Normalizing scores when switching teams

[Zetsumei]

Often in Red Orchestra the attackers can gain more points than the defenders. I have no doubt that TWI found something that for holding an objective the defenders will obtain points but it will still be likely that one side will generally gain more points than the other.

Often when a player in the middle of the game switches side, the top player of the defending team suddenly goes to the bottom of the scoreboard. Or someone at the bottom of the scoreboard of the attacking team goes to the top of the scoreboard with the defending team.

It would be nice if when changing side the game would look at what your score was relative to your team mates on one side. And then rescale your score to end up similarly relative to your team mates on the other side.

 

[Walter]

I don't think Red Orchestra is a game that should be played for points, so I find any mechanic like that redundant. I can't imagine people interested in score liking it either, as it would inflate your score for... pressing 2 buttons - hardly seems fair.

 

[Zetsumei]

I don't think Red Orchestra is a game that should be played for points, so I find any mechanic like that redundant. I can't imagine people interested in score liking it either, as it would inflate your score for... pressing 2 buttons - hardly seems fair.

a point system is in place and as that is the case there will be people going for those points.

If anything I do not think its fair if someone goes to the top of the scoreboard on the defending team, purely because in the first 20 minutes he played on the attackers side. A lot of people take the scoreboard as a rank,and in that sense it should display the best person according to the score system on top.

 

[SolitarioSoldat]

a point system is in place and as that is the case there will be people going for those points.

If anything I do not think its fair if someone goes to the top of the scoreboard on the defending team, purely because in the first 20 minutes he played on the attackers side. A lot of people take the scoreboard as a rank,and in that sense it should display the best person according to the score system on top.

u can have the best gamer of the round having mediocre points without switching teams....but usually people who play the game as a team can tell who was da man that round......that should count more than points

 

[Miro!]

Who cares about that scoreboard ? Only thing u should care of is being useful to the team, winning ur duels and fight for victory. :IS2:

 

[BlackLabel]

Miro, ever heard of "human nature" ?

 

[Miro!]

Miro, ever heard of "human nature" ?

Yeah... Capitalism is everywhere.
I wish there was more of a Communism spirit onto our battlefields

 

[Zetsumei]

Guys sure the scoreboard is not perfect. But that doesn't mean that improvements should be made.

If you want the scoreboard removed make a suggestion for that. This suggestion is not about the case of having a scoreboard or not, or how accurate it is.

But based on the ideal situation that the scoreboard does work as intended, how to reduce the effect of relative score inflation and deflation when changing team.

 

[BlackLabel]

Simple..take away the cappoints if you switch from attackers to defenders.

Yeah... Capitalism is everywhere.

uhm...you dident get the poitn did you...Its about people are feel better ( as pathetic as this might seem..) for incentives such as "beign top of scoreboard" or "archievements". Those that deny that are flat out lying. Some games evolve completely around such things.

 

[Zetsumei]

Simple..take away the cappoint if you switch from attackers to defenders.

That would do fine as well, the reason for me of scaling was that for instance in Kaukasus even if you take away cap points. The defenders will have a much higher kill quantity than the attackers. (Hence the reason for the attackers having more reinforcements).

Which is why I feel simply scaling someone might give a better outcome. Especially as the defenders can often cap as well but do it for instance less often, so people should regain some cap points as well, and points would need to be scaled on for instance reinforcements. In the end you get a more complex situation than scaling someone against his team and then scaling it back to the other team.

Especially since TWI put in a team balancer that doesn't only look at amount of players but somehow at skill as well (said somewhere on the forums), meaning that mean skill of one and the other team should lay close to each other.

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

Personally I think this would discourage those players that might switch sides to even up the teams a bit. If they find out half of what they worked for is going to disappear, they might not do that. Then of course we will all be chat spammed about making the teams more even.

 

[BlackLabel]

I think the points for kills should allways stay no matter what.

 

[Susi]

Yeah... Capitalism is everywhere.
I wish there was more of a Communism spirit onto our battlefields

uhm...you dident get the poitn did you...Its about people are feel better ( as pathetic as this might seem..) for incentives such as "beign top of scoreboard" or "archievements". Those that deny that are flat out lying. Some games evolve completely around such things.

