Damage-based XP proposal

[KingJackaL]

Giving XP for 'Damage Given' rather than 'Kills' is just silly. Statwhores don't go and say "WOW, I GAVE 10,000 DAMAGE!" they say "WOW, I HAD 47 KILLS AND 13 DEATHS"

So kills should be rewarded because kills are what statwhores care about? Remind me again how this shows why I like the old system....

ON TOP OF THAT: giving damage, last time i checked, is not as important as getting a kill. If someone /kill's and robs you of your XP, HOW MUCH XP ARE YOU ACTUALLY LOSING? I could understand if you had a terrible shot, and gave the other "terrible shot" the time to /kill, its your own fault. Sorry pal, awarding XP for 'Near Kills' is codling noobies. If someone is gonna kill me, I want to make sure they earned it, not because they'd been inflicting damage the whole round, gathering XP so they could actually make a difference later on in the round.

Yes, that's a valid point. BUT, this doesn't mean the old system is right, the new system is wrong. This emphasises the need to balance the points correctly.


For example, the following systems could all be used:

3XP per kill, 0XP per HP DMG

2XP per kill, 1XP per 140 HP DMG

1XP per kill, 1XP per 70 HP DMG

0XP per kill, 1XP per 50 HP DMG


Note how there is more than 2 solutions - not just an 'old' and a 'new', and not just a 'kills only', and a 'damage only'. Bearing in mind that the exact #s above are examples only, consider what they represent. The first is the old system - what you appear to like. The last is what you appear to hate. The 3rd ( perhaps ) is what the new system could be.

....but I seriously doubt Bani has his mind made up ( or this thread wouldn't be here ). So debate away on where you feel the balance is - do you think ONLY the first example above makes any sense? Note that the second still rewards kills more than damage - but people doing lots of damage to enemy will still be rewarded for doing so...

[Lethal]

i think that a damage based system of experience is whack, a good idea in theory but as far as competition goes, not good, it gives the defensive team more of a chance to get their xp up faster, more xp for defense = more locks, ie: an artillery hits 3 guys and doesnt kill them1 medic comes around and finishes em off, field ops gets exp and medic gets exp, it gives the spam people complain about so much more power, maybe only 10 exp but if that 10 exp gets u 2 into f.o. spammage = a harder time for offense, offense needs the easier time, not the defense

[KingJackaL]

i think that a damage based system of experience is whack, a good idea in theory but as far as competition goes, not good, it gives the defensive team more of a chance to get their xp up faster, more xp for defense = more locks, ie: an artillery hits 3 guys and doesnt kill them1 medic comes around and finishes em off, field ops gets exp and medic gets exp, it gives the spam people complain about so much more power, maybe only 10 exp but if that 10 exp gets u 2 into f.o. spammage = a harder time for offense, offense needs the easier time, not the defense

Nah, you've got it wrong. The damage XP doesn't go ON TOP OF the current kills XP. They're balanced so that overall a similar amount of XP will be rewarded.

In your example:

The F-op gets a little bit of XP - LESS than if he'd killed them under the current system. However, I've gotta ask you - how often do you get hit by artillery and NOT DIE? Often? Wow, you're special... The medic gets a little bit of XP, but because the medic does very little DMG, the medic gets WAAAAAYYY less XP than under the current system.

Consider the system with 1XP/60HP and 1XP/kill. 3 allies charging in @ 120 health each, the F-Op does 100 damage on each ( HIGHLY UNLIKELY ), so he gets 5 XP. The medic then runs in and guns them all down, getting 3XP for kills, and 1XP for the damage. F-Op gets 5XP, Medic gets 4XP.

Now the old system: F-Op gets 0XP, Medic gets 9XP.

OMG HAX, THEY DON'T GET ANY MORE XP UNDER THE NEW SYSTEM. >_>


The changes would benifit OFFENSE, not DEFENSE, because it is the defense that always do the least dying. Don't believe me? Look at the Battle Sense imbalance, graphed over a few matches/a whole season of a tournament - defenders come out WAY on top.

[NewdeaL]

KingJackal said: "0XP per kill, 1XP per 50 HP DMG"



so I land 1 headshot, recive my XP even though my teammate shot him 4-5 more times?

REDICULOUS!

the point i was making with the reference to 'StatWhores' was that damage given is not a relevant OBJECTIVE. I don't shoot at enemies to GIVE DAMAGE, i shoot at enemies to MAKE THEM DEAD. Giving damage is just a part of that.

