cRPG
cRPG => General Discussion => Topic started by: ilikere19 on November 08, 2012, 03:21:10 am
-
I've been gone for almost half a year. I see this new score thing. How does it work? Very often I find myself having 20 kills and a score of around 100. But another person with lets say 10-12 kills having way more points then me. How does thus do so? How does this point system work?
-
Damage dealt, proximity to damage dealt and hits you take on your shield (Not sure about this last one, although it's the only explanation I can think of for why I can easily double the score of the 2nd place person on siege with my 24/15 shielder STF).
-
In a nutshell:
Points=
Damage_Player/10 (Unless it is a headshot then it is only 2 points, possibly a bug)
Damage_Horse_Yes_Rider/5 (So basically a total divisor of 50 for attacking horses with a player riding them)
Damage_Horse_No_Rider*0 (So basically you never get points for horses that are not under player control, or riderless horses)
Damage_Friendly*-2 (So if you did 20 damage to a friendly, it would penalize you by 4 points, because 20/10*-2)
You also get points for being near a friendly player scoring damage.
Damage dealt, proximity to damage dealt and hits you take on your shield (Not sure about this last one, although it's the only explanation I can think of for why I can easily double the score of the 2nd place person on siege with my 24/15 shielder STF).
Proximity bonus, shielders due to their durable/front-line nature will receive a lot more points from proximity since they don't have to be as mobile (and thus farther away at times) from the front-line fight. If you can somehow get any other class to remain in front-line combat as long, then they too will have similar points.
-
Ah thx guys appreciate the reply. One last thing. I always or more like very often, use a xbow. How does that work with the points? Sometimes i get 1 point for killing a guy and sometimes over 10.
-
That is most likely dependant on their health when you killed them.
-
is it just me or this enw system is bullshit. it doesn't actually reward those who do well, instead rewards those who just do damage.
-
Damage dealt, proximity to damage dealt and hits you take on your shield (Not sure about this last one, although it's the only explanation I can think of for why I can easily double the score of the 2nd place person on siege with my 24/15 shielder STF).
Basically means ranged never ever get valor because well...points based on proximity...and 3 points for a headshot across the map...yeah....retarded.
-
is it just me or this enw system is bullshit. it doesn't actually reward those who do well, instead rewards those who just do damage.
Whatchu on about, my k/d is 4.1 and I get valour almost all the time.
Granted, I'm easy-mode 2hander longsword crutcher spammer noob. Also, xbow is probably the hardest class to get high scores with, what with the 50% point reduction for ranged combined with crossbow reload time. That being said, melee is over-represented in average score.
All this system needs is some more tweaking, IMO.
-
Being cav and playing melle a good bit too what ive noticed is that you get alot of points just for being around team mates in combat. This means its harder for people like cav or maybe ranged to get as many points as melle players. There hav been times when i was playing melle and i didnt hit or kill anyone, but i got like 20 points just for being in the area of combat. And ive played cav and killed 4 people and didnt get 20 points from it.
I personally dont really think score is that great, i dont care about personal glory of being on top of the charts, but if score is used for team balance especially id see that as being bad. Id take a guy whose 25-1 and a lower score over a guy whose 2-4 and just got abunch of points for standing around in the area of combat, and ive seen many cases like this.
-
is it just me or this enw system is bullshit. it doesn't actually reward those who do well, instead rewards those who just do damage.
So you're saying that those who do lots of damage to the enemy aren't doing well?
-
points reward proximity (TEAMPLAY)
snipermy old friend xbows and cav line up to whine
-
is it just me or this enw system is bullshit. it doesn't actually reward those who do well, instead rewards those who just do damage.
No its not. It does not reward leeching archers who enjoy last-hits in a duel of fair opponents 8-)
-
points reward proximity (TEAMPLAY)
snipermy old friend xbows and cav line up to whine
Shooting an enemy before he murders a teammate good play and distracting and picking off infantry or charging through lines and breaking up infantry awesome team play moves for Cav. And it's easy to get shit loads of points with Cav especially if you know how to stay near the fight without getting dehorsed. Arabian 2h Cav best Cav
-
The score system is a joke. Sometimes you see guys with -1 kill and 8 deaths ahead of people with 10 kills and 2 deaths for example. The proximity part is the part that really needs to be removed. Being close to the battle doesn't really mean a player is doing anything useful, especially if they just sit there with a shield up. Ranged don't get good scores because they are not close to the fighting generally and they don't get very many points for head shots.
