Ranking Suggestion

[NomNom]

I've noticed that there's a big skill difference between a lot of the lvl 60s in the game...
Technically it only takes about 2 weeks of regular playing to reach lvl 60 which is not that much imo. I think it would be very useful for the sake of team balance and as a motive for people to play more if you were to introduce higher ranks.
There should definitely be a different rank when you hit 200k/500k/a million xp etc... No extra perks are necessary, just a seperate rank would be enough to motivate a lot of players and you could seperate the big skill difference between the people who have just reached lvl 60 to people who are already playing for several months.
Hopefully something like this wouldn't be too difficult to implement.

As a side note, I've noticed that no matter how long I play there are certain moments during a hectic battle or while flying next to a teamate with the exact same plane as you that you lose track of which plane is yours and end up crashing into a wall .
I think it would be very useful if you have a certain indicator on your plane like a star or maybe something customizable that seperates you from the others. Of course it would be optimal if only you can see this, you don't want to see everyone else's customized planes all over the place .
I don't know how difficult this would be to implement but I'm hoping something of the sort will be possible in the future.

[michael]

Originally Posted by NomNom

As a side note, I've noticed that no matter how long I play there are certain moments during a hectic battle or while flying next to a teamate with the exact same plane as you that you lose track of which plane is yours and end up crashing into a wall .

Done that before.

Originally Posted by NomNom

I think it would be very useful if you have a certain indicator on your plane like a star or maybe something customizable that seperates you from the others.

I think the three bars above your plane do this quite well. And yet i still find myself running into walls thinking i'm someone else...

[Triped]

Originally Posted by NomNom

I've noticed that there's a big skill difference between a lot of the lvl 60s in the game...
Technically it only takes about 2 weeks of regular playing to reach lvl 60 which is not that much imo. I think it would be very useful for the sake of team balance and as a motive for people to play more if you were to introduce higher ranks.

Don't out me.

[Valarauka]

Hmm. Simply adding more ranks or other indicators for huge XP pileups would still suffer the same problem, that is, not distinguishing whether that was accumulated from skilful play or just longevity.

What could be really cool, I think, is tracking XP / minutes played - that would give a much better idea of relative skill and also not be biased against newcomers who show a lot of talent...

As for the side-note, yeah, that happens to me too. I've found myself wishing for a highlighted outline or something around my plane...

[lamster]

We have some ideas for higher ranks, should be getting around to it in the not too distant future.

We'll also experiment with an (optional) outline around your plane (kind of like the Miranda's afterburn-chargeup halo) to help you identify your plane.

[nesnl]

Originally Posted by lamster

We have some ideas for higher ranks, should be getting around to it in the not too distant future.

We'll also experiment with an (optional) outline around your plane (kind of like the Miranda's afterburn-chargeup halo) to help you identify your plane.

Can you also give us the option of going back to the old Display system with the 3 bars in the lower right hand corner for the speed, energy, health and the small box that shows your powerup?

[lamster]

Yeah I've been meaning to add UI options for a while

[Beagle]

Yeah, any system that only ranks you on your accumulated XP is going to result in this at the max level. Raising the cap just delays the inevitable.

It would be nice to see a seperate system for 'ranking' to 'level' - because Level is important for the delayed introduction of perks anyway. Have a new ranking system like you see in a lot of online games where it only lasts for a certain month, or depreciates over time so your skill is always represented honestly and up to date. Instead of just representing it as the bare score/numbers earned, you could also have honorific titles (for example Ace to Rookie or something), which you could optionally display on your name maybe. Gives incentive to be the high rank so you can show it off. Have a special rank for the current #1 player for everyone to fight over, etc.

Also, I wouldn't want to see a huge amount of 'avatarization' of planes, would get a bit gaudy, but maybe you could display a custom decal on your aircraft? I'd love to display the classic shark mouth on the front of my Biplane...

[NomNom]

Yea of course raising the cap just delays the inevitable but to reach the current cap takes about 2 weeks. If it would be at 2 million xp for ex. it would take lets say a year so you could tell the difference between a guy who's been playing for 2 weeks and a long time player.
Also having a higher rank doesn't necessarily mean you're better but at the same time you know that on average a guy who has 2 mil xp would most likely be better than someone who has 200k xp or w/e.

