Score/Pointsystem

[Hypnosekröte]

Here i want to discuss the DTG Scoring system. Everyone is welcome to comment on these, and suggest how to make them better. the decision of how the manage the pointsystem belongs to DTG too. So DTG will hold an Internal Poll to pick from all the versions put forward.

We dont want to discuss the sense of the Scoring system more the weighting of the Point giving to make it fair! And we dont want to show players bad behaviour ingame

Here is my Theory:

There are easy roles to play in nexuiz and there are hard jobs in Nexuiz. I want the people who do the hard Jobs to get more points than people who have an easy job. I think Flagrunners/Attackers have the hardest job in CTF. My Points system is based on this Theory.i'll count the Pros and Cons for every situation the Flagrunner/attacker and Defender might find themselves in. i'll probably miss some or Interpret some wrong, but that's why we discuss it here!

I count Pros and Cons for red Defenders and Pro and Cons for Blue attackers.

CLICK ON THE PICTURES TO SEE THEM FULLY!

Legend:

Legend.jpg (11.99 KiB) Viewed 48948 times

This is the Worst Case Scenario for everyone i think:

1. Situation

1.jpg (11.06 KiB) Viewed 48948 times

We take into account 4 defenders and 4 attackers and figure out the difficulty of the work which every type of player has to do and count the Pros and Cons for each situation for both sides.

2. Situation

2.jpg (14.9 KiB) Viewed 48948 times

Pro for Defenders
- Have time to move into Position

Cons for Defenders
none

Pro for Attackers
none

Contra for Attackers
- Need to defeat the other Attackers

3. Situation

3.jpg (15.08 KiB) Viewed 48948 times

Blue dominates red!

4. Situation

4.jpg (17.17 KiB) Viewed 48948 times

Pro for Defender
- Good position for a kill
- easy to tell where the attackers want to go

Contra for Defender
none

Pro for Attackers
none
Contra for Attackers
- dont know where all defenders are hiding

5. Situation

5.jpg (20.32 KiB) Viewed 48948 times

OK, now imagine that one blue attacker realy gets the flag!

Pro for Defenders
- Good position for a kill
- know where the left attackers are hiding
- enough time for killing

Cons for Defenders
none

Pro for Attackers
none

Cons for Attackers
- Flagcarrier doesnt know where all defenders are
- respawners helps defenders

6. Situation

6.jpg (18.13 KiB) Viewed 48948 times

Now The Defenders are trying hard to defeat the Flagrunner

Pro for Defender
- even on respawn, they're near to the Flagcarrier
- Position of the Flagcarrier is obvious

Contra for Defender
- Defenders and respawned Attackers from the other Team help the Flagcarrier

Pro for Attackers/Flagcarrier
- Have their Team's backup

Cons for Attackers
- Flagcarrier doesnt know where all defenders are
- respawners helps defenders

7. Situation

7.jpg (16.66 KiB) Viewed 48948 times

The Cap counts!

Pros for Defenders
- Can get help from attackers

Cons for Defenders
- Most defenders are Dead

Pros for Attackers/Flagcarrier
- Most defenders are death

Cons for Attackers
- Cant attack with everyone

Ok... i'll count.

Defender
9 Pros
2 Cons

Attacker/Flagrunner
2 Pro
7 Cons
=

9-2 = 7 Pros for Defender
7-2 = 5 Cons for Attackers

So defenders have an advantage of twelve times the attackers!
Thats why i think the cap must count 12 times more than a flagkill + return together!

Atm the Pointsystem is like this:

8 for flaggrab
8 for flagkill
2 for return
80 for cap

If you take my theory it must be like this:
when we count this:
8 for flaggrab + 2 for return than it must be:
10* 12 = 120 - 8 for a flaggrap = 112 for a CAP

I know not all pro and cons comes in every round of attacking but i think these are most likely

[Hypnosekröte]

still fixing typos but who cares xD

[Oxyd]

For me CTF is teamplaying. We need both attackers and defenders. I agree that CAP (not take the flag) is the hardest, but actually, it's disbalance. Cap is the only way to have a high score and taking the flag, cap and next waiting in the opposite base till ur friend is dead and the flag is back, it's not teamplay at all. And a person like that will have a lot of points.

