Ranged scoring

[Kamirane]

Proximity points might be not perfect but being close to the fight raises the risk to die significantly, doesn't it?

Standing on a hill, pewpewing all the time is pretty risk free compared to being in the middle of the melee clusterfuck.
Point system is fine. Ranged shouldn't get as many points as melee... imo.

Besides, where is the valour in attacking the enemy from afar?

Archers are not designed to be extremely near to melee fighting and thats why they should get a disadvantage to gain valor?
And standin alone on a hill is everything else as risk free. Just think about Cav.

[Gurnisson]

currently throwing gets you 1-2 points per hit and there is not much ammo, but TH's get you -8 points which is ridiculous

Pretty much goes for all classes, the difference in points from team attack and normal hit, just hurts more for classes with low possible damage output and low RoF like throwers and arbalests.

[Macropus]

Proximity points might be not perfect but being close to the fight raises the risk to die significantly, doesn't it?

Standing on a hill, pewpewing all the time is pretty risk free compared to being in the middle of the melee clusterfuck.
Point system is fine. Ranged shouldn't get as many points as melee... imo.

Besides, where is the valour in attacking the enemy from afar?

The lower risk is already compensated by light armor/low melee capabilities.

Why shouldn't ranged get as many points as melee if we consider players with equial skill both in archery and melee?

The term "valour" has nothing to do with rewarding skilled players who did well in the fight through the round.

[Zlisch_The_Butcher]

Valor is a broken feature and should just be removed completely.

[Gurnisson]

The lower risk is already compensated by light armor/low melee capabilities.

It's perfectly possible to make builds with both decent melee and ranged capabilities, it's just that most people prefer not to. I have an 18/24 archer for example, but I've also tried 18/18 and 18/21 with melee capabilities. They all work quite well with a different niche for each build.

[Teeth]

May I ask in what why ranged scoring got nerfed? Are you talking about since the start of the score system or something more recent. If the former, this is not restricted to ranged. Couching 8 people in a round as Great Lance cav = 25 points 

Adjustment 1:
A big flaw is that the points system seems to reward lots of low damage hits more than a few high damage hits. Couching someone from full hp to death gives you 3 points mostly. Whacking Butan to death with a quarterstaff gives you like 30. I think it would be a lot better if every player would be worth 10 points, with the amount of points your hit gives you being the amount of hp you took away divided by the total hp times ten and then rounded up.

Example:

You slash 15 hit points of a 60 hp player  15 / 60 x 10 = 2,5 -> 3 points

You headshot a 60 hp player with an arbalest and he dies instantly  60/60 x 10 = 10 -> 10 points

You took another player out of the game, whether you did it in one shot or it would have been done in 4 seperate hits later, it has the same effect and therefore the reward should be the same in my opinion. The values are just examples, it should probably be more like 7 points per player to work with the current valour system. Perhaps armour should be taken into account some way or another to prevent low armour hunting. The base argument is, everyone should be equally and proportionally awarded for the damage they inflicted.


Adjustment 2
Probably wont have a huge effect, but it would be nice if the proximity points radius would be around the guy that inflicted the damage, not the one that received it. This way people protecting ranged get points and groups of ranged boost eachother's points similar to the way melee groups do.

[Kamirane]

It's perfectly possible to make builds with both decent melee and ranged capabilities, it's just that most people prefer not to. I have an 18/24 archer for example, but I've also tried 18/18 and 18/21 with melee capabilities. They all work quite well with a different niche for each build.

yup. thats the thing. i play C-RPG because i am able to play what i want and not only a few standard builds. Without this choice i could also play just a normal M&B multiplayer.

(click to show/hide)

Couching 8 people in a round as Great Lance cav = 25 points 

Adjustment 1:
A big flaw is that the points system seems to reward lots of low damage hits more than a few high damage hits. Couching someone from full hp to death gives you 3 points mostly. I think it would be a lot better if every player would be worth 10 points, with the amount of points your hit gives you being the amount of hp you took away divided by the total hp times ten and then rounded up.