-
The score system is a joke. Sometimes you see guys with -1 kill and 8 deaths ahead of people with 10 kills and 2 deaths for example. The proximity part is the part that really needs to be removed. Being close to the battle doesn't really mean a player is doing anything useful, especially if they just sit there with a shield up. Ranged don't get good scores because they are not close to the fighting generally and they don't get very many points for head shots.
Whose to say that that -1 to 8 guy isn't doing amazing help with wounding the enemy team?
Ranged don't get points? You watched DaveUKR ingame he often gets 140 points with just his arbalest
-
I call bullshit on just using an arbalest unless he's just shooting horses and body shots because head shots give shit for points. I shot all my bolts one round as a dedicated arbalest killed like 7 people and had mop up 2 more to clutch. I made double the points on killing those guys with my military cleaver than with my arb all on my alt of course.
-
Shooting an enemy before he murders a teammate good play and distracting and picking off infantry or charging through lines and breaking up infantry awesome team play moves for Cav. And it's easy to get shit loads of points with Cav especially if you know how to stay near the fight without getting dehorsed. Arabian 2h Cav best Cav
1) When most archers attempt to "help" me by shooting into melee I get tw more than they hit enemy.
2) yes it's true cav can get a lot of points if they actually support infantry as melee cav, and not just go around padding their k:d by courser lancing peasants away from fight.
-
Proximity bonus needs to be completely removed, only give points for damage dealt. Currently an Arbalester will get ~2-3 points for a full HP to zero kill from across the map,, while a shielder can triple those points by doing nothing except RMB in the time it takes the Arb to reload. Shielder classes dominate current score system, so do pikemen.
Defensive, passive playstyle that don't do anything except sit in blobs avoiding damage are the only current winners in this system. I get less points for going on a rampage behind enemy lines winning 1 vs 10s against enemies than a shielder will get doing much less damage but closer to teammates, leeching their points.
It is a neat system but the proximity bonus is simply too good compared to actually doing damage or getting kills.
-
noticing a trend here, every person who says they dont like promixity scoring is 2h frag whore. too bad so sad, theres always duel server for you!
-
Proximity bonus needs to be completely removed, only give points for damage dealt. Currently an Arbalester will get ~2-3 points for a full HP to zero kill from across the map,, while a shielder can triple those points by doing nothing except RMB in the time it takes the Arb to reload. Shielder classes dominate current score system, so do pikemen.
Defensive, passive playstyle that don't do anything except sit in blobs avoiding damage are the only current winners in this system. I get less points for going on a rampage behind enemy lines winning 1 vs 10s against enemies than a shielder will get doing much less damage but closer to teammates, leeching their points.
It is a neat system but the proximity bonus is simply too good compared to actually doing damage or getting kills.
So true. I swear when I was a shielder I got valour like 1/3 of time and maybe even 1/2 on siege. You gain points for doing nothing. Literally.
-
noticing a trend here, every person who says they dont like promixity scoring is 2h frag whore. too bad so sad, theres always duel server for you!
Agreed. I think the proximity bonus needs to be toned down a bit, but it does support teamplay, which is something the battles seem to be lacking lately.
What I'd like to see implemented are assists. Damage an enemy before he is killed might be an alternative to the proximity scoring. Ranged that are supporting their infantry instead of shooting at random lone cavs would be able to cash in on points. Same thing with cav bumps to help out their infantry.
-
noticing a trend here, every person who says they dont like promixity scoring is 2h frag whore. too bad so sad, theres always duel server for you!
It's just not balanced currently, proximity points reward too much compared to damage. Not just 2handers complaining, plenty of us get it when playing well. Arbalests get a pathetic amount of points for the damage they do.