Another thing I like about raising the cap is there are so many lvl 60s out there and in Altitude you can change your nick at will so a lot of times you're not sure if you're being owned by some new player or it's just an old school player under one of his many nicks. With a higher cap you know that the player has been around for a while and if you don't recognize his name then it's just one of the old schoolers under a dif name and at the same time their privacy is still kept.

[Shyney]

Originally Posted by NomNom

Yea of course raising the cap just delays the inevitable but to reach the current cap takes about 2 weeks. If it would be at 2 million xp for ex. it would take lets say a year so you could tell the difference between a guy who's been playing for 2 weeks and a long time player.
Also having a higher rank doesn't necessarily mean you're better but at the same time you know that on average a guy who has 2 mil xp would most likely be better than someone who has 200k xp or w/e.

Another thing I like about raising the cap is there are so many lvl 60s out there and in Altitude you can change your nick at will so a lot of times you're not sure if you're being owned by some new player or it's just an old school player under one of his many nicks. With a higher cap you know that the player has been around for a while and if you don't recognize his name then it's just one of the old schoolers under a dif name and at the same time their privacy is still kept.

I was actually thinking about a system to do this! A way to encourage players to keep playing, strive for new goals, give them challenges, and separate the players who just play a lot, from the ones who are actually good, and from the ones who are REALLY good.. without screwing the current system(too level 60, for perks).

So the regular system would stay(to level 60) and then we would have new(and simple) performance/Achievement based levels, that are much "tougher" to attain.

The idea is you get the extra levels, by achieving set out goals, and it would be hard to get all of them you would HAVE, to be a very good, well rounded player. And you could also "lose" levels, should someone try whore levels/not keep thier game up.

The extra levels would be for the following,: Total Xp, K/d Ratio(by plane), Kills(per plane), and Xpph(XP-per hour).

So you would get +1 level for (total of 5 possible levels)
100,000 Xp +1
250,000 Xp +1
500,000 Xp +1
750,000 Xp +1
1,000,000 Xp +1
While this isnt exactly performance based, it takes a considerable amount of play(experience) to get all(unless your Maimer )

Having a k/d ratio of 2.0 or greater(above 2500 kills to count)
Biplane +1
Loopy +1
Miranda +1
Explodet +1
Bomber +1
Having all 5 combined, an extra +1 to your level
Again, a player may get some, or (if they are REALLY good) all 5 possible levels, and the bonus for having all 5.

Having 5000+ kills
Biplane +1
Loopy +1
Miranda +1
Explodet +1
Bomber +1
Having 5000+ kills with all planes, an extra +1
This one "could" also just be about how much you play, but to get all the levels, it would FORCE a player to play with all the planes to get good with them(Achievement based). Rather then being a one trick pony(Caped ).

Xp per hour, +1 for each
2000 xpph +1
2500 xpph +1
3000 xpph +1
3500 xpph +1
4000 xpph +1
This is good to see how active a player is, how much they contribute to the games they play in.. And you can lose the levels, if you dont keep your play up, or if you try and ratio whore for the k/d levels, you would likely damage and never top out the xpph levels. And is entirely performance based, not matter how much you play.

This is a total of 22 levels available to achieve based on performance/experience with the game, and leaves 3 levels open for something else(some crazy stat perhaps, ie Ferrets 78-1 deserves a level of its own ) Someone would need to come up with ideas for the last 3 levels(or more if you have them). And these levels are based on the stats that are already kept, and wouldnt need to screw anything up(current 60 level perk system)

This should also do a VERY good job of separating someone who plays a ton, from someone who is "one hell of a player!" A player who just plays a ton, would likely only get +11 or so levels(for xp, and for kills), where as someone who is a dominant player could "possibly" get all of them. And there should be a very big difference between someone who is level 60, someone who is level 70, and someone who makes level 85!!(83 as i have it). And it gives the vets a challange and something to shoot for. You could expect a level 80+ player to dominate a server, where as now a 60 means very little.

As an example "I" would be level 72. +2 for 500,000 xp, +3 for 2.0 k/d ratio for 3 planes, +2 for 5000 kills with 2 planes, and +5 for 4000 xpph. I've been around quite a while, and am a pretty decent player, and i'd still only be half way through the possible levels, which still gives me room to grow..

Thoughts?

