[ 1st post 0wnage :p ] scores chat

[Steve]

ok lets set the scene...

u play good, hiding, dodging, running, killing, and end up with 45 kills and 4 deaths but....

you come second to a guy with 46 kills and 40 deaths. *

#1 46 40
#2 45 04

come on u tellin' me the guy who wins is the better player?
do u agree with the scoring system?
think u should get points deducted at the end for deaths?
or did he deserve the win cause of the way the scoring system is set out?

how do u play:
all out killing?
survivor?


*NB scores are made up, any relation to real events is totally coincidental ( looks for spelling book )

[Matt]

I'm a raper.

Heres a pic from a 1 on 1 I played.

[STEALTH]

Winning isn't the only thing, It's EVERTHING...(or is it)


Winning is always determined on Score in all game types.
Winning is NEVER determined on kills because of the different scoring possibilities with kills.(headshots, knives)
Also Flag and Zone and Target Games are Scored even differently.

1. The person that wins is not always a better player.
But that person did play for score and did win. Could
have even had more deaths than kills and still won.
2. I don't agree with the scoring sys.
3. I think you should have points deducted for deaths.
But the problem is tooo many people would have negitive
numbers if it was traded point for point. But perhaps loose only 1 point for a death might work good.
4. They deserve the win.
(sadly cuz of scoring sys and u agreed to play)
Since is was a DM I presume it wasn't pretty.
But TDM or another game type might have been a Different
outcome for winning.
Gettin back to #2. The scoring sys sux big time.

How about TKOTH scoring and winning. Now there's
something that's sad as well. Owning the zone most of 39 1/2 minutes in a 40 min game. ONLY to find a Kamakazi mad at4 Slammer bomber takes it all away for a 20-30 sec Zone Own Win...
A perfect example of 'Won the Battle but Lost the War'

IF every game was last man standing
things would sure be different.

I play depending on my mood.

In closing....
Winning is not always pretty.
And Losing? : I never found it to be pretty either.

[HD135]

Too many deaths ruins a high spot in the finish column, at least for me. Coming in second sporting a great kill to death ratio is much more rewarding. However a change in the way games are scored may have some unexpected consequences. Though it's just speculation, I would expect players to take a much more conservative approach if the score is based on "kill/death" ratio. That may or may not be a bad thing depending on how you like to play. It may work better for those who enjoy a bit more strategy as opposed to the instant gratification of a kill.
Speaking of scoring, it would be interesting to have head to head stats. Head to head refers to who killed you "x" amount of times vs how many times you killed that particular player. Surely that would be cumbersome but certainly interesting. You may win a game where your ratio is 75/7 but 6 of your deaths are by the same player. Lets say in head to head he beat you 6 to 2. If that player came in second to you with a score of 74/8 who is the better player? Regardless of how games are scored the "best player" will most likely be a somewhat subjective choice. Of course if you are winning with scores of 75/0 then none of the above applies and you are unequivocably the best.

[Diamond Bullet]

"Coming in second sporting a great kill to death ratio"

Same for me. Having the best ratio is always the most rewarding for me.

[Edward]

survivor

http://ed.wonderingraven.net/sniper.html as long as im in the top 4 i feel at home lmao and mostly i have low death and decent kill ratio

[Cathar]

Its annoying when a situation like that happens, but in team games it'll work against them, as they obviously die alot, so giving the other team lots of points.

If it was 1 point taken off for a death it mite work as then people would still stay in the positive points after they got a kill

[Steve]

got an example yesterday funnily enough:

[Ice Cannon]

lol does that face thing show up a lot SB???

Isnt the scoring system different in some way in BHD.... ?

[HD135]

"got an example yesterday funnily enough: "

Perfect game for making the point. With that score 2nd place shines like a gold medal.

[DeDRAGE]

Yea you drop points for deaths in BHD. I really like that idea. Makes you strive for kills and stay alive.

[Valhalla«ŠŠ»]

So u all think a pronin glitcher owns since he has a low number of deaths?

My respect is gained not only by the kill and death ratio but also trough how he got it. Snipin far away glitched somewhere dont get much(if the sniper aint damn good that is) but a raper rapin with out pronin does that altough he will get more deaths.

[Nev]

i don't care that much about the number of kills. instead i got my own "scoring" system:
if the sum of headshots and knife kills is higher than my number of deaths, then i'm satisfied

this mostly works out, but often just narrowly..


in df2 my kills/deaths ratio was on a steady average of about 5:1 (mostly sawing(~4-6 shots/kill) and sniping, later m4) and i was pretty happy with that.

at first i was very depressed about my BHD scores, because i just die more often (now i'm happy with a 2:1 ratio...).
IMO BHD is more difficult in terms of "staying alive" because most of the combat takes place in close quarters, and sniping isn't an option here (at least for me).

i hate players who don't care about their lives. but what i hate even more are campers who hide in some dark corner...


BTW, why hasnt anyone posted this before?:
kill +5 xp
headshot +10xp (total with kill)
knife +15xp (total with kill)
sniper kill 6-10xp (total with kill)
sniper headshot 11-15xp (total with kill)
death -2xp
AFAIK this is the standard scoring for (T)DM, correct me if i'm wrong

i'd find it appropriate if deaths were -5xp, but otherwise i like the scoring system as it is. but what i like best is that the list is sorted by experience, not by kills (although it shows only kills)
that way i'm mostly on top, even though i'm 20 kills behind

[Mabakiel]

well its really hard to tell, everyone plays different... so there isnt really a "best player" in my opinion, not unless you try every scenario on both sides of 2 players and see who comes out victorious more than 3 out of the 5 times for each scenario for each person, IE, your proning with a sniper, the other has a Mag from far away... and you both see each other... or you both run into each other around a corner, one has a mag, the other has a saw, the possibilities are infinate, but just because someone comes in first in a "grenade launcher close range FFA" means nothing

[blueprint]

Originally posted by Valhalla«ŠŠ»
So u all think a pronin glitcher owns since he has a low number of deaths?

My respect is gained not only by the kill and death ratio but also trough how he got it. Snipin far away glitched somewhere dont get much(if the sniper aint damn good that is) but a raper rapin with out pronin does that altough he will get more deaths.

How do you know all snpers glitch? And plus I've seen people go like 70 and 1, you an't say that doesn't take skill to do in a 30 min. game

[teej]

jesus trilogy u absolutly raped him lol. I have only known one person to do that to me befor and it was when T_Rex and i played a 1v1.

[Scott]

How do you get raped?

[EDGE]

SB, he prolly got more headshots or more knife kills than u. Hate that!

[Steve]

nope, he got more kills....

[teej]

really i do agree with the scoring even though it is weird how they do it...in tdm, its all about kills so its not about the deaths u get so u can get a megetive ratio and still come in first. I would post some of mine i have but i cant find em...must of deleted em