Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Server Stats Suggestion:
Please read this entirely without /flaming me. I am being constructive and the new system I describe below should be easy to implement and effective. The current system fails, everyone knows it, so if nothing else we should at least ‘try’ to attempt a new formula.
I say it’d be a well designed system if everyone got the same amount of ppk (depending on weapon modifier. Essentially meaning the ppk equation = 1 and the weapon modifiers control the ppk(points per kill). Let me elaborate why this ‘should’ work better than our current equation.
If player uses this gun he always gets x amount of points would make sense. The current formula that calculates points is terrible. If people get 2 – 5 points a kill (based on weapon), 10 or so points per hostage rescue/bomb plant, and 3-5 per win then it would make sense. This way if your doing well and getting a lot of kills your score goes up. If your sucking, dying a lot, your score goes down but can still be augmented by the fact that you plants bombs or rescue hostages and the possiblity of your team winning.
(Objectives would be encouraged with this system in a more efficient way than the current system. It doesn’t currently because objectives are *edited* compared to killing someone for 20-25 points).
I don’t see why we can’t ‘try it’ for a semester. It isn’t going to cause anymore *edited*ing than we already have.
The new system does need to be implemented ‘only’ after a stats reset.
A formula based on your score vs. another players score would work ‘if’ everyone on the server was a regular. It doesn’t work because we have huge numbers of new players on a daily basis. The stats can never be accurate because there isn’t a consistent player base to base it on. Simply making it so nubs don’t get points til 100 kills also doesn’t solve the problem because they can still take 10-25 points from anyone with a high number of points once they get 100 kills.
With the new system a player knows why they are progressing, have a positive K:D ratio and/or win/complete objectives. With the current system the rank, to an extent, depends on the luck of whether or not you kill a high ranked player or are killed by someone well below you. This leaves the player unsatisfied and frustrated because they can’t choose who they kill or who they are killed by (to an extent the last part, everyone dies, and this system still shows who is the best player). Luck should not be ‘the deciding factor’ in our ranking system. (Obviously there are those that rarely ever die but this won’t affect them anyways, they still get the rank they deserve)
Basically the stats should be based on your K:D ratio, objective completions, wins, and what weapon you use. Without a consistent player base, using a formula based on the ranks is inaccurate and as has been seen, frustrating for many people.
Trying something ‘new’ shouldn’t really be a big deal! Lets go for it and see what happens!
CS:S stats changes. (Got some pretty good ideas)
Freeplay LAN Party sometime?
mm… also:
If all the executives die, what do we do?
joking obviously about the last one.
Falcon said:
mmkay… perhaps we add in an extra bit to the equation to scale the points per kill by the weapon modifier within 2-5 points or something? still if we forget scaling per weapon the awp’s will take off. also, we should leave flashbang and smoke grenade kills at a well-earned amount, say 30+ ppkIf we make the base equation per kill = 1 then all we have to do is adjust weapon modifiers. AWP could still be controlled. It is a very simple equation, try not to make it more complicated than it should be ^^.
I don’t think anything should be worth more than 10 points. If most weapons are 2-5 then grenades at 10 would be double the highest weapon. That is more than enough! Gotta keep knife / grenade in check because of SK and Grenade rounds.
Please read this entirely without /flaming me. I am being constructive and the new system I describe below should be easy to implement and effective. The current system fails, everyone knows it, so if nothing else we should at least ‘try’ to attempt a new formula.
I still say it’d be a completely accurate system if everyone got the same amount of points.
If player uses this gun he gets this many points, always. If player uses this gun he always gets x amount of points. The formula that calculates points is terrible. If people get 2 -5 points a kill (based on weapon), 10 or so points per hostage rescue/bomb plant, and 3-5 per win then it would make sense. This way if your doing well and getting a lot of kills your score goes up. If your sucking, dying a lot, your score goes down but can still be augmented by the fact that you plants bombs or rescue hostages and the possiblity of your team winning.
(Objectives would be encouraged with this system in a more efficient way than the current system. It doesn’t currently because objectives are crap compared to killing someone for 20-25 points).
I don’t see why we can’t ‘try it’ for a semester. It isn’t going to cause anymore *edited*ing than we already have.
The new system does need to be implemented ‘only’ after a stats reset.
A formula based on your score vs. another players score would work ‘if’ everyone on the server was a regular. It doesn’t work because we have huge numbers of new players on a daily basis. The stats can never be accurate because there isn’t a consistent player base to base it on. Simply making it so nubs don’t get points til 100 kills also doesn’t solve the problem because they can still take 10-25 points from anyone with a high number of points once they get 100 kills.