If someone leeches every single kill I SHOULD have had, that means i need to practice more. That is the only scenario where i would feel robbed of XP.

Think of it this way: Should i reward my dog for ALMOST making it outside before POOPING on the carpet?

bani: next time you decide to edit my posts, plz, do not mess with what i had to say, instead, change the word that you didnt agree with.

[bani]

here's another way to look at the situation.

if you heal a teammate for X hp, you get X medic skill points

if you hurt an enemy for X hp, why don't you get X light weapons skill points? only a 'kill' counts?

why does tossing ammopacks get you signals skill points? shouldnt only airstrikes and arty get you signals skill points then?

if you only think of skill points as "frags", then you might argue that only a 'kill' should count as weapons skill.

i just happen to disagree, and point out that it's completely inconsistent with the other skills in ET. this would bring weapons skill accounting into consistency with engineering, signals, and medic skills.

medic skill is roughly a measure of how much hp points you heal your teammates. only makes sense to bring weapons skill into line of how much hp points you hurt enemies. it makes it consistent and logical.

[O2.iceman]

Is the proposal consistent with engineering though?

Do you get engineering XP for building half a bridge or command-post?

Who gets the XP if 2 people are building something together?

Anyway I happen to agree with this proposal, it's just that the end of round screen should show DG/DR ratio instead of k/d

[bani]

If the couldn't do it the ol' fashioned way (and actually kill people) in the begining of the round, it should stand that they SHOULDN'T be awarded for it.

why are players rewarded XP points for healing teammate hp, but not rewarded XP points for hurting enemy hp?

to bring the medic skill system into line with your weapon skill system, medics should only get medic xp for revives, not for any medpacks.

which also begs the question, lt's should then get 0 signals xp for ammopacks?

[blaz]

Put it this way: Would you reward your dog for ALMOST making it outside before shitting on the floor?

BWHAHAHAHAHAHA :)

[bani]

Do you get engineering XP for building half a bridge or command-post?

yes you do, at least for the fueldump bridge

[bani]

Who gets the XP if 2 people are building something together?

well, who gets it now?

[O2.iceman]

That's what I'm asking..

If 2 engineers build a commandpost, who gets the engineering XP?

Do they halve it, or if one guy has built 90% and another guy comes along and gives it a tweak, who gets the XP?

I'm talking about NOW, and in yuor proposal.

[bani]

now, its whoever gets the last unit of engineering required to build the item, so its a tossup. it goes 100% to one or the other.

its possible to make engineering xp based on the amount of work required to build an item, at least for constructibles. so it could be split evenly between multiple players building something.

[KingJackaL]

That's what I'm asking..

If 2 engineers build a commandpost, who gets the engineering XP?

Do they halve it, or if one guy has built 90% and another guy comes along and gives it a tweak, who gets the XP?

I'm talking about NOW, and in yuor proposal.

Currently, the last tweak gets the XP. It's common to see an eng use his entire charge-bar on the Fuel Dump bridge (for example), then die. A friendly eng comes along, gives it the extra 20% or so (the bridge takes more than 1 charge-bar to build), and he gets all the XP.

Doesn't worry me in a game because I'd rather a teammate gets XP than the partially-built bridge section sits there, times out and dissappears. BUT, the point stays that the rewards there don't go to the engineer that did the most building work.


Good point with eng XP though - LW XP obviously isn't the only area where this applies.

[dA*Rogue]

Run this poll on the TWL forums, and take the result of that forum FIRST. the people who are posting here for the most part are "pro pub players" making desicions for the competitive community that they're not apart of.

Sorry to shatter your ego, but TWL isn't the only ET competition in the world.

Giving XP for 'Damage Given' rather than 'Kills' is just silly. Statwhores don't go and say "WOW, I GAVE 10,000 DAMAGE!" they say "WOW, I HAD 47 KILLS AND 13 DEATHS"

I thought this was about what was best for the competitive community (as YOU stated) - not 'statwhores'.

so I land 1 headshot, recive my XP even though my teammate shot him 4-5 more times? REDICULOUS!

That's how it is now - your teammate can shoot an enemy 4-5 times, then you can land a last headshot and get ALL the XP. Good to see you think the current system is REDICULOUS(sic)!

Lmao.

[gotenks]

sorry misread at first (jumped to p3 to vote) i say this wouldn't be bad, but will it be optional... i think this would be better than the /kill nerfing