Not ranks, but something to indicate player's skill/experience

[mmiedzianyy]

[MENTION=2108]Aniallator[/MENTION]rroror, how will we know if somebody is more experienced than others without ranking system? By displaying gaming hours near his nickname?!
Some system should be implemented. Maybe on the end of the round there should be statistic tab showing players with most team points earned? That would significantly encourage team play!

 

[FlyingR]

@Aniallatorrroror, how will we know if somebody is more experienced than others without ranking system? By displaying gaming hours near his nickname?!
Some system should be implemented. Maybe on the end of the round there should be statistic tab showing players with most team points earned? That would significantly encourage team play!

The problem with this is that it depends what team point is. I think it was Ani that said that how will an LMG get teampoints if he is like 50 meters away from capzone covering everybody? It's not fair for LMG, so what he will do is go up the flag, leave everybody uncovered and get the points.

As I mentioned before, it would be cool to assign points to each class. Riflemen get point for capping flags, Medics for healing, LMG would get more points for killing people or something like that, Sapper for destroying. All points would be roughly the same so it would be balanced.

 

[mmiedzianyy]

The problem with this is that it depends what team point is. I think it was Ani that said that how will an LMG get teampoints if he is like 50 meters away from capzone covering everybody? It's not fair for LMG, so what he will do is go up the flag, leave everybody uncovered and get the points.

As I mentioned before, it would be cool to assign points to each class. Riflemen get point for capping flags, Medics for healing, LMG would get more points for killing people or something like that, Sapper for destroying. All points would be roughly the same so it would be balanced.

Maybe LMG gunner should get point's also for suppresing fire if the team is near the cap zone? He ought to be in the right place to provide proper cover fire. Let's be honest, LMG's are not as agressive in attack as assault teams.
As you mentioned, point's should be assigned to each class according to it's purposes. Otherwise, it will be very unbalanced and will not provide team play.

 

[Aniallator]

I maintain that points are unnecessary... however were we to have them, I agree that it'd be best if each class earned points differently.

 

[Sydd]

I maintain that points are unnecessary... however were we to have them, I agree that it'd be best if each class earned points differently.

That's exactly what I've been saying, also... if there is a point system for each rank, if you get to a particular rank, you unlock the nco branch, till then.. you need to play other classes.

 

[FlyingR]

That's exactly what I've been saying, also... if there is a point system for each rank, if you get to a particular rank, you unlock the nco branch, till then.. you need to play other classes.

No, there would not be any unlocking of weapons. All the weapons are there... the thing about ranks is priority for being squad leaders, commanders and having assets (vehicles). You can play any class, but if there would be a private and a private 1st class (let's assume), the private 1st class would have priority of being squad leader.

The points are indifferent to the ranks, they are not correlated.

It would be nice to have ranks in this game as this would be very realistic. Just like in the battlefield, the highest ranking is the leader, if that person dies, the second highest ranking would be the next leader.

 

[Sydd]

No, there would not be any unlocking of weapons. All the weapons are there... the thing about ranks is priority for being squad leaders, commanders and having assets (vehicles). You can play any class, but if there would be a private and a private 1st class (let's assume), the private 1st class would have priority of being squad leader.

The points are indifferent to the ranks, they are not correlated.

It would be nice to have ranks in this game as this would be very realistic. Just like in the battlefield, the highest ranking is the leader, if that person dies, the second highest ranking would be the next leader.

My idea comes from battlefield's system as well but the thing is, I am only talking about giving exclusivity to the nco branch this is because I would like to have a sense that I earned that class by playing, you wouldn't want newbies running around struggling with controls to be our squad leader right? As for weapons I dont care if they are already unlocked. Just need ranks for each class.

 

[FlyingR]

My idea comes from battlefield's system as well but the thing is, I am only talking about giving exclusivity to the nco branch this is because I would like to have a sense that I earned that class by playing, you wouldn't want newbies running around struggling with controls to be our squad leader right? As for weapons I dont care if they are already unlocked. Just need ranks for each class.

