199 réponses à ce sujet

[Drummernate]

+1 OP.

Sick and tired of people saying that when I outscore them by like 80k it is because they were "Doing objectives!"

Yeah, right... you mean the 1 out of 4 hack objective that you were right next to?... Yeah.

That accounts for the 80k lead since you stopped shooting for 9.9 seconds right?

Sure pal.

[alayyubi]

since it's euro 2012, what do u think about the striker who's JOB is to score goals ? is he the only guy that matter in a football game. NO, it is about winning as a team.

again i said the credit reward difference is not huge for finishing gold. if you are good at stripping down enemies, play that role.

in gold, the most important is not to get flanked / blindsided by swarms. if against cerb, i always take down engineer and phantom first - not atlas. if against geth, it is the hunter before they get close. if it is reaper, marauders and ravagers. i think that is the best way for "crowd control" and surviving on gold as these are heavy hitters and can hit u when u least expected. its funny that you score is also consistently in the high if u do this.

anyone else have diff strategy ?

[Yigorse]

A lot of responses about decoy, tactical scan, sabotage, and other "non-score" abilities.

While I agree with you that despite being incredibly helpful to the team, they give you no (little) score credit. That being said, you have to use your weapon and your other powers AS WELL.

Just because you use tactical scan or decoy a lot, it doesn't excuse you from helping to kill enemies. Sabotage is not the only skill the QI has (TC is generally considered OP, and sticky grenades can deal some pretty lethal damage, also: if you didn't bring a Sniper rifle, or a powerful shotgun, you're really not doing this right).

Yeah, abilities like these won't "show" on your score, putting you a little below Pwnmast0r_N7 with his Geth Infiltrator, but it is, as I said in my OP, a question of scale. A difference of 10-20k (depends on difficulty levels) makes sense, a difference of 50-100k is clearly an issue.

Score is not the all-important decider of skill, I acknowledged that, but it's still important in its own way. If you can manage it, the most effective crowd control is to make sure that there is no crowd left to worry about.

EDIT: Since I'm pretty sure it'll come up...

Yigorse (i.e. Me) wrote...

Your score at the end of the game is directly related to how much damage you did compared to the rest of your team. 

 

OK yes this is technically incorrect when you factor in abilities that cause enmies to take damage rather than straight up dealing it.  

However, I feel like reading the full post sort of explained my thinking there: the scoring system's a little odd sometimes, Biotic detonators get no credit, random 1-hit ninja kills get unusually high scores occasionally.  This stuff can account for SMALL discrepancies between players.  The big ones?  Not so much.

Modifié par Yigorse, 17 juin 2012 - 03:17 .

[Krade2k20]

I pretty much always top the scoreboard. That said, it's always more of a pleasant surprise when I DON'T. It means that I've actually run into someone that's at least as good as me, and I'll always welcome that.

alayyubi wrote...

i must admit the class i seldom see working in a team is vanguard (no offense to anyone ! )

You should play with me then. I actually really enjoy playing the Novaguard with the team. No other character can race to the other side of the map to get to an objective or downed team mate faster. And I can hold the aggro of any group of enemies that can't insta-gib (I especially enjoy holding two Primes at once. Waiting for the team to get there and help can be a pain sometimes, though)  All the while rarely going down before wave 10 when I get sloppy after the objective is done.

I've never ran into a random Novagaurd that played it as well as I do. I think part of it is their forgetting that they have a weapon. I use a Phaeston X with damage and piercing mods. With +%180 recharge and the power recharge gear, spamming the hell out of charge-nova and firing in the few seconds when you're not is incredibly effective. It's also nice to have a decent weapon and 3 ranks in Shockwave for those pesky hack objectives where you're anchored to one spot, but god help any poor soul that wanders into the circle 'cause they're in for a world of hurt after I've been cooped up in one area for so long.

Now that I think about it, I hardly ever see a Novaguard outside of Bronze, anyway.

[boblebob]

the score for the final blow really annoys me. has it always been like this? i dont remember it being like that when i first started

[paperbook]

My e-peen grows up on 10cm each time when I outscore someone with my Krysae GI. I like to dominate over useless n00bs. They are just bad players because the game is pretty balanced and each class and weapon have equal opportunities for scoring.

