Score/Pointsystem

[kitho]

You should also award people for protecting the flagcarrier -- Which involves beeing as fast as him and shooting people who follow him !

- Screw the scoring system, the guy with the highest score doesn't have to be the mvp.

The old one was sufficient.

A cap giving that insane amount of score is weird.
There are plenty of moments where "noobs" cap because they get defended on their way back + the Flagdefender are doing a great job. yet they get like 8 points and the fc gets 100. or whatever.

[SpcmnK]

All i've read so far is total bs, i hold the truth and will speak it.

Failing to kill an enemy before he grabs the flag and killing him right after get more points than killing him before.
The fc got killed next to his flag, cap for walking half a second with the flag.
Killikng the fc in your base get you the same as killing the fc in his base (while he has all the cons of the attackers
0 for fc protection.
0 for tactical kill (like clearing enemy base so that your mate can pickup and run)

So, here's my suggestion,
0 for pickup
0 for fckill
0 for return
0 for cap

(and let the stats speak for themselve)
And that comes from the undisputable best ctf player that ever lived.

If some ppl needs to show they've got the biggest, there's 1on1 for that.

Anyway, if you think camping or heavy defence defence ruins the game, i suggest playing an other.
And that comes from someone who only played one game in his life, yet realised the importance of defence.

Now, since i have no influence what so ever, im gonna fake quote heddiz on this:
"Listen to spook, he's always right no matter what, plus he's got a huge dick."

Well, thanks heddiz, but it's not about me ..


Took me half an hour to write that shit on my phone, and i dont even fucking care..

[Hypnosekröte]

You should also award people for protecting the flagcarrier -- Which involves beeing as fast as him and shooting people who follow him !

This idea we had too! But needs some advanced QuakeC modding

The old Score was:

fckill 20
pickup 25
return 20
capture 50

I think the capture is too less, because of the chances

My new suggeston is:

fckill 12
pickup 3
return 2
capture 88

[SpcmnK]

Fuck yeah !
I spoke the truth and it paid.
Don't thank me, im just glad to make à difference in that ugly world, and make it à better place, for you AND for me.

[Akari]

This idea we had too! But needs some advanced QuakeC modding

I have done alot more advanced work on QuakeC, I can code this feature for you, if it's needed. Talk to me on IRC.

fckill 12
pickup 3
return 2
capture 88

Huge gap again.
25*3 + 1 + 88 = 164 (attacker)
24*12 + 4*2 + 6 = 302 (defender)

Edit: Since the way I calculated these is not obvious for some people, I took initial values from this post but replaced the score system.

[Hypnosekröte]

Akari i think ur argument of returning is less important is good thats why i did return to 2 in my suggestion. As i told in first post i think cap = (fckill+return)*12, because u need 12 times more chances to do a cap then a flagkill+return. In my suggestion i only took 7 times chances. I will also make the suggestion with full chances.

[radio]

just play the game, f*cking nerds

[It'sMe]

just play the game, f*cking nerds

Best answer

What do you expect from a scoring system?
When should attacker and defender have equal score?
When should an attacker have a better score?
And which model you use to evaluate your scoring system?

Perhaps you should have a "test the scoring system week" ^^, nothing gives a better result for reality than reality.

[Akari]

What do you expect from a scoring system?

To reflect usefulness for the team/quality of gameplay of each player with relative accuracy. Don't ask why and don't say it's not needed, as Hypno mentioned we are not arguing about sense of scoring here.

Perhaps you should have a "test the scoring system week" ^^, nothing gives a better result for reality than reality.

Or how about to just go back to the previous scoring system that nobody bitched about and stop trying to fix stuff that already works.

[Hypnosekröte]

Hypno mentioned we are not arguing about sense of scoring here.

Hey c'mon dude its the third site of the thread ... Its hard to remember the first now :/