Jump to content
elerik

points system thoughts

Recommended Posts

Who is best player ?

There are few still open and repeating discusion.

 

1) About "point" system. Who is best player? How to count it, what to display, record K/D,...

2) Medical system. How to motivate people not "give up" and motivate them to wait for medic.

 

There are players who focus on realism and trying fight hard in team. And others who are focus on shooting and stuff like that. some people think about ticket count, loosing or wining like a team. But most of players i guess just ignore that and just enjoy battlefield atmosphere. So we can see how people just without fear run against wall of bullets and luckily clear position without injury. No fear and in 10-20% of situation they will have success and broke enemy line.

 

There are ideas like "respawn" penalty. But this will have effect "rage quit" because people want play, not wait. We can experiment with dynamic ticket counting (for example each double twice ticket reducing) but many people dont care if they win or lost a game as a team so this can very fast bleed out team.

 

So i got idea. Its simple organize of end of game overview table. I think almost everybody watch their K/D at the end of game. And points. And this is where people win or loss a game. If they found their nickname in Top of 10 they are happy they win. What will happen if we remove -100 point for each death ?They could be great shooters but if they give up easily they will be at the end of table. And what will be in their head next game ? I am great player. I want to be at the top 10. I have to survive this fight.

People dont care about tickets. They care about points. I saw many times at the end of game [sL]xxxyyyy 1500 points 0 kills 4 deaths. What does it mean ? He is not squad leader he is pointman. First come, first death. Fast respawn. End of game. Title "your team lost a game" but this guy see he is first with point in squad he win. He is happy and next game he is again terrible leader who is first under fire and make some crazy decision like suicide run against wall of bullets. 

 

So sort list by death and equal by points and we will have reality about players. This bring frustration about "self" and skills. And slowly change thinking to "survive" battle.And people will start care about better "death" score.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your K/D is not representative of your influence on the game. Squad Leaders having negative K/Ds is pretty common, as they deal a lot with management and information gathering. That can mean staring at your map, communicating to other SLs, and issuing orders to your squad members and fireteams. All stuff that can make you pretty combat ineffective. It's not because the SL is playing point man that he dies a lot, it's because he's not often in combat and so not racking up kills, while dying when his squad dies. In fact, point man SLs far more often have positive K/Ds, while us Logistics/Recon/Transport/Artillery SLs generally always have negative K/Ds. 

 

But again, K/D is not representative of your influence on the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure K/D is not representative...example  it was just fast example which i got in my head (true/fact is not important)

 

But Iam talking about human psychology. how it works. K/D is not representative. But individuali its very important. Points are even much more important. Doesn't matter if team win or lost. Sure there are peoples who dont care about it and think about team. But very often theme is there ... "rapid give up" and "point system" problems. And how to transform game to more teamwork. 

 

You can talk same about moneys. They are not important commonly. But individually humans are possible to do terrible things because of money. For pure Life itself they have 0 effect. 

Same with points. They are not important. But individually people want see themselves in Top 10. Its natural reaction. 

 

And my "point" was about end of game overview and sorting players. 

And motivating people not give up when they are wounded and take more care about their virtual life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't the K/D show up at the end of the round, if I'm not mistaken? I believe it's not shown during the course of a round so folks aren't fixated on their K/D rather than their influence on the overall objective. The end of round summary shows point standing and K/D. Seems like a balanced compromise to your point. 

 

*Edit*: I also believe some of the proposed changes to the medic class will help influence players not to "give up" so quickly allowing for revives. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Edit*: I also believe some of the proposed changes to the medic class will help influence players not to "give up" so quickly allowing for revives.