[NomNom]

It's a nice system but it doesn't promote teamplay. Getting a 2.0 k/d ratio will make a lot of players stay back and camp, 4000 xp per hour will be as easy as going to one of those 20+ player servers and just spam with the bomber all day.
It's just deceiving stats that could be easily achieved by whoring whatever it is you're trying to get without much regard to your team.
Stats can never give a clear reflection of the player, I've learned that from BF2. Awards and achievements are just there to keep your average idiot Joe playing, which is good I guess but something as simple as making the ranks higher would be just as effective.

[porpus]

Originally Posted by Beagle

Yeah, any system that only ranks you on your accumulated XP is going to result in this at the max level. Raising the cap just delays the inevitable.

It would be nice to see a seperate system for 'ranking' to 'level' - because Level is important for the delayed introduction of perks anyway. Have a new ranking system like you see in a lot of online games where it only lasts for a certain month, or depreciates over time so your skill is always represented honestly and up to date. Instead of just representing it as the bare score/numbers earned, you could also have honorific titles (for example Ace to Rookie or something), which you could optionally display on your name maybe. Gives incentive to be the high rank so you can show it off. Have a special rank for the current #1 player for everyone to fight over, etc.

Also, I wouldn't want to see a huge amount of 'avatarization' of planes, would get a bit gaudy, but maybe you could display a custom decal on your aircraft? I'd love to display the classic shark mouth on the front of my Biplane...

I like this idea. No matter how complicated you make the leveling, people will eventually max it out and it will become meaningless.

Something simply like top 5 players for the week/month/year in a couple categories (xp, k/d ratio with min kills, team games won, etc.) would make for more interesting ongoing competition. Along with that list I think players would like to see how they stand even if their outside. For example, the stats screen could show the top 5 in a category and your listing of 67th out of 300. Everyone loves competition.

[Shyney]

Originally Posted by NomNom

It's a nice system but it doesn't promote teamplay. Getting a 2.0 k/d ratio will make a lot of players stay back and camp, 4000 xp per hour will be as easy as going to one of those 20+ player servers and just spam with the bomber all day.
It's just deceiving stats that could be easily achieved by whoring whatever it is you're trying to get without much regard to your team.
Stats can never give a clear reflection of the player, I've learned that from BF2. Awards and achievements are just there to keep your average idiot Joe playing, which is good I guess but something as simple as making the ranks higher would be just as effective.

Curious, Your original posts in this thread brought up clear issues you wanted to see addressed.

You wanted a way to tell a difference between someone whos played a couple weeks and a year. And the level system should reflect that accurately.

"Yea of course raising the cap just delays the inevitable but to reach the current cap takes about 2 weeks. If it would be at 2 million xp for ex. it would take lets say a year so you could tell the difference between a guy who's been playing for 2 weeks and a long time player.
Also having a higher rank doesn't necessarily mean you're better but at the same time you know that on average a guy who has 2 mil xp would most likely be better than someone who has 200k xp or w/e."

You wanted a way to a player to be able to change thier name while maintaining their level, so we could tell the player is good.

"Another thing I like about raising the cap is there are so many lvl 60s out there and in Altitude you can change your nick at will so a lot of times you're not sure if you're being owned by some new player or it's just an old school player under one of his many nicks. With a higher cap you know that the player has been around for a while and if you don't recognize his name then it's just one of the old schoolers under a dif name and at the same time their privacy is still kept."


You wanted to leave the current system intact, no extra perks, just rank, and give players motivation, things to aim for, again to help separate skill difference.

There should definitely be a different rank when you hit 200k/500k/a million xp etc... No extra perks are necessary, just a separate rank would be enough to motivate a lot of players and you could separate the big skill difference

Im pretty sure the system i suggested accurately met all the requirements you yourself set out point for point(you made no mention of team play etc...) Why is it not good enough for your own idea of what you wanted?

Also yes, someone could ratio whore, however, they cannot do that without compromising their xpph. You'll never see gamegaurd(sorry ) around 3500xp per hour... or if they do go around just spamming for kills, their xpph will plummet unless, they are very good players and can do both at the same time(sustain a good kd/ratio with any thing they fly, and still be a huge part of every game), I could see ferret, blank, snow doing that... which is what the system would differentiate, those who "could" do that, and those who cant(do one or the other).

Just making ranks higher, dosnt challenge anyone to do ANYTHING, they'll have no reason to learn another plane, or to do anything other then ratio whore, or do anything to actually "get in the game".. How is simply increasing the level cap going to be a better differentiator of the skill of level 60 players then the system i suggest??

