I find it idiotic that the top players is just the player who plays the most and I outplay almost everybody on the leaderboards...
We need a ranking system based on kills-deaths + captures + defends + damage + win or loss. Would be best if you lost ranking for losing a game too...
I was slamming Meida and agni all night, Opod is pretty good though, and Poul just stands still holding right click with guardian all game every game so nothing to say there.
The "Top Ten" did worse than me just about every game I played against them. The only time SOME skill is involved is determining the rank of two players who have played the same amount of games, mostly they are just above average players who play as much as possible.
and your in game name killa?
awww thanks for the compliments lol. K/D ratio probably won't be implemented with in the scoring system since the objective is to capture or defend points. I think "rank points" will change with as many capture points or defends you've obtained throughout the match. Or maybe damage points, because trust me people have taken plenty of my kills and vice versa. Poul and I made a pretty good tag team guardians, so don't hate on camping a capture point if you can't break a shield lol.
- Opod
How is the point system not fair? Think of it this way: If you have the most points then yeah, you've probably been playing way too much BUT there is always someone who plays as much as you, and if you are ahead of him it's most likely because your team won most times, and although this has some luck attached to it, if a team lacks 1 player normaly they will lose so i was probably doing my part, i would say.
In conclusion: I did end up in first, i don't know if i played the most, but i probably did :)
2nd conclusion: I'm a guy god damnit.
-Meida
I would agree, it would be nice to have some stats collected. I love checking out my BFBC2 stats, and enjoyed UT ngworld stats (wee thats a while ago now :`]).
If the right stat data is taken and displayed I think you can change the way people play the game to a point also (encouraging certain types of stats to be achieved). I like points (instead of kills), and when it comes to promoting teamplay anything for defending and taking control points rewards people who dont just want to play LMS (Last Man Standing) or DM style games.
Really hope the steam users get a chance to play on the beta soon, if I had any idea there was going to be a beta on the weekend I would have planned to stick around and be another steam user denied :`P
@Killa Don't balme me for finding my best way to play for me; I played as racon from friday to Saturday, on Sunday i decided to give a chance to guardian and I love it.
Going back to topic, this game its more 'casual' so that may be the reason this games has no penaties if you/your team loses a game, so everyone (or who plays most and better) has a chace at leaderboard.
P.D. As my point of view I would love not to be a leaderboard who plays more, I would like to see penalties for who are just not that good playing. Or just not giving them a few points only.
@ Poul Not blaming you for playing like anything, I just found it extremely boring to attack or defend against you, all you do is stand still holding down right click, if your shield is breaking you hit the road and come back later, it's just not fun imo, lol.
@killaizsik
it was rarely than I ran away, most of times a striker went for me and finished me before I could ran away. It requires skill to 1 vs 1 a guardian, it includes status bombs or prefectly timing your hits to break the shield, I found that it's much more defficult for a striker to deal with guardians.
Hey, I was playing with you guys too, and winning :P
I you don't remember my Test Server IGN was Orange-Man, you know, the guy that would say "It's time to split," and that he was a vog bomber.
And, for future reference, I just wanted to say hi :P
I remember ya haha. We went about 50/50, when other people didn't interfere anyways X) and btw, you still haven't dropped a name killa.
And Paol did more than just stand there, if you actually tried to 1v1 him.
And you're not quite getting the point, I think. It isn't all about killing, it's about controlling the points. I purposefully might camp on a point as a guardian knowing full well I was going to die. I have a feeling Meida had the same viewpoint. But in doing so, I waste your time and give my team longer to loop around behind you and retake your control points. Other times I might see you, and two other guys coming up behind. 3v1 is pretty hard, at that point I forget strategy and just try to kill one of you before I die.
So maybe we're just outplaying you, because you're not playing the real point of the game ;)
Teamwork is what makes you win lockdown, but killing is an art :3 I pwned everybody on 1 vs 1, even 1 vs 2 or 3.
Gianfri aka Quick
I would do the same, but, it always ended funny for me. Ex: me vs 4 other people, I'm on their CP, and they just couldn't push me off. It looked so amusing :P
Sometimes the wall would fall forward, and air resistance would pull me back into reach ~
If the class remains the same, these Guardians will be quite the challenge. :>
Win/Lose rate will suffice.
When I played Guardian, I do like minimal damage but I know I played a good game. When I played Striker/Recon, I get much higher damage. Having over 10k + damage does not imply you're playing well, as teamwork wise.
10k damage doesn't mean your playing well? ok lol
The point of the game is to take and hold control points. that is how your team wins the game. Racking up 10, 11 or even 15K damage doesn't mean you are necessarily helping your team. You can kill, kill, kill all you want but that is not how this game is won. I would suggest, with skill, that it might be possible to win the game without scoring a single damage point. That would be playing well.