Also it doesn't seem balanced for damage done compared to number of hits you need. See how archers prefer racking up body shots than head shot kills, throwers griefing with throwing daggers to get constant valor, and how killing someone quickly in 2 hits sucks points wise compared to standing around blocking for a minute leeching proximity points and doing low damage hits.
What I'd like to see implemented are assists. Damage an enemy before he is killed might be an alternative to the proximity scoring. Ranged that are supporting their infantry instead of shooting at random lone cavs would be able to cash in on points. Same thing with cav bumps to help out their infantry.
Ideally you would get points mostly for just damaging people, then a point or two bonus for things like killing someone near a siege flag, assisting in a kill, or getting a kill. Like every other points-based scoring system in multiplayer games. Proximity bonus as of now is just not a very good system at all.
-
Agreed. I think the proximity bonus needs to be toned down a bit, but it does support teamplay, which is something the battles seem to be lacking lately.
What I'd like to see implemented are assists. Damage an enemy before he is killed might be an alternative to the proximity scoring. Ranged that are supporting their infantry instead of shooting at random lone cavs would be able to cash in on points. Same thing with cav bumps to help out their infantry.
As a teamplayer, I would much rather archers shoot and kill enemy cav than try and shoot into melee. More often than not they tw me, opening me up to get stunlocked killed by enemies.
-
the best way to get a lot of points is to fight with 5+ alone
you need to be fast and be good in blocking and of course had some luck
enemies will usually THs a lot
30 points in 10 sec isn't so rare
you will die but... who cares, you will get valour
with only xbow you can't have many points (ok, in some maps there are pretty save places close to battle but...)
even dave are mostly get points for using his mace, not only bow
generally score system is good
even with that points for being close to battle... but that points should be reduced for sth like 50%
about head shots: I think system is adding only points for main dmg, headshot dmg is multiplicated
edit:
oh, and about teamplay
I'm xbowman
I'm killing horses or riders that are going to attack my teamates
I'm killing inf that is going to kill my teammates
I'm shoting best players to weaken them and to let my teamates kill them
Isn't it a teamplay?
-
Funny you guys complain that frontline infantry like pikes, hoplites and shielders rack up points by staying alive, but who do you thinks wins most rounds? The team that decisively wins the initial infantry clash probably wins 90% of battle rounds, and they win that clash by staying alive and wearing down their opponents. Once a team is down a 10-20 player deficit after the first minute it's tough to recover.
There seems to be a prob with headshot scoring (I notice it too with throwing), but that's a seperate issue.
Also I'd like to suggest that you get proximity points for the negative damage enemy team does around in in form of teamwounds. if your footwork is slick enough you are causing all these TW you should be rewarded.
-
is it just me or this enw system is bullshit. it doesn't actually reward those who do well, instead rewards those who just do damage.
Doing damage is acctually doing well. What whould you suggest? Getting points for watching someone fight or just showing him your MW weapon? The new system is awesome imo. If you beated the shit out of your opponent, you get the credit for it, not some other dude who just happened to make the last 1hp hit.
-
Proximity-based score should be toned down a bit, but needs to stay in as it accurately reflects how people that do not do damage still cooperate in combat. It encourages people to form up squads, but not one big blob either.
-
Current system is measuring team-helpfulness pretty good with an easy method.
Staying alive in groups is never useless as you draw targets to you and if you are alive under the last 10-20 you can have more impact on winning or loosing the round. Also you are exaggerating, if you do really no damage yourself you won't get much points.
headshots should give more points though.
-
Proximity-based score should be toned down a bit, but needs to stay in as it accurately reflects how people that do not do damage still cooperate in combat. It encourages people to form up squads, but not one big blob either.
People who don't do damage simply aren't doing very well and shouldn't be rewarded. Proximity needs to be removed. I don't see what the problem with kill and death was, but if everyone wants a scoring system it should be based off damage/kills. Any proximity bonus just encourages big blobs of retards. Back when all xp was based around proximity the NA servers had all these dumb bridge maps that everyone just converged on for a complete lack of any sort of tactics. Squad play is much more viable without any sort of proximity bonus.
-
I understand now why skilless shielders had always good score.This shit should be removed really.
