169 réponses à ce sujet

[Maurodax]

Hi there!

I am a pretty average player, i usually don't have any problem with silver and definetly not bronze (unless i get to cocky), so i've started playing Gold and cleared it twice.. not thanks to me tho, mostly because of my teammates.
Anyways, enough about me.

From reading different threads aswell as listening to teammates ingame, i've gotten the feeling that most people think that a low score is equal to a bad player, but is that really true?
I am a huge fan of supporting, so i play engineer (Mostly human male/female or Quarian Male) or increased duration infiltrator, just so i can remove the shield from as many enemys as possible, tactical scan (i have "enemy vision" or whatever it's called, instead of the extra damage) or as an infiltrator run around invis trying to revive or get those devices that are placed in an open space.
So all that usually makes me score 3rd or 4th place, specially on gold. But am i really all that useless just because i have a low score?
 
I've outmost respect for people who top the scoreboards, like the first time i cleared gold, the nr1 guy had around 100k more than the rest of us, so he clearly was the one doing ****, although rest of us helped. But both me (as an engineer) and our adept, were mostly supporting, not really killing anything but rather disable them (stasis bubble and whatever engineers paralyzing thingie is called).

So i guess what i'm trying to say, is it really true that low score = bad player?

Sorry for my bad english.

Regards Maurodax

[Edalborez]

Low score does not always mean a player is bad. Score is only indicative of how much you kill.

In the example you describe I'll assume that while 1st place was very high (100k+), the other 3 were closer in score? To me the distance between scores is what matters. If 4th place has, say, 20k total in the whole game then they didn't pull their weight at all.

Play style is more of a sign of a bad player than score, but generally a bad playstyle will also lead to bad score. Unless they are a Vanguard or Infiltrator which can score really high while ignoring the team.

Modifié par Edalborez, 05 juillet 2012 - 07:42 .

[coldlogic82]

People who believe a low score equals a bad player are generally trying to get the highest score possible to make up for their tiny dick.

Playing support won't get you a huge score, but most people are fine with that. If you're okay with a lower score, then a) awesome, you are now a valuable support team player and you probably have a huge dick irl.

[Crimson Vanguard]

well it depends mate, I once used a HV and detonated most of the biotic combo and i got the lowest score but hey the truth is im the one who ram and headbutt against banshee while my other teammate s (which is AA, DA, AJ and yes you can call us the anti-reaper boom boom team) stay far away and "highlighted" them for me.

[HoochieHamiltoe]

If you feel that you contributed to the team then no it really doesnt matter. Bad players in my book are players that run all the way across the map and die and expect someone to stick there neck out and revive them. And continue to do so wave after wave. Or people that refuse to help teammates with objectives. It is a team game and if you help and do your part its really not that hard.

[WestLakeDragon]

It really depends on the class, situation of the match, and the actual score you ended up getting.

For example: If I'm using my Asari Adept on Gold, and I'm priming Biotic Explosions, I'll get more score than if I'm still my Asari Adept but I'm setting off the Biotic Explosions, but either way, though I may not be very high on the scoreboard, I'll still have a score that is reasonable by the end.

On Gold, if you have something above 50K or so by the end, and didn't die a lot, and at the very least felt like you were helping the team, you probably weren't doing bad.

[NotPotato]

Just so you all know: the xp for a power combo always goes to the primer. Because of this it's quite possible for someone to top the charts by just spamming area reave while another adept spams throw and gets close to none.
This brings us to my main point:

SCORE DOESN'T MATTER.

[WestLakeDragon]

NotPotato wrote...

Fixed: SCORE DOESN'T MATTER so long as the player is helping the team and being a good team-player.

[Erghiez06]

I tend to favor classes that use Overload. Stun locking is great fun and hugely useful in Gold. While it doesn't do **** for damage, you (or your team) can easily make up for that.

If I want to go balls out and just kill **** I'll play my Salarian Infiltrator or play a human soldier using a Claymore. More often than not I am a Salarian Engineer. If I hop in a game and someone is already a Salarian Engineer I'll fill in the missing spot with something complementary to other players. Turian Sentinels are great for filling in holes.

