soupp April 11, 2016 Share soupp Member April 11, 2016 Here is a suggestion to help balance out the game. When each level begins: If( score difference >= 500 ) { Give losing team 5 points each } else if ( score difference >= 1000 ) { Give losing team 10 points each } else if( score difference >= 2000 ) { Give losing team 20 players each }The score limit and or points can be tweeked to a fair number.What do you think? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lordbaby April 12, 2016 Share lordbaby Member April 12, 2016 may need to take good players who just joined the team with lower scores half way into consideration Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crasx April 12, 2016 Share crasx GC Alumni April 12, 2016 interesting idea. as lordbaby says there would be some edge cases we need to take into consideration. What do others think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anzul April 12, 2016 Share anzul Member April 12, 2016 seems a bit too much in my opinion. maybe just give 3 points if scores diference goes beyond 1000. that way scrambles/switching is still an option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soupp April 12, 2016 Author Share soupp Member April 12, 2016 I wouldn't try to code for good players in the first version. If you get those numbers right, the good players will bring the score difference below the first if statement, and there will be no auto balance. Perhaps the finale could have different logic applied, but I can't really see making a case for that for the first roll out either. Like anything, see how it affects the game and adjust as needed + see what other players say. Do you keep logs of the final game score or for each level? That would be useful for optimizing this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MasterTalpa April 12, 2016 Share MasterTalpa Member April 12, 2016 (edited) if points were an issue, and with everyone seemingly knowing how to get points fast, this wouldnt hold them back at all Good idea still Edited April 12, 2016 by MasterTalpa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EliteGandalf April 12, 2016 Share EliteGandalf Member April 12, 2016 Here is a suggestion to help balance out the game. When each level begins: If( score difference >= 500 ) { Give losing team 5 points each } else if ( score difference >= 1000 ) { Give losing team 10 points each } else if( score difference >= 2000 ) { Give losing team 20 players each } The score limit and or points can be tweeked to a fair number. What do you think? I like the idea. As far as changing for good players.. Meh idk. It seems fair, because if the team is losing by 2000 points giving better players 20 would help a lot in efforts to carry. Who knows.. What if only one good player joined the losing team, and he doesn't get the 20pts that everyone else got. That player gets wrecked all game too. Looking at it from the other side.. That player doesn't get wrecked and point farms, gets an early wipe.. Serves the stacked team right for playing the campaign so stacked. It has been a personal opinion of mine for a while now to have the amount of points you get for doing things vary depending on the score of the game. Losing team would then get more points depending on the difference in score at the start of the round. As for winning team.. It wouldn't mean they would receive any less points for their action.. Meaning 1 boomed survivor still = 1.79 and so on. But for the losing team. 1 boomed survivor = 1.79 + .75. If the starting round had a difference in score anywhere from 1000 to 1200. Ex. Your Team 1000 Enemy Team 2200. Soup idea works fine for me. Since no one likes to swap these days anyway. If there is some sort of disconnect in giving away extra points.. How about making the items in the buy cheaper for the losing team. The items would vary in price.. Being cheaper for the losing team. How cheap you say? Well it would depend on the difference in at the start of the round. This way you would have to deal with people exploiting.. Ex. Gandalf buys unannounce tank and up hunter limit.. Gandalf leaves the game. Gandalf rejoins the game and buys reghosting. Gandalf leaves the game again etc... Soup's idea works fine with me as long as it can't be exploited. Or maybe slight variation to it would work. Please comment. I'd love to hear what all have to say on the matter.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anzul April 12, 2016 Share anzul Member April 12, 2016 most of that could easily be avoided if points are given only at the start of the round when the safe door is opened. or a multiplier could also be implemented for earning points (or even the buy menu) like the loosing team getting 0,20% more points or so depending on the score. implementing it on the buy menu would be hard i'd guess, because that would mean the entire text file for it would have to change whit the score. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeanutButterNJelly April 12, 2016 Share PeanutButterNJelly GC Alumni April 12, 2016 I don't have a problem with something along these lines, as long as it is a small amount of an advantage. The problem with gauging things on score is that scores can be very deceiving, due to the length of campaigns. Almost every time a round is over, people leave and new ones take their place. Typically, in a lopsided game, people on both sides end up leaving during the campaign (the best players on the winning team often leave as it is boring). The teams in the later stages of a campaign, many times, are not even close to the teams that caused the lopsided score. Sometimes the losing team halfway through the campaign becomes the "stacked" team for the second half. I think the score is silly anyway. I play infected with the goal of trying to kill the survivors before they reach the saferoom. I play survivor with the goal of reaching the saferoom (or escaping if a finale). I also, always swap myself to the losing team or the team with less players and I appreciate all of you out there that offer to do the same when I ask for volunteers. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garychios April 12, 2016 Share Garychios Member April 12, 2016 I say scramble every round. Who cares about points? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos April 13, 2016 Share Carlos Member April 13, 2016 I say scramble every round. Who cares about points? Lol I doubt you were being serious, but I was just starting to think about this interesting idea of yours. What would happen if there was actually a scramble at the beginning of each chapter? I mean think about how crazy this could be. Games would be unpredictable if this actually happened XD 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPG1770 April 14, 2016 Share MPG1770 GC Server Admin April 14, 2016 It's so easy for top players to buy tanks within a minute - maybe we should increase tank to 65pts and heal at 40pts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilkys April 14, 2016 Share Vilkys Member April 14, 2016 It's so easy for top players to buy tanks within a minute - maybe we should increase tank to 65pts and heal at 40pts? How does that help the losing team? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yortz April 14, 2016 Share Yortz Member April 14, 2016 Like Turbo said, scramble every map. Or after every map, everyone gets sent back to spec, you get 3 choices, go to 1. Survivor 2. infected or 3. Random. Choosing random will give you bonus 5 points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mizemor April 14, 2016 Share Mizemor Member April 14, 2016 (edited) It's so easy for top players to buy tanks within a minute - maybe we should increase tank to 65pts and heal at 40pts? One way to help that is balance the infected out slightly. The current points as an example for hunter pounces are incredibly high, with a 12.5 points (not including damage) for 25 damage pounce is a bit ridiculous. Drop it to 5 points for a 25 damage pounce and you would see less tanks being bought super early in MOST instances. I bet if you trolled the logs you would find most tanks bought by the top hunter pouncers. Not bashing those players at all by the way, they have honed that skill and it can be very difficult to hit some of those pounces, but there are also some maps where it's insanely easy (DA2) and the points just don't balance for them. Would be worth looking at other infected as well to make sure there is balance all around, but typically the others are fairly even from what I can see. Regarding the +/- for losing team, you would really want a base number according to difference in score. The issue with adding multipliers to players is that it gets exponentially more powerful the longer the map goes. Having it check the score constantly to determine when to stop adding the multiplier would be an insane headache and hassle to do. A score check at the start of the round however is much easier. Edited April 14, 2016 by Mizemor 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilkys April 14, 2016 Share Vilkys Member April 14, 2016 So how does lowering the points earned per pounce help the losing team? Scramble after x amount of points or give x mount of points to the losing team to help them out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lordbaby April 16, 2016 Share lordbaby Member April 16, 2016 is this implemented to the server alreadY? i saw the survivors got a whopping 15pt freebie last night.. perhaps a one time thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackieChan April 16, 2016 Share JackieChan GC Alumni April 16, 2016 Only admins can give points out to players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.