A Badge For Points.

[frazzler]

in order to let us silly noobs know who to follow, we need a rewards system. If there was a different style of scoring (not the old Kill/Time Board) it would be much better for builders, or for the more useful team members. Some players are essential to success but are ignored by other players due to their small kill count. Or perhaps builders who never get respect just because they aren't out with the big boys. The time has come to change all this. The time has come to reward those valuable players. This is how it should be done.

Rather than the old scoring system (Kills and Time), there should be a way for us to recognise who VALUEBLE players are. The board would use 'points' instead of kills. There are plenty of ways to get points, so i made a list.

Kill: 5 points
% Kill (did some damage): 1-5 points depending on damage dealt
Building a Structure: 10 points
NOTE: Deconstructing a structure will result in a deduction of 7 points.
Building OM/RC: 25 points
NOTE: Deconstructing the OM/RC will result in a deducting of 25 points.
Destroying Structure: 10 points
Destroying OM/RC: 50 Points.

If someone were to achieve 1000 points in a single game they would receive a small badge. Something along the lines of a white skull next to the players name. If someone received 2000 points in a single game the white skull would change to yellow. Once they reach 3000 point in a single game the skull changes to red. 4000 and it changes to black. If someone were to be skilled enough to get 5000+ points in a SINGLE game, they would get the ultimate prize. A Gold Skull!

(These colours and Point Markers are just estimations)

[gimhael]

I also think that the kill counter is incredibly silly. No scoring system will properly reflect the real value of the player (unless it always puts me in 1st place of course  ), but I would differentiate the kill and destroyed building points on the type of killed player or the destroyed building. Maybe also on the type of the killer, so that a dretch killing a chainsuit gets more points than a tyrant etc.

[Lakitu7]

http://projects.mercenariesguild.net/issues/31

Something along these lines is happening, yeah. The details are just always hard to work out.

[Nux]

I'm interested; what made you decide that the cash given to the enemy shouldn't be displayed? Perhaps you feel this will encourage camp or make feeders targets for abuse?

You agreed that the scoreboard should encourage good behaviour so what about discouraging bad behavior? Bear in mind that trem matches are highly dependent on whether a team does or doesn't feed; it only takes one heavy feeder to put the game in the enemies favour. So if the scoreboard shows you and everyone else how much you're helping the enemy win then the more self-conscious players might not be so keen to rush in alone and might even get some teamplay and tactics in public matches as a result.

[CreatureofHell]

With those values, you could keep building and deconning the om/reac and gain points 

[janev]

So to suck i would have to score:
200 kills
or
100kills, 3 overminds and 35 structures

To be omgwtfbbq i would have to score:
1000 kills
or
500kills 15 overminds and 175 structures

 

[kevlarman]

I'm interested; what made you decide that the cash given to the enemy shouldn't be displayed? Perhaps you feel this will encourage camp or make feeders targets for abuse?

the latter mostly.

[frazzler]

So to suck i would have to score:
200 kills
or
100kills, 3 overminds and 35 structures

To be omgwtfbbq i would have to score:
1000 kills
or
500kills 15 overminds and 175 structures

 

now I did say the the point markers are just estimations. I didnt really put in the mathematical effort at 10pm. I just came up with the idea. These point markers (or colours) could easily be lowered or raised.

With those values, you could keep building and deconning the om/reac and gain points 

if you read my post it clearly says:

Building a Structure: 10 points
NOTE: Deconstructing a structure will result in a deduction of 7 points.
Building OM/RC: 25 points
NOTE: Deconstructing the OM/RC will result in a deducting of 25 points.

this would mean that if you deconstructed the OM you would lose the same amount of points as building it. Perhaps you got this confused with 'Destroying' a structure. This is when you destroy the OTHER TEAMS OM/RC. My reasoning for making the amount of points for building a structure HIGHER than it is for deconning a structure is for a quite obvious reason. Lets use an example: 'A Noobs Enthusiam For Floor Trappers' would clearly need to be deconned. this player taking time out from his game to help fix someones mistake shouldnt lose points.

I'm interested; what made you decide that the cash given to the enemy shouldn't be displayed? Perhaps you feel this will encourage camp or make feeders targets for abuse?

I didn't inculde that feature because I assumed that the Coders would Kill you for suggesting it. This goes for gimhael too.

[Nux]

I'm interested; what made you decide that the cash given to the enemy shouldn't be displayed? Perhaps you feel this will encourage camp or make feeders targets for abuse?

the latter mostly.

