Home » Tiberian Technologies / Blackhand Studios » Tiberian Technologies Forum » Fixing... Points?
|
|
|
|
| Re: Fixing... Points? [message #350126 is a reply to message #346858] |
Tue, 09 September 2008 10:32   |
 |
jnz
Messages: 3396
Registered: July 2006
Location: 30th century
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
Well I don't look at my score, my kills or whatever. I just play with the cash I have. If I don't have cash I get a shotgunner or something and fool around or sometimes an engineer and repair tanks/buildings. That is my game play, it will still not be effected. I don't care if I win or lose.
If I have money, I might get the PIC or Railgun out. If not, it doesn't matter I just do something else. More points/cash wont effect my game play. If the other team has more points and cash then their tanks and soldiers are just fodder for whatever character or tank I have.
[Updated on: Tue, 09 September 2008 10:33] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Fixing... Points? [message #350158 is a reply to message #349940] |
Tue, 09 September 2008 14:02 |
 |
s0meSkunk
Messages: 62
Registered: June 2005
Location: West Philadelphia
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
| Spoony wrote on Mon, 08 September 2008 15:41 |
here's a question: if you want a ladder where the top players can be guys who spend all game shooting stuff they don't damage... why don't you make one?
the key word in that question is "you".
|
I never said that.
You're being way too arrogant to understand my posts and give any point I mention, even points for your side, and on topics not even relating to the points fix any thought at all.
I'm even coming around to see why this could be good, and you didn't even notice, you just continued on assuming I'm some kind of jerk or asshole, which I don't feel like I've been.
I apologize if you feel I've been that way, but maybe you see that because you're used to people here acting that way.
It's what I see when I look through the boards after all.
You can prove the points fix makes sense, and you can prove the system previously made no sense when vehicles had green health.
But you can't prove that Westwood didn't just make it that way on purpose, for whatever reason.
(it's a bitch to fight tanks now as infantry)
So all this proof talk you mention is really just opinionated "proof," and can never truly be proved anyway.
So I don't like hearing you call it proof.
I guess I'm going to have to take a neutral stance on this, because neither sides arguments can prove anything, and one side just shouts "We proved it!" and the other side just shouts back "No you didn't!" And so then the first side shouts "Well prove how we didn't."
"Sexy Kick!!!"
|
|
|
|
| Re: Fixing... Points? [message #350165 is a reply to message #346858] |
Tue, 09 September 2008 15:19 |
 |
R315r4z0r
Messages: 3836
Registered: March 2005
Location: New York
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
I'm pretty sure they said it was an error in code and not an intentional effort to fix the game's points.
You see, in Level Editor, when you modify an object that has health, you get to put in how many points you get from it for shooting and killing it.
Now, if you look a few posts back, you will come across a test I did involving finding out how many points you get for using a Ramjet against various vehicles. Here is an excerpt:
| I said: |
Stealth tank = 22 Points
Buggy = 12 Points
Light Tank = 10 Points
Flame Tank = 10 Points
Mammoth tank = 12 Points
Medium tank = 10 Points
Humm-vee = 12 Points.
|
The Stealth tank gives off 22 points. Now here is the same preset's settings in Level editor:
I don't know about you, but 0.110 Points does not equal 22 Points.
If Westwood had intended to make the points we currently get the actual point system, they would have set the points in their presets to be larger than what is shown.
And upon further investigation of the Ramjet rifle itself, neither in its weapon settings, ammunition settings, or preset settings does it dictate a point multiplier. And even if it did, it would take a rather large point multiplier to get from 0.11 to 22.0.
Therefore, I think it is pretty safe to assume that this was NOT an intention addition to the game.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Fixing... Points? [message #350170 is a reply to message #346858] |
Tue, 09 September 2008 15:35 |
 |
sadukar09
Messages: 2812
Registered: May 2007
Location: Ottawa,Canada
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
Not to mention Spoony already PMed a former Westwood employee, who also thinks it's a bug.
| Quote: |
[19:16:48] <APBBR> @ryan3k: THE ENFIELD DEFIES THE LAWS OF PHYSICS BECAUSE THE BULLETS INSTANTLY HIT THEIR TARGETS LOL
[19:16:52] <APBBR> @ryan3k: CHRONO TECHNOLOGY IN TEH BULLETS
|
| Quote: |
[22:48]<APBBR> @V0LK0V: AOL COMING UR WAI K
[22:48] <APBBR> Host: Quitting due to Westwood Online connection loss.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Fixing... Points? [message #350171 is a reply to message #350165] |
Tue, 09 September 2008 15:40 |
|
s0meSkunk
Messages: 62
Registered: June 2005
Location: West Philadelphia
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
I know it sounds all nice and good, and I do honestly see the good that will come from the points fix.