[ryebone]

I only have 69 in shyney's system, so I don't like it.

[argonide]

I don't think stats are always meaningless or hopelessly flawed, its just that you would have to put more work, tuning and complexity into it to get better results.

For instance one way to discern who is good and who is noob farming would be to give everyone a rating similar to chess, kills of higher rated players would be counted as more significant than kills against lower-rated players.

[NomNom]

Originally Posted by Shyney

Curious, Your original posts in this thread brought up clear issues you wanted to see addressed.

You wanted a way to tell a difference between someone whos played a couple weeks and a year. And the level system should reflect that accurately.

"Yea of course raising the cap just delays the inevitable but to reach the current cap takes about 2 weeks. If it would be at 2 million xp for ex. it would take lets say a year so you could tell the difference between a guy who's been playing for 2 weeks and a long time player.
Also having a higher rank doesn't necessarily mean you're better but at the same time you know that on average a guy who has 2 mil xp would most likely be better than someone who has 200k xp or w/e."

You wanted a way to a player to be able to change thier name while maintaining their level, so we could tell the player is good.

"Another thing I like about raising the cap is there are so many lvl 60s out there and in Altitude you can change your nick at will so a lot of times you're not sure if you're being owned by some new player or it's just an old school player under one of his many nicks. With a higher cap you know that the player has been around for a while and if you don't recognize his name then it's just one of the old schoolers under a dif name and at the same time their privacy is still kept."


You wanted to leave the current system intact, no extra perks, just rank, and give players motivation, things to aim for, again to help separate skill difference.

There should definitely be a different rank when you hit 200k/500k/a million xp etc... No extra perks are necessary, just a separate rank would be enough to motivate a lot of players and you could separate the big skill difference

Im pretty sure the system i suggested accurately met all the requirements you yourself set out point for point(you made no mention of team play etc...) Why is it not good enough for your own idea of what you wanted?

Also yes, someone could ratio whore, however, they cannot do that without compromising their xpph. You'll never see gamegaurd(sorry ) around 3500xp per hour... or if they do go around just spamming for kills, their xpph will plummet unless, they are very good players and can do both at the same time(sustain a good kd/ratio with any thing they fly, and still be a huge part of every game), I could see ferret, blank, snow doing that... which is what the system would differentiate, those who "could" do that, and those who cant(do one or the other).

Just making ranks higher, dosnt challenge anyone to do ANYTHING, they'll have no reason to learn another plane, or to do anything other then ratio whore, or do anything to actually "get in the game".. How is simply increasing the level cap going to be a better differentiator of the skill of level 60 players then the system i suggest??

The reason I was suggesting to make higher ranks was to discern between someone who has been playing for 2 weeks and someone who has been playing for several months or longer and at the same time you have something to aim for. I didn't suggest it as a "challenge". If you want a challenge play against people better than you, no need for some stupid goals that require whoring and selfishness to pad your ego.
Knowing that someone has been playing for a while is enough for me to assume that they're at least decent.

[Shyney]

Originally Posted by NomNom

The reason I was suggesting to make higher ranks was to discern between someone who has been playing for 2 weeks and someone who has been playing for several months or longer and at the same time you have something to aim for. I didn't suggest it as a "challenge". If you want a challenge play against people better than you, no need for some stupid goals that require whoring and selfishness to pad your ego.
Knowing that someone has been playing for a while is enough for me to assume that they're at least decent.

Hey, dont get me wrong, i totally get what you are trying to say! "But" there is a tremendous difference between the level 60 players, and just "how long" someone has played really isnt all that good at determining whether or not a player is "decent". A system that could separate players out to higher levels would certainly be beneficial, especially if we ever get some sort of matching, or skill balancing system in effect on the servers.

[NomNom]

Originally Posted by Shyney

Hey, dont get me wrong, i totally get what you are trying to say! "But" there is a tremendous difference between the level 60 players, and just "how long" someone has played really isnt all that good at determining whether or not a player is "decent". A system that could separate players out to higher levels would certainly be beneficial, especially if we ever get some sort of matching, or skill balancing system in effect on the servers.

With the way altitude tracks stats all I need is a couple of days in a private server with novice bots to reach all your ranking requirements. Even your single player xp/kills count towards your stats so besides my other points, your system is also very easily abused.