Example:

You take slash 15 hit points of a 60 hp player  15 / 60 x 10 = 2,5 -> 3 points

You headshot a 60 hp player with an arbalest and he dies instantly  60/60 x 10 = 10 -> 10 points

You took another player out of the game, whether you did it in one shot or it would have been done in 4 seperate hits later, it has the same effect and therefore the reward should be the same in my opinion. The values are just examples, it should probably be more like 7 points per player to work with the current valour system. Perhaps armour should be taken into account some way or another to prevent low armour hunting. The base argument is, everyone should be equally and proportionally awarded for the damage they inflicted.


Adjustment 2
Probably wont have a huge effect, but it would be nice if the proximity points radius would be around the guy that inflicted the damage, not the one that received it. This way people protecting ranged get points and groups of ranged boost eachother's points similar to the way melee groups do.

want to up this 10000000000000000000000 times....

[Turboflex]

The whole being in range bonus encourages ppl to zerg (some for of team work i suppose), but at the same time punishes classes which by their very nature should not bunch up.

For the objective of team victory, bunching up in the first minute is MUCH more important than being a loner.

The team with 30 guys smashing into the other team's 15 bunched guys is going to smash through them, and that result will snowball the whole round and usually the next 1-2 minutes will just be cleaning up scattered people.

So it stands to reason that the system rewards people for actions that encourage strong grouping play for the initial confrontation between infantry formations which settles the outcome of the round 80-90% of the time.

[Bars]

its shit. to get valour u need minimal 25 points, its mean u need 25 hits with 30 arrows!!! its possible?! if u hit alies u get -3 points! this is crazy

sry for my bad english

[NejStark]

For the objective of team victory, bunching up in the first minute is MUCH more important than being a loner.

The team with 30 guys smashing into the other team's 15 bunched guys is going to smash through them, and that result will snowball the whole round and usually the next 1-2 minutes will just be cleaning up scattered people.

So it stands to reason that the system rewards people for actions that encourage strong grouping play for the initial confrontation between infantry formations which settles the outcome of the round 80-90% of the time.

It is more important to do so, and in doing so succesfully they will be reward with multiplier. Eschewing how representative the scoreboard is of the actual player contribution is an indelicate solution, when it clearly penalises players who (rightfully) arent in the blob.

How it is now merely serves as an operant conditioner to keep people together (which is the right thing to do for inf). 

Teeth makes good suggestions with reward being proportional to the targets HP total.

BUT for cav ( I know, everyone hates cav, they dont need any help at all) if the radius/helper scoring is staying, the radius for ranged cav players should increase to represent their greater mobility and intentional isolation?)

Personally though, I think scrap radius. I can run around with powerful melee players and end up in top ten, and guys below me have been headshotting/decapitating people like champs.

[MrShine]

Proximity points might be not perfect but being close to the fight raises the risk to die significantly, doesn't it?

Standing on a hill, pewpewing all the time is pretty risk free compared to being in the middle of the melee clusterfuck.
Point system is fine. Ranged shouldn't get as many points as melee... imo.

Besides, where is the valour in attacking the enemy from afar?

My understanding was that valor was supposed to reward the players who have the greatest impact on their team's chances of winning.  If that's truly the goal, then it has failed. 

Proximity points are garbage IMO... it rewards melee classes disproportionately, and oftentimes it rewards people for doing something wrong (bunching up too much & interfering with teammate swings).

There are a lot of good ideas for how to fix this (I made a suggestion thread about it ) but I doubt devs are going to spend the time to improve it at this point.

[Molly]

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

For this kind of play style they simply don't deserve a reward.


Oww, and best suggestion yet: Simply remove valour - it was stupid from the start.

[NejStark]

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

For this kind of play style they simply don't deserve a reward.

Of course they do. Not everyone should be route-1 charging inf. They're playing to their strengths and should not be penalised.

People playing and enjoying different classes is one of the things I love about this mod. Sure I'm not alone.

[Teeth]

It's just that some classes are enjoyable only for the guy playing it, and thoroughly annoying and lame for everyone else. Surely discouraging people from playing those classes is justified for the sake of gameplay?

[NejStark]

The diversity of classes is one of the things that make this game/mod better than others, for me anyway.
 
If some archer is up in the rocks raining arrows down, and headshots me then well played him imo.

Same as if a 2h or polearm in the thick of the blob slicing ppl up and he takes me down when i try to bump him.

I dont think people should be penalised for playing with personality, even if it is annoying.