I think that players who give up before X amount of time should recieve penalties, such as 1 extra death added to score and X amount of points taken away. This makes it something players will consider the effects of before doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In terms of the medical system, the game currently allows for too many respawns. Limiting respawns will definitely encourage people to not give up so quickly, along with encouraging more teamwork and more tactics. In fact, the entire respawn system is very unrealistic. By unrealistic I mean it goes against the grain of what would be considered a tactical simulation. The forward spawns and ease and quickness of spawns is almost similar to a CoD title. I would much rather see spawns conducted in timed waves and each side being given a limited number of waves/reinforcements. This would provide a much more tactical and realistic flow to combat. But, I know this will never change as this current system has been a staple of the franchise. It's just very odd to have these instant respawns in this type of game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

highlighting individual accomplishments willonly take away from what the game is  "SQUAD" ... not "Call of Duty".  Making an individual stand out for killing the most is not what this game is about.  

 

Sure we all like to see how many peeps we actually killed, but lets not make it the standout in the end.  I like to look at my kills just to see if the guys I thought I killed, I did kill.  Most of the time it doesn't.  I kill much less.

 

Adding a ranking on kills will only bring all the COD gamers to come play this game to see if they can be top score.  They wont care about the SQUAD.  and the squad only succeeds if all its player work together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what you described I'm afraid "those people" are not exactly the target audience.

I for one like Squad/PR because of the experience it provides. Intense firefights, team play, the thrill and virtual danger.

I care more about the experience of storming an enemy position in a coordinated assault with my team or dashing to save a wounded team-mate as a medic while the rest of the squad provide cover fire.

I don't care about my KD rate or if I'm top player at the end screen. Some of the best matches I had were lost by me and my team.

Let's just say it's not about the destination, it's about the road there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Adding a ranking on kills will only bring all the COD gamers to come play this game to see if they can be top score.  They wont care about the SQUAD.  and the squad only succeeds if all its player work together.

 

You guys are being awfully silly if you really think CoD gamers will be on Squad because of a point or ranking system. RO has one too and the two crowds are entirely different. It's the gameplay that separates everything not a progression system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Indeed sir!...

Squad=Teamwork

Individuals /Individually = Lone wolf's

Simples! !

 

That's not true at all. It takes a special individual to be able to lead a team to success. By the same token it takes great individual teammates to lead to a strong collective and cohesive unit. Being an individual does not automatically equate to being a lone wolf. It's a disservice I think to look at your teammates as nameless grunts. 

 

Also, if individuals don't matter then why is there a squad member recommendation thread? Why are they separating and highlighting individuals? Performance in this game isn't necessarily about k/d which is what so many fail to understand. They assume that those in favor of points are all about k/d, which is not the case at all. To the contrary there are many other ways to measure an individuals contributions to the team and the team's overall goals. It's basically just an automated system to what you guys are already doing on the forum. If you're not in favor of highlighting individual performance then the thread should be removed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In terms of the medical system, the game currently allows for too many respawns. Limiting respawns will definitely encourage people to not give up so quickly, along with encouraging more teamwork and more tactics. In fact, the entire respawn system is very unrealistic. By unrealistic I mean it goes against the grain of what would be considered a tactical simulation. The forward spawns and ease and quickness of spawns is almost similar to a CoD title. I would much rather see spawns conducted in timed waves and each side being given a limited number of waves/reinforcements. This would provide a much more tactical and realistic flow to combat. But, I know this will never change as this current system has been a staple of the franchise. It's just very odd to have these instant respawns in this type of game.

 

Not to worry. The current spawning system is just a stop-gap while logistical assets and systems are being completed. In the final iteration, we're likely to have a logistical system where FOBs require supplies brought from the main base to build, and spawning on FOBs will drain supplies, which means that teams have to be able to consistently resupply FOBs to keep them operational. Something similar to this suggestion of mine.

 

Respawns are already limited by the team's tickets, and you are unlikely to see a timed wave feature as it is destructive to emergent gameplay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Current scoreboard figures are so abstract, reaching tens of thousands for one squad, not really awarding points for a lot of actions, etc - so the system is inherently flawed. Bottom line is that we'll never make a script that's fully able to quantify 'what is teamwork'. That's why I think we should have something different instead. Something much more tangible, that displays your DIRECT contribution to losing/winning the round.

 

Two figures. 