[gameguard]

hey now, I do have ~3000 per hour haha. It would be higher if I counted out my noob days. But I do get your point. Ferret and snow are pretty much on another level. Only played with blank once so I wouldnt know about him.


oh and about your system.. I think its just overly complicated. It would be more sensical to just have some sort of ranking system for the week or soemthing (based on k/d, expph, etc etc). The rank can be displayed on the scoreboard next to your name or soemthing.

[DiogenesDog]

I really dislike using xp per hour. Here's why:

- Screws over excellent players that had a slow start - once you've logged a lot of hours with low xpph, you're pretty much never going to make that up.

- Screws over people who observe games a lot

- It gives the most benefit to the good-but-suicidal. More conservative players get screwed.

- Players that are extremely valuable at bomb running but not great at dogfighting get screwed.


Basically, I think it makes sense to only award challenges that you can make positive progress on. Anything based on an all time average (kill ratio, xpph, etc.) just seems like a bad idea to me.

[DevilsAdvocat]

yeah, i tend to focus on... well being a d*ck with time anchor, killing their bomber, catching bombs, and bombing... i dont really think that there is anyway for my stats to be anything but terrible and id like to think i am past the terrible stage

[tyr]

I totally agree with that. Plus it's really easy to screw your xpph by just playing alone on a map with lots of neutral turrets.

[gameguard]

The thing is its so hard to determine a good player statistically. No matter what you set as the criteria, it can be abusable or could be misrepresented. If you count base damage, someone can go to an empty server and bomb the **** outa the bases. If you count kd, you can kill a bunch of bots. If you limit it to players, you can go noob stomp. Also, some people just like to screw around once in a while. XPph can be messed up by abusing custom maps or just idling around.

I guess there is no real clearcut solution. Anyways, its pretty obvious to people who play regularly, who the good players are. So ehh.

[jeppew]

it would be awesome if the players would balance teams themselves.
but considering that many unbalance them on purpose i doubt that will happen.
i doubt you can find a solution that isn't abusable or creatres more problems.

[NomNom]

Yup this is why I just wanted to keep it simple, cause the stats are meaningless for the most part. Just need higher ranks to seperate from the plethora of new lvl 60s out there.

[Valarauka]

Hmm, yeah, I can see the problem with the "standard" stats like xpph or kdr. However, I don't think player quality is inherently not quantifiable, it's just those are the wrong things to measure it with.

How about some TBD-specific stats? I'm thinking stuff like:
* Bombing XP per number of bombs picked up ("Offense Rating")
* Number of bomb carrier kills + defusals + bomb blocks per life ("Defense Rating")
You guys could probably come up with some other useful stuff.

These could be supplemented by the regular xpph / kdr stats (because those aren't entirely meaningless either), and I think they'd allow for a more complete picture of player quality. Also, shouldn't be too hard to fix the problems people are mentioning:
* Track stats by server rather than globally (or have unified stat-tracking, but only across official servers - probably the preferred option) - server-side stats means no gaming the system by playing with bots, etc.
* Either have time-weighted averages so that older games play less of a role, or a simple moving average based on the last X games or weeks/months of play - this way the stats should always be a reasonably accurate picture of current player quality; slow-start players won't be penalized forever.
* And, of course, only track these stats in TBD games, so FFA records don't screw things up.

[yankeeboy]

im gonna be the first to say i love Shyney's lvl system.

All the problems ppl have with it r about specific stats, n how some ppl will be bad at some stats b/c thats the type of player they r. but thats OK. there's a reason y there r a few categories. some ppl will do well in some, n bad in sum. there r sum players who will do well in all of them, those r the best players in the game, thus they deserve to be ranked highest. If a player cant do well in any of these than clearly they dont deserve to be ranked very high.

For the last 3 lvls, i do 1 of 2 things (or both n make it go to 28 more lvls)

BASE HITS PER BOMB EQUIPPED
**making these numbers up**
1/10 +1
1/5 +1
1/3 +1


TOTAL BASE HITS
**making numbers up**
500 hits +1
1000 hits +1
1500 hits +1


then again idk if these states r in the database at all, n idk how partial hits should be counted.

I think there is a prob with xpph b/c its hard to tell how accurate it is. i have altitude up all the time, n i end up playin 1 life every 5 mins. n on community maps with **** load of turrets for free xp or that r huge n not possible to get xp on.

This idea should be worked n i think this lvl system will give a good idea of who the best players r

[NomNom]

Originally Posted by yankeeboy

im gonna be the first to say i love Shyney's lvl system.

