Agree/disagree.

It certainly does encourage some people to just wanna be toothpick strikers and run around killin' folk with little~no consideration for the actual objectives (@Heaven, it is NOT a TD game, it's Annex/KotH (whatever you wanna call it), there are absolutely no points rewarded for kills, just captured points; spending your time runnin' around killing noobs while their pros cap all the points will lose you the game) and has a nasty habit of discouraging useful team play. This can also lead to certain support players (bombers, come to mind) who can be extraordinarily useful in protecting points, pushing crowds etc, but wind up with very little in the ways of damage/caps etc, making people who didn't see them [tart] and moan that they're just useless, via judging people based on the scoreboard.

However, it's nice that they're one of the few games that considers how aggravating it is to not look at kills, and just clock damage, and it is always nice for the strikers in the team to get a feel for how well they actually did compared to others. It's beneficial for the damage classes, as are caps/defends for the point-men, to keep a track of how well they're playing and what their goals are. It's just a shame that there's no real way to quantify "didn't let a single person past mid-point the entire game" in the scoreboards.

"Wut? Remove dmg counter since it motivates to kill? Ok then what they will start capturing point, omgonoz remove def/cpt count since it motivates to capture points. What next? Remove point counter."

I don't even know why you would even fathom, in your head, how this statement holds any intellectual value.

You just stated this:
"What? Remove damage counter because it motivates people to only kill, and not play the objective which is the main way to win? At that rate, we shouldn't show how useful people were in actually contributing to points that 'matter' in winning since that motivates in playing actual objective, instead of a pointless sword fight that has no significance to winning aside from allowing the rest of your team to capture points, if anyone is even doing that."

Lets play Call of Duty, without the experience gain.

@Quotefanboy that was beautiful man *wipes tears away

I agree with this personally. I've always said that LD makes GF Strikers with 15K damage and a single cap look like gods, while 10 caps and 5K damage players look like total noobs. At least, in player perception. The damage counter is really frivolous to have in a "KotH" type game, and motivates people to play Deathmatch rather than KotH.

@Asukalanforum: The rager be ragin' again; what you just said makes no sense, and I won't explain it again since Fanboy did my job.

@Kreeara: That's it? You can't think of anything else to say? Why post?

~Sev

"Then why are those final results showing damage given and not bases captured?"

...have you ever played lockdown? Points captured is the first thing shown, then points defended, THEN damage. In that order, (aka, order of importance).

Idk about the rest of you, but I always check out all the counters. I was playing T2 a few days back, and saw a guy in full proto and an autogun running around as recon. Naturally, I was a little annoyed, but at the end of the game, I saw that he had 15 caps, even if he did only have a few hundred damage. So, when people commented on my damage, I pointed out his caps and told them that he was the reason we won the game.

STOP TRYING TO RUIN THE GAME! Some people play for damage, and others play for caps. It is mostly just your preference. Imagine if no one killed one another, the game would be idiotic. If you remove the damage counter, you remove some of the drive to keep the other teams population under control, and that would ruin the game as easily as taking out the capture counter.

Why put it in LD but not the CW?

ITT butthurt