Im not cav. I used to get valor before, but never now - even though I can get 2-4 kills per round at times on my main.
New system... lame.
I was getting valour much more often before the score system but by aim for it my playstyle was sometime teribad for the team. To get valour you had to hide somewhere for few minutes being useless and then come out in the end to aim for wounded/bad players ....
Not anyone was doing this but this was much more common, now you have to actualy be usefull to your team to get valour which is really good. Of course the new system is not perfect, ranged player are not rewarded like they should and heavy strengh based shield user get too much score for what they are doing.
This is the old system which is lame ...
I find that it is an incentive to use a strength build over a balanced or agility build.
I didn't read all posts but what I noticed is that you are getting points for the damage that is dealt close to you to some other people. Therefore if you stand close in the clusterfuck in giant gangbangs where shielders (because of survivablity) and guys with long weapons (because of better ability of supporting) spend most of the time, you will get a lot of points. You just have to stand close to people dying (those are like the assist points that you get) and you will collect a lot of points.
Also if an archer that is good in melee hits an enemy like 8 times before he finally kills him with his hand axe, archer will collect 1 point for every hit that deals any dmg. If archer couldn't hurt the enemy he wouldn't get any points for hitting him, if archer was dealing like 5 dmg with every hit, he would collect 1 point each time he hits.
The new valour system is punishing the cav and archers because they stand away from clusterfuck. Therefore as a Cav I had 7 kills and 18 points or something like that. Even if I kill some kind of good enemy that had an influence on the field of battle, I am not rewarded by more than a few points (2-4 or sth like that).
Bjord, you are wrong in your first post stating that shielders get points because of the shield. It's standing close to people dying which makes you get much more points. Just a while in a clusterfuck can make you get valour.