 

1) One showing how many tickets you robbed off the opposing team with your actions. (kills, objectives, bleeds, etc combined) 

2) Second showing how many tickets you cost your team. Not only deaths and teamkills, but also losing a FOB you placed and such.

 

Obviously a very rough idea, but I find it interesting. In the end of the round if you see that you took 300 tickets from the enemy, and they started off with say.. 400 - you'll know you did a damn good job. In any case these numbers would be much smaller and comprehensible than right now. And this system wouldn't be something totally foreign either, all important actions already cost tickets in-game. We'd only need to count/show them differently.

 

I should probably make a separate suggestion, but I would probably over-explain it and nobody would bother to read that book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Who is best player ?

There are few still open and repeating discusion.

 

1) About "point" system. Who is best player? How to count it, what to display, record K/D,...

2) Medical system. How to motivate people not "give up" and motivate them to wait for medic.

 

There are players who focus on realism and trying fight hard in team. And others who are focus on shooting and stuff like that. some people think about ticket count, loosing or wining like a team. But most of players i guess just ignore that and just enjoy battlefield atmosphere. So we can see how people just without fear run against wall of bullets and luckily clear position without injury. No fear and in 10-20% of situation they will have success and broke enemy line.

 

There are ideas like "respawn" penalty. But this will have effect "rage quit" because people want play, not wait. We can experiment with dynamic ticket counting (for example each double twice ticket reducing) but many people dont care if they win or lost a game as a team so this can very fast bleed out team.

 

So i got idea.

 

1) The best player is the best team player, it depends on the situation. Points are a crude inaccurate method to attempt to define it and not necessary. If you're playing to top the scoreboard instead of helping your squad to succeed even if that means driving a truck the entire time, you're in the wrong game.

 

2) Make respawns long enough that you will avoid it at all costs unless you have no choice. Let them rage quit, consider it an effective filter.....

 

There is no need for "points" to be associated with an individual player, squad wide would be ok I suppose, although I'm fine with simple stats only available at the end. Show # of caps/kills/deaths/revives etc and by squad, no individual listings. I'm cool with individual stat tracking, but not while in game. 

 

The more that you create a meta game outside the battle at hand, you will divide players attention and create an environment that a points chaser will inhabit. CODites won't come to Squad because of a point or ranking system, but they will stay because of it and dilute the player base who doesn't give a crap about that stuff.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) One showing how many tickets you robbed off the opposing team with your actions. (kills, objectives, bleeds, etc combined) 

2) Second showing how many tickets you cost your team. Not only deaths and teamkills, but also losing a FOB you placed and such.

 

The problem here is that there are a lot of actions that heavily affect your team's success, which have no way of being recorded. The obvious example here is recon; lying around on a hill for the duration of a match, reporting on enemy movements that allows your team to effectively attack and defend can have a huge impact on the game, but there is literally no way of quantifying this. There's also a lot of squads that operate between objectives, screening the objectives and tying up enemy forces. They can often have negative K/Ds and little if any points from capping objectives, but if they tie up and distract enemy forces in great numbers, they can often be responsible for another squad being able to cap the next objective or defend their flag. Points just don't work without context, and there's no way of recording that context.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem here is that there are a lot of actions that heavily affect your team's success, which have no way of being recorded. The obvious example here is recon; lying around on a hill for the duration of a match, reporting on enemy movements that allows your team to effectively attack and defend can have a huge impact on the game, but there is literally no way of quantifying this. There's also a lot of squads that operate between objectives, screening the objectives and tying up enemy forces. They can often have negative K/Ds and little if any points from capping objectives, but if they tie up and distract enemy forces in great numbers, they can often be responsible for another squad being able to cap the next objective or defend their flag. Points just don't work without context, and there's no way of recording that context.

 

I know. What you are describing is exactly how things are right now.

 

With my idea though, points are much more defined. DIRECT actions are rewarded points - you shooting that enemy, you sweating in that cap, you destroying their FOB. Whatever ACTUALLY takes a ticket off their team. Obviously support roles have little direct impact on opposing team's ticket loss, so it goes without saying that their scores are low or even negative. People would come to expect that. I don't see any way around that. 