But I still don't think I'm wrong in saying that it's great the way the game is now because we have the ability to come back and win from hopeless odds...stuff like that makes people watching get hyped, and feel good.
I'm seeing it from both sides right now.
I think I like what the points fix will accomplish, and I'll sorely miss what it takes away from the game.
The flaw here in this argument that you guys are providing is "it is pretty safe to assume that this was NOT an intention addition to the game."
Growing up I was taught that when you assume, you make an ass out of u and me.
But on the flip side, if Westwood did in fact intend for it to be like this, (which we'll never know save for the Westwood employee who did the coding comes on the forums and talks about it [which is extremely unlikely...]) then I want to experience it.
I've been playing on points fixed servers the last few days, and what I see is more opportunity to use flame tanks and stealth tanks and Mammoth tanks without ruining the game, and I don't have to yell at my team mates as much anymore for doing stupid things, and I'm still getting MVP when we win...but when we're losing it's pretty hopeless for come backs : (
It's still fun for now. But I still think the points fix is better off not implemented for the games depth (which I still feel is gone.)
"Sexy Kick!!!"
|
|
|
|
| Re: Fixing... Points? [message #350172 is a reply to message #346858] |
Tue, 09 September 2008 15:43 |
|
sadukar09
Messages: 2812
Registered: May 2007
Location: Ottawa,Canada
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
Please explain why you should win because GDI gets so much points off Stealth Tanks and Flame Tanks with Ramjet for doing 5 damage, while Mobius and PIC Sydneys get less for doing actual damage? Oh yes, please explain why you should win if Nod kills all your base but your Barracks? Have you tried to rush GDI Barracks with Stealth Tanks or Flames? Of course you fail, thanks to the PICs and Volts, and then you lose 250-500 points to Ramjetters, hmm?
| Quote: |
[19:16:48] <APBBR> @ryan3k: THE ENFIELD DEFIES THE LAWS OF PHYSICS BECAUSE THE BULLETS INSTANTLY HIT THEIR TARGETS LOL
[19:16:52] <APBBR> @ryan3k: CHRONO TECHNOLOGY IN TEH BULLETS
|
| Quote: |
[22:48]<APBBR> @V0LK0V: AOL COMING UR WAI K
[22:48] <APBBR> Host: Quitting due to Westwood Online connection loss.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Fixing... Points? [message #350173 is a reply to message #346858] |
Tue, 09 September 2008 15:44 |
 |
Crimson
Messages: 7428
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars)
ADMINISTRATOR |
|
|
Looks like someone else didn't read the proofs that we posted:
On the following chart, "Previous points per shot" value is based on shots on the armor wth a PIC/Rave/havoc/sakura (non-fixed server). "Current points per shot" is based on PIC/RAVE doing 80 real damage on a vehicle (fixed server). For vehicles with light armor it might deal more damage and thus get more points.
Object name Damage points Previous points per shot Current points per shot
CnC_GDI_Mammoth_Tank 0.06 12 4.8
CnC_Nod_Harvester 0.04 8 3.2
CnC_GDI_Harvester 0.04 8 3.2
CnC_Nod_Apache 0.15 30 12
CnC_GDI_Orca 0.15 30 12
CnC_Nod_Stealth_Tank 0.11 22 8.8
CnC_GDI_Medium_Tank 0.05 10 4
CnC_Nod_Flame_Tank 0.05 10 4
CnC_Nod_Transport 0.09 18 7.2
CnC_GDI_Transport 0.09 18 7.2
CnC_Nod_Light_Tank 0.05 10 4
CnC_Nod_APC 0.04 8 3.2
CnC_GDI_APC 0.04 8 3.2
CnC_GDI_MRLS 0.06 12 4.8
CnC_Nod_Mobile_Artillery 0.06 12 4.8
CnC_GDI_Humm-vee 0.06 12 4.8
CnC_Nod_Buggy 0.06 12 4.8
The following chart details "Damage points" (point gain per 1 damage dealt), "Death points" (bonus for causing the final death), "Total death points" (points gained for causing damage from start to finish):
Object name Damage points Death points Total death points
CnC_GDI_Mammoth_Tank 0.06 75 147
CnC_Nod_Harvester 0.04 50 98
CnC_GDI_Harvester 0.04 50 98
CnC_Nod_Apache 0.15 45 90
CnC_GDI_Orca 0.15 45 90
CnC_Nod_Stealth_Tank 0.11 45 89
CnC_GDI_Medium_Tank 0.05 40 80
CnC_Nod_Flame_Tank 0.05 40 80
CnC_Nod_Transport 0.09 35 71
CnC_GDI_Transport 0.09 35 71
CnC_Nod_Light_Tank 0.05 30 60
CnC_Nod_APC 0.04 25 49
CnC_GDI_APC 0.04 25 49
CnC_GDI_MRLS 0.06 23 46.5
CnC_Nod_Mobile_Artillery 0.06 23 46.5
CnC_GDI_Humm-vee 0.06 18 35.5
CnC_Nod_Buggy 0.06 15 30
Some people will come back and say that you get "no points" for shooting tanks. These charts prove that is NOT the case.