With the new system a player knows why they are progressing, have a positive K:D ratio and/or win/complete objectives. With the current system the rank, to an extent, depends on the luck of whether or not you kill a high ranked player or are killed by someone well below you. This leaves the player unsatisfied and frustrated because they can’t choose who they kill or who they are killed by (to an extent the last part, everyone dies, and this system still shows who is the best player). Luck should not be ‘the deciding factor’ in our ranking system. (Obviously there are those that rarely ever die but this won’t affect them anyways, they still get the rank they deserve)
Basically the stats should be based on your K:D ratio, objective completions, wins, and what weapon you use. Without a consistent player base using a formula based on the ranks is inaccurate and as has been seen, frustrating for many people.
Trying something ‘new’ shouldn’t really be a big deal! Lets go for it and see what happens!
30 minutes losing 200 – 300 points
5 hours to get it back (or lose more)
The system is terrible and a good argument has also been made as to why the system sucks.
It can be improved upon. Some people are just too lazy to do it.
Kappa Decay and Kappamerc (kappamerc is on my old account that my friend uses so until i get him back im stuck with low levels.
Hopefully the point system will be revamped by next semester. /shrug
No system will be fair but the current system could be improved upon.
At this point I don’t care anymore but I figured I’d post this in regards to people saying he is easy to kill. If he really is that easy I would imagine more than 2 people would have a positive score against him.
I also don’t give 2 *edited*s what we do about awps. My post was slightly more centered towards the server players attitude towards blgx.2.
I was merely pointing out that a lot of players on the opposing team from him were complaining and quitting the server. It was annoying because people were asking the admin to do something when there was nothing legit admin could do. The fact that flakes and brian can kill him easily says nothing in way of what most of the server population can do. You guys act like I’m saying ban him.
It was the majority concensus that people weren’t having fun on the server that particular night.
Hell look at the stats on what players hes killed vs whose killed him:
The two people that have clearly killed him are,
Brian 4/14
Prince Chantz 8/15
The people that have probably wanted to shoot themselves in the face are: Killed by/Killed Him
Rook 33/6
Seph 18/13
Webstar 16/2
Kappamerc 14/5
Untouchable 11/3
Spartan 10/7
Ducksauce 10/1
Davey-T 10/1
Bracket 9/0
Jim Jones 9/1
Gravy Neck 8/0
Patient Zero 8/0
Nicanico 8/0
(Clemson) Enough 7/1
Whatup 7/0
The rest below this are negative compared to him but numbers are too low to really say anything about it.
There aren’t many that have bested him. A match a person played against CoSu says nothing about our pub players and their ability. Again, I’m not mad because hes good, I’m frustrated because people on the server wanted something done and there was nothing freeman, seph, or I could do. Therefore, I figured I’d bring it up here. I’d rather not get smartass remarks everytime I post something. At least once it’d be nice to get something constructive that lacks the smartass line.
As far as I’m concerned I don’t care if anything is done. I was posting to recieve legitimate feedback on what other players thought based on the fact that many pubbers were getting frustrated and leaving due to his ability with an awp. Instead I get flamed for /*edited*ing?
meh..
bunnies and wabbits
I have no problem with the awp. What I have a problem with is pro cs:s player coming into our pub for 10 hours causing anyone on the opposing team to have a terrible gaming experience. I know thats how I and several others felt last night when Cosu bLg was playing. He would have an AWP by the third round and just about keep it the entire game. I generally have no problem with an awp as I can smoke, flash, etc… but there are those out there that can use the weapon to take out entire teams. /shrug, dunno what i’d have done but I do know that it sucks when pro’s play on our server simply to own everyone. Its a pub and I don’t enjoy being someone’s practice dummy.
Beyond the above scenario, the awp is fine w/ me. Me, freeman, and seph wanted to shoot ourselves last night though. Pro AWP whoring ftl.
I love cake and babies. Got any orange juice? Happy people wear penguins.
Yeah.. I hate when one team has 5 awps, opposing team rushes in, opposing team is almost wiped out. It is really hard to avoid being shot by more than 2 awps lol.
Kuros said:
And then you caught AIDS and diabeetus?On a scale of 1 to 10 do my posts make sense?
1 – Your a friggen idiot
2 – Your full of fail and AIDS
3 – You fail
4 – Who are you?
5 – No one cares
6 – Tickle Me Emo
7 – No
8 – Maybe
9 – Yes
10 – I am pregnant w/ kappamercs baby.
This is a study brought to you by the lots of retarded posts corporation… please feel free to respond.
nickname said:
This really has nothing to do with this game, but has anyone here played STALKER? it looks cool but I haven’t had the money to dish out on it yet; this is only relevant because it’s another new FPS.Stalker is a great great game. The atmosphere and balistics are awesome. Shooting takes a bit to get control of and most of the people you encounter in the begining are vets/experts while your a rookie (basically) so it takes a lot to kill them. Later on when you get better weapons and armor they die much easier. The best tactic is to shoot them in the head (they all wear body armor and have a life bar that lasts as long as yours). This does mean they can shoot you in the head and you almost die but that is a very rare occasion and if your quick enough to pop a first aid you won’t have any problems.