In that case why not just disable chat so they can't say nasty things? 

Surely this is a matter of the kind of player you play with and whether words happen to break your bones.

Also, there might be more complaining about feeders, but now their accusations can be verified. Isn't that better?

I, for example, have a habit of going kamikaze... all the time. I don't like healing and would prefer to take my chances in an action packed, high-risk battle (which I often lose). Maybe if this feed score was displayed I'd hold back so as not to damage my street-cred. And lo, Nux hast learned!

[kevlarman]

I'm interested; what made you decide that the cash given to the enemy shouldn't be displayed? Perhaps you feel this will encourage camp or make feeders targets for abuse?

the latter mostly.

In that case why not just disable chat so they can't say nasty things? 

Surely this is a matter of the kind of player you play with and whether words happen to break your bones.

Also, there might be more complaining about feeders, but now their accusations can be verified. Isn't that better?

I, for example, have a habit of going kamikaze... all the time. I don't like healing and would prefer to take my chances in an action packed, high-risk battle (which I often lose). Maybe if this feed score was displayed I'd hold back so as not to damage my street-cred. And lo, Nux hast learned!

and you've just explained why we're reluctant to list feeds, the whole idea is to encourage doing just that.

[Lakitu7]

I'd rather have feeders than campers anyday.

[+ OPTIMUS +]

I'd rather have feeders than campers anyday.

I'd rather play as a friggin' feeder than a frozen camper anyday.

[cactusfrog]

I'd rather have feeders than campers anyday.

I'd rather play as a friggin' feeder than a frozen camper anyday.

I feel the same way i sometimes wonder if campers are just stupid drones manufactured by china.

[frazzler]

without me even realising it, my new form of Scoring could easily discourage camping, feeding and encourage teamwork in the process. All the more reason to add this feature into trem.

[cactusfrog]

if you really want to encourage attacking the other teams base instead of camping make it so killing turrets acid tubes and trappers give you credits that way if someone attacks and kills enough structures they will have enough credits for another base asault instead of camping in there base so they can rack up enough to attack again.

[Urcscumug]

So if the scoreboard shows you and everyone else how much you're helping the enemy win then the more self-conscious players might not be so keen to rush in alone and might even get some teamplay and tactics in public matches as a result.

Speaking of feeding, what does the game itself consider a feed? I'm talking about /mystats. Getting killed without dealing any damage? Because I was in a game one day, died about 30 times and stats said I also got about 30 assists (no single kill ). And it also said zero feeds. So how does it work?

Perhaps more of the /mystats figures could find their way into the scoreboard, for starters. Like feeds and assists. If you couple them with kills then you get a somewhat better picture of what's going on. Although I've noticed that not all servers keep /mystats.

Also, perhaps it would be useful if you could look at any teammate's stats, in game. Like, pressing TAB when his name shows on screen would get you his full stats instead of the scoreboard.

I've also read the topic on MGDev and there's obviously some heavy thinking going on. I'd like to point out that:

* The scoreboard layout should be fixed. It needs to be checked fast in the middle of the game and I don't want to have to waste time because the columns or the sorting have changed. (From one TAB to the other, I mean, not changed from the current layout, that is fine, we'll get used to it.)

* As long as kills are _the_ method for advancing stage, and as long as you get to see the enemy team's kills, then they should remain on the scoreboard. Because they can be used to estimate when the enemy jumps stage, using basic addition skills.

Of course, this open up a larger issue; you're not supposed to be able to know when the enemy reaches a certain stage, are you? Perhaps they want to keep that in hiding, attack as basic dretches/riflemen only, then suddenly hit you with a lucisuit/tyrant rush. But they can't do that as long as their kills are on public display. So the question is: why are the enemy kills shown on my scoreboard? As it is, it's nice for people to sayteam "rant!" or "hs3", but I can add in my head, thank you very much, and I usually keep an eye on the enemy's scores at all times.

This could possibly lead to a solution to the overcrowded scoreboard: during the game, only show the scores for your own team. I can't think of much stuff that would interest me regarding the enemy stats, AND that would be fair for me to know of in game. This would open up many additional columns. As for the spectators and endgame scoreboard, split it horizontally instead of vertically ie. show alien and human team stacked and make sure it can be scrolled (simultaneously if need be). Or, how about mixing humans and aliens in the same endgame scoreboard, and sort alphabetically? Perhaps the "team game" feeling of Trem should be extended to surpass individual teams.