Spoony has also discovered that if you look at the "Total Death Points" for vehicles and round them to the nearest multiple of 5, then compare them to the cost of the vehicle, you get this:
| Quote: |
syntax: vehicle/total points/cost
Mammoth Tank: 150/1500
Harvester: 100/not applicable
Apache/Orca: 90/900
Stealth Tank: 90/900
Medium Tank: 80/800
Flame Tank: 80/800
Chinook: 70/700
Light Tank: 60/600
APC: 50/500
MRLS: 45/450
Artillery: 45/450
Hummvee: 35/350
Buggy: 30/300
|
Since it's already understood that aside from free infantry, the points gained for killing an enemy are 10% of the credits used to buy the character, having this chart work out to 10% on vehicles as well in a points-fixed server, it proves that this was not a bug intended by Westwood. Add that to the previously-shown testimony by a former Westwood employee that it was a bug as well, and you have conclusive evidence that the points fix is the system Westwood intended before they were so unceremoniously shut down.
I'm the bawss.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Fixing... Points? [message #350176 is a reply to message #350171] |
Tue, 09 September 2008 15:48 |
|
R315r4z0r
Messages: 3836
Registered: March 2005
Location: New York
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
| s0meSkunk wrote on Tue, 09 September 2008 18:40 |
But I still don't think I'm wrong in saying that it's great the way the game is now because we have the ability to come back and win from hopeless odds...stuff like that makes people watching get hyped, and feel good.
|
No, it makes the team who was losing feel astonished for 5 min until the next game starts and makes the losing team pissed, angry, and tempts them to leave the game and not play for another week. What really makes people get hyped and feel good is if they actually came back FAIRLY and won a game. Because then, the final losing team can understand why they lost and reflect on it. However if they lost because people used snipers to steal points for no damage, then they will just leave.
Do you honestly think it is fair for a weapon to get so many points and provide no counter for the opposing team to win those points back? IMO, something that gets a lot of points should also GIVE a lot of points back.
| s0meSkunk wrote on Tue, 09 September 2008 18:40 |
The flaw here in this argument that you guys are providing is "it is pretty safe to assume that this was NOT an intention addition to the game."
Growing up I was taught that when you assume, you make an ass out of u and me.
|
...assume was just a word I used to sound grammatically correct. I assume using it all the time even when I'm not assuming things. And even so, it was a figure of speech. I've proven that it was not an intentional implementation from Westwood, therefore it is 'safe to assume' meaning I can say something without fear of it being rebutted for lack of evidence.
[Updated on: Tue, 09 September 2008 22:05] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Fixing... Points? [message #350207 is a reply to message #350176] |
Tue, 09 September 2008 19:19 |
|
s0meSkunk
Messages: 62
Registered: June 2005
Location: West Philadelphia
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
Yea, I thought it was fair for the ramjet rifle to get the same points a PIC got from a shooting a vehicle (last time I checked they both got the same points in non poits fix) because I thought vehicles have the ability to get SOOO many points, and that's why it made sense for us to be able to get sooo many points off of the vehicles.
It honestly made perfect sense to me, since vehicles were such good point getters, that you could get such good points off of vehicles.
While I did use this ramjet tactic often, I was also a team player.
