Spiral Knights - Expand stats on capping

Expand stats on capping

6 replies [Last post]

Wed, 09/05/2012 - 12:38

Addisond

Right now in LD a "cap" is counted in your stats every time you are standing on a point and the point shifts to your side. I feel that this misrepresents how capping actually works, and while this stat should remain, several more stats should be introduced:

1. Total capping

How much progress you contributed to capping over the entire game, capping or uncapping.

2. Uncaps

Number of times you were on a point while it was returned to it's "neutral" state.

3. Anticaps

Amount of time you stood on a point while a player from the other team stood on the same point. If multiple players from the same team are on the same point, they gain this slower, and if there are more enemies on the point they gain it faster (amount of time on point/allied players on point*enemy players on point). For example, if you and one allied player were on the point, and there were three enemies on that point, and you all stayed on the point for the duration it normally takes to cap a point (this situation is unlikely, but it's an effective mathematic example) you would get 1/2*3=1.5 anticaps.

The following was written to clarify later in this forum:

When you are on a point at the same time as an enemy player, all capping on that point is stalled, as though there are no players on the point at all. This measures that. It's not a really significant addition, but it's easily measurable and currently left out of stats. The thing that is probably confusing you is HOW it's measured.

The intent behind the measuring system is that when you stall a cap, you get all the progress that you are cancelling dropped into your "anticap" stat. It would be as simple as "time on cap point*enemy players on cap point", but sometimes there's also an allied player on the cap point. Since you only need one to totally stall capping, all progress is divided amongst those on the cap point. So it ends up being "time on cap point/allied players on cap point*enemy players on cap point". Hope that clears it up.

Wed, 09/05/2012 - 13:35

Qwao

Let me clear this up a little

You get 1 capture if you were standing on a point when it is captured.

You get 1 defend for an enemy killed in a radius (I don't know exactly but it's somewhere around) of a control point you own. (Unknown if simply being in there counts, or if you have to contribute to the killing. I believe it's the former)

Now, to comment.

Total capping: How would that be presented? Percentage?
Uncaps: I'm all for this. +10
Anticaps: I'm a little confused, but I don't see (from what I assume) any point to this.

To add on, I suggest a "Capture assist", where you assist in the capturing of a point. This way it would make players who died on a certain point before it was captured feel better. HOWEVER I'd rather keep it simple, simply being a "1" for having stood on the point at least for X time before a successful capture.

Wed, 09/05/2012 - 14:14

Little-Juances

The thing is... in wich way does it help to see such information?

Wed, 09/05/2012 - 16:14

Qwao

I don't see anything in showing damage, caps and defends etc at all anyway. It's pretty interesting to see though.

That and it makes us feel better.

Thu, 09/06/2012 - 16:44

Addisond

@owaoforum

Yeah, this is how capturing works

I'm not too clear on how defenses work, either. I *think* that it's killing someone on a point you own, but I don't really care to test.

Total capping would be presented in a percentage where 100% was either a full un-cap and cap. If OOO wanted to keep the game simple they could just leave the percentage sign out and use a raw number.

Unfortunately, there's not an easy way to explain this stat, so I'll write a long-form explanation:
When you are on a point at the same time as an enemy player, all capping on that point is stalled, as though there are no players on the point at all. This measures that. It's not a really significant addition, but it's easily measurable and currently left out of stats. The thing that is probably confusing you is HOW it's measured.

As for the "capture assist" thing, I can understand this, but I think it makes sense to have any player who contributed a certain amount to the cap near the time of it's finalization get a stat to signify that. Players can often get drawn off the point to pursue opportunities. As for the "keep it simple" thing, are you suggesting that all "capture assists" be simply counted as one capture in terms of stats?

@Juances
People like stats to analyze. And the current ones are kinda inaccurate. People tend to get equally credited for totally different actions, for example newbs often get stuck outside of the main flow of a LD map and consequently spend a lot of time solo-capping points and getting the same amount of credit as a skolver who spent two seconds on a point.

Thu, 09/06/2012 - 12:27

Qwao

Wall of text hurrdurr

Yep, that cleared it up.

For the capture assist it's something like this, for example

A starts the capture.
C comes and kill A.
B comes and kill C, and finishes A's capture.

In that scenario, A gets awarded 1 capture assist while B receives both 1 capture and 1 capture assist.

Now for another scenario

A starts the capture.
Just as the capture reaches somewhere say 90%, B comes and help finish it.

In this scenario, Both A and B receives 1 capture and 1 capture assist.

Now for more complicated statistics, it would be something like you said

A initiates the capture.
B joins A as the capture reaches 50%.
Point gets captured, A earns 100% Capture and B earns 50% Capture.

Now in my suggestion, things are kept simple and credit is given for the slightest contribution, while in your scenario, things are more accurate and credit given scales with how much you have contributed.

But how are you going to reward them, like you mentioned?

As it is, even players who are what everyone deems as the "noob" that rarely capture and contributes little damage would earn the same prize as the others if their team won. Then we split.

The noob that initiated majority of the capture only to get killed and their teammate steals the cap, or the noob that literally dies in 3seconds WITHOUT even bothering to cap.

In that case, the former should be rewarded and the latter should be penalised, but I find that hard to implement. What if said latter noob was really distracting enemies from capturing? The game wouldn't know.

Overall I think the system is as fine as it is. Simplicity is sometimes best, though simple statistic additions would be nice (and make noobs feel better if they really think they contributed. Like me :P)

Thu, 09/06/2012 - 16:50

Addisond

To be clear, I was not suggesting that any monetary rewards be given for anything. By rewards I was referring to rewards in terms of stats, bad word choice in retrospect. Changing it to avoid future confusion.

I feel that the current reward distribution process is appropriate because it directly rewards winning, hence on average it will gauge how much you contributed. And no statistical analysis can beat a win average, though the difference in monetary rewards between a good player and a bad player will be less significant than otherwise. However, I feel that this is also a good feature, since it keeps new players willing to play because they aren't losing cash.

Search

Expand stats on capping