[Lakitu7]

Mystats isn't a standard part of the game. I wrote it and incorporated it into my patchsets, which many servers run by itself or as a basis for other forks and patches. I can answer your questions about it.

When the enemy advances toward the next stage for killing you, you gain a feed. There are no feeds once the enemy is s3, since by definition that's impossible. You have the deaths counter to tell you how many times you died.

Assists are when an enemy dies and you did some damage to them, but your teammate got the kill.

I think you're just asking that the scoreboard refresh more often? Not sure what you're saying with this one.

On mgdev/1.2 kills are still how stages are advanced but more indirectly: stages are based on credits earned, and while credits are earned from kills, different amounts are earned based on what you killed.

You do have a feel for when the enemy is nearing stageups, but it's still imprecise enough that you're never quite sure and will always tend to die when you're the first goon to run across a helmet. I think the proposed changes to score will sufficiently ofuscate that without needing to remove enemy items from the scoreboard entirely, but we'll see when that gets implemented.

[Urcscumug]

I think you're just asking that the scoreboard refresh more often? Not sure what you're saying with this one.

No, I was just wondering what the mystat definition of a feed is. The usual accepted definition is probably "a useless death at the hands of an enemy player". Which probably means that I wasn't feeding at the time. It's relative. That's why I think we need more parameters to get a feel for a player's worth.

On mgdev/1.2 kills are still how stages are advanced but more indirectly: stages are based on credits earned, and while credits are earned from kills, different amounts are earned based on what you killed.

You do have a feel for when the enemy is nearing stageups, but it's still imprecise enough that you're never quite sure and will always tend to die when you're the first goon to run across a helmet. I think the proposed changes to score will sufficiently ofuscate that without needing to remove enemy items from the scoreboard entirely, but we'll see when that gets implemented.

Let's put this another way: what exactly in the enemy scores is useful during the game? I can't think of anything. (There was the kills to estimate stages, but you say that it's been mitigated in MGDev.) So why clutter the screen with two scoreboards and not use the space for more player parameters?

Also, what do you think about my idea of mixing alien and human players for spectators and endgame scoreboard?

[Lakitu7]

I think you're just asking that the scoreboard refresh more often? Not sure what you're saying with this one.

No, I was just wondering what the mystat definition of a feed is. The usual accepted definition is probably "a useless death at the hands of an enemy player". Which probably means that I wasn't feeding at the time. It's relative. That's why I think we need more parameters to get a feel for a player's worth.

I realize it was unclear, but I meant this:

* The scoreboard layout should be fixed. It needs to be checked fast in the middle of the game and I don't want to have to waste time because the columns or the sorting have changed. (From one TAB to the other, I mean, not changed from the current layout, that is fine, we'll get used to it.)

What was this about?

Let's put this another way: what exactly in the enemy scores is useful during the game? I can't think of anything. (There was the kills to estimate stages, but you say that it's been mitigated in MGDev.) So why clutter the screen with two scoreboards and not use the space for more player parameters?

Also, what do you think about my idea of mixing alien and human players for spectators and endgame scoreboard?

I don't think it's so much that the enemy scores are useful as that I disagree with putting a bunch of other info on the scoreboard. I don't think that feeds should go there for reasons that others have said before me, and there isn't really another measure that tells the story without needing all of them (which even then is still incomplete and must be since no statistics really accurately measure one's worth). That's why a summary measure is needed, which is what we're working on. Such a thing can't be perfect, but it can easily to a better job than just "kills."

I do think it's useful to see the names of the players who are on the other team, and since their names are listed anyway, you might as well list their scores too. Past that, I'd say it's simply justified by "players like it and are used to it." People like to be able to see that they're the best on the server. I tried a mod where all scores were given ONLY relative to the others on your team. Nobody really liked it, including me.

I think that people should play the game to win, and in a team game that means winning as a team. If you jumble up the teams on the scoreboard at the end, you decrease the emphasis on teamplay and winning as a team.

