Thank God for no Kill/Death counter

[FuSiOn]

it has nothing to do with gameplay i like the current point system but once ur out of a game u can look at ur stats and see liek which weapon your more accurate with and such

 

[Shadowman]

I played on a server last night that had death messages turned off -- in other words, you don't know if you're shot killed someone, or who it was, unless you could see it. A few people were complaining about it, but it did add a whole new element of realism and chaos to the game.

But for the most part, I prefer it with them on -- it's gratifying to see your name at the top right after you throw a grenade, etc.

I like the points system -- puts less emphases on racking up kills, and more emphasis on teamwork and completing the objectives.

 

[Rameusb5]

Well, I guess I'm a stat ho then. I really wish we lost a point for dying. Then it would be patently obvious who's wasting our spawnlists because they'd have a massively negative score.

I don't think points are the only reason to play this game, but I guess I take some pride in ususally being among the top 5 scorers on any map. Perhaps that would change if they included deaths in your score.

IMHO, not losing points for dying encourages Rambo tactics because if you die a lot, nobody is really going to notice, are they?

 

[Muddy_May]

I personally take the other side competely. IRL the only thing that counts is not dying. Therefore I argue that to focus players on the correct things (psychologically) only deaths should be counted. If you really want to keep track of kills you can do it on a piece of paper and be just like the messed up people that put knicks in their rifle....

I always thought that we should be penalized for dying alot. Like, dying once is okay, but after that the player could be docked a few points per death. Not only does dying alot waste reinforcements, but it also portrays a very unrealistic type of situation.

However, this very suggestion shows my bias; my own playing style is geared around not dying or, barring that, dying as little as possible. I make liberal use of the prone function in game and, presto, I die very infrequently. Don't get me wrong, I don't just hide and let other people do the work (which I suppose, in itself, is not a particularly unrealistic tactic). On the contrary, I rack up points with the best of them. I feel I have an advantage with not having to respawn frequently; I am always right where I need to be to cap or provide support for the squad!

 

[Mr._Kong]

I always thought that we should be penalized for dying alot. Like, dying once is okay, but after that the player could be docked a few points per death. Not only does dying alot waste reinforcements, but it also portrays a very unrealistic type of situation.

Millions of people died on the eastern front, so dieing a lot is very realistic.
Also having the rienforcments go down is the penalty for dieing.

 

[Muddy_May]

Millions of people died on the eastern front, so dieing a lot is very realistic.
Also having the rienforcments go down is the penalty for dieing.

Right, but each person only died once, they weren't able to respawn, that was my primary point.

Without a death penalty towards the individual (ie pts), RAMBO-type gameplay is not inhibited as far as the points system is concerned.

I am not particularly sensitive about this issue though, I think the gameplay in ROOST is just fine, a point penalty for excessive death is just a bit of wishful thinking on my part. I would interpret such a penalization as one more step towards realism and one step away from the typical online FPS.

 

[Hyperion2010]

You have to remeber that if you die IRL you not only are doing your self a disservice but you are also leaving your teammates out to dry. You are no good dead. You need to be alive to help them out and give them covering fire and support. You cant do that if you're dead.

 

[10-78 BusterKing]

Points would mean something if you get something extra at a certain total.

There's a mod in CODUO that gives people artillery once they have reached a certain point total. Then points count for something.

 

[sappo]

anyone have any hard evidence on how the scoring actually works?

cause I know when im a tank driver for my commander, I end up with twice as many points as he does, and hes doing all the killing+capping, all I do is cap.

the way I see it is kills are 1, caps are 10, i dunno the rest.


shouldnt shooting an officer be worth a few more points? or taking out a MG up the hill?

 

[wokelly]

Points would mean something if you get something extra at a certain total.

There's a mod in CODUO that gives people artillery once they have reached a certain point total. Then points count for something.

God, the arty spamming was terrible in that game, especially on 64 people servers (I wish this game could hold 64 players). No thanks!