 

With this system we would also get rid of separate kill/deaths counters, which may be really good for this game.

 

So to repeat - the difference is that currently we are rewarding various actions such as being in cap or healing a teammate. We're trying to quantify teamwork and it will never really work. I propose we concentrate on an actual figure we can measure - tickets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But that's even worse, cc. The only function of points is to say "these are the people who did the best". It affects how people play the game, think of other players, and judge themselves. Your suggestion would not promote teamwork.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But that's even worse, cc. The only function of points is to say "these are the people who did the best". It affects how people play the game, think of other players, and judge themselves.

 

Would you prefer to not have any stats at all? That would be a bit strange. Round ends *poof* new starts. 

 

 

 Your suggestion would not promote teamwork.

 

I don't agree. It really comes down to what bleeds tickets the most. Singular kills are often irrelevant. However capping objectives, holding them for a long period of time and destroying enemy assets are much more significant. And here is the point - you can't do any of the latter alone. So it does in fact promote objective oriented gameplay and sticking together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you prefer to not have any stats at all?

 

Uhhh, yes. There are many other ways of rewarding players without resorting to de-contextualized stats.

 

I don't agree. It really comes down to what bleeds tickets the most. Singular kills are often irrelevant. However capping objectives, holding them for a long period of time and destroying enemy assets are much more significant. And here is the point - you can't do any of the latter alone. So it does in fact promote objective oriented gameplay and sticking together.

 

 

But you're talking about rewarding two squads differently, even though both squads contributed equally. As I showed with my previous examples, you can do a lot of things that do not directly affect the ticket loss of your team or the enemy team, but does facilitate other squads to inflict a ticket loss on the enemy, or saves your team considerable tickets. Now, either stats do matter or they don't. If they don't matter, then what is the point in having them? If they do matter, how do you justify this?

 

I really have to ask you, what are you trying to achieve with this stats system of yours?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But you're talking about rewarding two squads differently, even though both squads contributed equally. As I showed with my previous examples, you can do a lot of things that do not directly affect the ticket loss of your team or the enemy team, but does facilitate other squads to inflict a ticket loss on the enemy, or saves your team considerable tickets.

 

 

Contributed equally in what way? Time spent playing? Yes, we can only measure the actions of players, who are actually doing the work. A recon team providing verbal support would undoubtedly have a close to zero score. And I think it makes perfect sense if you understand the context of these points. They measure your (and I can't stress this word enough) DIRECT impact on tickets.

 

 

I really have to ask you, what are you trying to achieve with this stats system of yours?

 

 

I feel like I have to repeat myself here, but okay - my proposed idea is an alternative to the current scoring system. Like we have established already, current system isn't whole because it's difficult to quantify teamwork. This is why I think we shouldn't try to measure it, but rely on tickets instead, which really are the defining numbers of our gamemodes. And through that, we encourage teamwork, playing the objectives, not lone wolfing and such. People who are in supportive roles would have to understand that their contribution would not show up on the scoreboard, because they didn't participate in the the fight DIRECTLY, with their OWN hands. These numbers don't necessarily show how good of a teamplayer you are (contrary to what current system is TRYING to achieve), but instead how much hurt you inflicted to the opposing team. (considering tickets=lives) It's an important distinction between the two systems. It's something we can actually count.

 

Ultimately winning or losing always boils down to two numbers (team tickets), so in my opinion it make sense to display team successes/failures based on exactly those.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does reward it, if it has anything to do with tickets. TICKETS. No emotional support from a hilltop.

 

 

 

Singular kills are often irrelevant. However capping objectives, holding them for a long period of time and destroying enemy assets are much more significant. And here is the point - you can't do any of the latter alone. So it does in fact promote objective oriented gameplay and sticking together.

 

But alright enough is enough, doing full circles here quoting myself. I put my idea out there and explained it, maybe it'll be useful, maybe not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×