Get an APC at beginning of the game ASAP and go remote C4 rush a building...and I hated people who would wait to detonate their C4 so they could get the more points, or put down timed C4's to try to get the more points, when we could have totally taken out the building if it wasn't for their bungling.
To me, it's fair to be able to come back and win with points as the alternative because you're trapped in your base and have to defend well for fifteen minutes or more.
To me, that was the reward for being able to defend your base without x building and keep the enemy from killing you.
It always made sense to me.
TBH the new way makes sense too.
I hate how I can understand what people talk about, but they can never understand what I talk about.
This is me. 
This is everyone else. 
"Sexy Kick!!!"
[Updated on: Tue, 09 September 2008 19:22] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Fixing... Points? [message #350214 is a reply to message #346858] |
Tue, 09 September 2008 20:38 |
|
R315r4z0r
Messages: 3836
Registered: March 2005
Location: New York
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
You have the right attitude, but you aren't grasping the situation correctly. Take a look at what you just said:
| s0meSkunk wrote on Tue, 09 September 2008 22:19 |
Yea, I thought it was fair for the ramjet rifle to get the same points a PIC got from a shooting a vehicle (last time I checked they both got the same points in non poits fix) because I thought vehicles have the ability to get SOOO many points, and that's why it made sense for us to be able to get sooo many points off of the vehicles.
It honestly made perfect sense to me, since vehicles were such good point getters, that you could get such good points off of vehicles.
|
You don't see the problem with what you just said? Ok, try reversing what you just said. Instead of saying 'Because vehicles give you a lot of points, you should get a lot of points off of vehicles,' use that same logic and turn it around 'Because snipers can get a lot of points off vehicles, you should get a lot of points off snipers.' And that isn't the case.
Not to mention vehicles get a lot of points because they actually put effort in and actually DO things to shape the tide of battle.
Vehicles should get points because:
-They require a substantial amount of control and effort to use and earn points. Ramjets however simply require to stand out of range from enemy targets and pick points off of them by simply pointing and clicking.
-They can actually do damage to other people, vehicles and structures. Ramjets however, get a substantial amount of points for doing next to no damage. A vehicle might get 25-30 points for taking out 2/3s of 1 block of health to a structure were as a Ramjet gets 22 points for shooting a stealth tank doing 4-5 damage to its armor.
-They are within range of enemy attacks, meaning the enemy can easily counter their point gaining. Ramjets however, can fire from far out of range of anything it is shooting at giving the victim no chance to redeem them self.
-The points you earn from vehicles are points well earned for helping your team in battle. Were as using a Ramjet to earn points in no way helps your team win the battle. The time you spend planting sniper shots into a tank doing no damage could be better spent actually hurting the enemy and rightfully earning points.
Sure, it is always fun to win by the alternative points victory, but if you got the points using this bug, then it simply isn't fair, competitive, or fun. Coming back and winning a game using this glitch is not something to take pride in, it is something to pity.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Fixing... Points? [message #350219 is a reply to message #350158] |
Tue, 09 September 2008 21:39 |
 |
Spoony
Messages: 3915
Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
| s0meSkunk wrote on Tue, 09 September 2008 16:02 |
| Spoony wrote on Mon, 08 September 2008 15:41 |
here's a question: if you want a ladder where the top players can be guys who spend all game shooting stuff they don't damage... why don't you make one?
the key word in that question is "you".
|
I never said that.
|
Answer my question. If you want a ladder where non-pointsfix games are counted, why don't YOU make one? TT isn't making one because we don't see the slightest point when there is a far superior points system available, where points gained are actually earned.
If you don't answer the question I'll just assume it's laziness and selfishness on your part, shall I?
| s0meSkunk wrote on Tue, 09 September 2008 16:02 |
You're being way too arrogant to understand my posts and give any point I mention, even points for your side, and on topics not even relating to the points fix any thought at all.
|
The flaw in your statement is the rather obvious point that I've responded to pretty much everything you've said, whereas you've dodged the vast majority of what I've said... generally the bits that showed you were categorically wrong about a great deal of different things.
| s0meSkunk wrote on Tue, 09 September 2008 16:02 |
You can prove the points fix makes sense, and you can prove the system previously made no sense when vehicles had green health.
But you can't prove that Westwood didn't just make it that way on purpose, for whatever reason.
|
| s0meSkunk wrote on Tue, 09 September 2008 16:02 |
So all this proof talk you mention is really just opinionated "proof," and can never truly be proved anyway.
