Lockdown Scores - An Overall Score Concept
Wed, 06/13/2012 - 11:51
Greetings everyone, Shidara speaking.
PvP is a subject that has been embraced since the release of Blast Network, and now it has moved its focus to Lockdown, which was the first mode since Super Brawl in the preview event that allowed you to use your equipment to battle other players. We already have topics discussing things such as highest damage, most captures and most defends, and record these to put together some sort of leaderboard using these scores individually. So I started thinking...
What if we combined the scores to create an overall score system? I have already proposed the idea in another topic, but I cannot expand the idea within it, resulting in this topic. The easiest way to determine score would be to use damage as your base, and assign captures and defends their own value and then combine the three for your overall score.
As proposed in the previously mentioned topic, my first idea goes like this:
Captures = 1,000 pts. each
Defends = 500 pts. each
Damage = 1 pt. each
Canozo also suggested a 10% point bonus for being the victor. That being said, here's an example:
Lock scored 2 captures, 5 defends and 16,396 damage.
Down scored 7 captures, 1 defend and 12,407 damage.
Down's team won the match, so their scores would look like this:
Lock: 2,000 pts. + 2,500 pts. + 16,396 pts. = 20,896 pts.
Down: 7,000 pts. + 500 pts. + 12,407 pts. = 19,907 pts. + 10% bonus = 21,897 pts.
Lock scored more than Down with his high damage, but Down's effort to capture points over fighting other players led to his team's victory, giving him the 10% bonus and overtaking Lock.
Note: Using the bonus, points are rounded down, so Down's 1,990.7 bonus is rounded down to 1,990.
Now, my question is, what do you think captures and defends should be worth?
Discuss and post your own scores, along with your own ideas of how Lockdown scores should be determined.
Wed, 06/13/2012 - 12:10
#2
The current counting of
The current counting of "defends" is a little wonky. I'm not entirely sure, but it seems like you only get credit if you retake a point that was halfway to being down.
This means that if you hold off all comers for 30 seconds without ever letting the point lose health, you don't get credit for a defense.
These things combined would create an incentive to capture- but not hold- points. In a perfectly played match, every player on the winning team would get 1 capture, and the losing team would get 0. Matches where everyone gets 12 captures seem cool, but put another way, high turnover means that defenders aren't doing their job or supporting each other.
Wed, 06/13/2012 - 12:13
#3
About defends...
I actually don't know how defends work. I honestly do not know how it works. So anyone who does, do share your knowledge.
It'd also be nice if you added your own ideas to the concept. The points I put up are just placeholders for now.
Wed, 06/13/2012 - 15:40
#4
My take on things.
I thought defends were simply counted when you killed an opponent who was trying to take one of your points, no?
If I interpret what you're saying correctly, you basically prefer a system where you individually calculate each player's effort into an overall score for each team, rather than the current one where everyone on a team seems to get the same score regardless of effort (which basically has no effect on wins or losses anyways).
In my opinion, that would probably make LD even more unbalanced than it already is, favouring those decked out with UVs/Trinkets, and leaving the others in the dust. Newbies would get shunned even more for not "contributing to their team enough", but given that I'm not a very experienced LD player, I may have an incorrect take on things. Scoring based only on CP points, with the other stats mainly just being there as feedback of how you did, is a lot more friendly towards the general player base as a whole.
Tl;dr - You can fix the scores so people actually get different amounts, but I don't think it should have an effect on the actual outcome.
Wed, 06/13/2012 - 15:52
#5
Wait, what?
I can't figure out if you're taking this out of context or just reading too deeply into it... I can't comprehend the message you're trying to convey.
I'm not looking for anything evolutionary, just driving attention away from damage scores alone. You know, instead of obsessing over damage, how about making people look at their full score rather than using damage as a factor to put themselves over someone who might be contributing to the team more, but it doesn't stand out through their damage. Damage doesn't win you the game, not on its own, so I want to see how people would react when you pull in captures and defends into the equation, making a new, unofficial point system that people can use to boost their egos with.
Yes, that was blunt.
I'm not looking to change anything, only to change the perspective. If you're not interested in a fictional way of measuring points, this topic is pointless to you.
Wed, 06/13/2012 - 16:34
#6
...
I never really cared much for lockdown scores. However, I wouldn't mind having something like this though, because it will give people an incentive to do something other than hunt for people to kill.
The big stumbling block that I see in getting a good LD score is for status bombers. I've seen a bombers hold off half a team via only status bombs, walking away with about 1,000 damage compared to most (good) strikers getting in the 15,000 damage area. In addition, most bombers spend more time defending points, rather than trying to capture new ones, so they tend to not get a lot of caps unless they are really aggressive (or RSS spamming, but that's something completely different).
