ARMA Scoring System....

[guerilla -MCY- 0]

What's this no score coop idee about ? do you play poker without money ? would you like football matches without a score. join the army if you like discipline or buy VBS2 and let others enjoy their game as they want too

[Universel 0]

Cleanrock in his OFP crcti has a good scoring system, based on damage inflicted.

It's not perfect but is still much better than the actual system, I really think BIS should implement something like that.

And I am sure there are many events that BIS can easily detect thus give points for them :

fuel leak detected ? the guy who caused it +x points

tail rotor failure ? the last guy who hit tail rotor +x points

tank canon disabled ? +x points

So basically, 1. damaged inflicted based scoring system, 2. bonus points for special events.

[max power 21]

I think timers, last hit, etc are poor indicators of real achievement. Also I think there is a place for scoring inside ArmA, my problem is just how it's used. In a game of evolution a player with 35 kills, 99 deaths, and an average lifetime of 2.5 minutes has a higher score than a player with 28 kills, 3 deaths and 20 minutes per life.

In the simplest case, the player that provided the majority of the damage should get the points.

More complicated methods award points for "mobility kills" as well as total kills and also divvy up multi-point items to the top damagers of the target.

Say a tank was worth 10 points, the guy who damaged it 80% gets 8 pts and the guy that finished it off gets 2.

I diagree about the majority of the damage. Say someone shoots up a tank pretty bad but there's still some players in it, shooting up your lines. You blast it with a rocket but it's overkill, the tank explodes... you save the day but someone else gets the points? Pshaw. That's not how confirmed kills work anyways. Your confirmed kills are the ones that go down as a direct action of your fire. Whether or it ran over a landmine before you took it out isn't really relevent.

[Metal Heart 0]

What the hell??

Are you some kind of nutjob?

Discipline of fire? Go join the real army ffs.

ITS A GAME...GAME...

Stop thinking of your own selfish needs mate.

Some people play games to win!

Personally I like teamwork and playing coops as best I can.

But like Snake I like to see my score so I can have a laugh about it with friends...thats friends you might not have many with that attitude...you probably just have "War Buddys"...

"Discipline of fire? Go join the real army ffs."

Go play BF2 ffs. I already did the mandatory military service and found it to be quite boring compared to playing games but if my country will ever be attacked, I'll be there even if it was a choice.

"Some people play games to win!"

That was my point, I find it sad. Some people play computer games to have fun and to relax with friends, not to compete seriously in some retarted nerd-off.

And to [CAVE]guerilla: I've actually played poker with fake money and it was rather fun. Many professional poker players don't do it for the money either.

[guerilla -MCY- 0]

yeah but there was still this symbolic chip, wasnt there, i dont get money for arma neither doh

[frederf 0]

I think timers, last hit, etc are poor indicators of real achievement. Also I think there is a place for scoring inside ArmA, my problem is just how it's used. In a game of evolution a player with 35 kills, 99 deaths, and an average lifetime of 2.5 minutes has a higher score than a player with 28 kills, 3 deaths and 20 minutes per life.

In the simplest case, the player that provided the majority of the damage should get the points.

More complicated methods award points for "mobility kills" as well as total kills and also divvy up multi-point items to the top damagers of the target.

Say a tank was worth 10 points, the guy who damaged it 80% gets 8 pts and the guy that finished it off gets 2.

I diagree about the majority of the damage. Say someone shoots up a tank pretty bad but there's still some players in it, shooting up your lines. You blast it with a rocket but it's overkill, the tank explodes... you save the day but someone else gets the points? Pshaw. That's not how confirmed kills work anyways. Your confirmed kills are the ones that go down as a direct action of your fire. Whether or it ran over a land mine before you took it out isn't really relevant.

You didn't save the day, both the initial damager and you combined saved the day. The tank went down as a consequence of both of your fires. It's like a football (American football) game, everyone says "Oh that last touchdown won the game!" but that's bullocks. Without any one of the touchdowns throughout the game the team wouldn't have won. Without the first touchdown then the team wouldn't have won... then didn't the first touchdown win the game? Hmmm.

God forbid a team effort be rewarded, right?

Obviously if I hit a BMP2 with a M203 round then my fraction of the score is going to be less than a whole point anyway.