So I don't like hearing you call it proof.
I guess I'm going to have to take a neutral stance on this, because neither sides arguments can prove anything, and one side just shouts "We proved it!" and the other side just shouts back "No you didn't!" And so then the first side shouts "Well prove how we didn't."
|
These two posts sum up the anti-pointsfix crowd perfectly.
The FACT (Yes fact, not opinion) that the pointsfix is what the original point system was supposed to be, BY WESTWOOD, has been proven again and again and again, in several different ways. Nobody, NOBODY has refuted a single shred of it, let alone the whole package, LET ALONE proved the opposite viewpoint.
Now, you just said you're going to take a "neutral stance" based on the rather wild assertion that "neither side has proven anything". Crimson's posted a big chunk of what we have proved; there's more if you want it. The anti-pointsfix crowd has proven absolutely nothing.
So, in the light of the fact that one side actually has proven a great deal, which the other side has spectacularly failed to debunk (or even acknowledge, in many cases) perhaps your "neutral stance" should be reconsidered?
| s0meSkunk wrote |
But I still don't think I'm wrong in saying that it's great the way the game is now because we have the ability to come back and win from hopeless odds...stuff like that makes people watching get hyped, and feel good.
|
like I already said... you can still come back from a losing situation on a pointsfix server. There is one difference compared to before:
YOU ACTUALLY HAVE TO EARN IT NOW!
| s0meSkunk wrote |
The flaw here in this argument that you guys are providing is "it is pretty safe to assume that this was NOT an intention addition to the game."
Growing up I was taught that when you assume, you make an ass out of u and me.
|
Assume? Making a conclusion based on a staggering amount of evidence, none of which has been refuted, and none to the contrary has ever been presented, is "assuming"?
In this next quote, I'll italicise the important part.
| s0meSkunk wrote |
I've been playing on points fixed servers the last few days, and what I see is more opportunity to use flame tanks and stealth tanks and Mammoth tanks without ruining the game, and I don't have to yell at my team mates as much anymore for doing stupid things, and I'm still getting MVP when we win...but when we're losing it's pretty hopeless for come backs : (
|
True colours shining through right there. Crimson and I have both said on different forums how pitiful it is that the "pros" love to treat new players like shit just for buying a stank or a mammoth or fixing the WF or whatever; just some new player who is trying to help his team. It's a disgusting way to act and it's yet another argument against the points bug; it's also very telling that everyone who does this is generally on the anti-pointsfix side of the argument.
| s0meSkunk wrote |
Yea, I thought it was fair for the ramjet rifle to get the same points a PIC got from a shooting a vehicle
|
oh... god...
...please tell me this is an unfortunate series of typos, please...
| s0meSkunk wrote |
(last time I checked they both got the same points in non poits fix) because I thought vehicles have the ability to get SOOO many points, and that's why it made sense for us to be able to get sooo many points off of the vehicles.
|
oh dear, it wasn't a mistake, you really meant to say something so massively absurd.
here's the colossal flaw.
the reason vehicles have the ability to get big points is BECAUSE THEY DO BIG DAMAGE. that is how the whole points system works (once the green-vehicle bug is fixed, at least...)... the more damage you do, the more points you get.
PICs do decent damage to tanks, so they should get points accordingly. Ramjets don't do shit, so they shouldn't get points for shooting a vehicle. This is blindingly obvious common sense, sorry.
| s0meSkunk wrote |
Get an APC at beginning of the game ASAP and go remote C4 rush a building...and I hated people who would wait to detonate their C4 so they could get the more points, or put down timed C4's to try to get the more points, when we could have totally taken out the building if it wasn't for their bungling.
|
uhhh... that's nice, what's it got to do with the pointsfix?
| s0meSkunk wrote |
To me, it's fair to be able to come back and win with points as the alternative because you're trapped in your base and have to defend well for fifteen minutes or more.
To me, that was the reward for being able to defend your base without x building and keep the enemy from killing you.
|
if all you're doing is defending, if the enemy's done more damage than you and has dictated the entire pace of the game, preventing you from playing offensively at all... why do you deserve to win?
| s0meSkunk wrote |
I hate how I can understand what people talk about, but they can never understand what I talk about.
|
yep, but it hasn't occurred to you why that is...
