Author Topic: How about a common-sense scoring system  (Read 3207 times)

Offline Masherbrum

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 22416
How about a common-sense scoring system
« Reply #120 on: May 10, 2002, 11:38:03 AM »
Quote
thing is.... most guys feel that they should get credit for their work and not have to give their kills to some hovering vultcher that "finishes off" their kill with a nik or lag7 cannon after it has been drained of e and shot to pieces. Your particular talent should not be rewarded IMO.


If I see a smoker FLYING , he's going down, I don't care if there are three birds on his 6, I'll be the fourth trying to bring that wreck down.  It isn't vulching, it isn't "kill-stealing", it is simply Elimination of the Enemy!!!.   I don't care about getting points, I've been thanked countless times for saving their prettythanges, I can care less about the points involved, I just pray they do the same for someone else in a similar situation!
I'm supposed to sit back and follow him into his base, watch him land, come back up and then engage.  Feel free to do such a thing.  I'm not trying to come down on you AT ALL lazs2.  
If you were part of a trio of birds shooting up a Lanc, would you be upset and demoralized if someone came in to lend a hand and got some points as well for helping you out?  I guess teamwork is a null point in here, I don't know.  Oh well, I'll continue helping my fellow Rooks (my squadron aside) when they are in need, A Rook is a Rook.

Hooligan - the Guadalcanal Savo Island?

jay
FSO Squad 412th FNVG
http://worldfamousfridaynighters.com/
Co-Founder of DFC

Offline AKSWulfe

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3812
How about a common-sense scoring system
« Reply #121 on: May 10, 2002, 11:44:58 AM »
Teamwork is lending a helping hand when you need it, not killing something that is about to be killed anyway.

Maybe that's the common misconception here, some think teamwork means working together to kill an plane... while it's actually covering the guy while he kills that plane... and coming in to kill it IF he needs it.
-SW

Offline Masherbrum

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 22416
How about a common-sense scoring system
« Reply #122 on: May 10, 2002, 11:55:25 AM »
If you say so.  I can see why my buddy has been flying in here since its inception and stays away from the bb.  Lopsided as all hell.  I've noticed the trend.

Hooligan - Wasn't it part of Tokyo Express by Victory Games?  

Jay
FSO Squad 412th FNVG
http://worldfamousfridaynighters.com/
Co-Founder of DFC

Offline AKSWulfe

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3812
How about a common-sense scoring system
« Reply #123 on: May 10, 2002, 12:03:12 PM »
Tell me this Masherbaum, where is the teamwork of a friendly diving in on a con that you are about to deliver the final blow to?

There isn't, it's just the guy diving in to see if he can get the kill instead.

This happens a lot, but it's still not teamwork.

Teamwork would be covering the guy so when more cons come in you can help him out. It goes towards the efficiency of the "team", and therefore that is teamwork.
-SW

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
How about a common-sense scoring system
« Reply #124 on: May 10, 2002, 12:12:24 PM »
masherbaum... I got no problem with you finishing off a smoking wreck.   I do it myself constantly.   Point is, if you get an assist for doing it you don't come all unglued about it and feel robbed like our friend widewing.   Wide believes that he should get the credit even if he has done less damage.  

If you jump in and help that is more than fine with me.    If you get the kill because you did more damage that is also fine with me but... if you jump in after I have done all the work and most of the damage and you puit the final bullet or two into his shot up wreck and you feel that you deserve credit for the kill.... that is not fine with me.
lazs

Offline Masherbrum

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 22416
How about a common-sense scoring system
« Reply #125 on: May 10, 2002, 12:18:05 PM »
I do believe I discussed what are trying to point out to me SW.  I always put my self in danger to help out a squad mate, with NO SELFISHNESS, that's teamwork and committment.  It just amazes me what the human mind conjurs up when a good game such as this one comes along and people will do everything possible to point the negatives of it.   You always have the "couldn't we do this?", "couldn't we do that?" attitude.   When will mankind suddenly realize that this is a game?  They way things are discussed in here sometimes gives you the impression that they, have flown combat missions in WWII and have 30 swastikas or meatballs on their warbird.   When after all of the yelling, finger-pointing, and butchery we wake up and realize, "I wish I could create a game like this".   Post done.  Continue the misc. ramblings, because as my first post stated, "Keep up the good work in Tejas", this is a great GAME.   Thanks Dale for creating a game like this, it beats anything store bought!