[Catastrophy]

I played matches where I thought: "Man, I rule them!" and ended up last.
Yesterday I played the Geth engineer again after a long time, with a GPS - I used to equip it with a Carnifex before. I outranked the other by quite a margin (silver). And I tweaked the turret for more damage.
I think it's more about the loadout and whether you're able to use it to kill. A VS equipped with the Kishok did horribly point-wise when I tried it out. The VS is probably the most volatile class for me when it comes to the number of points I collect in a match.

[Arppis]

I don't think it is.

Most of the time if you get downed a lot or don't help your team, that is bit more better indicator of "lack of skill". But even when you get downed a lot, it can be because of really bad luck or lag and not helping your team might just mean you are cut out from them or something.

Stuff happens.

Modifié par Arppis, 05 juillet 2012 - 07:55 .

[spjeanfritz]

I'm about n7 rank 2500 and i've seen lots of players like you don't forget we are in a co-op game and any body thinking that low score means bad player just suck at this game or he just had to many Gold / Firebase White / Geth.

For me i play both side DAMAGE and Most of the time SUPPORT.

Let me tell you this SUPPORT players are the best in my opinion cause they are the true key of success on Gold cause there is no run to it: Team mates will go down and will need to revive.

Plus for me it require tatical skill to play support cause you need to constantly be aware of what is going on.

I'm not saying that DAMAGE character are useless cause we need people to take down as quickly as possible the enemies.

SO BE PROUD ENGINEER AND GIVE THEM HELL. Your Job is to keep us alive will we kill them (co-op game).

[the slynx]

Score can be indicative of assisting, too, in that you do get points for damage done even if you don't get net the kill (although you don't seem to score much for things like stripping shields/barriers). That said, plenty of team-oriented tasks like communicating, covering flanks, doing area-of-effect and hold abilities, etc don't register in score very much. If your score is jarringly low, that might indicate a problem, but not leading the team doesn't mean much. You'll also see high-scoring bad players, who take bad risks to get extra kills and end up threatening team success, even if they top the scoreboard. I'd rather play with a low-scoring team player than a high-scoring lone wolf type any day of the week.

In short, someone has to come in last, even on a good team. A better measure for yourself is whether or not your teams are extracting successfully on a regular basis and in a timely fashion.

[kilgh]

Depends on the character more. If I'm Infiltrator I'm more likely to aid than kill and will get a lower score than when I'm a Soldier say where I'll often get top score. So I don't think it matters as long as the mission gets done.

[WizeMan305]

It really depends, there are acceptable low scores that if you were doing your job in assisting and support they are easily attainable, usually 30k - 40k for silver and 50k - 60k on gold is a respectable score, that means you at least tagged a decent amount of enemies. If a person finishes up with only 10k worth of points, they were either leeching, playing a sabotage specced QFI, or they weren't doing much of anything. If it is a lower N7 player that is understandable, but if they have decent equipment and knowledge of the game there is no reason to have a score so low with the QFI as the only exception.

[Torguemada]

coldlogic82 wrote...
Playing support won't get you a huge score

This playing support think is a pretty huge fallacy, there are very very few thinks you can do to help team that dont give you points.
For example playing engineer(any of them) doesn't in anyway stop you from equipting a good weapon and shooting the enemies to pieces with the rest of the team.

[kilgh]

Agreed Wizeman305.

I've only ever once had the misfortune of having a leecher in a game and it was really obvious. That and they hid behind the same very distant wall the whole time and only came out if they absolutely had to and to run for the extraction. Grrr....I walked up to them and emptied my full magazine into their face and then kept trying to lure banshees to them. But, anyway....if someone is actually trying they may not get a huge score but that's fine with me.

Modifié par kilgh, 05 juillet 2012 - 08:02 .

[HoochieHamiltoe]

Torguemada wrote...

coldlogic82 wrote...
Playing support won't get you a huge score

This playing support think is a pretty huge fallacy, there are very very few thinks you can do to help team that dont give you points.
For example playing engineer(any of them) doesn't in anyway stop you from equipting a good weapon and shooting the enemies to pieces with the rest of the team.

True but when I use my Geth Engineer I spec it with a healing turret. And when I hear someones shields go down I usually pause and toss my turret there way. That is being a team player and also is a little thing that doesnt show up on the scoreboard.

[red_ryder]

What's a decent score for someone like me with N7 rating around 120+? I have two ultra-rares - BWII and Saber I. My best rare is a Claymore III.