I don't think that's realistic though... points would give you a higher rank, which means = priority. If newbies are running a squad and they are doing nothing or interrupting teamplay it would be up to a vote of other squad leaders and/or commander to decided whether or not to remove the player from leading a squad.

The purpose of the game is not to get better weapons or better ranking. The ranking just comes with the experience. The main purpose is to play as a team to attain all the objective and obtain victory as well as to immerse the player in a realism game done in WWII. Which is what many people, including the 2000+ members in the site want.

 

[LuckyOne]

I started writing a paragraph about "upvoting" players you saw doing a good job in combat and base the ranking up on that, but I realized how bad that would end up with clans in mind just upvoting eachother XD

You might be on to something there... Upvoting really could work but it needs one downside, it should cost YOU your reputation to upvote somebody. Sort of like "real-life" simulation. You stand up for some guy you think deserves it, but if he ends up being a jerk your reputation should suffer too!

There are then two problems left to solve. The first is how the "initial" upvote points are gained. Maybe you could get upvotes by completing objectives, being the best player, best teamworker, one for completing the tutorial etc. In any case the initial batch should be quite limited and you should have to use it wisely. After a while the only way to gain more upvotes would be through impressing other players by your actions. The upvotes should be something valuable but not something that gets you a massive advantage, just slighthly increases your chances of being NCO, getting limited kits and having a shiny medal next to your name.

It could work if the upvotes gained through objectives can only be used to upvote others and not yourself. There is still a slight problem with the clans but it's limited as they would need to impress other players too and even then the upvotes would still be limited.

The second, and more complicated problem is how to prevent hoarding points. I don't have a good answer on that though. Because it's human nature to hoard things that are perceived to be valuable. xD

 

[Sydd]

Lucky I'd have to disagree with you on that. If there are in incentives such as getting limited kits or getting medals etc you will see players begging to up vote them after every game. In league of legends the player rating is similar to what you just proposed, however the league doesn't offer much incentives in the way of limited kits or whatever, yet you will see people asking to honor them after every game anyways, and here you have a big incentive so people will be like those seagulls from finding nemo going " mine,mine" after every game... Stats of how often a players average team score, average objective score etc can give more information than a mere up voting system. Which is why I suggest two things, 1. Add ranks for each class you start with a minimal rank appropriate for that class and. Then you attain the highest rank you can. With that class. So I think that would be NCO level rank for a rifleman? Like a sgt? And, 2. Stats that show up on your profile that display how wll you play as a team so basically minimal information required for showing his tea play stats, I'm not interested in kd and avg wins

 

[LuckyOne]

I wasn't aware of that honor system in LoL. Yeah sounds similar to what I just wrote. But the thing is they could ask, but only you could decide when you want to "spend" your upvote points (and when I say spend, I mean really spend, if you don't have anymore objective based upvotes you would lose those from your current upvote level, so whoever you're upvoting better be worth it!).

Also notice I said "chance". Having more upvote points would not guarantee you access to limited kits, just push you up a bit more in the queue of many newbies that still have to learn how to play. Medals of course, would be simply cosmetic things that you could show off on your profile.

You are right on the possibility of exploiting the system though. What about a combination of both systems? (Interesting, it seems that LoL uses multiple ranking systems for different things)

The thing is, awarding medals based on spent time/points achieved/kills/whatever else can be earned through just playing simply leads to people farming those, and some of them are pretty much based on FPS, ping, luck and the correct alignment of stars and galaxies.

Average score could be a way to find the "most appropriate" people to rank better. But you can't completely ignore kd and W/L ratios. Because there could be some players that have many teampoints earned through spamming bandages/ammo/repairing/spotting etc. but if they waste 100 "tickets" getting those points how good for their team are they really?

The thing is most automated systems can be exploited by statpadding on lower populated servers, and most user-feedback based systems can be exploited through social engineering...

So what games usually do is either make ranks just a sign of time spent playing/statpadding (pretty useless) or get rid of them completely... Which can also work, but if actions don't have any long term repercussions people just resort to trolling and teamkilling...

 

[Aniallator]

Rather than a player score system, how about a squad score system? It's fulfilling in PR to see that TRACTIONWARS was top squad... so what about a system that scores squads, not players, based on the squads' captures, kills, et cetera?