[frazzler]

see, as you said

* The scoreboard layout should be fixed. It needs to be checked fast in the middle of the game and I don't want to have to waste time because the columns or the sorting have changed. (From one TAB to the other, I mean, not changed from the current layout, that is fine, we'll get used to it.)

this is why the 'point' system should be introduced. People want to quickly and effectively know how useful they (or their teammates) are. All these different /mystats junk is confusing and time consuming for most. Someone needs to contact the dev's about this. I realise that this is what the forums are for, but i mean on the Mercenaries Guild and junk. I have no idea how to do this, so I leave this task in the capable hands of my fellow Forumers.


and can we please get back on topic? rather than blabbing on about how others peoples posts are confusing. :

I think you're just asking that the scoreboard refresh more often? Not sure what you're saying with this one.

No, I was just wondering what the mystat definition of a feed is. The usual accepted definition is probably "a useless death at the hands of an enemy player". Which probably means that I wasn't feeding at the time. It's relative. That's why I think we need more parameters to get a feel for a player's worth.

I realize it was unclear, but I meant this:

* The scoreboard layout should be fixed. It needs to be checked fast in the middle of the game and I don't want to have to waste time because the columns or the sorting have changed. (From one TAB to the other, I mean, not changed from the current layout, that is fine, we'll get used to it.)

What was this about?

Let's put this another way: what exactly in the enemy scores is useful during the game? I can't think of anything. (There was the kills to estimate stages, but you say that it's been mitigated in MGDev.) So why clutter the screen with two scoreboards and not use the space for more player parameters?

Also, what do you think about my idea of mixing alien and human players for spectators and endgame scoreboard?

I don't think it's so much that the enemy scores are useful as that I disagree with putting a bunch of other info on the scoreboard. I don't think that feeds should go there for reasons that others have said before me, and there isn't really another measure that tells the story without needing all of them (which even then is still incomplete and must be since no statistics really accurately measure one's worth). That's why a summary measure is needed, which is what we're working on. Such a thing can't be perfect, but it can easily to a better job than just "kills."

I do think it's useful to see the names of the players who are on the other team, and since their names are listed anyway, you might as well list their scores too. Past that, I'd say it's simply justified by "players like it and are used to it." People like to be able to see that they're the best on the server. I tried a mod where all scores were given ONLY relative to the others on your team. Nobody really liked it, including me.

I think that people should play the game to win, and in a team game that means winning as a team. If you jumble up the teams on the scoreboard at the end, you decrease the emphasis on teamplay and winning as a team.

too many quotes. seriously guys.

[Urcscumug]

What was this about?

Oh, I just meant that once a scoreboard format is agreed upon, you should find certain items at fixed places at all times, and the logic should be also preserved at all times. This is in reference to the idea about randomizing sorting at every scoreboard display. It's important to be able to derive useful information from the scoreboard very very fast in the middle of the game.

That's why a summary measure is needed, which is what we're working on. Such a thing can't be perfect, but it can easily to a better job than just "kills."

So, basically, you're leaning towards the idea of an algorithm for computing a score out of all the player parameters. I can live with that. Of course it would have to be a very good algorithm for people to be satisfied with it. And, like you pointed out, it would need to be relevant even across teams (alien vs humans).

I do think it's useful to see the names of the players who are on the other team, and since their names are listed anyway, you might as well list their scores too.

OK, I kinda've forgotten about the names/. And it would mean being able to tell which team is doing better. So OK, I stand corrected.

Past that, I'd say it's simply justified by "players like it and are used to it." People like to be able to see that they're the best on the server. I tried a mod where all scores were given ONLY relative to the others on your team. Nobody really liked it, including me.

I think that people should play the game to win, and in a team game that means winning as a team. If you jumble up the teams on the scoreboard at the end, you decrease the emphasis on teamplay and winning as a team.

Agreed, competitiveness is a factor. One I hadn't thought about, or rather downplayed.

[Nux]

what exactly in the enemy scores is useful during the game?

...since...

you're not supposed to be able to know when the enemy reaches a certain stage, are you? Perhaps they want to keep that in hiding, attack as basic dretches/riflemen only, then suddenly hit you with a lucisuit/tyrant rush. But they can't do that as long as their kills are on public display.

...but then again...

It's important to be able to derive useful information from the scoreboard very very fast in the middle of the game.

...such as information about the enemies stage/cash. Afterall...

I can add in my head, thank you very much, and I usually keep an eye on the enemy's scores at all times.

You make the point well enough yourself. The information is there as a reminder for things you could have figured out anyway from the logs. If the enemy reaching s3 is somehow a suprise to you, then you haven't been paying attention.