I think kill the FC is more valuable than taking the flag.

Maybe something like that: 100 for a cap, 15 for a FC, 8 for taking the flag.

[Hypnosekröte]

For me i think it is teamplay if someone is defending if he have the feeling now its realy nessesary and if he find out now its good situation to go for the flag so its more circulation and the teams need to coordinate it in more dynamic roles dunno xD

[teh.f4ll3n]

Also, you'll have players like Sedat, who'll just shoot you in the back just to get the flag for himself. How much teamplay is that? In a 2v2 game today Jom was defending and I was flag running, result - Jom didn't even break 200 points, me - 1350-ish. Just saying.

[Akari]

Pro for Defender
- Have time to bring their self in Position

Contra for Defender
none

Pro for Attackers
none
Contra for Attackers
- Need to defeat the other Attackers

This is inaccurate. Assuming we're considering a lostspace/dance/gasoline-type map, which are the most popular and pretty much define the gameplay, and a fairly skilled set of players. Approaching high velocities with DTG setings is easy, that's a fact. This enables attackers to quickly reach the enemy base in a few seconds. "Have time to bring their self in Position" is a very questionable argument at this point. This works as a contra for defenders and pro for attackers: while gaining speed is easy, aiming at very fast players requires more skill. So far, this is what a defender does during the game: a defender has to memorize patterns of attackers' movements, predict their next appearance, take a good spot, time the shot and press the buttom at the right time. Mind the fast gameplay and multiple constantly invading enemy attackers, this happens in approximately a second. And this process has to be repeated through the whole map, all the time. And if you fail, and you will fail at some point since you are not perfect, your task changes dramatically (unless you just prefer to camp the base): you now have to chase the enemy fc and take him down. This implies being just as fast as him, knowing the map well, being aware of his movement and use it to predict his next appearance. It doesn't sound very easy, does it? An attacker, on other hand, has less to do. An attacker constantly rushes the flag, taking slightly different paths to make himself less predictable, and thus make the defenders' job harder. He often doesn't have to defeat the enemy attackers since it's often easy to bypass them on speed, passing the job of killing them to the defenders. An attacker has to memorize common positions of the opposite team's defence and either try to avoid them (which often works), or take a few down based on this information. After that, he has to get the flag and run back to his base, avoiding or killing the defenders again (difficultness of this heavily depends on the map). Once he passes through the first half of the map it normally gets easier, since he gets further away from enemy spawn points and closer to the team's, who can protect him. If the base is reached but the flag is missing, he either runs around the base or camps to decrease the chances of getting hit, but again, base defenders and respawning players are there to help him at this point. I'm not saying this is very easy in general, but I consider it relatively easy compared to what defenders do. An attacker's job gets hard only when the opposing defence is damn good at their thing. And by using such a huge scoring gap between attacking and defence as the current score system has (notice how good attackers often get much highest scores than good defenders on the same team), you influence the players to defend less and attack more, easing the task of attackers and making it even harder for defenders.

That being said from an attackers point of view. I won't comment on the rest yet, want to hear your opinion on this first.