What I find excruciatingly stupid is I will shoot at T-72 and the crew bails. T-72 is no longer a threat. I don't get any points, whatever I don't care. Now another guy playing with me sees the totally non-threatening tank and deploys his AT4 on it to collect the catastrophic kill points. Normally I wouldn't mind but this score whoring attitude has the following downsides:

1. The AT4 is wasted on a non-threat, possibly jeopardizing the mission, the safety of myself or my element due to not having it later when we need it as well as the lack of his attention to other threats while doing this.

2. Friendlies may be hurt by the explosion that didn't have to happen.

3. Elements of stealth are lost due to the explosion, smoke trail, and vehicle fire.

4. Use of the vehicle in a pinch no longer possible.

Points for say a infantry-tank-plane-whatever kill should be awarded "based on the lack of combat effectiveness achieved to the enemy unit." Taking out the tires on a BRDM immobilizing it, even though it can still shoot, is very worthy of "partial credit."

As for the "BLUFOR hopped in it and now it's friendly so I got negative points" issue. One, why did you blow up an empty vehicle? Did it say something about your mother? And two, all vehicles that have changed hands (OPFOR to BLUFOR example) at least once should be worth 0 points since they don't belong to either side definitively anymore.

This should prevent stupid point losses in Evolution (since that of course defines the very existence of ArmA /sarcasm) despite the fact that people shouldn't be roaming the countryside blowing up crap for points anyway (I think it deserves the point whores right but I digress).

[frederf 0]

On the larger topics at hand: Scoring

What makes ArmA so cool? I think it's the wide range of things you can do in the game. The game is very flexible from DMs to large nerd-coops to BF2-clones to even RTS-style games.

Now what if I never ever used parachutes. I hate parachutes and have a tattoo to that effect. Now should parachutes be completely stricken from ArmA? Some people love parachutes. They parachute all day and all night.

It is better to have a feature in a game, even if it's not perfect than to abandon it altogether. Scoring in ArmA serves some really useful roles. Is it always the most positive influence on the gamer's psychology? No.

What would be very nice is to have much much much more control over the scoring system. That way Evolution could have a scoreboard and Johnny realism nut could have scoreboard=0 in his description.ext and maybe even be able to adjust the point values per-mission. That way everyone wins.

Second topic: "It's just a game."

It's just a game. is the most screwed up, backward, and ignorant phrase ever to be released from word or keyboard. Let's examine the meaning behind this phrase.

"It's just" would seem in indicate that the object "a game" has little value or importance. The time, effect, and real money invested by the players, mission makers, server admins has exactly 0 value. TKing your squad leader 10 minutes into a mission is no big deal. It's just a game, right?

Hopefully the above sounded vaguely like sarcasm to you. Otherwise it's a lost cause already. Anyway, it should sink in that there is some value to this or any other game.

I think (warning, personal opinion) that the value of the game is the satisfaction one gets from participating and playing the game.

I say "satisfaction" because the word "fun" has an obscure meaning. "Fun" is riding in the minigunner seat of a UH60 with infinite ammo over all sorts of soft targets on the ground and rock music playing in the background. Sitting in a bush covering an advancing fireteam without firing a shot is "Unfun." Both of those can be satisfying or not depending on your personality and wants.

Don't knock on the guy that likes to charge through a full town of infantry as the gunner on a M2_HMMWV if that's what is the most satisfying about the the game to him.

Don't knock the guy that will rtb back to base to visit the medic after being injured even if that means a 10 minute drive if that is what makes the game satisfying to him.

[Metal Heart 0]

guerilla @ May 22 2007,22:21)]yeah but there was still this symbolic chip, wasnt there, i dont get money for arma neither doh

Well, it's a very integral part of the game because it's all about the betting, my point was that it was about playing for nothing basicly. I don't even remember who of us won, only that it was fun.

Let me put it this way, when I play football with friends, we often do keep scores but never invidual scores. When the other side is losing, someone from the winning side will usually join it to keep the game fun for both sides, thus, it's not about winning at any cost and getting the highest score.

[Bunks 0]

Ive got an Idea on a new scoring system. If your side wins you get 1 point, if your side loses you get none.  

And if you kill a friendly unit, the person killed gets to kick you off the server or put you in seagul mode for a minute or two depending on the type of ff. Do this and maybe you will see teamplay raise quite a bit and tk's alot less often, especially chopper whores who crash them like crazy.

Or another simple but more apealling one for those who like to see scores for some reason. How bout just a kill death ratio. Not points for tanks and such but just 1 death = -1 point and 1 kill = 1 point. I was a bit bothered by a guy shooting an empty tank when infantry was all around us. His empty tank kill got us all wiped out.