To be honest I've never really looked at my score, just how I ranked amongst the four. Usually I'm dead last when playing with higher N7s. What's up with people N7 in the 2000s, with ultra rares X playing in bronze?

[kilgh]

I'm 1100ish. I like Bronze matches so I can try new characters and weapons out. And to run around like a lunatic with my Krogan and Vorchas.

[StarStruck010]

While score IS indicative of how much damage you put out, it is not the only tool that needs to be used when measuring a teammate's abilities.

I have had off-days where I feel like I'm playing like crap and we barely get past wave 10, but I'm 40+k score ahead of the next guy. That's because I'm not doing my job, and not helping the team actually get the job done. I've also had perfect days where I can't help but feel that I'm approaching the best play I've ever done, and never been able to claw my way out of 3rd place on the scoreboard. That's because the team just sync'd perfectly (whenever someone went down I was there to pick them up, and when I went down he picked me up immediately. There were biotic explosions everywhere and it was beautiful. etc.)

I would say that (excluding a backfire-spec QFI that has to clutch multiple rounds, which has mostly gone away with the Tech Vuln. nerf) if your score is WAY below everyone else's then you're probably doing something wrong, but if you're in the middle of the pack and helping the team as much as you can (calling flanks, supporting, de/buffing, etc) then you're doing just fine.

As an example: my friends and I ran gold a while back. My friend played DA, and I played AA. I never used warp the entire game, only stasis on dangerous targets (phantoms mostly) and throw to detonate Reave. Somewhere around 90% of the game could be summed up by our communication over the mic ("Reave." "Throw." "Reave." "Throw.") I came in dead last in these games, but I was damn well contributing by detonating everything she reaved.

[Shampoohorn]

WestLakeDragon wrote...

NotPotato wrote...

Fixed: SCORE DOESN'T MATTER so long as the player is helping the team and being a good team-player.

Agreed.  Score (and medals) are two of many ways to determine if a player is contributing to the team.  I've been in a number of GOLD games that seemed quite hard and then the score comes around and there's a salarian infiltrator with 10K points at the bottom of the rank.  Trying?  Maybe.  Helping? No!  I would prefer a 4 player team vs reapers instead of 3 or even 2 doing the bulk of the work.

Other examples:
Kroguard 16 with 15K points, 25 assists, no biotic kills.  Trying but not helping.
QME 15 with ZERO points after two waves, but 17K by the end of the match.  Still not sure wtf.
ExCerbguard 12: 25K with 25 assists, 10 biotic kills, 5 revives.  Learning and helping.

You could just as easily have a putzfiltrator with 100K points who won't revive the guy on the ground next to him.

Or you could have a game where everybody is within 10K of each other.  Those frequently feel like the best games.

Modifié par Shampoohorn, 05 juillet 2012 - 08:25 .

[WestLakeDragon]

^^^^ Exactly, score doesn't matter, neither high nor low, so long as the team is working together, properly

Modifié par WestLakeDragon, 05 juillet 2012 - 08:27 .

[Shampoohorn]

red_ryder wrote...

What's a decent score for someone like me with N7 rating around 120+? I have two ultra-rares - BWII and Saber I. My best rare is a Claymore III.

To be honest I've never really looked at my score, just how I ranked amongst the four. Usually I'm dead last when playing with higher N7s. What's up with people N7 in the 2000s, with ultra rares X playing in bronze?

Weapon levels certainly factor into your ability to get kills vs. assists.  Score can be as much about your class/weapon choices as about your skill as a player.  However, if you're alway last in score you should watch some youtube videos and learn some tactics.

[Grammaton Dryad]

Not entirely true, yet not entirely false. If you consistently score at the bottom though, then it's probably a good sign that you could be playing better. I would not necessarily blanket the lowest scorer as a "bad" player though....I mean there's ALWAYS going to be a guy at the bottom. It's more about their in-game actions and by how much score he/she has compared to everyone else.

Support actions contribute; it's not a huge fallacy, but it isn't a crutch/excuse either. You shouldn't have a significantly lower score just because of it, you should still be competitively close to the person above you.

As I've told many of my friends before, I'd rather take a non-skilled player than a "bad" player. Meaning I'd rather have someone who's a team player but can't kill or play all that well over a teammate that can run the scoreboard but never helps with an objective or revives other players. In-game behavior and synergy > score and N7