[Hypnosekröte]

sounds like the other side of the view XD Good to hear ur argues. Maybe you tell us what you think how the scoresystem should look like that you have an influence to the Poll :p Maybe everyone should do that who argues here

But on startup surely they have the time to bring them in position ... later this becomes even harder because respawns mix the stuff up but even have more chances to live than a attacker if attacker dont sit at a respawn spot and do respawnkills :> Thats why i tell all mappers to dont do the respawn spots at the flagpoint (-.-)"

[evil_mercenary]

I agree about the fact that the flag carrier has a difficult job, but it shouldnt be quite as high a difference in points i dont think. theproblem with hightening the points for the people who flagrun is that it will encourage a lot of people to just run back and forth waiting to get the flag...meaning overcrowding, and flagcampers.
the way the points are at the moment, they reward people who are really good at flagrunning, so long as they are *really* good at it. but that's only doing one job at a time. the top players, like heddiz, tend to take on more than one job at a time in normal matches: defending while flagrunning for example. this means that they get points for flag returning and for flag caps. this multiple-job approach is great, and is encouraged by the current scoring system. many jobs is harder, an better, than one job. i think that the system doesn't really need that much change from what we have already.

[Pir*]

I think the points for grabbing should be higher and the difference between capping and flag grabbing should not be so huge.
Why?

1. All the arguments so far did not take into account the flag grabber's defending role: on fast maps I personally prefer to rush for the flag as soon as possible when our's is taken mostly to prevent their capping, even at the expense of being easily killed by a defender. That spares us some valuable time to organize defense. The current system doesn't favor such kind of tactics.

2. Such huge difference also favors accidental cappers or campers : it's not unusual situation when during fc to fc clash at the own base the camper has enough time to grab the dropped flag and score. This way he benefits twice. I've seen Satan doing this many times

3. On some maps, like e.g. nagstation, it's very hard to even grab the flag. Defenders benefit again.

So, with the current scoring system, if I'd had a goal to score more I would still prefer to defend not attack.

I think the fair one should be somethink like this:
15 for flaggrab
8 for flagkill
2 for return
50 for cap

[Akari]

But on startup surely they have the time to bring them in position ... later this becomes even harder because respawns mix the stuff up but even have more chances to live than a attacker if attacker dont sit at a respawn spot and do respawnkills :> Thats why i tell all mappers to dont do the respawn spots at the flagpoint (-.-)"

That time is measured in seconds and hardly holds any value, if any. Chances to live are really irrelevant in a game where death is a teleport back to home, and where taking back to the enemy base is done in no time. Nature of defensive gameplay is more tactical and careful, while offense is rushed. It's obvious that it leads defenders to normally stay alive longer, but I fail to see how is that much of a gain. Respawn camping is another good point that once again proves that defenders' job is harder than it seems.

15 for flaggrab
8 for flagkill
2 for return
50 for cap

Ok, let's take this in consideration. An 1on1 between a fairly skilled attacker and a good defender is going on. The defender does not care about the caps, let's assume he just trains his defence skills. The attacker constantly tries to capture the flag, and most of the time manages to grab the flag but then gets killed by the defender. After 30 iterations of this, the attacker finally breaks out and captures the flag, killing the defender once. Let's assume that the attacker managed to pickup the flag 25 times. The match is played on a space map and the flag fell into the void 20 times, like it commonly happens. Let's calculate scores.

Input:
pickups = 25
fckills = 24 (pickups - 1, since the defender failed to retrieve the flag once and thus attacker capped)
voidfalls = 20
returns = 4 (fckills - voidfalls)
defender_frags = 6 (30 - fckill, we're counting only regular frags here)
attacker_frags = 1 (Let's assume his aim/tactics are so bad that he managed to frag the defender only when he broke out and capped)
caps = 1

Now, score formulas for each:
Attacker = pickups*15 + attacker_frags + caps*50
Defender = fckills*8 + returns*2 + defender_frags

And solve them for our particular situation:
Attacker = 25*15 + 1 + 50 = 426 points.
Defender = 24*8 + 4*2 + 6 = 206 points.

The attacker gets more than twice as much as the defender, while in fact he fails to capture the flag most of the time, and the defender succeeds to prevent the capture. You are awarding the attacker for failing. This is wrong. You should change this scoring system to at least 20 for a fckill, then the resulting score of the defender in our situation is 494, which doesn't have such a huge gap between the attacker, and is more accurate because, admit it, the defender obviously did a better job here, and therefore has to be awarded with more points.