Myself I would like to see a more dramatic scoring sytem but I havent a clue how it would be implemented. Something like a Squad leader gets a point for every kill his team gets and loses one for every squad member killed with a -3/5/10 depending on original size for the whole squads death. And a player who doesnt move, respond, or comply with the Team leaders ingame orders lose points. You get the idea but I think it would be fun to try something like that.

[celery 8]

"Some people play games to win!"

That was my point, I find it sad. Some people play computer games to have fun and to relax with friends, not to compete seriously in some retarted nerd-off.

I find it sad that you can't accept that every person has their own amusements. Please try to broaden your mind and see that there is room for everyone, not just your narrow, personal preferences.

guerilla @ May 22 2007,22:21)]yeah but there was still this symbolic chip, wasnt there, i dont get money for arma neither doh

Well, it's a very integral part of the game because it's all about the betting, my point was that it was about playing for nothing basicly. I don't even remember who of us won, only that it was fun.

Let me put it this way, when I play football with friends, we often do keep scores but never invidual scores. When the other side is losing, someone from the winning side will usually join it to keep the game fun for both sides, thus, it's not about winning at any cost and getting the highest score.

If you want to draw a comparison between ArmA and your friendly football games, that means you want to forbid others from playing football competitively with individual statistics and that sort of thing. What would happen to deathmatch if there were no individual scores?

[Gaffa09 0]

Quote[/b] ]"Discipline of fire? Go join the real army ffs."

Go play BF2 ffs. I already did the mandatory military service and found it to be quite boring compared to playing games but if my country will ever be attacked, I'll be there even if it was a choice.

Why play BF2? Just because he's trying to prove a point? very childish 100's of people that play ArmA have been in the military, and don't want a game to poorly recreate that atmosphere.

As for serving your country, what country are we talking about here? because if its England, they can go to hell sorry. All i do is work 24/7 for them to take every penny from me. But thats enough of my life

Quote[/b] ]"Some people play games to win!"

That was my point, I find it sad. Some people play computer games to have fun and to relax with friends, not to compete seriously in some retarted nerd-off.

So what If people want to compete at games?? If you want to relax and have fun do it! Leave the others to play the game for the reason they PAID for it!

Quote[/b] ]And to [CAVE]guerilla: I've actually played poker with fake money and it was rather fun. Many professional poker players don't do it for the money either.

Very nice Your right... maybe the Pro's don't do it for money, but they play it to WIN!

Quote[/b] ]Let me put it this way, when I play football with friends, we often do keep scores but never invidual scores. When the other side is losing, someone from the winning side will usually join it to keep the game fun for both sides, thus, it's not about winning at any cost and getting the highest score.

No offense, but you obviously ain't good enough to play in a competitive match then? Ive played in too many to name, and the feeling you get when you win a final with your team is most probably the best there is. knowing how hard you worked with each other to reach where you are. THEN! what do you get at the end? A NICE BIG FAT TROPHY, to enjoy with your team. then the piss up starts

Back on topic....

Why not have 2 types of scores? Assist and kill? wouldn't that make life alot easier?

Don't forget... Whatever game your going to play, your always going to get idiots wanting to ruin it.

Btw mate... It says your an Advanced Member maybe you should act like it?

[Zedfragg 0]

I was going to post a reply but if i do i'll end up looking like snakes damn shadow lol or worse his sidekick lol

[NoRailgunner 0]

How will you get the balance right in scoring system for combat simulation? (Don't like those "Skill-kills" e.g. BF and CS.)

Only count on "targetkills" or fired/left ammunition or damage level or what else? Would be hard work to get all aspects into one "true" score.

[Frantic 0]

nice thread with many funny replays in it!

personally i never had such a prob with the scoring system, so that i was sad to not get the point for shooting down the heli with a stinger, cause every other team mate was happy that i shot him.

BIS has really other probs to solve till they can think of something like making the scoring better.

One huge improvement about the scoring would be to have a full scoring table with all players in it!

[Metal Heart 0]

...

Why play BF2? Just because he's trying to prove a point?

Because in BF2 it doesn't matter whether you open fire whenever you want. He was asking if I was a nut job for merely mentioning that it is not always the best option to immidiately open fire at the first glimpse of an enemy, a course of action often favored even by some very good* players.

