Originally posted by NoBaddy
Please explain what is different about what you suggest and what I am telling you has been previously done. The only difference is that in AW if you lost, points were deducted from your score based on your relative ranks. Sorry, not my fault if you can't see the similarities.
BTW, did you not want criticism of your idea?
Absolutely, my apologies for getting salamanderly.
Let's start over, shall we? If you've got the time and/or desire, please let's analyze the proposals one at a time instead of a 'been done, didn't work' blanket statement.
I would say that your caveat of the 'lost points' is a very big difference, and in this aspect would certainly create a timidity or overly careful mindset with players that cared... After all, there is something to lose besides a positive accumulation of points. Take that out of the equation, and I propose that we're talking about something totally different.
The system I was thinking about used comparative rank and the other conditionals below as a
modifier, not a be-all, end-all to absolute scores. This modifier could be as inconsequential as 10% or as heavy-handed as 50%... it would have to shake out what worked best. The scoring would be triggered by a confirmed kill.
Then I threw in an eny modifier to account for differing comparative plane strengths and weaknesses. This is already done with perk points, and while eny is a rather coarse judgment of any particular plane in comparison to another, IMO it's better than nothing.
As an added bonus, I proposed a simple calculation at the time of the kill to find number of enemy planes within icon range (or another static range like 1 to 3K) versus number of friendly planes within the same range. The purpose of this would be to detect hording or ganging and adjust the kill modifier accordingly, thereby decreasing the reward for horde-like behavior, and also reward bravery (or, if you like, suicidal desperation). Note that this doesn't necessarily exclude cooperative gameplay at all, in large fights that are fair in numbers (i.e. say 6 nme vs 5 friendly within range at time of kill) it would have little to no effect on the score. Just in the 5v1's would it really come into play.
The whole point of this purely mental exercise is to improve the relevance of scoring as pertains to actual skillsets that may be considered desirable and worthy of note (such as SA, ACM etc.) instead of promoting 'gamey play' and 'scorepotato tactics'. I noticed you said that this would promote timid gameplay, but I couldn't see really what you were specifically referring to or how exactly it would. Everyone knows the scoring system as it stands is kind of a joke, I'm just throwing out ideas on how to make it stand for something more meaningful. No matter what, some people will always dislike scoring, but at least it could have a little relevance other than who plays the most, who's vulching shades, and who's managed to cherrypick their way to the top.