Many players don't seem to take note of the fact that when you kill, you make Control Points available for capture. When players die, they do not respawn instantly. Mid game, respawn times are often 15+ seconds. The more times you kill a player, the more time they'll be wasting watching the countdown timer tick away. Those are seconds that can be used to gain hold over the positions they would* be attempting to control or defend had they been alive. Killing = Lessening the opposition, which of course means more base time to gain points allowing you to actually win the game faster. When you focus on doing damage, and don't do much of it, yes you aren't helping; but when you spam 10k+ regularly, it helps significantly.
Of course dealing damage helps, it kills possible protectors/invaders, it creates pressure and fear. Killing is obviously necessary.
You have to know when to kill, camp, or hold your position. If you're gonna kill you gotta be Quick and efficient. Be smart, be a step ahead, wait for them to make their own death move :P
Since blast network I have said that ranking should be relative and have you go up or down based on wins and defeats and who you were against, instead of an absolute "get points for playing" system with no cap on how high you can get.
Steal the code from Y!PP for their able-ultimate ranking if necessary.
And no ranking based on k/d ratio, since to be a good player you have to be credit to team, which doesn't really mean killing the enemies or not dying.
I second this, I don't care how you do it, but please fix the ranks in such a way that they record SKILL, not TIME.
+1 to Pupu for the YPP reference and because he is right. That game is so competitive and still fun.
Well Chris you are bad at Lockdown. You don't even understand the Lockdown's logic.
I played with and against you yesterday(13th last test) many times and clearly say you cried about Steam players, you cried about server's lag; you cried about fighting 2v1 or 3v1 and then end of each game I clearly checked your stats and these were awful. Your best one was 3 capture 0 defend, the damage you dealt was less than 8k if you are insisting killing is good that was a bad damage deal either. You were only trying to kill players not even care about capture points. You have a zero logic about teamplay.
If there will be a team deathmatch version of this please stay there and don't come for capture point games. I really don't like your attitude and gameplay. Hope won't be you teammate in future.
-> Yes you have to kill but with gameplay like I saw it is useless. Coming to control point, kiilling the player and leaving even without capturing it of defending it. You need to know basic tactics at least.
Considering there was a whole of 2 or 3 games where I didn't do the best on my team and/or the best in the game I find the chance that you are a butthurt little kid who got stomped all over.
Unless of course you are talking about the ONE game we all played before they updated the servers to fix the lag, in which case I spend the whole game rofling at the fact that there was a 1-2 second latency problem and people were getting killed from 4-5 times as long of range as they should have.
Last game I can recall was 6v6 where I had a leaver halfway through making it 5v6, I still had 12k damage (next highest in the game was 4k) and I have 7 captures and 2 defends.
I'm always top damage + captures + defends.
My comments about the flood of steam users is that they are less skilled and a lot more annoying than veteran non-steam players. Before steam hit the test server there was rarely anybody under 2k damage in a game, after steam, half of the players who I know hadn't been playing before it were under 2k and some even under 1k damage in a 6v6, which lasted nearly NINE MINUTES.
My comments about 1v2 1v3 1v4 1v5 etc. are that I laugh extremely hard when I am able to kill multiple people without being killed as I find that extremely funny. I 1v5'ed some steam users in that 5v6 game I was talking about above using striker, when they were something like 2 striker 2 recon 1 guardian, that's just sad....
Now to get back to my suggestion and how it relates to this post, the players who lost the 5v6 to me should have lost a significant amount of rank points while I should have gained a significant amount of rank points. Then we should be matched up next game based on rank, that way they will not be destroyed again and I will have a challenge, which will make the game more fun for both of us.
The only time I ever do damage is when trying to capature or defend a point, get ya [crap] talking out of my thread because clearly I know how to play Lockdown a whole lot better than you if I have more damage, captures and defends. I have never once come to a control point with a player at it, killed them, and left without either taking the control point completely or at least waiting until somebody less skilled on my team comes into it to start capturing it for me to move to the next one.
"Considering there was a whole of 2 or 3 games where I didn't do the best on my team and/or the best in the game"
"I'm always top damage + captures + defends"
These are pure gold dude, keep it up.
It would be cool to have those stats. However, the ranking is not solely based on who plays the most. For instance, Meida only played about 5 more games than I did, but she ended up with about 1200 more points than me. Skill is involved, as well as the random chance of who you were put with. There were a few games I had to REPEATEDLY play against Paol, Meida, Agni, and Opod, and the next game one of them might be on my team, but it kept putting me against the rest of them. And despite your opinion of them, they knew how to play their role better than anyone.
I will give you that we probably did play the most of everyone, and that we had a good player who wasn't on the leaderboard (that's you twili), but that's not only entire factor here.