182 réponses à ce sujet

[Swan Killer]

Looks like a good team. Especially if it was set to a specific location/specific enemy.

[codsquallic]

To have 4th come in at 80K in a pug would be very rare for me. I'd be super happy.

[Zero132132]

Yeah. Honestly, I've played multiple games with people that have done a lot worse.

And sometimes folks have an off night. That was definitely me last night. Consecutive nights with 4 hours of sleep and the mental fatigue of this stupid marketing project I had to take home with me weighed me down. I actually nearly passed the **** out while playing. It was bad.

[SoulGuard03]

As long as you extracted, and #4 assisted in objectives and reviving. Alls fine.

[Zero132132]

tivesz wrote...

Looks like a good team. Especially if it was set to a specific location/specific enemy.

If it were set to a specific location, wouldn't that many high scores imply that they completed objective waves with poor efficiency?

[Beerfish]

Very inflated scores. 80,000 is more than fine.

[jcamdenlane]

~60k spread between 1 and 4 is a fairly tight pattern. No one was doubled up. Just don't see an obvious problem with these scores.

[Derp88]

Without context, its hard to say. Even the top scorer may not be worth playing with again if he/she didn't help with objectives, didn't help revive, etc.

[upinya slayin]

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?

that score is abnormally high for a collector game. collectors generall bring in less then 400k exp your over 450k. a normal score for collecotrs is

1st 130k
2nd 100k
3rd 80k
4th 70k

[Grinch57]

Cyonan wrote...

Not enough information to determine.

This.

Plus, all scores need to be taken with a very large grain of salt, the scoring system is not all that accurate, at least on PC.  I will make a huge assumption and say it is true across all platforms (data free analysis, oohra).

How many times have you worked a big critter, to have someone come in at the last moment, fire a few shots from an Eagle and you get very few points?  How many times have you come upon a big critter that is almost dead, fired a few shots from your Eagle and gotten a silly large number of points?

How many times, when the score is close, have you topped the leader board with a lower score?  How many times, when the score is close, has someone topped you on the leader board, even though you had a higher score?

The point is not that the 147K score was so error filled that in reality that person was outscored by the 81K person.  No, not what I'm saying.  What I am saying is that it is quite possible, within the range of scoring errors that the top person scored 127K and the bottom person scored 91K.  Now the difference between top and bottom is even less significant.

Finally, 81K is reasonable.  As Cyonan said, without context, a casual observer sees no compelling evidence to ****** (or kick).

Modifié par Grinch57, 23 janvier 2013 - 05:49 .

[jlee375]

Some people are score snobs, ignore them. I've actually played with you once, though you probably don't remember me, you are more than ready.

Score is meaningless for the most part.

[CrimsonN7]

jlee375 wrote...

Some people are score snobs, ignore them. I've actually played with you once, though you probably don't remember me, you are more than ready.

Score is meaningless for the most part.

True except for when you play with chumps in Gold who limp to the finish barely scoring 30k, happened to me yesterday Pugin damn leech!<_<

[Arppis]

Seems like solid numbers.

[SilentStep79]

too many variables.
what kit was #4 using?
what kit was #1 using?
aggressive playstyles, spawn nuking, etc...
good scoreboard considering the map/enemy

[Sihmm]

Something to consider is that when players in-game are looking at the after-game score summaries the little horizontal bars representing each player's XP are not zeroed.

So this is what xtorma's score would have looked like on the summary screen for his fellow players:




But this is what the actual proportions are if a zeroed axis is used:




A non-zeroed axis highlights the difference between players' scores - it's meant to make those differences look more extreme, and it does.  Consider this score screenshot:




Looks like the fourth player, a volus, scored almost nothing.




But if you zero the axis you see that even though her score was a lot lower than the other players', it was not insignificant.




TLDR: The bars on the score screen do not show the proportion of points each player got, they instead highlight the differences between their scores. Which is a little bit odd for a cooperative game and perhaps encourages the sort of behaviour xtorma encountered.

Modifié par Sihmm, 23 janvier 2013 - 05:11 .

[jlee375]

CrimsonN7 wrote...

jlee375 wrote...

Some people are score snobs, ignore them. I've actually played with you once, though you probably don't remember me, you are more than ready.

Score is meaningless for the most part.

True except for when you play with chumps in Gold who limp to the finish barely scoring 30k, happened to me yesterday Pugin damn leech!<_<

Aye leeching is not good. All I ask is people try their best and have fun and I will play with anyone regardless of their rank/loadout. But I dont like when people simply don't try and hide. 

Also back to the main topic, 80k in a match with two infiltrators is still just fine. I make no judgements about the class, but it has one of the highest damage output ceilings in the game, that is a fact. I am sure everyone here has at some point been outscored by a skilled infiltrator, but score alone does not mean they are less skilled or the infiltrator more skilled. The only way you can even somewhat measure a player's skill is by playing games with them and observing. But even that isn't always a complete depiction of their abilities. 

[HolyAvenger]

Err, he didn't post a screenshot, just the numbers....

[GriM_AoD]

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?

Insufficient data.

[jlee375]

Zoetropes wrote...

I almost never contribute to these types of threads, as I don't feel I have anything to say beyond the obvious, but I've played with you quite a bit TC and you're fine pugging gold.

I would in fact go so far as to say a Gold Collectors with those scores might be (key word, "might") indicative of poor understanding of what needs to be done by the "top" scorers, or just a general unwillingness to do it, which in my book lends itself to a less enjoyable match.

Random matches are random, you never know what mood the people you play with are going to be in. I've been called a "loser f-n f*gg*t" totally out of the blue for medigelling near another person (never mind that he was being stunlocked by a Prime at the time) and not waiting for a revive.

Z.

Haha same, the only time I've ever been abused in this game was because I used medi-gel next to a teammate, who apparently really wanted that revive as four phantoms, an atlas, and some troopers were closing in. I wonder if it was the same person. 

tl;dr: people will be people. you will run into very nice and reasonable players who understand that score is a rather limited metric, and the not so nice players who will criticize you no matter what you do. End of the day, have fun and ignore the idiots. 

[terryfonz]

You did OK. You don't deserve red X's

[L.ast L.ife]

Anything above 30,000 is abnormally high for a random.

...

Especially for Gold.

...

Triple for Collectors. I'd only play again though if they contributed to objectives.

[Robbiesan]

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.

Agreed.

[Invader Nemesis]

I see nothing wrong with his score. He's not a 100k but it appears that he pulled his weight which is all that matters at the end of the match.

[ValorOfArms777]

Sihmm wrote...

Something to consider is that when players in-game are looking at the after-game score summaries the little horizontal bars representing each player's XP are not zeroed.

So this is what xtorma's score would have looked like on the summary screen for his fellow players:




But this is what the actual proportions are if a zeroed axis is used:




A non-zeroed axis highlights the difference between players' scores - it's meant to make those differences look more extreme, and it does.  Consider this score screenshot:




Looks like the fourth player, a volus, scored almost nothing.




But if you zero the axis you see that even though her score was a lot lower than the other players', it was not insignificant.




TLDR: The bars on the score screen do not show the proportion of points each player got, they instead highlight the differences between their scores. Which is a little bit odd for a cooperative game and perhaps encourages the sort of behaviour xtorma encountered.

DUDE great job  I knew this already but I'm glad you poitned this out