New version: 0.287

[dodnet]

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.

As I said before I'm OK with this. The bonus for finishing just shouldn't be too high. 1-2 is ok, but 4 is too much as it's only a bonus to the actual damage done.

[Elindor]

I like it overall, but can you tell us how it works chadz?  We could probably give better feedback if we knew more how it worked.  Like generally how things are rewarded/penalized?  Don't need exact numbers per say, just an overview.

Also, in siege are there rewards for capping flag or opening/closing gates?  Pushing siege tower?
Not sure if that is even possible but would be cool for objective based gameplay being rewarded.

[Molly]

I don't see a reason for a kill bonus tbh but I guess the 2h heroes need something to finally shut up ;)

Just make it 2 points or something and the same as ranged headshot. Killing blow is killing blow, no matter from how far away it was done.

[Micah]

Score should be so that k/d becomes neglectable and can simply be skipped imho ... Since  that guy with most damage dealt to enemies most propably has  good k/d its basically unnessessary to track k/d.
Nevertheless , if score mainly based on damage dealt it would still favor high damage/dps classes over supporting classes. Im not sure if thats good or bad...
Possibly solveable by including the plain <HIT> amount plus the <DAMAGE> dealt into consideratioin..

[Grumbs]

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.

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.

[Micah]

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.

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.

+1
agreed, as i mentioned in my previous posts...
yet , since scorepoints are there now , we have to deal with the situation for the moment and make it as much usefull as possible ...
One of the bad scenarios for the system would be that its intention (the idea to reward teamplay and supporting ) would be simply ignored due its to "miraculous" or inappreaciated character (to complex or so). This would render its intention to improver teamwork due rewarding ineffective.
"code is law"~lessig

[Nehvar]

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.

It seems like this might be the case.  In DTV last night I noticed that my score at one point was a fair bit lower than a teammate with substantially less kills.  We were both infantry with myself generally killing bots in one hit and he taking several.  The bots killed by both parties were the bots agro'd to us individually so his higher score could not be explained by assists.  In that light it certainly looks like the final blow counts for less than it should.

[Zandieer]

- opponent players score
I want to +100 you but i cant 
Good teamplay is often to NOT deal most damage or any at all

(click to show/hide)

- not attacking in a gank squad of your team but instead watch for the back of the others
- kiting a group of shielders away from ranged to let them get shots off
- blocking hits aimed at your team mates
- warning team mates that are about to get backstabbed
- ... various other, very situational tactics

Real good battle behavior and teamplay can never be rewarded by points ...
 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 .

One of my favorite things to do is to take a shield and block that nasty 2hand trying to to spam my friends, not even once trying to hit him. That way, people can freely hit him without me hitting my friends, I just block his weapon. Tho, it sometimes DOES mess peoples hits when I'm on the way, but sometimes it's better than him killing everyone.

[Butan]

Score system is OK but damaging horses should award less points than hitting players.

[karasu]

Honestly I don't care about scoreboard, other than to see if any clan mate is online too.

What scares me the most, is the upcoming shitstorm if the xp / gold gain will be related to this system.

[Micah]

Score system is OK but damaging horses should award less points than hitting players.

if horses would deal less damage this might be reasonable...

Edit:

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

[Penitent]

I love the score system.  I'd adjust a few things however.

I think a kill should be worth significantly more points than an assist.  No, not because people who get lots of kills should be at the top....but because killing an enemy helps the team a LOT more than hitting him.  I can have 3 hps left and still slaughter many players.

Slightly less points for hitting horses.  Yes, its a great help to hit and kill horses...but I think more points should be awarded for actually hitting and killing players rather than ruining their "equipment."

Maybe points for damaging and breaking shields? 

Overall, really nice change.  it is awesome!  Good job to all involved.

Now, please add the "dead bodies absorb damage" patch to the NA seige server.  Please.

[Blackbow]

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

agree with that !!!

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.

like i said u was cool in past what happend to you ?
maybe u need a small break ???!!!

[chadz]

algorythm here:
http://forum.meleegaming.com/general-discussion/adjust-the-new-scoresystem-slightly-feedback/msg573046/#msg573046

locking this thread for a few hours so the discussion moves there