 

[Athena]

anyone have any hard evidence on how the scoring actually works?

capping = 10 pts
killing an enemy = 1 pt
killing an enemy officer = 3 pts
resupplying the MG = 5 pt
tk = - 2 pts
tk an officer = - 6 pts
suicide = - 1 pt

 

[Mr._Kong]

anyone have any hard evidence on how the scoring actually works?

cause I know when im a tank driver for my commander, I end up with twice as many points as he does, and hes doing all the killing+capping, all I do is cap.

the way I see it is kills are 1, caps are 10, i dunno the rest.


shouldnt shooting an officer be worth a few more points? or taking out a MG up the hill?

You get three points for killing an officer, and -6 for tking one. You also get five points for giving ammo to any machine gunners. You get -2 for every tk and -1 for a suicide.

 

[The End]

Cap = 10pts
Kill = 1pt
Ammo Resupply MG = 5pt
Kill Commander = 3pts

 

[wokelly]

capping = 10 pts
killing an enemy = 1 pt
killing an enemy officer = 3 pts
resupplying the MG = 5 pt
tk = - 2 pts
tk an officer = - 6 pts
suicide = - 1 pt

Fixed it for you

 

[SlimHitman]

I agree that the points sytem isn't needed and actually hinders the game. The points sytem doesn't make sense imo peopel is doesnt reflect defense. If you are on a map where you start out in control of all the cap zones and they never cap anything then your team wins and you did your job but you would only have points from kills.On most maps the points are totolly lopsided to the attacking team. So all the current point system tells you is how you did compared to others on your team and cannot be used to compare you to your enemies.

I would get rid of points altogether or just have a team based point system where all the points go to a team score that includes points for defending non capped sites.

 

[wokelly]

I agree that the points sytem is needed and actually hinders the game. The points sytem doesn't make sense imo peopel is doesnt reflect defense. If you are on a map where you start out in control of all the cap zones and they never cap anything then your team wins and you did your job but you would only have points from kills.

You serious? I have rarely seen a map where the attackers have never capped a flag, and you are telling me the defenders have no chance to cap anything. Retaking the flags get you points.

 

[SlimHitman]

You serious? I have rarely seen a map where the attackers have never capped a flag, and you are telling me the defenders have no chance to cap anything. Retaking the flags get you points.

I've seen it a few time where nobody captures anything.

There is also a few maps where once the point has been capped it cannot be recapped so the defense has no chance for recap points.

 

[DieFledermaus]

I like playing on the "no death message" servers, but I don't often care for the elitest attitude of many who host them. Of course people are going to wonder what is going on and be out of sorts at first after they are used to a game having a partciular feature. Rubbing it in people's noses when they ask where the death messages are just makes you look like a brat.

I also am a team player big time. Selfish butt-tards will always be selfish butt-tards, having kills show up will not make that better or worse. I would still be curious to see my kill totals and accuracy. I will definately check that site out once it is up and running. If they had kill totals in the game itself it would quickly show which high point guys are not doing their share of capping objectives. That being said supression of the enemy is often as important as capping, if you are on maps that have re-cappable objectives.

I think 5 pts for mg ammo is too much, but 1 pt was too little. I try to give ammo everytime someone calls for it, if I can get there. But worth half a cap? No way.

I totally agree that sapers should get points for blowing doors and walls, IF the objective the doors lead to has not been taken yet. If it has been taken than they are just blowing it to get points. It should be set to give 0 points if the blow point is related to a taken objective.

I do not think having fewer deaths means you are better than other people. Sometimes those with the most deaths did the most to help their team win, like taking out tanks, etc.

Someone can sit back hiding on Konigsplatz and get a lot of kills sniping and have very few deaths but they will really not be helping their team very much. It is also rare for scoped snipers to really help their team all that much for that matter. I would say yes they do IF they are keeping some objective from being capped or if they are picking off officers, like scope snipers did in real life. But for the most part they are just a minor annoyance and do not really keep the other side from winning.

It is the close assault guys who win this game and they are the ones who have the most deaths even if they do not have the most kills.