Let's say you're an LMG gunner. Rather than running up to capture the CP with your squad, you lay down suppressing fire, knowing that your squadmates are earning your squad points by capturing, and that you're earning your squad points by suppressing while stopping the enemy from disrupting the capture.

 

[LuckyOne]

Rather than a player score system, how about a squad score system? It's fulfilling in PR to see that TRACTIONWARS was top squad... so what about a system that scores squads, not players, based on the squads' captures, kills, et cetera?

Let's say you're an LMG gunner. Rather than running up to capture the CP with your squad, you lay down suppressing fire, knowing that your squadmates are earning your squad points by capturing, and that you're earning your squad points by suppressing while stopping the enemy from disrupting the capture.

See, that's an example of a fine unique idea you get through brainstorming and discussion. I kinda like it, it would be a different approach to scoring, I can't think of many games that use it. For example, only the overall squad stats could be shown during round time, and in the end the best squad (or every squad ?) gets a detailed breakdown of their score and each man's contribution. It would really promote the team spirit I think.

 

[FlyingR]

It wouldn't be only capturing a flag, defending, destroying important assets like bridges and bunkers, building and HQ, etc.

If TW implements ranks and experience, what if the total score of the squad would be divided equally to every squad member, and that's how they get points/experience. Let's say the top Squad got 2000 points for capturing a flag, defending a flag, re-capturing a flag and destroy an important enemy asset. There's 8 guys in the squad let's suppose, so they each would gain 250 points (Of course if there's a squad member who is not helping out or running off, he should be kicked and wouldn't gain any points from that squad by the end of the round).

I mean, I really don't mind individual points, but I would prefer if it was team-based score only, but maybe if the individual players get points too, I think it would promote even more the team work since everybody wants their own points as well and players will do whatever to get them?

 

[mmiedzianyy]

Great idea Ani, i really really liked it when i read it for the first time Im sure that this will encourage team play, particurarly when only team is earning points.
But lots of players would miss traditional stats tracking.. Your suggestion is rewarding, but there is lack of.. distinction?
Individuals should be rewarded for their achievements like in real war.
Me personally, would love to see my personal stats and we shouldn't abandon the individual scoring idea. Maybe our effort should be multiplied by team score and then finally counted? I need something that shows my stats: team points, assists, kills..
But as we were discusing before, tracking only these basic statistics will never improve gameplay. And that's why your idea is sort of a breakthrough.

 

[Aniallator]

I guess we're in favor

While we're on the subject, I want to mention the scoreboard. In many games, the scoreboard is composed of...

1) Two lists of players, one for each team.
2) Players listed based on their point score.

I'd love to see a change in TW.

1) Two lists of squads, one for each team.
2) Squads listed based on their point score.
3) Players within squads listed alphabetically, not based on their point score.

Such a system puts more emphasis on squads, while listing players within squads alphabetically emphasizes that you and your squadmates aren't trying to compete for a better score.

Then there's scoreboard visibility. IMO we need two scoreboards; the one I mentioned, that isn't toggled but appears once the round's over, and one that shows two lists of players, one for each team, listing players alphabetically; no scores, just player names so you can see who's in the game and on what team (this scoreboard you can toggle in-game).

 

[FlyingR]

PR has a Squad score board, you switch it when you hold TAB, but it shows the individual score also within the squad total score.

What PR does is that when you kill someone, it wont show in the scoreboard for a while. So you don't know if you killed someone or not, therefore you don't bother checking that out.

My problem would be that making squad scores only won't make some squads do illegitimate things or play dirty so to speak to get top squad. I know it would be rare... but just wondering.

Maybe do a mix of WWIIO, PR, and BF2... in-game you would have squad performance and scores whereas out of the game like the profile in the game or profile in the website it would show all type of info... points, kills, deaths, K/D ratio, who you killed the most, who killed you the most, who has been your squad leader most of the time, most used/lest used weapons and all kind of stats.

 

[Aniallator]

Yeah, out of game you should be able to look up your stats as well as the stats of other players.