-
I don't get why my score doesn't affect on xp\gold gaining? No matter if my score is shit or good enough to be above the middle in scoreboard i just get crappy x1\50 - my actions never rewarded, and there is no sense to make too much efforts cause i will get shit xp anyway if team will lose.
THERE IS NO MOTIVATION TO BE USEFULL FOR TEAM AND IMPROVE YOUR PERFORMANCE.
-
I don't get why my score doesn't affect on xp\gold gaining? No matter if my score is shit or good enough to be above the middle in scoreboard i just get crappy x1\50 - my actions never rewarded, and there is no sense to make too much efforts cause i will get shit xp anyway if team will lose.
THERE IS NO MOTIVATION TO BE USEFULL FOR TEAM AND IMPROVE YOUR PERFORMANCE.
valour?
-
If you want to be rewarded for your efforts go longspear, x5 forever!
-
People who don't do damage simply aren't doing very well and shouldn't be rewarded. Proximity needs to be removed. I don't see what the problem with kill and death was, but if everyone wants a scoring system it should be based off damage/kills. Any proximity bonus just encourages big blobs of retards. Back when all xp was based around proximity the NA servers had all these dumb bridge maps that everyone just converged on for a complete lack of any sort of tactics. Squad play is much more viable without any sort of proximity bonus.
A battle, and even more so, a siege, is not about killing people. The "Battle" gamemode is a sick joke for that matter. It did play out as a big meat grinder back then because that was the way everybody could get the most xp. But in non-retarded circumstances, people fight for a purpose. Holding ground or pushing the enemy is the goal of fighting.
Now, valour only matters for the players that know they have reasonable chances to acheive it. Most people, no matter their class, don't. There's only one way to get lots of points : staying in a group, doing damage, and much more importantly, keeping your group alive. Any class caught alone is cake. An imaginary shielder that would turtle up to leech points is not contributing (or at least not enough) to it's teammates survival and will therefore lose them, and get killed right after that. In the meantime, he has gathered less points than any melee class actually contributing in any possible way to it's teammates survival.
-
System is flawless the more you risk the more points you get.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
/Thread
-
im getting valor at lvl 11
sounds about right
-
I was under the same impression, until I went on my 18/21 1h no shield and got a lot of points fighting 2-3 v 1s because I do so little damage and can sap 10 points per person from all the hits.
-
I was under the same impression, until I went on my 18/21 1h no shield and got a lot of points fighting 2-3 v 1s because I do so little damage and can sap 10 points per person from all the hits.
Ya, killing people in 2-3 hits gets you horrible points compared to lots of weak hits, even if it means you are killing enemies faster and helping your team win rounds. Same applies to arbalests doing lots of damage in 1 hit compared to horn bows or something with a higher rate of fire. The system just isn't balanced at all for damage to points ratio and rewards blobbing with proximity too much.
Lowering/removing proximity bonus and weighting damage far more for the points you get would make it a better system.
-
valour?
Tbh, i don't know how valour system works(kinda after winning round few top scorers get some bonus for xp\gold or something). But my skills not so high to be able to rival with top players and i don't want to, tbh. And my efforts in teamplay doesnt rewarded, so no matter if i will end round in middle of scoreboard or in very bottom i will get standart x1\50 gold. It makes me
1. - leeching(not trying to bring maximum profit for team)
2. - just ragequiet and play DTV, where my efforts rewarded according how good and fast we beat waves of bots.
All i want is motivation to be usefull for team with adequate reward, let it be small bonus if you are so greedy for giving ppl xp, but reward for your efforts should be, not only for top scorers! What sense to look at your scores if its doesn't bring you any profit??? Just senseless and frustrating.
-
If you want to be rewarded for your efforts go longspear, x5 forever!
Each time i get up to x5 bonus balancer switches me in losing team(especially in siege) no matter how you trying to prevent it, even longspear can't help me!
-
Each time i get up to x5 bonus balancer switches me in losing team(especially in siege) no matter how you trying to prevent it, even longspear can't help me!
Yes it can, the longspear will give you valour whatever team you are on.
-
Yes it can, the longspear will give you valour whatever team you are on.
I have a sneaking suspicion this isn't true...