182 réponses à ce sujet

[Googleness]

I prefer to make my decision byy how that player was during the match.

I've played with guys having top scores while being utter useless and camping somewhere getting kills without reviving anyone or trying to use some power synergy with other players or my fav... ignoring objectives.

[count_4]

xtorma wrote...

Just trying to figure out if I am ready to pug gold regularly. A lot of differing opinions here, so I will re-evaluate and see. Thanks to everyone.

Having played with you quite a few times I'd say you definitely are. 

[stysiaq]

In my last gold PUG vs Clocktors, I had a Fury who scored less than 30k, so yeah.

[spudspot]

Istari Ipuosta wrote...

Lag, bad composition (like 3 infiltrators and 1 squishy adept), unexpected bug (no sound for example) or even bad mood from last game all lead to relatively or extremely low scores. Can't really blame people for scoring last.

Host getting extremely low score on anything other than a Volus though... is less acceptable.

This above everything else. 

[IllusiveManJr]

I hate when I'm a non-Infiltrator with three Infiltrators. It's weird seeing an enemy shooting at them, then suddenly switching over to me.

[xtorma]

Lord_Sirian wrote...

Most probably, yep. Especially seeing as it's collectors. But more detail than just score would be needed to give a definitive answer.

I was the 81k
I was playing krogan soldier
we had 2 inf and 1 human soldier
Game took 26 minutes
I died 3 times (krogan more than skill)
Did not notice any missles used, although there could have been.

The reason I asked was because I don't see 81k as a bad score, regardless of the other scores.
Red exes all around after game.

I was just looking to see if anyone thought that was a low score just because the others scored so high.

[HolyAvenger]

xtorma wrote...
I died 3 times (krogan more than skill)

Sync-kills? Or dropped and then gelled or were rezzed?

[P51Mus7ang]

xtorma wrote...

Lord_Sirian wrote...

Most probably, yep. Especially seeing as it's collectors. But more detail than just score would be needed to give a definitive answer.

I was the 81k
I was playing krogan soldier
we had 2 inf and 1 human soldier
Game took 26 minutes
I died 3 times (krogan more than skill)
Did not notice any missles used, although there could have been.

The reason I asked was because I don't see 81k as a bad score, regardless of the other scores.
Red exes all around after game.

I was just looking to see if anyone thought that was a low score just because the others scored so high.

I would probably ask them why if it bothered me.

Sometimes we bring a random 4th in while a friend finishes up whatever they are doing. After a game I will always go into the lobby, thank the random, explain that we are changing the game to private as we have a friend joining, look forward to playing with them again. Generally they will leave, if not we start another lobby rather than kick, it`s this mental thing with me, I hate kicking people unless they are being a total A double hockey stick.

[xtorma]

HolyAvenger wrote...

xtorma wrote...
I died 3 times (krogan more than skill)

Sync-kills? Or dropped and then gelled or were rezzed?

Dropped then gel or rezz.

[Supermarkiisi]

In a pug, purely based on score and what people usually get, I'd totally play with this guy again. Like some have said, I'm used to people having way lower scores on gold and still I don't get wiped too often. And sometimes a really good player (I'm not talking about super elites) can get a score like that if he has a somewhat deliberative playing style whereas the others are more aggressive.

In short, that's a good score to me.

EDIT: didn't read the whole thread at first 

Modifié par Supermarkiisi, 23 janvier 2013 - 12:09 .

[WebE6]

Homey C-Dawg wrote...

Looks fine to me. TBH I'm kinda surprised someone even could consider an 80k score as not pulling their weight.

THIS 

I have seen a lot of players with much lower scores. If I were in this game I would have been quite pleased that everyone was quite evenly matched - doesn't happen often 

[Qui-Gon Glenn]

Strange lobby. I would have said nice job and readied up for the next match.

I played my first games since Saturday last night, scored 78k on a wave 3 drop in with my KV. Not lolReegar, but still a "low score".

Brush it off, op. You are solid.

[WizeMan305]

xtorma wrote...

Just trying to figure out if I am ready to pug gold regularly. A lot of differing opinions here, so I will re-evaluate and see. Thanks to everyone.

Lol, when I saw this I figured you were already a gold player and have been for a while. I am sure it was probably just one of those games, but even then it seems as though you did fine. You will never be ready for gold unless you play gold.