Wed, 06/13/2012 - 16:41
#7
I'm pretty sure defends are
I'm pretty sure defends are players you killed while on a capture point, or something like that.
Wed, 06/13/2012 - 16:50
#8
I took it out of context.
Well yes, if you put it in that sense where it doesn't have an actual effect on the game, then I'm completely fine with that. I just read the part where you said "Down scored more points than Lock" and interpreted that as the reason Down's team won, rather than the other way around.
I also agree with Traevelliath though. LD's a lot about psychological gameplay as well, and bombers keeping opponents away from bombs by that system will not receive many points and seem as though they're not contributing to the team. Of course, the current system doesn't do anything to address that as well (as well as a lot of games in actuality), but hey, you can never depend solely on points alone anyways.
Wed, 06/13/2012 - 16:55
#9
I like the idea of a better
I like the idea of a better scoring system (and I wish I knew how defenses were counted). However, my comments were meant to imply that any new scoring system could be gamed, sometimes leading to unexpected behaviors. There would need to be some way to account for the difference between a blowout and a tightly contested match- like scaling relative performance (getting the most captures, rather than x pts per capture).
Wed, 06/13/2012 - 16:58
#10
...
Is this thread a suggestion for in-game scoring or for score threads on the forums?
Wed, 06/13/2012 - 17:15
#11
I think defends are you
I think defends are you killed a enemy around a point you conrol(not sure about specific area).
How about we have a cap system that gets 750 per and everything lower than the high person will get slightly lower? Like top person got 8 defends so he gets 6000 points, middle got 5 so he gets 3375((750-(25x3))x5), and low person got 2 so he gets 1200((750-(25x6))x2).
Wed, 06/13/2012 - 17:20
#12
nice idea but won't help as much.
does't matter hope you rig the score, some people will always going to chase most dmg/kills even if their team loses, it's just gamers nature.
Wed, 06/13/2012 - 18:41
#13
Responses
@Altivu
All right, that makes things clearer. Unfortunately there is absolutely no way of recording out-of-report performance data outside of mouth-by-mouth, which could also turn out to be blatant lies, but if such a thing was possible, more measurements for point distribution would open up making this a little more interesting.
@Pauling
I like that idea. If you wish to elaborate on it, I'm all ears!
@Thrillhaus
The latter. This thread is for both discussing possibilities for new methods of measuring scores and, if people are interested, posting and sharing such scores. If it draws the attention of the developers, that's just a bonus.
@Tuhui
I see. That is another way of measuring scores that seems pretty interesting, but what would happen in the case of a tie, or there are less than six players on the team? And what happens if someone with a high count leaves the match? These things must be accounted for when you choose to use scaling as a factor. Another thing that bothers me is that if we're using scaling, I find 750 per capture isn't rewarding enough when combatting damage, and the lower your captures are, the less you're rewarded for your efforts, making damage-hunting more attractive and seems counter-intuitive for what I am trying to achieve. The concept has potential, though, and also, my view on how rewarding captures and defends should be might not be ideal, so I'd like to get as much feedback on it as possible.
@Vtmoon
This is more of an interest check to find out how many would be want and/or be interested in a different way to measure scores. Those who are may come, those who are not don't have to.
Wed, 06/13/2012 - 19:42
#14
Leavers would have no
Leavers would have no score.
It's not based on what rank you are it's how many caps fewer you got from the top, -25 per cap away. so a person gets 11 they get 9000((750-(25x0))x11) a person who got 3 would get 1150((750-(25x8))x3) some one who got 1 would get 500((750-(25x10))x1). Also 750 is just a value i made up.
The equation is (X1-(X2xN1))xN2 X1=the base value for caps, X2=value each cap fewer will be deducted, N1=difference from top cap, N2=number of caps you get.
Wed, 06/13/2012 - 21:43
#15
15 captures means that you lost every CP. Repeatedly.
I've seen people leave whenever they think their team is losing. Ideally there would be a mild score penalty for leaving. However, the penalty should only be applied if they leave AFTER the match starts. I've seen too many matches that begin even though a team is one player short, and that should not happen.
Per how defending works... despite the vast number of kills racked up in the average match, I actually see very few people score any, much less many, defense points. Hence my confusion.
As for how to tune the scores to rank blowouts differently than competitive matches? Anything that rewards individual capture events will encourage turnover and gaming of the system: a team with a commanding lead would deliberately give up and then retake their control point to generate an extra "capture".
Instead, I think a better system would be to reward people with a share of whatever score is generated by any CP they had a hand in taking or protecting, so long as that CP remains continuously up. (with bonuses for good defense, measured in a smarter way than the current system) Once the CP got dropped, the score would stop flowing in, and whoever took down the CP would get a small one-time score boost of their own. (to encourage people to spread out or drop CPs behind enemy lines)
If you receive recurring rewards for for capture points being up continuously, you won't have an incentive to let them drop. And if you're rewarded for defending, then teamwork becomes more important than dashing around to rack up meaningless un-defended captures.
