the scoring system

[Adam_Bomb]

I'm still waiting to hear someone say my 12 shield 12 ath build is effective and deserving of being near the top of the scoreboard...

[Bryggan]

Nice! You could zip around the fighters shield up just getting in everyone's way and make mega-points!  And you can have a lot of fun ctr-Ming the hundreds of team hits you'd get.

[Adam_Bomb]

Nice! You could zip around the fighters shield up just getting in everyone's way and make mega-points!  And you can have a lot of fun ctr-Ming the hundreds of team hits you'd get.

LOL thats actually a pretty good description... never said it wasn't fun Most of my kills are backstabs or people typing

[Elindor]

Wow, this has gotten pretty heated

Couple things:

- Score system is better than none at all imho, used to JUST be kills
- I'm pretty sure they are still working on the final system and multi's will be determined by more than just winning or losing then.
- I do think that one small tweak to the system could be to actually give a few more points for kills/dmg or a few less for proximity, not sure...just a thought.

[MrShine]

The next time you are in a strat battle take a look at the KD of players, and then take a look at their position on the scoreboard.

The guys that are going like 30-4 in the middle/lower end of the scoreboard?  Those are xbowers & archers.
The guys that are 25-30 near the top of the scoreboard?  Those are melee.

It's painfully obvious (I thought to everyone but I guess not?) that scoring for ranged is broken when compared to a melee class.  I didn't even think this was a question.

[Cyranule]

How about a straight 1:1 of damage - points

An archer headshots some mindless melee with 20 health out of 50? Archer gets 20 points. 
Same would go for melee and cavalry of course. 
Valour system would need to be tweaked something along the lines of top three get it.

It would open a lot of eyes.  Mostly those who feel ranged is underpowered and constantly over nerfed.

[Adam_Bomb]

How about a straight 1:1 of damage - points

An archer headshots some mindless melee with 20 health out of 50? Archer gets 20 points. 
Same would go for melee and cavalry of course. 
Valour system would need to be tweaked something along the lines of top three get it.

It would open a lot of eyes.  Mostly those who feel ranged is underpowered and constantly over nerfed.

Honestly don't think this is a bad idea.  Seems like this is how it should have been all along.

[Zlisch_The_Butcher]

How about a straight 1:1 of damage - points

An archer headshots some mindless melee with 20 health out of 50? Archer gets 20 points. 
Same would go for melee and cavalry of course. 
Valour system would need to be tweaked something along the lines of top three get it.

It would open a lot of eyes.  Mostly those who feel ranged is underpowered and constantly over nerfed.

Teamhits should give -10:1 of the damage to your points then, otherwise teamhitting amounts will be crazy.

[Siper]

I'd like to make another point- You know how you barely get points for killing naked/low armored folks? Ever notice how much you get targeted by arrows when you are poorly armored? I think archers tend to target only the lowly armored enemy just for the sake of kills, then complain about high kd/low points ratio. Not saying all archers do it, but I do think it's something to take into consideration. I'm also fairly certain people get most of their points based on the damage they inflict on the enemy, there is no unfairness.

Eh, someone correct me if I'm wrong.. do archers not get the same points for damage as melee? if they do the exact same damage?

[Bryggan]

They do, its just they're complaining they don't get proximity points near kills.  Though they help melee get it by shooting right into close fights the odd time they don't hit their own teammates.  Personally I love the proximity points.  It rewards you for charging right into the melee, rather than waiting for nice safe cheap shots.  It also makes it worth it to keep fighting when vastly outnumbered, spinning around and getting the enemy's TW points (I think it works that way), rather than running away leaving your few buddy's to cover your retreat.

The extra points are for the risks you take.  In melee if you miss a shot there's a good chance you'll die.  Ranged can miss every single shot and still be the last guy on the team and running away.  The guys who get valour consistently are usually the best players.  Unless a person has 12 ath and 12 shield skill, a mediocre player will usually die in those intense close combat conflicts.  With friends and enemies swinging madly you really need a good feel of who's who and where.  It's best to hold back and go for the cheap shots.

I love having good archer support, I love killing a guy after he's stunned by an arrow, but if I'm the one who's hit, I'm the one who's dead.  And after you're dead you don't get any more points.

[Adamar]

Lol, the same biased anti-ranged bullshit over the years.
Where you people even here when the damage stats where released when ranged was 'overpowered'.

How can people even dare to suggest ranged does the same damage as melee?

[Bryggan]

Um, did you read my post?  I love archers.  But just like melee and cav, I hate the ones that kill me.  I even feel a little ashamed when I get head shotted and it only takes 40% of my health.  I just don't think they're all that valourous.

[MrShine]

Eh, someone correct me if I'm wrong.. do archers not get the same points for damage as melee? if they do the exact same damage?

No, they definitely don't. I'm not sure how I could confirm that, but I typically get 0-2 points per arrow hit.  Meanwhile I've gotten 8 points in a single stab before when hitting a horse & rider as an example. 

[Siper]

No, they definitely don't. I'm not sure how I could confirm that, but I typically get 0-2 points per arrow hit.  Meanwhile I've gotten 8 points in a single stab before when hitting a horse & rider as an example.

You misunderstand me... Obviously a swing (or a stab) does more damage than a single arrow, but I'm talking about the damage inflicted on the enemy. Melee and Archers (if I'm correct) receive the same amount of score points from damage inflicted. Example: Melee does a swing which inflicts 20 damage, and archer shoots 3 arrows that inflicts 20 damage, both receive the same score, it would be logical/fair.

It's what cyranule suggests, but I think it's already in place, but still waiting on someone to call out my error.

[Adam_Bomb]

It's what cyranule suggests, but I think it's already in place, but still waiting on someone to call out my error.

I don't think I ever remember getting more than 5 points for a one shot kill (and not just peasants) with my mw steel bolts and mw arbalest. Pretty sure there is some kind of cap on ranged points per hit.