@Lakitu7: I feel your definition of feeding is a little.. narrow. Advancing to a higher stage (such as s3) can give the enemy an advantage, but if they waste their money and nobody feeds them [where 'feed' means "gives them cash"] their higher stage won't help them (if you can't buy the s3 stuff you may aswell be at s1). This is why I would include the money given away to a s3 enemy in your definition. All money given away is feeding in my opinion, so it's just a matter of whether your other 'contributions' outwiegh your feeds.

I'd rather have feeders than campers anyday.

I'd rather play as a friggin' feeder than a frozen camper anyday.

Camping is annoying, yes. It's like an opponent in chess who won't take his turn, banking on you forfeiting out of boredom.

Feeding can be fun, yes. I do it all the time. Incedentally this usually works because there are feeders on the other team to support me.

Displaying the number of feeds will force people to camp? No. That's their own decision.

What is it with this 'stick thier heads in the sand' mentality? If this scoreboard is supposed to show your worth to your team or how well you played, then I'd argue that your 1 kill to 2 feeds says more about your 'contribution' than your 10 kills per minute does. What about the rest of your team who had only one kill per minute but didn't die at all? Apparently giving the enemy more cash than your own team doesn't stop you from being an awesome player.

I thought you wanted to encourage good behaviour.

Edit: I want to be clear. Most people don't actually intend to feed. So it's silly to get annoyed about them when they can't help it. That said, players have the ability to learn that it's bad to die if this is made clear to them. So it IS annoying when players don't try to stay alive. I'm not saying people should camp, I'm saying people should try to stick with thier teammates and go back for health when necessary. Not just rush by themselves over and over.

Put the feed figures up and they'll learn.

[Urcscumug]

Ah, but then they become self-conscious, start playing defensively and thus we get camping. It's the Neverending Story.

[frazzler]

OR, they get self concious, and work as a team. You know, the far more likely option. From what you said, about how someone with 10 kills 9 deaths is whopper awesome. The guys with 3 kills and 0 deaths arent. perhaps the penalty for a death should be higher to encourage teamwork. Not to mention camping is boring as shit and doesnt work if your ping is over 100.

[Urcscumug]

You're preaching to the choir. I was just pointing out the irony. We know the arguments against camping and pro-teamwork, it's just that it's always going to be an issue as far as imature/unexperienced/uncommunicative players are concerned.

The best we could hope for is things to curb the tendency (hence this idea). But we'll never eradicate it; there's always gonna be a Trem n00b with good FPS skills who works alone, gets 72 kills while his teammates get 3 each, the match ends in a draw (or even as a loss), and then the guy gushes "yey, 72 kills, my new record", completely missing the point.

[Nux]

I wouldn't say he's missing the point. He seems to be having fun- albeit slightly repetitive fun -and as far as I'm aware the game is about having fun.

The idea behind including the feed stats is to disrupt this selfish way of having fun, and encourage more thoughtful behaviour.

I wouldn't expect this to make the more experienced player camp, they generally won't find camping as fun. It's mainly newer players with less confidence in their ability that camp, which I personally much prefer to the type of newbie that feeds. If the entire enemy team is camping, then you're playing against a team who seriously lack confidence and you should consider finding a more entertaining foe.

[frazzler]

the idea of the point system isnt to show feeds. The purpose is to show how useful someone is. A camper or feeder may the most useful player you have. If a deduction for deaths would be put in place then more people would stop and think before they rush in. If someone is accumilating a 30/2 kill to death ratio per minute, then they are certainly useful. The person who accumilates a 200/199 kill to death ratio isnt as useful because they are losing points for each death. If a noob runs in and feeds, he will soon learn that this is not how tremulous was designed to be played and will join his team.

[Nux]

A camper or feeder may the most useful player you have.

Camping is useful. It's what happens when defending meets a poor imagination, but it's defending nonetheless.

Feeding, however, is very much not helpful. It might be that it's a natural consequence of you attacking and in that case attacking would be the useful activity, not feeding. Yes, you can be a feeder (even the biggest feeder) and still be the most useful player. That just means that your positive actions outweighed your feeds on that occasion. Of course things would have been a lot better had you not fed, so it's still something you should be aware of improving- Hence why the feed score should be displayed.

If a noob runs in and feeds, he will soon learn that this is not how tremulous was designed to be played and will join his team.

Some do learn and some continue to do the same stupid action again and again- whether it be camping, feeding or spamming, these people like to stick to their habits). The feed score is there for those who will learn when it's emphasised on the scoreboard and those who want to impress people with more reliable statistics.