Jay
FSO Squad 412th FNVG
http://worldfamousfridaynighters.com/
Co-Founder of DFC

Offline Hooligan

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 889
How about a common-sense scoring system
« Reply #126 on: May 10, 2002, 12:30:35 PM »
Masher:  I have no doubt Tokyo Express has a scenario named "Savo Island", as do about 30 other games.  I'm just curious as to what 2 games widewing worked on.  It's quite likely I know somebody who has a copy of them.

Hooligan

Offline Masherbrum

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 22416
How about a common-sense scoring system
« Reply #127 on: May 10, 2002, 12:31:58 PM »
Sorry, just tried to help you.
FSO Squad 412th FNVG
http://worldfamousfridaynighters.com/
Co-Founder of DFC

Offline Turbot

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1122
How about a common-sense scoring system
« Reply #128 on: May 10, 2002, 01:08:10 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Hooligan
Eric Bergerud = rickt and he is a History Professor (not economics).

So you piqued my interest.  Who published "Savo Island" and what was the name and publisher of the other game?

Hooligan


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=savo+island+game

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8804
How about a common-sense scoring system
« Reply #129 on: May 10, 2002, 01:09:27 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Hooligan
Eric Bergerud = rickt and he is a History Professor (not economics).

So you piqued my interest.  Who published "Savo Island" and what was the name and publisher of the other game?

Hooligan


Back in the mid 1960s, I hung around with several older guys who were deep into wargames. One of these guys, Brad Davis was into naval games. Now, back in those days most guys used commercially published rules. Brad and I designed a game for our own use. We played it on an old ping-pong table. I researched the various ships and cut out counters from cardboard, drawing the silhouete of each ship on the cardboard by hand. We used a sheet of drywall, on which we painted a map of the Gaudalcanal area. Over the course of time we worked out rules and debugged the system of play. Brad took to game (minus the map) to some club meetings. One day he called me and said that he had someone interested in purchasing the rights to the game rules and system. Well, I was 14 or 15 and when told we could split $200 I was more than happy to sell it. That was more money than I could even imagine. My parents had to sign the release as I was a minor. Brad was 18 or 19 at the time. I never met the buyer, but I did see the check and got my share. About a year later I received a published copy of the rules in the mail. Some things had been changed, but it was largely intact. Moving ahead about 15 years, I was stateside after a deployment on Saratoga and while in a hobby shop, I discovered a game manufactured by Quarterdeck Games, titled Ironbottom Sound. Intrigued, I bought it. I discovered that the rules and play system were very similar, except that it used the now more common hex type map. We used some old drafting triangles, indexed in yards with a scribe. Well, I suspect that there are only so many systems that work well with naval war games. But the system, the scenario and details were remarkably close. I suppose that our system nestled in between Avalon Hill's Jutland and the newer game. Really very similar, yet there were some significant differences. Our rules were considerably more complex, taking into account the effect of sea-state on torpedo running depth and other infinitely detailed factors. Clearly, in hindsight, I can see that our game would have been much more difficult to learn, and game play was very slow. Most of my really old games disappeared while I was in college or in the military. I haven't seen the Savo Sound booklet since I left for my first carrier based flying deployment in 1977. I guess that was the price of being the oldest in a house full of boys. Leave for a while and everything gets trashed. I'm sorry, I can't recall the publisher's name, but it wasn't one of the big-name game companies, and it wasn't published as a boxed game, just a rules pamphlet. Back then, you could find a wide assortment of wargame rules published this way.

The second game sold was largely the work of Brad, and was designed for using miniatures, rather than counters. Brad kindly gave me $50 for my efforts. I don't know if that game was ever published. I can't recall what Brad named it either. It was a long time ago, and I was at the age where my interests changed with the seasons, so to speak. You know how kids are. My father bought me a used Honda CB-160 motorcycle for my 16th birthday, and for the next 6 months all I thought about and talked about was motorcycles. In retrospect, that little Honda barely qualified as a "motorcycle", but in my mind it was wonderful.