*(good as in can rambo effectively, not neccessarily as in doesn't get his supposed team mates wasted just to get a few points more than them).

As for serving your country, what country are we talking about here?

I can tell you it's not England, didn't even know you had to serve there.

No offense, but you obviously ain't good enough to play in a competitive match then?

I'd be completely useless in a professional football match. True but irrelevant.

Taking real sports seriously is very different, it's something I understand and respect. Getting all worked up about being robbed a few meaningless invidual points in a team-based mil shooter computer game not.

Btw mate... It says your an Advanced Member maybe you should act like it?

It only means post count over 800 or so. I guess I could ask for this account to be closed and then create a new one so I could act like I want again.

[l mandrake 9]

...

Why play BF2? Just because he's trying to prove a point?

Because in BF2 it doesn't matter whether you open fire whenever you want. He was asking if I was a nut job for merely mentioning that it is not always the best option to immidiately open fire at the first glimpse of an enemy, a course of action often favored even by some very good* players.

*(good as in can rambo effectively, not neccessarily as in doesn't get his supposed team mates wasted just to get a few points more than them).

As for serving your country, what country are we talking about here?

I can tell you it's not England, didn't even know you had to serve there.

No offense, but you obviously ain't good enough to play in a competitive match then?

I'd be completely useless in a professional football match. True but irrelevant.

Taking real sports seriously is very different, it's something I understand and respect. Getting all worked up about being robbed a few meaningless invidual points in a team-based mil shooter computer game not.

Btw mate... It says your an Advanced Member maybe you should act like it?

It only means post count over 800 or so. I guess I could ask for this account to be closed and then create a new one so I could act like I want again.

For the third time, please stop hijacking this thread with your meandering, emotive bullsh*t and go play 'Forum War' somewhere else.

Thank you.

[Gaffa09 0]

Quote[/b] ]Btw mate... It says your an Advanced Member maybe you should act like it?

It only means post count over 800 or so. I guess I could ask for this account to be closed and then create a new one so I could act like I want again.

Im starting to wonder if those 800 posts came from quoting people with useless replies.

Why not leave the people that want a scoring system to discuss on what they think should be fixed or added to the current score system? instead of repeating your self over and over again?

This topic is to discuss on what should be fixed/added to the current scoring system. If you want to open another topic saying you don't want the score system, why not do that?

Know one wants to listen to you ramble on and on, with non constructive posts.

You brought ArmA for your reasons, other people have brought ArmA for there own reasons! Whether that reason is to play CTF, CTI, DM etc... In order for them to be happy they would like to see improvements to the scoring system. Whats wrong with that?

[Rhodite 3]

|J:Ops| SNAKE & Mandrake5

+1wl for Flaming and baiting.

Knock it off, or you will be given time to cool off.

[Gaffa09 0]

LMFAO!!!!!

We are trying to discuss the overall scoring system, then people like Metal Heart post rubbish that is completely off topic, and WE get a warning.

Question.. Why didn't Metal Heart get a warning???

What a load of bull!

[Rhodite 3]

|J:Ops| SNAKE That will be a 1 week PR and +1WL

I suggest you read the rules and take your Moderation questions to PM where they belong.

Flaming is flaming whether its on topic or not in either case it is not welcome.

Metal Heart - Stay on topic. (First and final warning)

[OrLoK 20]

Hello,

Ok, in between the flames and arguments it still looks like the thing we need is the ability to:

1)Allow mission makers the ability to turn the score board ON/OFF.

2)Allow scores to be shown onlky at end of mission/round.

3)???

I understand that one doesnt HAVE to press I, but to not have it there at allwould change the feel of the mission IMHO.

Please add to the above list with a bit of cutting and pasting, so we have a definitive list of all the options that we "would" all like to see (no matter what playstyle we have).

This way any scripter will have a head start on what the community wants. And we all get to say our piece and everyone is all fluffy and happy.

Rgds

LoK

[Zedfragg 0]

Im just going to post to say FLAME TO YOU ALLL MWAHAHAHAH

And now on topic i would like to see a sort of damage based score system for CTi/TDM etc...

That'd be good for leagues and clan torneys

As for metal heart I didn't say I play to win i said some..

You just seemed to have a problem with others wanting a little more from the scoring system...

Why don't they all just go play BF2?...Because Armed Assault is better there now shush biatch befo i set ma hoe on yo ass ....And..Stuff lol