[Grammaton Dryad]

deleted

Modifié par Grammaton Dryad, 17 juin 2012 - 04:01 .

[Raging Nug]

Here's the thing; your score only tracks your performance within the perameters established by the points system. It won't track rocket kills, how many times you died, how many times you stole a kill or ****ed up on an objective. The score system tracks kill points and a little bit of objective. That's not the same as someone's overall performance. We need to clear that bit up right away.

Furthermore, score only 'matters' insofar as your relation to the other players. You can use it to keep track of carrying or leeching or new players, but on the whole it doesn't actually act as much of a reward system. You get experience points, but those don't really matter to someone who has 6x lvl 20 characters.

Score matters for a few reasons, but not many, and until it gives a monetary impact on your game, I don't think I'll really care all that much.

[Grammaton Dryad]

Raging Nug wrote...

Here's the thing; your score only tracks your performance within the perameters established by the points system. It won't track rocket kills, how many times you died, how many times you stole a kill or ****ed up on an objective. The score system tracks kill points and a little bit of objective. That's not the same as someone's overall performance. We need to clear that bit up right away.

Furthermore, score only 'matters' insofar as your relation to the other players. You can use it to keep track of carrying or leeching or new players, but on the whole it doesn't actually act as much of a reward system. You get experience points, but those don't really matter to someone who has 6x lvl 20 characters.

Score matters for a few reasons, but not many, and until it gives a monetary impact on your game, I don't think I'll really care all that much.

This is what and how I should have said it. Honestly, it's the conclusion everyone should come to on the subject matter. Thanks.

Modifié par Grammaton Dryad, 17 juin 2012 - 04:00 .

[Raging Nug]

My pleasure.

[Yigorse]

Grammaton Dryad wrote...

This is what and how I should have said it. Honestly, it's the conclusion everyone should come to on the subject matter. Thanks.

Super-long posts make your argument seem well thought out 

Glad to see most people here seem to have at least read the OP, I can't ask everyone to agree, theres a couple of posts that are fairly obvious: "Read title, headbutted my keyboard, pressed submit"

Modifié par Yigorse, 17 juin 2012 - 04:04 .

[JaimasOfRaxis]

I remember we had some biotic-explosion-spamming failure-pants all up in our bizness when the KRO TEAM was on the prowl at Firebase Giant. She got pissed when Urdnot Gamera, run by RoadGGG, reliably did better than her by virtue of his constantly being in the thick of it. That simple pissed-off-ness turned into white-hot rage, however, when a missile-induced rampage catapulted me to the top of the charts, ergo making 2 of the group she was lower-ranked than.

She wound up ragequitting soonafter.

[sclera]

Generally speaking, the highest scoring player in a match was the most helpful. This isn't always the case, especially as the margins between scores get tighter, but overall I think score is a pretty accurate representation of players' contributions.

[humes spork]

Yigorse wrote...

Yeah, abilities like these won't "show" on your score, putting you a little below Pwnmast0r_N7 with his Geth Infiltrator, but it is, as I said in my OP, a question of scale. A difference of 10-20k (depends on difficulty levels) makes sense, a difference of 50-100k is clearly an issue.

You'd be surprised how quickly that kind of difference in score stacks up when you're the one working yourself to the bone to keep a team on its feet.

When you're 100K behind on score and your two gold medals are for assists and revives, it kind of speaks for itself.

[Yigorse]

humes spork wrote...

Yigorse wrote...

Yeah, abilities like these won't "show" on your score, putting you a little below Pwnmast0r_N7 with his Geth Infiltrator, but it is, as I said in my OP, a question of scale. A difference of 10-20k (depends on difficulty levels) makes sense, a difference of 50-100k is clearly an issue.

You'd be surprised how quickly that kind of difference in score stacks up when you're the one working yourself to the bone to keep a team on its feet.

When you're 100K behind on score and your two gold medals are for assists and revives, it kind of speaks for itself.

Ok, I get that this CAN happen, but in my experience it doesn't.  If you're spending every SINGLE second of a game reviving your team, then I don't see where they're finding the time to actually get any score.

What's more, have you ever considered that you'd actually be MORE helpful by abandoning your suicidal team-mates and killing some stuff yourself?  It's kind of like the revive chain silliness.  3 players consistently getting up, going down, and using their temporary invincibility to get to the next downed player.  What's killing them?  A pair of cannibals.  If one guy just said: "screw my team for 2 secs, let's get to the root of the problem."