EMPHASIZE CONTRIBUTIONS, NOT INDIVIDUAL ACTS. SCORE AWARDED FOR:
- Damage. It has its place.
- Dropping an enemy CP, even if you don't capture it. (points awarded once)
- Bonus if your team holds a CP the entire match without ever losing it
- Your player score should be penalized if you leave during the match
- If your team wins when short-handed, you deserve a small bonus
- Contribute to the capture (or defense of) a control point: Score awarded repeatedly so long as the CP stays up, in a manner proportionate to the match score system (5,3,1...). Score awarded for EACH CP you were involved with. Might need to be scaled for 3 vs 5 CP maps.
Wed, 06/13/2012 - 23:23
#16
I think it would be neat to
I think it would be neat to see them shift away from the same concept for every map. For instance they could have one map without capture points at all and some different obstacles that played to the weakness or power of every kit. Then the outcome could be driven off a ticket system 50/50 like battlefield, each death removes a ticket until one team exhausts their supply.
Then you could have a 50/50 ticketed map with a big heart in the middle with the same mechanics as a key in PvE, damage makes you drop it. If a team were to return the heart back to within the safety of their locker room it could be +10 tickets. (yeah I know EoTS) This could make for some epic battles where teamwork is used and you see teams going on the offense or turtleing up together. Think about someone carrying the heart under a guardian shield while the rest of the team protects their efforts to return (cap) it.
And yes, though out of the box (to a degree) both are possible alternative methods of tracking success and failure and take the focus off of being a lone wolv.
~Luke
Wed, 06/13/2012 - 23:46
#17
@Lukehandkooler
The problem with that is, for one, it's irrelevant to this discussion, but most importantly it wouldn't be Lockdown. It'd be Team Deathmatch, with a proof-system, which makes me think of a pretty annoying feature in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3. Personal opinions aside, this is for another topic to discuss.
I'll get back to the other comments later at some point.
Thu, 06/14/2012 - 00:23
#18
it wouldn't be Lockdown. I
it wouldn't be Lockdown.
I politely disagree. I hate to use the "other game" card, but Arathi Basin and Warsong Gultch were both "battlegrounds" despite having vastly different mechanics.
However I digress, you are looking at scoring in a much more limited scope and criteria (and rightly so), going off of what we can apply to what we have, while I was trying to go off of what we could change, albeit both being targeted at promoting team play.
Unfortunately I feel either route is an exercise in futility as last weeks patch showed us, there are -alot- of Bros out there that are opposed to change.
~Luke
Thu, 06/14/2012 - 00:52
#19
@Lukehandkooler
Again, you are mistaken. Arathi Basin and Warsong Gulch are separate maps with different modes(?). Lockdown is a game mode with different maps. Changing the mechanics of the game would change the mode itself, in this case Lockdown, to something else entirely.
Back to the matter at hand, I am not looking to change anything within the game, merely the perspective of out-of-game scoring. People use damage alone as a score measurement against other players, in some odd cases captures are counted in as well, but I am looking to find an overall score by using damage as a base for points and assigning captures and defends their own values to ultimately add them all together for a final score. This is all artifical and entirely for the purpose of having another way to measure points, having no effect on the game itself.
Thu, 06/14/2012 - 09:29
#20
If you're gonna use this kind of system to score people unofficially, it'll mean nothing. It needs to be something actually coded into the game (preferably in place of the crappy score column we got already) if you actually want to change people's minds. Not everyone reads the forums, nor listens to what some random person says; only to the game itself. People also pay attention to the largest number, and if the score is damn near always higher than damage, people would shift to paying attention to it, and how the other things effect it.
Thu, 06/14/2012 - 09:45
#21
@Guyinshinyarmour
I've already accepted this fact. I don't need you to remind me, nor do I need you waltzing in here to say that you don't care.
I already said it before, if you're not interested, don't bother, and rather let those who are.
Still procrastinating on those posts because of troublesome people like these.
Thu, 06/14/2012 - 12:38
#22
+1
It is truly amazing that a forum user could come up with this brilliant system that people don't understand (by that I mean people think caps/defends are worthless and dumb). So props to you.
Thu, 06/14/2012 - 13:19
#23
...
Didn't I support this concept in the other thread? And you say I don't care? If anything, I was saying you need to actually push for this to be made an official rework of the current system, which you should. I don't see what's wrong with that. I thought people liked their ideas to matter/effect more people rather than less. :|
And since you want to be snide, I doubt my posts make it impossible for you to respond to others.
Reserved for future use.