[QUOTE=AnthonyDa;220916]Why matchmaking shouldn’t use win/loose ratio : http://imagik.fr/view-rl/234496
Also, it should use (at least) KDR imo.[/QUOTE]
/facepalm
your reasoning for saying they should use KDR and not win/lose ratio in Brink, is a scoreboard for a TEAM DEATHMATCH game over QL…
Its simple really, when your on the ground dead, making friends with the soil there isn’t much you can do, if your dead you cannot defend.
that’s what medics are for.
Indeed, your entire team can be excellent killers, if you can’t kill the team faster than it’s revived it really means zip to the outcome of the game.
Overall killing is not the most important thing when it comes to winning, but if your killing prevents an objective from being taken or helps it to be completed, it is the most effective. It seemed to me that the problem was people wanted to gimp the xp from killing people? Which is why anyone is arguing at all? Someone is mad because someone is camping their spawn or kill whoring etc, and so suddenly this is a problem… There are plenty of important factors besides just killing yes, but if anything is supposed to come out of this discussion, I am for killing being rewarded with equal XP to anything else. Discouraging people from being the kill whore and forcing them to do something else to earn XP is just dumb. If you don’t have stats, you force classes to help their teammates, etc then WHY GIMP KILLING XP?! Seems like over compensation to me.
[QUOTE=Jamieson;220889]I still think killing is the most important factor, Now the comp team I’ am in has done well and destroyed some teams but let me tell you about 1 time.
We played Bailed out and Mamut probablly the two best Clans in Europe at the time. They apsolutely destroyed us, I mean it was rediclous we spent 20mins in our spawn and hardly touched the 1st objective let alone complete the map.
Seriously I spent more time dead than alive at the end our team averaged around 12-15kills each they had 40+ each between them.
If we even got remotely close to the objective we were put down immediatly and that was it, wait till you respawn only to be killed again.
Im sure Nilco will agree with me he was there on the day playing alongside me, Ryan aswell.
So happened to be one of the most funny games I have ever played though, We got owned so bad it was funny.
Now try telling me killing isn’t important.[/QUOTE]
Misconception imo, but those guys are just at such a higher level in all aspects that it seems impossible to beat. Now if those two teams played each other, they might be thinking about much more than simply running around killing people. I have seen much more advantaged teams lose to the underdog because they figured their individual ability was > no matter what. If you can’t outkill someone, you have to think outside the box and change your strategy. There are plenty of ways to improve your chances thanks to the objective game system, as well as just organizing yourselves to always be in 2v1 scenarios. Still, I know what you mean and in situations like that it can’t be helped when your up against perfection 
. Fortunately you rarely see that kind of organization in a pub, which makes killing look much more important.
Overall killing is not the most important thing when it comes to winning, but if your killing prevents an objective from being taken or helps it to be completed, it is the most effective. It seemed to me that the problem was people wanted to gimp the xp from killing people? Which is why anyone is arguing at all?
I was arguing about K/D and KPM being key factors in determining player ranks/skill in matchmaking. There are far more important stats to consider than K/D ratio and KPM.
I am for killing being rewarded with equal XP to anything else.
they aren’t gimping xp from killing people, they are gimping xp for useless killing of people - like killing players nowhere near the objective or players that pose no threat. Spawn camping may also be gimped, to encourage against it.
[QUOTE=H0RSE;220933]I was arguing about K/D and KPM being key factors in determining player ranks/skill in matchmaking. There are far more important stats to consider than K/D ratio and KPM.
[/QUOTE]
Sorry, wasn’t referring to that. The only reason why it seemed like there would be any reason for arguing was relating to the xp you get from it, as it appeared like there was a plan to gimp its rewards.
[QUOTE=H0RSE;220933]
they aren’t gimping xp from killing people, they are gimping xp for useless killing of people - like killing players nowhere near the objective or players that pose no threat. Spawn camping may also be gimped, to encourage against it.[/QUOTE]
That’s fine by me, but it seems like a pretty difficult to do right. It just seems like some people consider overall killing as being useless, which didn’t make sense. Sometime even spawn camping can be helpful, as annoying as it is (should be server preference really). From a realistic view its like why put effort into something that is not a problem at all. You have someone spawn camping, you got base turrets- fixed. You have someone killing someone away from the objective, well that is 1 person on both teams not where they are supposed to be-not a problem. Someone can get 100 kills and still lose-no global stats/won’t guarantee a win, no motivation=not a problem. Your medic wants to go rambo- already explained. Why then focus on setting up a system where xp for kills is limited? If Brink can’t spread rewards evenly, then everyone will be fighting over who completes the objective etc, and I hope that those who had such a big problem with the “killing machine types” will be happy. Everything is used to kill someone at some point, and I would like to be getting the same XP for killing waves of attackers as the guy who runs in and completes the objective thanks to me.
That’s fine by me, but it seems like a pretty difficult to do right. It just seems like some people consider overall killing as being useless, which didn’t make sense.
I’m not saying killing is useless, it’s just some people on here think that it is the most important tactic, and that’s where I disagree.