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
[Updated on: Tue, 09 September 2008 21:48] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Fixing... Points? [message #350234 is a reply to message #350219] |
Wed, 10 September 2008 00:44 |
|
s0meSkunk
Messages: 62
Registered: June 2005
Location: West Philadelphia
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
| Spoony wrote on Wed, 10 September 2008 00:39 |
Answer my question. If you want a ladder where non-pointsfix games are counted, why don't YOU make one? TT isn't making one because we don't see the slightest point when there is a far superior points system available, where points gained are actually earned.
If you don't answer the question I'll just assume it's laziness and selfishness on your part, shall I?
|
What do you want me to say to this???
Cause we both know if I could have remade the ladder, I would have done so.
I wouldn't have changed anything either, because I loved the ladder.
There's nothing I can say to this question that would be the "right answer" because I can't make a ladder, maybe just because I don't know the right people, don't have enough resources, or just didn't know where to start.
I'm not trying to tell you how to run your ladder, that you made. I was trying to take part in a discussion, and didn't expect to be talked down to once I started to take part in the discussion.
| Spoony wrote on Wed, 10 September 2008 00:39 |
True colours shining through right there. Crimson and I have both said on different forums how pitiful it is that the "pros" love to treat new players like shit just for buying a stank or a mammoth or fixing the WF or whatever; just some new player who is trying to help his team. It's a disgusting way to act and it's yet another argument against the points bug; it's also very telling that everyone who does this is generally on the anti-pointsfix side of the argument.
|
I never treated anyone like shit. That hurts my feelings you think I would do that.
I would PM and explain to people why they should not buy a stank, or repair a building or whatever, and explain how it came to be, and what they can do in alternative.
I would actually talk to them; never getting through, and then it would all boil down to them being yelled at with words similar to "Please stop repairing the WF already! You're losing the game for us."
I don't curse at other players, and I don't go around acting like one of those snotty bratty rich kids we all know we hate.
I always got along with you too, and you never used to talk to me like this.
But I suppose times have changed, and people have too.
I always thought
use vehicles, get big points off of buildings (spend $800, get potentially tons of points, give them a few hundred) >
use infantry, get big points off of vehicles (spend $1000, get less points than the vehicles get off of the buildings, but still get good points, give them 100 points when you die, take a few hundred from them) >
use free infantry, get big points off of tier 3 infantry (spend nothing, or maybe even $175 and get semi good points off of the tier 3 infantry, give them 3-16 points depending, take 100)
It was a nice circle to me.
You guys tell me the circle doesn't work for you.
You're running the ladder now, so it is up to you.
I see the game is much more straight forward now.
(r4z0r and chuck both got through to me too btw)
"Sexy Kick!!!"
[Updated on: Wed, 10 September 2008 00:47] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Fixing... Points? [message #350235 is a reply to message #350234] |
Wed, 10 September 2008 00:54 |
|
Spoony
Messages: 3915
Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
| s0meSkunk wrote on Wed, 10 September 2008 02:44 |
What do you want me to say to this???
Cause we both know if I could have remade the ladder, I would have done so.
I wouldn't have changed anything either, because I loved the ladder.
There's nothing I can say to this question that would be the "right answer" because I can't make a ladder, maybe just because I don't know the right people, don't have enough resources, or just didn't know where to start.
|
I could make the same excuses myself, only I haven't. There's words and then there's action...
| s0meSkunk wrote on Wed, 10 September 2008 02:44 |
I never treated anyone like shit. That hurts my feelings you think I would do that.
I would PM and explain to people why they should not buy a stank, or repair a building or whatever, and explain how it came to be, and what they can do in alternative.
I would actually talk to them; never getting through, and then it would all boil down to them being yelled at with words similar to "Please stop repairing the WF already! You're losing the game for us."
|
sure you do, chief.
| s0meSkunk wrote on Wed, 10 September 2008 02:44 |
I always got along with you too, and you never used to talk to me like this.
But I suppose times have changed, and people have too.
|
you're confusing me here... remind me who you are, please? other names I'd know you by?
| s0meSkunk wrote on Wed, 10 September 2008 02:44 |
It was a nice circle to me.
You guys tell me the circle doesn't work for you.
|
indeed. getting points by shooting stuff you don't damage is absolutely ridiculous, misbalances the game, and was never supposed to happen in the first place.