Actually it was you BlackLabel, who didnt get the point.
On capitalistic society, individual is center of evrything.
On communistic or some asian society individual doesnt
even exist.
Which means that you dont learn to think like individual.
Which is typical to us. Like we think that if i do that,
what i get from it and what i will loose.

To people who are from communistic society,
community is much more important than yourself.
Community can be example, your family, village or
your nation.

Thats why we many times scratching our heads,
because we cant understand that somebody
spend his whole life for working to family, or village
or nation without getting anything by himself.

And when you act in RO so that, you help your team
to win, but doesnt get any prizes or points by yourself.
Its communistic thinking.

But best solution usually is allways on halfway of everything.

 

[Zetsumei]

Personally I think this would discourage those players that might switch sides to even up the teams a bit. If they find out half of what they worked for is going to disappear, they might not do that. Then of course we will all be chat spammed about making the teams more even.

It depends on what side they are playing.

It perhaps discourages the attacking team to go to the defending side, but then you could say it relatively encourages people to go from defending to attacking.

But in general exactly because it normalizes it should become more neutral to switch side, but in general I haven't seen a mass exodus with the current system so with the suggested system it is even less likely.

Currently when you switch from a middle position in the attackers to the defenders you are instantly the nr1 of the team. Which would be a bigger initiative for people to swap teams than from having a score in the top 90% on one team and when swapping getting scaled that your score still belongs to the top 90%.

With scoreboards people generally look more whether they are on the top of the scoreboard than so much what their exact score is. Especially as scores are so different of 2 different sides.

 

[Zetsumei]

Another method is dividing your points by the time played. As then the relative time you spent playing doesn't matter any more only your performance.

This means that it would be possible to simply reset someone's score (but saving it in case he swaps back) when swapping team and obtain a new ratio for the other side within a few minutes.

 

[BlackLabel]

@ Susi

and communism worked so phantasticly well did it...

 

[Zetsumei]

Scoreboards Points Achievements etc can actually be used for the benefit of the game. Capitalistic gamers as you call them without other stimuli would only aim at killing enemies.

Using individual points, individual reinforcements, perks and achievements. Allows you to somewhat steer people that care about those features to play in a certain way. Other wise you get the issue that when playing with friends or in a clan you get awesome gameplay, but in public with random strangers everybody will be doing things on their own that are actually detrimental to gameplay.

You cannot assume that every person in a server will behave and play the game as intended, and individual appraisal through different in game functions allows game developers to somewhat control the behaviour of people.

 

[Susi]

@ Susi

and communism worked so phantasticly well did it...

I didnt said in any point that communism works, i just
explained what i thought Miro propaply meant.

But i wouldnt either say that capitalism works, even that
its quite used nowadays.

Bymyslf i try to look things from middle.

 

[Bluehawk]

A capitalist gamer would try to invest his reinforcements (capital) in a way that would produce profits.. which doesn't make sense in the game. if capturing certain objectives had predictable costs and gains, than he might try to convince his team to prioritize them and reduce losses.... but still... what are we even talking about again? Besides, if his teammates don't listen to him, then he lacks the means of "production" and therefore can not apply his ideology.

A communist would try to determine how many times a player is respawning (dying) and curb his consumption of lives if it exceeds his necessity. Skilled players that actually get kills and enter the capzone frequently are permitted to consume more reinforcements that "ROPlayers" who essentially waste space.

In the context of the game, it would seem these two are not incompatible.

 

[Susi]

You need to think more out of box.

And dont take this too seriously.

Typical capitalistic gamer is 16 years old kid.
His mother have limited his computer playing for 4
hours. Those he decide to invest to RO2 (which is
bad choose, COD would be better when thinking profit)

By investing 4 hours of his life he gets certain amount
of spawns. Those he tries to spend best possible way to
get as much points as possible (By being on every possible
cap, when its capped and then leaving it, so that enemy
cap it back and it can be recapped once again).

By getting allkind of points he earns medals.

And on the end of the day he can show his fancy medals
to his friends, and get adoration from his friends = profit

If he doesnt have any, he can also post screenshots
about his points to some forums.