Page 3 of 10
Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:36 pm
by Cadillac
Pook wrote:QUOTE (Pook @ Nov 4 2006, 10:02 PM) It's already implemented. Go look for yourself - or check out the leaderboard.
Rank = kills / 100
There's no formula, no weighting, no penalties, none of that "broke" stuff.
If you don't kill other ships, your rank does not go up. Simple, eh? If you look at the leaderboard, you'll note that the good dogfighters are at the top, and the guys that fly scouts are at the bottom. Shiz is a (25), Noir is a (5). That's how it works.
To put it simply, the ranking system is now "Whore Based" rather than "ELO Based".
Enjoy!
/mrgreen.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":D" border="0" alt="mrgreen.gif" />
A good idea, but I'm glad you switched back or games would result in:
NAN ME NOW!!!
> Err, no thanks, let me kill this newbie.
Nobody would want to nan or probe ... or maybe comm /laugh.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":lol:" border="0" alt="laugh.gif" />
Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:48 pm
by jaybird39
got a silly Question for pook.
Thise of us that literally cannot dogfight, and are very likely to not be able to, but have an important role to play in game (yeah, I am talking about me)
What about us?
Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:50 pm
by Cadillac
Jaybird that is indeed an EXTREMELY silly question.
Read the whole thread, or the quote below. (Your question is obsolete)
Pook wrote:QUOTE (Pook @ Nov 4 2006, 11:25 PM) Wow so it seems you guys don't want whore-based ranks and that you actually did depend on ELO to get a measure of player skill?
Gee, alright. I'll switch it right back. Sorry about that!
Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 12:03 am
by Tigereye
jaybird39 wrote:QUOTE (jaybird39 @ Nov 4 2006, 06:48 PM) got a silly Question for pook.
Thise of us that literally cannot dogfight, and are very likely to not be able to, but have an important role to play in game (yeah, I am talking about me)
What about us?
I think that was the point that was proved... /wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />
--TE
Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 12:04 am
by jaybird39
Cadillac wrote:QUOTE (Cadillac @ Nov 4 2006, 03:50 PM) Jaybird that is indeed an EXTREMELY silly question.
Read the whole thread, or the quote below. (Your question is obsolete)
Ok, I can see that. but if we cannot find stat recogniton in either case of whore based stats, or the ELO system, where does the support pilots fit in, other than looking like dunces?
Neither stat system reflects that aspect of the game, and it is likely to not ever work out that way.
The only way that support pilots (true support pilots) seem to be known is by the word of mouth.
Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 12:05 am
by Pook
It's a long standing debate.
My personal opinion is that our community will never be able to successfully implement an individual-based scoring sytstem.
The reason: Everyone has a different idea of what's important and what actions are worth to gameplay.
That means that even if we recorded and tracked every single action (inlcuding actions not currently tracked in code, like nanning) we could never get everyone to agree on how much those things are worth to assign them points. One person may think kills are more important, the next thinks base kills are, the next thinks probing is more important, etc.
Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 12:09 am
by Cadillac
I personally liked the addition of the "people near the bomber get points when the base is killed" thing, and the "points should count towards personal ELO scores" and the "individual ELO scores at the end of the game stats sheet" ideas, where did all of them go?
Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 12:10 am
by jaybird39
Pook wrote:QUOTE (Pook @ Nov 4 2006, 04:05 PM) It's a long standing debate.
My personal opinion is that our community will never be able to successfully implement an individual-based scoring sytstem.
The reason: Everyone has a different idea of what's important and what actions are worth to gameplay.
That means that even if we recorded and tracked every single action (inlcuding actions not currently tracked in code, like nanning) we could never get everyone to agree on how much those things are worth to assign them points. One person may think kills are more important, the next thinks base kills are, the next thinks probing is more important, etc.
yep, exactly my point.
The importance of each job is important period. Tghe whore pilots, the bomber pilots, the nans, the probers. Equally share in importance. This is where things get difficult. No one can see that the importance of one job can actaully equal the other. It is just a different skill.
Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 12:24 am
by factoid
Thus the proposed (and contested) system that says, "Did you win? Did I expect you to? Yes/No? Ok, let's tweak that for next time."
Pook, I don't know if you have any daughters; but if you do, I fear for any man who enters your home without a solid grasp of 'personal responsibility'.
Oh, and in case I pull a Cortex, the above was meant to say I approve of your sense of humor.
Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 12:44 am
by Pook
I do have a daughter, but she's 5. /wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />
By the time I have to worry about that I'll be old and senile and (since I'm in Texas) armed to the teeth!
/mrgreen.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":D" border="0" alt="mrgreen.gif" />