New version: 0.287

[DaveUKR]

If you feel forced to go for a kill instead of helping your team just by a score, you are an idiot anyway.

The multiplier system will be gone and you'll see how many such idiots there are. I don't care about score and most of my kills are save kills, so don't bother to accuse me of being bad teamplayer. The problem is that currently it doesn't reward longshots (while in Native they're rewarded), it doesn't reward kills and doesn't reward headshots. It's still better to shoot in the horse than in the horseman scorewise.

Score should be something that will reward for doing good and right things. I think that after some working on it - it will be awesome. Thanks to chadz for that.

[Vibe]

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

[dodnet]

If you choose your target only by score, you really are an idiot. If the game encourages that, so everyone only plays to get the highest score we are definitely on the wrong way.

Personally I'm ok with the multi system and don't think its a good idea to bind that to a score. I get a fairly good score, so I'm not against it because it would hurt me, but it might encourage everyone to choose targets only on the points they give and thats a really bad idea.

[Grumbs]

The score will never accurately represent someone's worth. It can only encourage and give a slight reward to people who would get nothing before. It can't have any sense of the circumstance for the kill, whether you're in a clutch situation, whether anyone converts damage into kills or not (damage without a kill is fairly pointless), will you lose more points for team killing your top player, even if he isn't quite performing at his best atm but could be reliable in a clutch? Do you get points for destroying shields, or making them weaker? Points for kicks that guarantee a kill for a team mate? Points for a weak hit that interrupts the player for your team mate who then kills him?

You just shouldn't take points too seriously, just do what you think is best to win the round. That is why personally I think multipliers based on team wins is a very sound reward system. It takes everything that happened in the round and rewards everyone for the team effort. Making it more personal may result in people playing less for the team and more for looking good on the score board.

Maybe the score should be only visible at the end of the map, or still order by KPD. But if they put too much emphasis on it by rewarding people with more xp/gold for their score you can guarentee people will try to farm points rather than do whats best for the team.

I would much prefer people didn't take score seriously though, rewarding people based on their score may make that difficult tho

[Leshma]

Hitting destructible doors and gates in siege should give a (small) reward as well as capping the flag.

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.

[Ganner]

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)

!

[Molly]

You can't take every single action into consideration for points. Smashing Kinngrimms shield is nice but hasn't done anything to really help the team yet. You'll get points  for hitting Kinngrimm himself afterwards. Same for siege shields... it would get way too complex if you would go that way, rewarding every tiny little thing.

Hitting a player = points, hitting a horse with rider = points

Doesn't need anything else than that. The tricky part is the contribution of points based on those 2 factors.

[Akynos]

As we see, the score still needs to be tweaked to truly reflect contribution. To me, it seems like people who actually kill the guys are
not rewarded as they should be right now, even while considering that they may not have delivered the most damage.

Wow.  You're needlessly offensive; and not worth my time.

I'm sorry if that seemed offensive, it was not my intention. I just want to get my point across that I think, based on in-game experience,
that the score system does not yet fully reflect contribution.

Anyway, I'd still like to thank the team for it, because even as unbalanced as it is now, it is a very nice new feature to have. It is fair that
people should be rewarded for their contribution rather than for their kills. Now make it work properly

[Tovi]

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.
So, actually, scoring is cool but not my goal. It won't change my gameplay.

[dodnet]

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.

Well there should be a limit to this... and this might also be exploitable: put someone of your friends into enemyteam, bring a shitload of shields and just hit these shields over and over again. Whats with 13 shield skill btw? Unlimited points?

[Molly]

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.
So, actually, scoring is cool but not my goal. It won't change my gameplay.

You, good Sir, are probably one of the few exceptions.

[Akynos]

actually you never feel like complaining about it when you've got 5 kills less than the best player, yet you top the scoreboard
But you've got to be honest and see that maybe all you did was to dehorse a guy a swing at a headarmorless guy.

[Kafein]

I think cav and ranged people get big scores because they have the best opportunities for dealing damage to squishy flesh, aka horses.

Horses have lots of HP and most of those used have very light armor, which means you get a lot of points for each succesfull hit.

I also think kills should be more important. When you deal with 4 enemies, it's a lot better to kill one rather than damage all of them, even for double the amount of damage you needed to kill the first guy.

[dodnet]

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.

[Leshma]

There should definitely be some ladder based on k/d and w/l which will be used to determine value of individual player. Levels aren't good way to determine that because there are high level people who are way easier to kill than many level 30 players.

Btw. killing blow never gives more than 3 points. I think it's 2 points most of the time.