Besides that, it isn't ironclad.  Nothing in this discussion ever can be, it's all very situational.

[Razerath]

I agree OP.

The score ratio between players should be looked at to determine how much "work" a player is putting in. That's only half the battle though because the length of the match is also an important factor. At the end of a match if the number one player outscores the second place player by 75k or more and then third and fourth by even more of a gap, I would be much more impressed if that happened in 18-22 minutes instead of 26-32.

Simply put the faster the match goes the more you can assume that your squad was awesome even if you outscored them by a huge gap. That huge gap could mean that you might be "better" or it could mean a lot of things. I see a huge gap when I play my GI but not my GE. In my opinion when going for fast flawless runs you would almost always want four damage titans all with different debuffing powers.

[Lukeman1884]

humes spork wrote...

Yigorse wrote...

Yeah, abilities like these won't "show" on your score, putting you a little below Pwnmast0r_N7 with his Geth Infiltrator, but it is, as I said in my OP, a question of scale. A difference of 10-20k (depends on difficulty levels) makes sense, a difference of 50-100k is clearly an issue.

You'd be surprised how quickly that kind of difference in score stacks up when you're the one working yourself to the bone to keep a team on its feet.

When you're 100K behind on score and your two gold medals are for assists and revives, it kind of speaks for itself.

I can't remember the last time I DIDN'T get the gold medal for assists on gold, and this is on a phoenix vanguard, not a class most people list as "support". Simply put, if you're contributing to the team at all, I really can't imagine how you'd end up 50-100k points behind everyone else. Your assists alone should be able to carry your score so it's not THAT low. Unless all you were doing is putting one shot with your carnifex on the banshee then running for dear life. And if all you're doing is running around reviving, then you aren't much of a benefit either. Assists are fine and all, but I'd much rather you fully KILL that marauder instead of letting it kill me and reviving me.

[sydsyrious]

ElementL09 wrote...

Medals are a better representation of how much work someone did in game I think. Medals > Score.

This!  Even if I'm last, I usually get equal or more medals - so I don't feel bad.  I think it's suspicious when the top scorer has zero revive medals and the lower scorers have them...so you know who cared enough to revive their fellow teammates. 

[WizeMan305]

I use the point system as an indication whether or not I stick around the next match. If I play a match and we go down on wave 9 and my score is double or more than the person below me. Then I know it would be best for me to move on to another team. If I am last or someone is coming in on a close second then I know the team is doing what it can to win.

Anyone that contributes usually holds a decent score. I mean if you end gold with 60k even 50k you did a good share of work, 40k or 30k is usually good for a silver. Even if you get 50 assist medals and only 25 kills you can still reach that easily. But there are those that are ill prepared for the difficulty level they chose or were placed into that usually score low, most good players will notice that and forgive them. But then there are the leechers, where they have the equipment and they barely have any contributing score overall while everyone else has scored well above them.

Anyways, most people on the forum can take the score a little less seriously because most everyone scores on top, or they know their roles and have an idea of what they usually score while playing a certain class. But to completely dismiss the score system because of its flaws is a bit silly, since it is the only indication of what was done the whole game.

[Captain_Orbit]

You have to see it this way. Does Score matter? If so, how does it? Do you get more exp? Do you get more cash? Do you get better weapons or better gear? Did you answer no to the previous three questions just like everyone else does? Then no. Score is nothing more than a way for you to try and get better personal bests. Score has no point in the game other than the fun factor of it. It has about as much purpose as scores in Halo 3's co-op campaign. It's for fun. Until they implement a score to reward option, score will always be about personal bests.

When I'm playing my Human Sent or Asari Adept (for example) I only have a pistol. I go for Biotic combos because I cant match up to the weapon damage of say an Inf. When I'm comboing and people are sniping it from cloak with a Widow. they're going to do more damage. I don't care about whether you score more than me, I'm doing my job and you're doing yours. There's no need to be elitest about it.

And just for reference, I'm not passionate about this topic because I score low in matches. I'm always in the top 2 because of detonations. I'm just against players who look down on others because they may not be as good as you are. The point of the game is to have fun. If you want to win, make a team and take it seriously. There's no need to come down on anyone who likes to play a game in their own style.