[INFINITY650]

Wait a minute your #4 right?!
I call troll thread

[ToaOrka]

How many times did he bleed out?
Did he do objectives? Did he support
the team at all? Does he talk like a
douche over the mic?

These are all important questions.

[HolyAvenger]

xtorma wrote...

HolyAvenger wrote...

xtorma wrote...
I died 3 times (krogan more than skill)

Sync-kills? Or dropped and then gelled or were rezzed?

Dropped then gel or rezz.

Its fine then, they were probably making room for a friend.

[Clips7]

You can't really go by the score, it's morseo how he was playin during the game. As others have mentioned, there a host of factors to consider, most of which is lag.

I know sometimes when i play a game it seems like enemies are more attracted to me which causes me to take more of a defensive position, and spend alot of time recovering shields and manuvering...which can also lead to lower scores.

I've had games where banshees/brutes would follow a particular player around for the entire game, no matter if i was right behind them biotiv charging them, shooting them, meleeing them....they wouldn't turn around no matter what...

For the most part the game does a good job of balancing player detection and confrontations, but those games that seems like enemies are mostly attracted to you tend to be more challenging than usual.

[Leg3nd4t0ld]

With all due respect sir. You are claiming that you guys got 466 000 exp (not counting extraction bonus and other stuff) from playing collecters. They do not give that much experience. On a good game with collectors on gold, we might end up with 350 k. That's a really good game. Even if you farmed every objective wave untill you maxed score limit it is still improbable that you would get more than 400 k, though I suppose it is possible, seeming as when I play collectors I try to get it over with as quickly as possible. I don't see how these scores are logical though, there just isn't enough xp in collectors... But imo if I had a PUG on my team who pulled 81 k against collectors i would consider him a strong player.

Modifié par Leg3nd4t0ld, 23 janvier 2013 - 12:37 .

[Nynaeve]

No problem with that score OP

[fayk_id]

xtorma wrote...

Final approximate scores for a gold game - Collectors hazard Giant

1 - 147000
2 - 124000
3 - 114000
4 - 81000

Did #4 pull thier weight in your opinion?

perfect score, everybody did fine

[nicola_nibhroin]

I usually am not bothered at all about a random's score- for me it's much more about whether they're contributing overall or even not being a detriment. It's the overall feel I had of the game aftewards- was I getting help with objectives and backed up on bosses or was I frustrated because they weren't helping with objectives, were messing p spawns, weren't using consumables when they were needed, had poor peripheral awareness and were constantly moving in my way etc.

Some of that can be reflected in score but I've played with people who've scored 40,000 that I'd be perfectly happy to play with again because they helped during objectives. gave cover, used gels/rockets appropriately etc. and tried, and people who've scored 90,000 that would make me instantly quit the lobby if I ever saw them again.

Playing with a couple of friends last night (Gold, got Rio, Collectors) we had a Destroyer who, by the start of Wave 10, had scored 22,000 points. Which was an improvement on the 5,000 they'd scored by wave 6. Through liberal use of rockets (we got targets) he had actually nearly doubled that by the start of wave 11 and had 40,000. He spent nearly the entire match Ramboing, despite going down every single round and only medigelling once, letting himself get stomped even in later waves. We revived as much as we could but he was usually the other side of the map from us, with Praetorians and Scions et al. in between- he essentially made it a 3-man game, and even more than looking at the score, and his lone medal (gold or silver assists, can't remember) the feel for how he played during the game would have made me not want to play with him again.

Then PUGing by myself got Gold/Ghost/Cerberus and had an AA who also went down every round multiple times. Smaller map so we were able to revive most times, but by the last few waves they had gone down so many times that the other two players mostly weren't bothering to revive, even when the AA was down right beside them. So having felt like this person contributed very little beyond stasising the odd Phantom and their amount of downs was actually detrimental to the team I was astonished to see at the end that they had score over 90,000. I couldn't believe it or even fathom how it had happened. Considering how little of the game they actually spent up and attacking they must have been very good at killing things, just not at staying alive.


So tl:dr- on points alone I have no problem with 80,000, but would need to know more about how he played to decide if I'd play with him again.

[DragonRacer]

Homey C-Dawg wrote...

Looks fine to me. TBH I'm kinda surprised someone even could consider an 80k score as not pulling their weight.

[dream3873]

Yes they did pull their weight. Score is not really indicative of performance unless they are behind 80-100K.