The equation to the scoring system (loser's score/winners score *20) should implement the time it takes to knockout the other players, I therefore have two suggestions.
1: The equation could take points if you were the first on knocked out.
losers score/winners score*20+number of people-people surviving when knocked out.
2: The score could use time it took to knockout all people.
losers score/winners score*20+number of rounds-average number of rounds used to knockout the * out of ** people.
*= 1st, 2nd, 3rd etc.
**= 1-5
The only problem with this would be averaging the games. We'd have to guess. Also, these equations are just thought and I certantly don't think that if we did use one of these methods that these would be the exact equations.
maybe this shouldnt be in this thread , but there is a maximum you can gain , maybe there should be a mininmum of points too , such as 15or 17 ......I understand the theory of how the scoring is , however I feel its alittle flawed ....I find myself trying to watch what games Im in now (never thought I would do that)..........after losing 40 in a game in which i couldve maybe only picked up sixty ..........not to mention the low rank players that were in the game were pretty good ..........I dont think a players current scores actually say what kind of player he or she is because like me they may not have found their game to play on the site ( I did this with freestyle when I first started and lost a bunch of points) ................I'm sure there is a medium some where that can make the scoring alittle better
I'm not understanding this. If Alstergren player a new recruit who had never played, he would get about 3 points from that player. Personnaly I think that's ok, you ust need to find the level that you can play at and try to find people of that skill. don't be like me, I go around picking fights with Captains and Majors. lol
I don't think the time taken to eliminate a player should affect the score at all. A quick game may not even be the cause of the winner...someone could go suicidal in the match and attack to no end so the eventual winner just picks up the pieces. That doesn't take any more skill than a long drawn out battle so it shouldn't deserve any more points.
As for points being determined based on when you were knocked out- once again I don't think its a great idea. What's the difference between 6th and 2nd place? Sometimes its huge. 6th might have played terribly and never stood a chance while 2nd was in contention the entire time and playing admirably. However sometimes there is no difference at all. I have begun turns with everyone still in the game and knocked out each player in succession to win the game in that round. Should 6th lose more points than 2nd in that situation? Certainly not.
There is no way to tell how well one was playing unless they win the game, because that is everyones goal (except in terminator I guess). So if you don't win the game, no matter what place you got or how long it took you should always lose the same amoutn of points (well the points determined by the same formula).
so he picks up three points.........hows that fair , what if the new player knows how to play and he loses , so then he has to beat 30 newb's to get back that one loss..................................
this creates clicks........it detracts from the game when you have to look at who you are playing .............you shoudnt have to worry about that ......and if you can lose a maximum of a hundred havent you earned a right to atleast earn say 12 or 15pts lol ......................
another example say your a major , and get a couple of friends to sign up , play a three player game, and lose then your being penalized for bringing people on the site and having a good time with your friends ..............are you going to say ohhh here join this site but i cant play you ......................because if i win i pick up 6 point and if i lose , ill drop 55
i just feel that it would open games up to more of a mix of ranks instead of sticking to your own
Ah, I see the error in my ways. Some victories deserve more points than most, but the system can't be changed for every victory, and time isn't the answer.
