Commander Rank
ozbirdboy
Join Date: 2007-08-07 Member: 61827Confirm Email
Join Date: 2007-08-07 Member: 61827Confirm Email
How about a ranking system for players on either team which displays the number of times the player has won a round while commanding to give everyone on the team an idea of how good or bad they are? From there they might wish to vote in another commander who has more experience.
This could also be extended to show how many times they have commanded, the win/loss ratio, etc.
What are your thoughts?
This could also be extended to show how many times they have commanded, the win/loss ratio, etc.
What are your thoughts?
Comments
- Total kills
- Round time
- Buildings destroyed
- Buildings created
etc
If wins are recorded, people will stack marines and rush for cc whenever they feel the marine team has skill advantage. It happens already on public servers sometimes, I don't think rewarding the winning commander is going to help that.
Maybe you could give a gold cc icon for 50 hours spent in cc or so, but simple win ratio is always quite abusable in public games.
Yeah we would have the same problem because players could create a server with another player and go AFK while in CC, come back and they have a gold icon. I think the idea would be good but it would be very hard to monitor and enforce.
Make it require 12+ players. I don't think the system needs to be all foolproof, since it's just an icon, not any real benefit for your game. However, the way you get the icon shouldn't encourage any unnecessary prolonging or score gathering.
It's not perfect either. (I vote for a variety of wins with X amount of players in X amount of time) The ladder system is probably the only way unless UW comes up with a brilliant scoring system for the commander that is near impossible to circumvent.
Then comes the issue of a commander wannabe with a score that is too low. Chances are he won't find too many servers willing to let him play and maybe increase his score.
The deciding factor for the commander should stay with player reputation and/or democracy.
A global stats system may take stats from a player who dominates a very relaxed casual server, but then gets housed in a competitive server. The problem it creates an expectation of a player who has really high stats falsely.
Likewise the inverse could happen. A really good player can play on tough servers and perform low, and then goes to a lesser skilled player and will not be recognized for that talent, thus creating a skill imbalance.
The only way that I see that stats can work is if the stats are stored on each individual server, as the stats will mark that player's performance on that particular server.
Creating a global stats system for the purpose of balance would be nearly impossible and take an enormous amount of time to create.
You'll have to be really careful with those at least. Stuff like capping every node on the map basically encourage you to try to stall the game until you can just walk in and cap the last node while spawncamping. It's only a little, if any, delay on most cases but I'd still avoid those. The more difficult the achievement, the more delay on most cases.
On TF2 the achievements work so well, because there's very little dependency on a single individual effort and there aren't practically any map control/res/tech related advantages, so everyone is free to hunt the achievements at any point. On NS on the other hand you've got long periods of gameplay where you're just finishing the game without any real question about the winner. At that point you don't want to distract the winning team from finishing the round. The commander is absolutely crucial for finishing the round, so you'll have to be double the careful with his achievements.
On TF2 the achievements work so well, because there's very little dependency on a single individual effort and there aren't practically any map control/res/tech related advantages, so everyone is free to hunt the achievements at any point. On NS on the other hand you've got long periods of gameplay where you're just finishing the game without any real question about the winner. At that point you don't want to distract the winning team from finishing the round. The commander is absolutely crucial for finishing the round, so you'll have to be double the careful with his achievements.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Capping every node requires marines to push in the hive so I'd say it speeds the end game. I agree with the general statement that we have to be careful to avoid bonesaw/taunt/melee kills in one life achievements that take focus away from winning the game.
People ALWAYS abuse ranks in games. Ever heard of 'boosting' ?
People ALWAYS abuse ranks in games. Ever heard of 'boosting' ?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ranks give a new objective to the game. Rank up. This makes it a
'every man for himself" kind of game. Theres no leader or organazation, people just want to get kills
The positives far outweigh that one negative
Yeah that could work.
No way, imagine all the negative scores of the team looses