• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

Benefits for staying alive...

I have been playing another game that actually gives you a point for death.
I discoverd it while watching my score on a tie kill where both my opponent and myself killed each other.

That tie gave me 6 points rather than five. Stupid huh.

High score in these shooter games is always the objective and maybe correct.

I pesonally feel that if you simply run about and get at least one kill before you are killed and you do that a lot you will arrive at the top of the score list.

It proves nothing and requires no skill at all.

If you get points for a kill great. How about a 20% to 50% - minus score for a death.
That would put some skill in the game. Lots of kills lots of points. You keep your points by playing with some skill and you keep most of them.

Bob

You need people on your team that are willing to risk dying or there will just be a stalemate. On most servers now theres a lot of people that refuse to attack and prefer to let their team do the attacking while they sit back and camp. It would make the situation even worse if you lost points. The fact that you lose reinforcements and therefore screw your team's chances of winning should be enough to encourage people to be careful (when your team is defending. On attack you usually have plenty of reinforcements).

Staying alive for a long time isn't usually to your team's advantage simply because you respawn nearly instantly and unless you take chances you will take forever to capture objectives
 
Upvote 0
Just leave the game as-is. Rambos will be rambos, campers will be campers. People already value their virtual lives, in some cases way too much (ever play a round of Odessa when no one on your team will charge?).

People are already punished for dying too much in the form of having their reinforcements run out. People are already rewarded for attacking by getting points for being in the cap zone. Past that, I'd say anything else is just wishing people would play the game the way you want them to, and that just ain't gonna happen.
 
Upvote 0
I think points should be awarded to those who either lived or died in the cap zone at the end of the round

Now that I'd go for. I just got off a round of Koenigsplatz as Allies (right up until the end) where the Allies all but refused to advance. I probably killed about seven guys in one go in a cap zone (over time, not all at once), and there were maybe three other people playing who were pushing forward into the cap zones. Everyone else? Just the usual plinking away.
 
Upvote 0
No, I think it's better that you, the player, are the one responsible for how well your avatar works in game.

That's one of the things I like most about traditional FPS games -- everyone (assuming no hacks/cheats) starts at a level playing field. Our avatars all do what they do exactly the same. The difference is in our OWN ability to manipulate the game, rather than being rewarded with better abilities over time.

If that's the style of game you want, EA seems happy to cater to you. BF2 and BF2142 are available. Or you can go play an MMORPG and get REALLY deep into the "My gear is better than yours and I have six ability modifiers that mean you have no chance against me. So **** it" thing.
 
Upvote 0
Some good ideas on this page. How about this one: each player has a limited number of respawns so that one run n gun noob doesn't ruin it for the whole team? That way the run n gunner's would be more careful and the campers would have to get amongst the action at some stage before they find themselves fighting the battle alone with 6 spares lives.
 
Upvote 0
How about MORE KILLS MORE MEDALS!!!

Example!

A sniper gets 10 kills in a row (Or whatever), he is awarded a marksman medal. Now his sniper rifle will be more steady.

I was just about to suggest something like this but I was scanning the pages to see if it was already brought up! Medals and pins for staying alive and getting kills and capturing objectives. This would be for eye candy and prestige. There could be a screen at the end of each game displaying who got which medal. Similar to Dystopia's end round screen which shows who got 'most time cloaked' etc etc
 
Upvote 0
I personally TRY to play the game as if I'm NOT GOING TO RESPAWN at all- even though I know it's part of the game functions that I will. I tend to look at kill/death ratios more than total kill/total deaths in the end, anyway.

As far as cap whores go, eliminate the urge to BE a cap whore and simply use it as a victory condition- and don't do it for personal points. Just do your job, soldier, and get your boys home- in one piece- in time for Christmas.

when you show kills aswell people will whore for that instead of k:d.

KD doens't matter to your average player, but it would if that's the only show of how good they are in combat.
 
Upvote 0
How about letting players play the way THEY want you little control freaks?
Get a life and a girlfriend (Tho, she might leave you because you will always tell her what or what not to do) and let people play, they bought the game just as you did.

If you want to stay alive do it, if not then don't. Winning on a public server is.....not important. If you want real gameplay get yourself a clan and do some wars.
 
Upvote 0
Personally I like pubbing the way it is but...

Well a lot of you guys here seem to really value your lives in game on pubs. I
think many of you would enjoy playing in the EFO campaign (Eastern Front Operations) for RO where we use a mutator that allows all of us each 1 life per round. It's rewarding enough there to be on the winning side or atleast having died trying to defend your squad's flank. Rather than bothering TW to add some sort of option that rewards you for staying alive go join a realism unit that plays in EFO or on a server that has a mutator with similar conditions.
 
Upvote 0
Don't touch it.
Any type of alteration between players who die alot and players who don't makes the game unfair.
I don't want to wait longer being an assaulter than the rifleman who is growing mushrooms out of his ass from behind the front while i have to run into enemy fire to get to a cap zone or even into CQB for instance.

Punishing death ratios with realistic games is just a no-go imho.




The only thing suitable i think is to give them less ammo and less to no grenades next time they respawn after dieing 3 times in 5 minutes.
This will reduce nadespamming aswell and gives careful players a good but not overpowered advantage.
The thing is, people will start to camp and not follow into a full blown charge, which is what gives RO so much atmosphere.
Watching 10 people run forward through enemy fire, people dieing all around you, diving into the next foxhole while capping.... That might all disappear when you start punishing death.
 
Upvote 0
Stupid death is bad for your team. Just add death score. The stupid guys will get humilated. Maybe they will improve.

You're expecting that the things that motivate you when you play this game are the things that motivate everyone else. They aren't.

Some guys play this game for their score. So they'll happily charge with a primed nade and blow themselves up if it'll guarantee that they'll get an extra 5 points or whatever.

Some guys play this game because they want to live the experience of a grunt in WWII, so they treat each individual life as their ONLY life and play REALLY cautiously.

And some folks want an experience somewhere in between those two extremes.


Things like "rewarding living" or "punishing death" will not change how people play and the thing to remember here is that the way you want to play isn't necessarily the way everyone else wants to play.
 
Upvote 0
Your score reflects the last life you had not commulative, since in effect you are a different soldier when you respawn. So, make all scores based on your last life, and team wise, based on caps achieved?

The respawn idea is problematic, because it's not realistic, since the next wave of soldiers is can be right behind you. Does the next wave of soldier wait longer to get to the front because their are more deaths? (hrmmm, maybe they would because they do not want to die).

But, the true realistic aspect is current life generates the current score...thus, people will try and stay alive longer and still participate. It will not affect people who linger (no objectives taken no kills to score), and it will prevent a little rambo action a bit because the ultimate end result of that tactic is an erase of score potential unless you gain a cap because of the effort (which is more realistic team wise because your death helped achieve the objective).

Just my two cents.

Just to clarify with an example: My first life is going great, geting kills, staying alive, and then I get cocky and do something stupid. Why should my score reflect what I did before I died (but, I did help in getting that cap zone, so) my score carries over just the cap score and starts new for number of kills.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Rewarding by making the game less realistic isn't something I think the devs are too keen of. I do agree that there should be some sort of reward for staying alive as long as it doesn't compromise the realism the devs strive to attain.

What would be really cool if they had campaigns scenarios in which maps progressed depending on which side won or lost. Secondly, if you survived a game then you could upgrade your class depending on your score.

If you were a rifleman who killed a few enemies or at least capped a point then on the next map you could be a submachine gunner and so on to simulate increase in rank. However, if you died then you go back to rifile man.

Perhaps that is too brutal... But hey... Its very realstic.
 
Upvote 0