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Fixing... Points? [message #350246 is a reply to message #346858] |
Wed, 10 September 2008 03:42 |
|
sadukar09
Messages: 2812
Registered: May 2007
Location: Ottawa,Canada
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
Using ad hominem doesn't help you.
| Quote: |
[19:16:48] <APBBR> @ryan3k: THE ENFIELD DEFIES THE LAWS OF PHYSICS BECAUSE THE BULLETS INSTANTLY HIT THEIR TARGETS LOL
[19:16:52] <APBBR> @ryan3k: CHRONO TECHNOLOGY IN TEH BULLETS
|
| Quote: |
[22:48]<APBBR> @V0LK0V: AOL COMING UR WAI K
[22:48] <APBBR> Host: Quitting due to Westwood Online connection loss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Fixing... Points? [message #350332 is a reply to message #350246] |
Wed, 10 September 2008 17:10 |
XCorupt69
Messages: 52
Registered: August 2008
Location: Quebec
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
| sadukar09 wrote on Wed, 10 September 2008 06:42 |
Using ad hominem doesn't help you.
|
it getting old and annoying having you say that every second topic...
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Fixing... Points? [message #350359 is a reply to message #350214] |
Wed, 10 September 2008 18:51 |
 |
liquidv2
Messages: 3407
Registered: February 2007
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
| Quote: |
Please explain why you should win because GDI gets so much points off Stealth Tanks and Flame Tanks with Ramjet for doing 5 damage, while Mobius and PIC Sydneys get less for doing actual damage? Oh yes, please explain why you should win if Nod kills all your base but your Barracks? Have you tried to rush GDI Barracks with Stealth Tanks or Flames? Of course you fail, thanks to the PICs and Volts, and then you lose 250-500 points to Ramjetters, hmm?
|
you shouldn't win; that's not even the point
it's just an incentive to keep the team that's getting its ass kicked to play and hold on
after a game where some team with one building left that got owned royally had more points i'd think Heh, that actually doesn't make any sense
but you know what? it didn't bother me, i never lost sleep over it, and in fact i think that made the game more fun at times
it's like NFL Blitz on the n64, you can literally beat the shit out of the other team's players because it allows late hits and all kinds of cheap shots that aren't allowed in Madden or most other football games
some guy will score a touchdown and while he's doing a victory dance you can knock him him to the ground and drop an elbow on his face; it makes the guy who just gave up a touchdown not feel as bad about it while the guy who scored the touchdown doesn't care since he just scored a touchdown
that's how in my mind there is a connection; the team that did not deserve to win won anyways, and the only people i can think of that would get legitimately upset about it are the ones who take renegade too seriously and turn the game into a competition and think ladder actually means something
like i said i've never lost sleep over it but the way some people talk about it makes me wonder about them
| Quote: |
-They can actually do damage to other people, vehicles and structures. Ramjets however, get a substantial amount of points for doing next to no damage. A vehicle might get 25-30 points for taking out 2/3s of 1 block of health to a structure were as a Ramjet gets 22 points for shooting a stealth tank doing 4-5 damage to its armor.
|
the #1 problem with the original points system with most pointmod people is snipers getting points for not doing shit
i liked the overall points exchange between vehicles and infantry, but snipers really did unbalance games beyond belief at times
then again a light tank hitting a mammy in green health got more points than it did for hitting a building which does seem odd
but if anything a building really won't fire back whereas a mammy has two massive cannons and some rape missiles if you get close, plus it moves unlike any building
if the ladder extremists don't want original point servers on the ladder that's fine with me; they get their revenge on the evil bug exploiters and the evil bug exploiters get to play renegade and not give a shit about it
it's just a game, and the stupid nonsensical system is fun
unless, you know, renegade is more than just a game to you 
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Fixing... Points? [message #350471 is a reply to message #350170] |
Thu, 11 September 2008 09:15 |
XCorupt69
Messages: 52
Registered: August 2008
Location: Quebec
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
| sadukar09 wrote on Tue, 09 September 2008 18:35 |
Not to mention Spoony already PMed a former Westwood employee, who also thinks it's a bug.
|
Nice lie, that was only that "LordMot" guy, who like crimson was choosen at random to just try the game. The fact he had no idea, nor even noticed it AND WAS AN OFFICIAL WESTWOOD beta tester for this game PROOVES:
a)westwood didn't notice it, therefore was not fixed because it was not significant.
b)when finally released it and the many hours of beta testing (crimson I guess can atest to this?), the gameplay was deemed fair.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu May 23 09:28:16 MST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 1.32805 seconds
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