Modifié par Captain_Orbit, 17 juin 2012 - 06:00 .

[Kel Riever]

@OP: If score matters to you, that's fine.

I do not, have never, and won't care about score.

Modifié par Kel Riever, 17 juin 2012 - 05:56 .

[TLK Spires]

Barneyk wrote...

I have never been in a game where I felt the scores meant nothing.
Theoreticcly it is possible, but out of all the games I have played, it has always meant a lot more than nothing.

Sometimes it only told us something, sometimes it told us everything.
150K
120K
33K
29K

The story of those scores is pretty clear.

it sure is:

infiltrator (used rockets)
infiltrator (didn't use rockets)
soldier (used grenades)
soldier (didn't use grenades)

[Stinja]

I agree to a point: generally top scorers are killing the most, and the point is to kill stuff.
Very low scorers are either spending most of their time down, ineffective with weapons and powers, or not very good players.

You do get issues with people too worried about kills, and the mechanics of scoring: if I kite two banshees and a brute while the guy with the Krysae and two leeches clear the trash, I get my three mobs down to 10% health left, and then Krysae guy comes along and coup de graces my stuff, he ends up with way more score, and not a true reflection of usefulness.
But that depends on players: good players also know who's doing a good job, and who's not. By wave 6 you get a feel of the other players, and score usually matches that.

The only other issue are people who run about killing stuff when they'd be better with the team. Propping up the weak players is better in most cases, unless you really can solo when they go down, and few can do that, and it makes the game time longer, than two weak and one average player being alive and doing something.

Summary: score is fine, mostly.

[Seerezaro]

sclera wrote...

Generally speaking, the highest scoring player in a match was the most helpful. This isn't always the case, especially as the margins between scores get tighter, but overall I think score is a pretty accurate representation of players' contributions.

This is actually a fallacy.  Their could be large gaps in score and the top person be the least useful and helpful person in the game.

The statement you made is only true on bronze and partially true on silver, it has no meaning in gold.

Take for example this group:

Infiltrator(any really)
Geth Engineer
Salarian Engineer
Human Sentinal

The following scores will read out something akin to:

(made up numbers)
130k
70k
55k
45k

The top score will be the infiltrator as they'll gain the most straight up kills, the second will be one of the engineers who ever gets luckiest with tech bursts really, in this case most likely the Salarian due to energy drain aoe, the third and fourth will alternate between the sentinel and the other engineer.

Getting a BE in this party is rough as it'll sometimes take up to 4 throws before the boom occurs in the meantime however, the engineers TBs have been blasting the party,  energry drain has been priming everything and overload has been stunlocking large groups.

The most important person in this party?  Hard to say, but the Sentinel really is responsible for the majority of the damage even though his score will be amoung the lowest as he's the one setting off the TBs making it so they go off at a much faster rate than just the SE or the GE could do together.

This particular combo is extremely hard to kill, the infiltrator can be taken out of the equation completely and they'd still manage to extract just fine.

Same goes for a combo of

Asari adept/vanguard, Engineer, Infiltrator, Soldier.

Against Cerberus the last two will end up with the highest score but the true saviors will most likely be the Asari who kept all the phantoms statis'd or the engineer who would be doing with an engineer does best.

Edit:  Just thought I'd mention that in most cases I'm playing the infiltrator, simply because the main group I run with doesn't like the sniping aspect and I'm fairly quick on the aim, but I've played it from the adept and engineer perspective.

Modifié par Seerezaro, 17 juin 2012 - 06:30 .

[Leisure Muffin]

ReflectedRed wrote...

Leisure Muffin wrote...

Disciple888 wrote...

co-sign.

I've scored 100K+ with a variety of classes, many of which I've never used before. The fact that bad players who regularly use these classes score 20-40K (with a 40% XP boost!) and then call themselves "support" really baffles my mind.

You use GI + GPS  of course you score alot.  LOL   I love when people use OP'd classes and weapons, and then get all high horse about their score...

I'm pretty sure he said "variety of classes", and I'm pretty sure that means something too than just GI. Nice logic you got there.

Or, I could have read his post about his GI + GPS class, and how proud he was about how he was on top of the scoreboard all the time.  Nice logic you got there.