All the problems ppl have with it r about specific stats, n how some ppl will be bad at some stats b/c thats the type of player they r. but thats OK. there's a reason y there r a few categories. some ppl will do well in some, n bad in sum. there r sum players who will do well in all of them, those r the best players in the game, thus they deserve to be ranked highest. If a player cant do well in any of these than clearly they dont deserve to be ranked very high.

For the last 3 lvls, i do 1 of 2 things (or both n make it go to 28 more lvls)

BASE HITS PER BOMB EQUIPPED
**making these numbers up**
1/10 +1
1/5 +1
1/3 +1


TOTAL BASE HITS
**making numbers up**
500 hits +1
1000 hits +1
1500 hits +1


then again idk if these states r in the database at all, n idk how partial hits should be counted.

I think there is a prob with xpph b/c its hard to tell how accurate it is. i have altitude up all the time, n i end up playin 1 life every 5 mins. n on community maps with **** load of turrets for free xp or that r huge n not possible to get xp on.

This idea should be worked n i think this lvl system will give a good idea of who the best players r

Did you read all the posts?

[yankeeboy]

i read from Shyney's post on

[as red as black]

BCS system

problem solved

/thread

[Shyney]

Originally Posted by yankeeboy

im gonna be the first to say i love Shyney's lvl system.

All the problems ppl have with it r about specific stats, n how some ppl will be bad at some stats b/c thats the type of player they r. but thats OK. there's a reason y there r a few categories. some ppl will do well in some, n bad in sum. there r sum players who will do well in all of them, those r the best players in the game, thus they deserve to be ranked highest. If a player cant do well in any of these than clearly they dont deserve to be ranked very high.

I think there is a prob with xpph b/c its hard to tell how accurate it is. i have altitude up all the time, n i end up playin 1 life every 5 mins. n on community maps with **** load of turrets for free xp or that r huge n not possible to get xp on.

This idea should be worked n i think this lvl system will give a good idea of who the best players r

Yeah, I guess I wasnt all that surprised that "everyone" came up with a reason how the system was bad because it effected them negatively... As if gamegaurd is the only person to have been playing a long time, and was a noob at one point. Or to have idled in a game.. But that was the point, its supposed to be that way.. People arent supposed to rank high, thats whats separates the average players, from the good ones. I also wouldnt be surprised if peoples dislike of the system I proposed was directly proportional to their lack of rank on it.... Its funny how that works sometimes.

Like, how hard would it be to make it so the xpph hour and k/d only count in tbd/ffa games(no bogus maps), and not against bots, or on spectator time?? Like come on.. Hard to implement?? the stat system is already in place!! Thats what its there for..

Granted my programing skills top out at q-basic and grade 11 pascal, so i dont have a ****ing clue. but, I cant imagine the "idea" behind it is anymore difficult then
if k/d ratio > 2.0, then level +1
if loopy kills > 5000 then level +1
etc..
Yes, i know the actual programing/implementation is more difficult then that, im just trying to make a point here

I dont see why would couldnt make the last few levels bombing related to round out the field.

Sure some will try and abuse the system, But its not hard to see how to cut that down.. If someone wants to hang back and ratio whore to improve their k/d ratio, their xpph will tank significantly! and they'll lose that level. And they wont be doing any bombing. If someone only plays ffas to try and improve thier xpph(i dont know if that works im just assuming), then their k/d ratio will drop like a stone. It works both ways. Unless you ARE a really good player and can do both, as i've already mentioned..

Dio, you mentioned the system effects the players that are more conservative, and those that arent good at fighting. That was exactly the point. People who only play "one way" can only rank so high. You could only get so many levels just playing a ton, or just playing with 1 plane. etc.. you'd have to be a very good, AND very well rounded player to score high on this system.

[Blank]

I haven't read a single post in this thread.

[Shyney]

Originally Posted by Blank

I haven't read a single post in this thread.

Liar [;]

Now apparently i need 10 random characters to complete this message.

[Karl]

how the pros do it:
http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/projects/trueskill/

it's something we want to do we just need the time to do it and the player base.

[DiogenesDog]

shyney, let me put it this way: blank, pillars, snowsickle, and ferret would all fail to max out their level under your system, and most of those guys have styles targeted towards the type of play you want to reward. that is pretty damn retarded.

