Good to see you Ispellcorrectly, are you still running with QF?
Ispellcorrectly is right though and this is something I have already pointed out, Rank systems based on overall stats don’t work because peoples skill levels differ day to day and month to month, like he pointed out, some people may take a break and come back and be unable to compete with the rest.
I am good mate, thanks, no not with QF no longer, they don’t play QW no more apparently, haha - I am with =GK= now my first ever clan
I think the whole fact of worrying about stats is silly, it should be the last thing on your mind…
Only thing I am worried about it playing with my friends, and if I was to be on my own after being on a business trip for a month, will I still be able to compete, or would I have to create a smurf?
I would like to point out that in Halo 3 the ranking system did allow for decrease if you went inactive for a while. I witnessed this first hand because I was not able to play on-line for (6?) months. I went from a rank 42 to a rank 35 in Lone Wolf and had to work my way back up. It didn’t bother me because I found it nice that it occurred.
It would have sucked to come back into the game playing on-line after that amount of time and having to play with the “big boys” again.
On the other hand, your rank did go down as well if your performance was not good (lose a set amount of matches). This kind of annoyed me because on team based servers you did not always know who you were playing with unless you went in as a party. Half of the time, people would exit out for (blank) reason leaving you already crippled against 4 other players.
With that said, I don’t see Splash Damage shooting themselves in the foot with having the options locked for platform specific servers. By limiting the choice to one platform you are oust the others as, for lack of a better term, being the red headed step child that got away.
I would enjoy the option of having these ranked servers entirely but I think a free mode would ease the tension of only being able to play in ranked matches. This free mode would have powers off or limit the “over power” abilities so the newer player base and older player base could still play with one another. Of course this could be just a cesspool of “elite” players prying on the newer members for the kicks of it. But that will never be avoided in ANY game. Just my 2 cents.
A combination of Kills Per Minute, Kill to death Ratio, Total Accuracy, XP per hour and Average distance covered per map is imo the best way to measure, as they can catch out stat whores and campers.
I think measuring K/D or KPM is useless in a game like this. Players can go entire matches having little to no kills, and still be exceptional in a game like this.
It seems through reading posts in this thread, that there are 2 types of ranking systems people are proposing - How good a player is at the actual game (working as/with a team, winning matches, doing what needs to be done, etc.) and how good a player is against other players (K/D, KPM, etc.)
Having K/D and KPM as a deciding factor not only is an inaccurate measurement of what a ‘skilled’ player is, but it also encourages players to have a high K/D, KPM, which destroys the whole foundation of Brinks gameplay.
So brink isnt a FPS anymore? If I dont want to track my kdr I should play pacman instead… You guys make me giggle, ofc objectives etc are important, but the basis of a shooter is to shoot ppl right? If you cant get a clue about killing ppl I hope you are in a really good team, if not all your wonderfull plier skill will be useless cuz you wont be able to leave spawn alive!
Brink IS a FPS, not a dumbed down rpg, keep it that way please.
peace
So brink isnt a FPS anymore? If I dont want to track my kdr I should play pacman instead…
since they won’t have global leaderboards, they won’t be tracking much of anything…
If you cant get a clue about killing ppl I hope you are in a really good team, if not all your wonderfull plier skill will be useless cuz you wont be able to leave spawn alive!
Yeah, ok, so when the game first comes out and every one is new, the chances of me having a “really good team” aren’t all that great - guess i’ll be stuck at my spawn. Or what if I only have a mediocre team or a good team, opposed to a really good team? Should I just quit while I’m ahead, and avoid the inevitable failure that awaits me?
You are right, it is a FPS, but shooting/killing people isn’t the strongest aspect of Brink, teamwork is, and having K/D and KPM, which is typically a ‘lone wolf’ playstyle statistic, as a deciding factor of judging who’s good and who’s not would really just result in false positives - "wow this guys really good! He has a K/D of 3.5!..oh wait, he never arms/protects the objective or supplies teammates…but he has a high K/D, he’s awesome!
since you’ll have all this free time to play pacman, maybe you should give Billy Mitchell a call - maybe you’ll beat his high score.
[QUOTE=Apples;220787]Yeah we can almost agree on XP part, the index to me is more another thing calculated for matchmaking only, which need to be different from XP cuz in no way you can prevent any player to find something to increase his xp by farming, farmers were there, are there and will be there long time after we both died 
To me there is a difference beetween accumulated XP and “skill rank” because if you do the matchmaking beetween … say 14 leet aimers and 2 objectives guyz, even with the same amount of xp per hour the poor 2 guyz will get raped the whole map and wont do any objective anyway, please remember that its still a FPS, so even if I agree that nowadays with these kind of FPS the “skill” is more than aim/point/click, I also consider that if we want fair games for everyone, we should take the accuracy and KDR in the balance, but with some sort of good index which limit the flaws in each of these “raw” datas.
Oh, and peace :D[/QUOTE]
The thing is, as soon as you start modifying flat xp amounts to make them better represent someone’s ‘skill’ you might as well integrate that into the xp rewards system anyway.
Brink is an FPS. An FPS is a First Person Shooter, note the last word SHOOTER.
How can you be exceptional at a first person shooter without killing anyone? You can be USEFULL but not exceptional.
[quote=Exedore;220036]Oh sure, I didn’t mean to say it like it was an absolute. We’ve seen a lot of different things happen in playtests, but yes, kicking ass does tend to help your team in most situations.
:stroggtapir:[/quote]
As mentioned above killing helps the team. I dont know why this was being disputed but there you go, little bit of evidence.