[quote=H0RSE;220926]/facepalm
your reasoning for saying they should use KDR and not win/lose ratio in Brink, is a scoreboard for a TEAM DEATHMATCH game over QL…
that’s what medics are for.[/quote]
Ho thought we were talking about FPS in general now …
Yep. I mean most everyone feels that its not the #1 factor. Killing should however be rewarded equally though right? I know some don’t think so, and if I recall a SD quote it appeared like there would be some discouragement XP wise in this area (as a result of whine about campers, kill whores, etc). I mean someone has to draw a line between needing to help your teammates and holding hands in a circle while singing kumbya all the way to the objective .
shooting people at the objective gives more xp than shooting people away from the objective, as it should be.
doing the objective gives more xp than side tasks (iirc), both shooting and doing the objective are equally important. Without shooting you’ll never get to the objective, without the objective, you won’t win, KDR is nothing if your team loses. But as this thread was about the match making aspect of the game, which only applies to consoles (imo), I don’t care how they do it, PC players will continue with our dedicated servers and play whoever we like.
I am hoping a forward defenses doesn’t get discouraged (not talking about camping). Still setting a limit on how much XP you get distance wise would be a good method of discouraging full blown camping.
I dunno why I feel that a lot of these threads end up going back to some particular peoples’ desire to gimp or belittle the shooting portion of the game, but it happens… and I personally feel compelled to slap them with a fish.
Even if I hate that, if you want to encourage teamplay, either bannish XP, rank and shit (impossible…), or give significant advantages in xp for the said teamplay (+++ for objectives, ++ for healing, reviving, shooting and protecting a mate etc and only + for a loner kill far from anything, the distance to obj should be taken from the enemy perspective ofc, if you snipe one defuser from a far distance you are still helpfull and deserve some monies).
Anyway once again I feel like talking to wallz, so i’m out. Oh and yeah : rank/matchmaking != general xp
Peace
Excellent revivers would invovle people walking around with defibs and hence would get killed first. Good luck reviving if you’re on the floor.
I reallyl don’t see what you’re defending Gorker, I you can’t hit a thing you simply can’t win.
Excellent revivers getting killed first wouldn’t be excellent revivers.
What I mean is, the amount of kills really don’t matter if the team you’re fighting against specialised in getting them up as fast as possible. A team can focus on not getting hit, or getting hit and revived back fast. K/D ratio or kills per minute aren’t fixed qualities that way.
To give any significance to just the kills is just foolish, yes it helps the game, but so do so many other things. If all those other things didn’t matter they shouldn’t reward xp for them either.
I know a k/d or bodycount is great for your e-peen but there are lots of other important things in this game. If you can’t appreciate that complexity then maybe such kind of shooters aren’t the thing for you.
… You should close the subject …
And tokomat should stop being rhetorical… brink is a shooter, if you cant kill anyone you cant win, except if your team does all the job for you, but IMO the best shooters will win 99% of the time (maybe some sneaky objective can make them loose).
One of the dumbest point ever was that “you dont need to kill people to defend an objective” tell me how in hell would you do that? all your team going in front of a barricade to block the plant with their body?
Mining stuffs or deploying turrets are also things aimed to one thing -> killing people. Now if you are so closeminded that you cant see where you are wrong we will see ingame if you can win by not killing anyone… I would like a video tho, cuz it’ll be epic.
While I agree that you dont have to be a super shooter to be a great asset to your team, if you die more than the ennemy you will loose, even with good revivers or whatever, please try to revive a mate someone just sniped in the open @ qw, you’ll prolly be the next one to get headshotted and die, the “fast pad” 1337 skills cant save you here.
On your last point “a team can focus on not getting hit”, explain me how you cant get hit if the attackers are pushing to objective? you just run in circle on a rooftop? So you loose, because the attackers get to the obj and do it.
Most of your point are really like you are in a total denial here… I think I got your idea tho, but definitly not the way you express it.
Peace
[QUOTE=Nail;220956]
But as this thread was about the match making aspect of the game, which only applies to consoles (imo), I don’t care how they do it, PC players will continue with our dedicated servers and play whoever we like.[/QUOTE]
can you say that again. i think i missed the five times you said that in this thread.
Capturing other people’s command posts was an excellent way of giving the enemy huge set-backs without harming anyone.
The point is. This game isn’t just about killing, and the amount of kills you matter in the end as the only thing that counts is whether or not that final objective is completed. THEREFORE kills shouldn’t be the deciding factors in measuring skills, they’re a handy attribute that rewards xp just like any other contribution you can make to the team.
And even if it was just about killing, the kills you make aren’t all equal of value. Killing key classes in the right moment is far more important than just killing whoever you can find. Just measuring kills would do the selective players a disservice.
Therefore, use XP (per minute/hour whatev) as it includes everything, including kills, you can do to win the game in the best way possible.
In ecology you speak of K and R species.
One focusses on limited individuals high survivability, the other high quantity, high reproduction, low survivability. Many RTS and board games already (unconsciously?) play wit his concept (elites vs swarm), but shooters with such added depth and even a bit of resource management are touching up on this as well.
Whatever they do, both extremes and everything in between works.
Same thing in Brink. A team could focus on shield buffs in a team and preventing players from getting killed, or they accept the kills and focus on getting them back on their feed as fast as possible.
A team could focus on slowly advancing, keeping integrity intact, secure the area and complete the objective, which means they have a few, or even one probable chance, or they can try to get as fast to the objective with many (low) chances on the objective as possible.
The value of the kill varies in both approaches. Again. Kills are a very bad indicator if measured in such a flat way. It’s way to simplistic and doesn’t represent the player’s skill accurately. Maybe in a deathmatch without much complexity it does. But not in games where killing people isn’t the ultimate goal.