[Shyney]

Originally Posted by DiogenesDog

shyney, let me put it this way: blank, pillars, snowsickle, and ferret would all fail to max out their level under your system, and most of those guys have styles targeted towards the type of play you want to reward. that is pretty damn retarded.

Curious! I dont see why not. Why couldnt they max out that system? because of xpph?? Im not so sure about that.

We(you, me, blank, coke, ferret, snow etc). All played tons of hours when beta was just released, and there were only a handful of players that knew about the game let alone played it. It would have been a miracle if we had a full server(or servers full of newbs like we have today), so i get that its biased against us older players, who started off having no one to play with, and much much harder competition! Trust me i get that, but from what ive seen, it will eventually even out as play time increases.

This is why i dont believe that, heres my example. a couple of months ago, my total xp was 250,000, and xpph was around 3000, today, my total xp is 500,000, and my xpph is 4000. My xpph went up 1000 from a month before the game was released, to a month after. So it can/does change pretty quickly. Doubling my xp brought mine way up. Yeah, we started off with a disadvantage, but i dont believe that over the next 2-3 months, it wont even out to a proper level. Because every time they play, it will continue to increase until a more accurate level is reached. I dont believe for a second the previously mentioned players could not max that system.. Its just a matter of time. We could of course adjust the xpph cap down. But i dont think it will need it, if anything in 6 moths, we would probably have to increase the xpph cap for those very same players.

[DiogenesDog]

meh. no one yet has a k/d ratio above 2.0 with every plane, only one person has over a million xp, I doubt anyone has 5k kills with a plane... I mean, a lot of this is just tuning, so it's silly of me to gripe about the specific numbers, but if you're going to do something stat-based, it'd be nice to at least try to reward good bomb carriers for instance.

but more importantly, I just don't like how easy it is to dig a hole for yourself with this system. if I play for a couple years and suck for a long time, then get good enough to have a 2.5 kill ratio, it's going to be a few more YEARS before I can get the 2.0 k/d ratio bonuses. that's kind of bogus considering that that person's skill level is well above the goal level. what makes more sense to me is having achievements that either are a one-way spout (total xp acquired, etc.), that require single impressive feats (get a 3.0 kill ratio AND most deadly in a game), or both (get the 3.0 k/d + most deadly in 5 games). then you have more of a chance of rewarding someone for their _current_ skill level instead of going by ancient history.

also, I think more people would enjoy the grind of going through the levels again than would want to go for those achievements. even if we had some kind of award system for stuff like this, I think there's a lot of value in a cod4 style prestige system where you can just go back through and play through the levels.

[nesnl]

Originally Posted by DiogenesDog

5k kills with a plane...

I am close to 20K on three separate planes.

But honestly, in response to this whole thread: we need to unite as one. I am glad everyone is coming up with ideas for different things that they want in the game, but the reality is that this is an indie game with limited programming time. All I see are different posts of things people want in the game, but I think a unified player base that overwhelming supported one idea would definitely show lam/karl what exactly it is that we would like to see in the game next.

As for me I would much rather see more game modes. Specifically I would like to see Team Deathmatch. If it meant that I would have to wait another 6 months for a more detailed ranking system, etc, then so be it. I think we need to set our priority here and go with it.

[nobodyhome]

i think that in terms of priorities for this game, more gamemodes (team deathmatch seems to be pretty easy to implement, as well as highly demanded) is up there on the list. next i would say is more powerups/perks. then followed by some fixing up of some of the imbalanced or boring red perks (the bombs bomber is kinda lame, bomber in general needs some balancing, remote mines is good but boring, and dogfighter needs tweaking for it to have a defined role)

[DiogenesDog]

you are no human, maimer.

but yeah, I don't think the ranking thing is a big deal. honestly, it's hard to set priorities without knowing the time it would take to do stuff. some crazy ranking stuff seems like it would take a lot of work, but some really simple things that would be fairly easy to add (basically in order that I think it should be added):

- team deathmatch
- CoD4 style prestige mode
- more challenges / advanced challenges
- more powerups
- more blue/green perks
- Planeball


Stuff I'd love to see but that's more complicated:
- animated textures in maps
- moving polys in maps
- new map special features: teleporters, maybe boost arrows, whatever else people can think of
- another plane (which isn't as crazy as it sounds... programming-wise I think this is quite easy, and the art time for it isn't super out of control compared to making a new map for instance)
- more single player content