Its easier to turn a pubstar loner into a team player than Jan Q. CantAim into rglaf/Chump. More importantly, every member of a comp team needs to be able to aim but only a couple need to be able to think, as long as the others do what they say!
I dunno Horse I tend to agree with Apples, Brink is an FPS the main goal of an FPS is to kill people.
You can be the best person at doing objectives in the world but if you can’t get past the 4 guys defending the objective because they out shoot you then your going to get nowhere.
FPS are about being able to hold your own, A good objective person is someone who can handle themself if they need to. You can see this in comp, even the obj person must fight and kill if they need to.
Teamwork is important in an FPS but not to the point where the rest of the team has to babysit you or carry you around because you can’t kill people.
People may have a go at lone wolfs such as myself but we are the ones who run into rooms and put people down for good, we are good shooters so why waste our talent? is it not better for us to help the team by killing people so the objective people can get to the objective unhurt? The fact is if your good shooter but are also tactically minded so you can do the objectives then your a more valuable player to the team than someone who can only do objectives, because lets face it at its core Brink is an FPS and killing is the most important thing.
I dunno Horse I tend to agree with Apples, Brink is an FPS the main goal of an FPS is to kill people.
Let me know when they add DM and TDM - THEN it will be about killing people.
You can be the best person at doing objectives in the world but if you can’t get past the 4 guys defending the objective because they out shoot you then your going to get nowhere.
anyone who charges in alone against 4 guys deserves to die, regardless of if he wins or not. - I’ll be attacking with my team.
FPS are about being able to hold your own, A good objective person is someone who can handle themself if they need to.
“if they need to” doesn’t really go hand in hand with a high K/D or KPM - it’s more like leaving killing to a minimum.
Teamwork is important in an FPS but not to the point where the rest of the team has to babysit you or carry you around because you can’t kill people.
If you are destroying every objective in a match, your team won’t mind protecting you. And what about medics? You’re supposed to protect the medic so he can keep his team alive and shooting. I’m not going to take a break from reviving and dropping medkits, just to shoot some badguys - unless like you put it, “I need to.”
People may have a go at lone wolfs such as myself but we are the ones who run into rooms and put people down for good, we are good shooters so why waste our talent? is it not better for us to help the team by killing people so the objective people can get to the objective unhurt?
that’s fine and dandy, but unless the objectives are actually destroyed, all that killing was for nothing.
Brink is an FPS. An FPS is a First Person Shooter, note the last word SHOOTER.
is this the same game that has knives in it…
Oh sure, I didn’t mean to say it like it was an absolute. We’ve seen a lot of different things happen in playtests, but yes, kicking ass does tend to help your team in most situations.
it “tends to help,” - like a million other things in the game. It is by far not the deciding factor fo who’s good and who’s not.
Most important=> Objectives, Kills. To clear the objective you must kill, and once cleared you must defend it. Also to get to the objective you must kill to push. Killing is important, and those who spend time killing in the “wrong way” (as in not towards the obj) will still lose. Someone who has a good strategy for completing objectives or is good at dodging bullets more than aiming them is equally important. In the end however, you can’t have one without the other.
[QUOTE=Jamieson;220850]I dunno Horse I tend to agree with Apples, Brink is an FPS the main goal of an FPS is to kill people.
You can be the best person at doing objectives in the world but if you can’t get past the 4 guys defending the objective because they out shoot you then your going to get nowhere.[/QUOTE]
Still, you can kill as many guys as you like, at the end of the day it’s the team that either successful defended or completed the objective that wins.
The amount of people killed is totally meaningless, just a tool to get to the objective like anything else.
Very true, but the majority are gonna be pub players… doesnt really help the masses if pro shooter only cares about teamplay in a clan match. But i guess the rewards themselves are going to supply incentive for that… hopefully.
[QUOTE=H0RSE;220851]is this the same game that has knives in it…
it “tends to help,” - like a million other things in the game. It is by far not the deciding factor fo who’s good and who’s not.[/QUOTE]
Ok… not the best example of how its not an FPS with the knives. #1 its a shooter (although not every weapon is a gun). #2 its a team shooter, meaning everyone needs to be pulling their weight (its not dueling) and also be organized. #3 Objectives add a different priority over kills, but kills are still as important. I can tell you right now that if Team A has better shooters and Team B has those who are better at playing objectives, Team A will win. Unless those who have good aim suck horridly at organizing themselves or get too greedy, there is a chance that Team B will sneak an objective. In most all cases however, shooting well, while playing the objectives= being the biggest factor over who wins. If someone feels there needs to be new ways to beat out another player other than aiming, then you got turrets, mines, etc (note backstabbing still requires you to aim). Most all of these are balanced with shooting still, and you might recall vehicles as the biggest mistake moving in this direction (which is why we won’t be seeing them). If that is still not good enough for you, then go complete a puzzle and feel better.
[QUOTE=tokamak;220854]Still, you can kill as many guys as you like, at the end of the day it’s the team that either successful defended or completed the objective that wins.
The amount of people killed is totally meaningless, just a tool to get to the objective like anything else.[/QUOTE]
Which is why it is not the most important, but its still pretty important eh? So why should it not be rewarded? If your not killing to help your team, you don’t get the objective and win. That’s how you punish it… people just don’t want to be the one’s doing the clearing/pushing/defending and not be rewarded as much as the guy who just runs in and plants a bomb.
I think it’s pretty obvious that all aspects are important… a game can’t be won if the enemy are alive to shoot you, and it also can’t be won if there’s no one to complete the objective. Ideally we’d have a happy mix of both aspects, but generally player specialize in specific areas, hence why my very crude formula included most aspects. So really, this back and forward debate is pointless because both are just as important as each other.