These days, Brad owns an insurance agency and coaches baseball at his local High School. He served in Vietnam, oddly enough, in Special Services, in Da Nang I believe.

Anyway, I still wargame (still have Ironbottom Sound too), but I am now into miniatures gaming more than boardgames. back in '68 or '69, I play-tested (think beta testing) Avalon Hill's first hex based wargame, Panzerblitz. I probably played every game published by Avalon Hill, as well as many from GDW, Strategic Simulations and others. I also enjoy many of Talonsoft's PC games, such as West Front, East Front and all of the Civil war games. However, they don't run on XP, so until they provide a patch, I'm doing without, or use my old WIN98 machine.

So, Hooligan, are wargames a former or present hobby of your's?

My regards,

Widewing
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline Lephturn

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1200
      • http://lephturn.webhop.net
How about a common-sense scoring system
« Reply #130 on: May 10, 2002, 01:19:09 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Widewing


I see your point, you believe the scoring should reward based upon contribution. I agree, however, I believe that the system should reward the final killer more than those who contributed, regardless of whether the killer did more or less total damage. Assists should get some perk percentage, or kills should be shared. IE: .33 kills or .50 kills, and so on. Also, non flying proxies should go away, along with proxies caused by AI ack.

Does this make a little more sense?

My regards,

Widewing


No, I don't think it does make more sense by itself.  The "final killer" would simply be the guy that shot it last.  It would make kill stealing far worse IMO.  However, I think your idea of shared kills does have merit.  Instead of doling out "assists", dole out .5 of a kill or some other fraction of a kill.  However, it still needs to be based on total damage done to be workable IMO from a programming point of view.  Maybe another improvement would be granting a "kill" after critical damage is done.  Use the same determination for damage as you do now, just give out the kill and stop calculating after something really big breaks like a whole wing or entire tail section.

Still, changes like this are not trivial.  I think what we have now works fine, although it could be improved.  I'm sure HT would be willing to consider these ideas, and if HTC like them they'll prioritize and do their thing at some point.  However, I submit that a much less contriversial thread posted in the Gameplay/Feedback forum would be much more likely to accomplish that goal.

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8804
How about a common-sense scoring system
« Reply #131 on: May 10, 2002, 01:34:53 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by AKSWulfe
Teamwork would be covering the guy so when more cons come in you can help him out. It goes towards the efficiency of the "team", and therefore that is teamwork.
-SW


That's it in a nutshell, Masherbaum. Once a teammate saddles up, you should lag back and provide cover. Should the teammate run out of ammo, or the con shake him off, then its okay to move in. Until then, your job is to cover his 6. Competition for the kill is not teamwork. Shooting over another's shoulder is not teamwork. Flying through his airplane while he's concentrating on hitting the enemy is most definitely not teamwork, especially if that results in his being killshootered.

Teamwork will not result in less personal kills, you will probably get more because enemies are being chased from your 6, allowing you to pursue the enemy unmolested. That means you will likely suffer less deaths too. Teamwork means better scores for all involved. Teamwork means people will be glad to see you on their wing, instead of dreading your presence. Being a reliable teammate means that when calling for help, someone will come. There is no down side to being a good teammate. And, you don't have to be in a squad to be a teammate. Any member of your country is a teammate. Hell, I'd even cover Lazs if he needed it. :D Although I suspect he'd rather die..... ;)

My regards,

Widewing
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8804
How about a common-sense scoring system
« Reply #132 on: May 10, 2002, 01:41:53 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Ogun
Still waiting for the punch line Widewing :D


No punchline, Ogun. I was grossly out of line. Making smug comments about another player's scores is a low as it gets. I sincerely apologize for that.

Just say the word and I'll delete any post that belittles you in any way.

My regards,

Widewing
« Last Edit: May 10, 2002, 01:51:07 PM by Widewing »
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8804
How about a common-sense scoring system
« Reply #133 on: May 10, 2002, 01:49:38 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Hooligan
Eric Bergerud = rickt and he is a History Professor (not economics).

So you piqued my interest.  Who published "Savo Island" and what was the name and publisher of the other game?

Hooligan


Back in the mid 1960s, I hung around with several older guys who were deep into wargames. One of these guys, Brad Davis was into naval games. Now, back in those days most guys used commercially published rules. Brad and I designed a game for our own use. We played it on an old ping-pong table. I researched the various ships and cut out counters from cardboard, drawing the silhouete of each ship on the cardboard by hand. We used a sheet of drywall, on which we painted a map of the Gaudalcanal area. Over the course of time we worked out rules and debugged the system of play. Brad took to game (minus the map) to some club meetings. One day he called me and said that he had someone interested in purchasing the rights to the game rules and system. Well, I was 14 or 15 and when told we could split $200 I was more than happy to sell it. That was more money than I could even imagine. My parents had to sign the release as I was a minor. Brad was 18 or 19 at the time. I never met the buyer, but I did see the check and got my share. About a year later I received a published copy of the rules in the mail. Some things had been changed, but it was largely intact. Moving ahead about 15 years, I was stateside after a deployment on Saratoga and while in a hobby shop, I discovered a game manufactured by Quarterdeck Games, titled Ironbottom Sound. Intrigued, I bought it. I discovered that the rules and play system were very similar, except that it used the now more common hex type map. We used some old drafting triangles, indexed in yards with a scribe. Well, I suspect that there are only so many systems that work well with naval war games. But the system, the scenario and details were remarkably close. I suppose that our system nestled in between Avalon Hill's Jutland and the newer game. Really very similar, yet there were some significant differences. Our rules were considerably more complex, taking into account the effect of sea-state on torpedo running depth and other infinitely detailed factors. Clearly, in hindsight, I can see that our game would have been much more difficult to learn, and game play was very slow. Most of my really old games disappeared while I was in college or in the military. I haven't seen the Savo Sound booklet since I left for my first carrier based flying deployment in 1977. I guess that was the price of being the oldest in a house full of boys. Leave for a while and everything gets trashed. I'm sorry, I can't recall the publisher's name, but it wasn't one of the big-name game companies, and it wasn't published as a boxed game, just a rules pamphlet. Back then, you could find a wide assortment of wargame rules published this way.

The second game sold was largely the work of Brad, and was designed for using miniatures, rather than counters. Brad kindly gave me $50 for my efforts. I don't know if that game was ever published. I can't recall what Brad named it either. It was a long time ago, and I was at the age where my interests changed with the seasons, so to speak. You know how kids are. My father bought me a used Honda CB-160 motorcycle for my 16th birthday, and for the next 6 months all I thought about and talked about was motorcycles. In retrospect, that little Honda barely qualified as a "motorcycle", but in my mind it was wonderful.

These days, Brad owns an insurance agency and coaches baseball at his local High School. He served in Vietnam, oddly enough, in Special Services, in Da Nang I believe.

Anyway, I still wargame (still have Ironbottom Sound too), but I am now into miniatures gaming more than boardgames. back in '68 or '69, I play-tested (think beta testing) Avalon Hill's first hex based wargame, Panzerblitz. I probably played every game published by Avalon Hill, as well as many from GDW, Strategic Simulations and others. I also enjoy many of Talonsoft's PC games, such as West Front, East Front and all of the Civil war games. However, they don't run on XP, so until they provide a patch, I'm doing without, or use my old WIN98 machine.

So, Hooligan, are wargames a former or present hobby of your's?

My regards,

Widewing
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline AKSWulfe

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3812
How about a common-sense scoring system
« Reply #134 on: May 10, 2002, 01:57:03 PM »
Masher, I believe we are talking about two different circumstances.

You are referring to diving in to help someone out that appears to be in trouble- that's team work.

Back in the day (in the long long ago ;-) people would ask before engaging.

Now-a-days, they just dive on in thinking you need help when chances are some guys don't.

That really isn't teamwork, but it isn't really intentionally going in for the kill for yourself. It's more like "I thought I was helping"

If I get one of those in replies, I could care less if the guy came in to kill the bogey.

But, if no response to "why'd you join the fight? I didn't need help", then that's just kill stealing.

I dive in to help squad mates when they need help all the time when I'm online. It's just natural to help out "your boys", I'll help someone who is outnumbered too... I would expect anyone to do the same (although a few won't)...

In any event, I think we just misunderstood each other.
-SW