Ultimately it is a great experience. It isn’t as gut wrenching as Doom 3 (or Fear depending on your personality) and really does a good job of giving a good ratio of the weird moments and the normal (blow up military guys) action. I would say it is worth a buy but be aware that there are issues with people not being able to play the game due to some weird bugs (as usual I guess).
If you ever have a question about a new game feel free to pm me, I pretty much stay on top of everything that is new or up and coming to the gaming world.
If you don’t have the money you could always ‘borrow’ it to ‘make sure’ you like it
.Kuros said:
It’s snowing in Cullowhee, and it’s quite cold. This sucks major *edited*.*edited* you say?
MasterP said:
Teamspeak’s voice quality is higher than Ventrilo when the admin’s set the server up correctly.Ventrilo uses GSM 6 and 11. Teamspeak uses CLEP 5 and 7, GSM 14 and 16, and Speex 3, 5, 7, 9, 12, 16, 20, and 25. Each of those represent Kbit/sec baudrate.
If Ventrilo was still free I’d say use it but it can’t do anything that Teamspeak can’t.
First I will say that I understand that we are using TS because it is free.
Ventrilo can do a lot that Teamspeak can’t. Anything that Teamspeak and Ventrilo have in common, vent generally has a better application of its use. Vent is also updated more often. (TS3 should be out some day… it was due at the end of 2k6, that could potentially have many great options)
Ventrilo codecs are only limited by the person in control of the server. It is not only GSM 6 and 11.
Any claim that TS or Vent has better codecs is incorrect based on the above information. They can have the same codecs. It has been my experience, using the same codecs on both applications, that ventrillo still has superior quality of sound.
Between its ease of use, simple and efficient gui, TTS, customization of sound, surround sound positioning, and ability to control just about every aspect of voice; Ventrilo is simply my prefered application. My favorite option is its superior control of incoming sound. Often times when using TS I find myself frustrated because I cannot get the other users sound adjusted properly. This is by far the biggest problem I have with TS because it really does affect gameplay when you don’t have enough control over how loud your friends are
.Also, remember that both applications codecs are only limited by the server on which they are hosted. I’ve seen vent hosts with Speex (32KHz, 16 bit, 10 Qlty) 5520 bytes/second. So please stop saying that one can use these codecs over the other; these comments are simply not true.
I may setup a vent starting this summer, just depends on the money flow.
Kuros said:
The voice quality is much better than any in-game system. We can also make admin channels so that our admins can use teamspeak for admin chat. Also, a lot of WoW players may want to get their friends together and be able to use voice com thru Team Speak. There are a lot of great applications for this if we can get people to use it.Ventrillo has much better quality than TS. I’ve used both extensively and for all purposes vent has always been the better choice in any gaming situation
. Is there a reason why were using TS and not Vent?Kuros said:
When I catch who’s editing my posts there is going to be a ban.I was gonna make a april fools post about me having cancer but thought it would be in bad taste sooo..
April Fools? x_X
Falcon said:
think day of defeat with a lot more classes, you can’t pick up someone else’s gun to trade classes, and there’s only 1 flag / team. plus you normally have to run through all sorts of bases to get to that flag.at least that’s what i learned last night
Do not compare TF to DoD x_X. That insults TF
.Classes, especially in TF2 are well defined and balanced. You’ve got an engineer that can build sentry guns and teleporters. A spy who can cloak for about 10 seconds as well as put on the suit of an opposing player. A medic who has a ghostbuster style healing gun and a syringe launcher. Plus an amazing 60’s spy theme with a freeze frame on death mugshot of your killer (they may be adding an option to have video replay of your death instead of just a freeze shot). Also, on top of point control there is going to be territorial control maps too. This is different in that it pushes players to different parts of a large map, defending, attacking, or neutral ground depending on whose taken the territory. Lots and lots of cool things to look forward to.
Falcon said:
eh, I don’t mind them waiting on meI played it last night and I didn’t find the map to be extremely big. At first it was a little overwhelming but after I got adjusted it is pretty simple. However, anything less than 12 people would suck on that map.
Kuros said:
bump, post valid topics please.I was thinking about what happens when officers leave the club or graduate and nobody is really sufficient to take on their previous role. During this thought I wanted to ask if we had anything in place to insure that someone down the line could take a graduating club officers place.
(In other words do we have backups in case someone leaves the club?)
I’ve seen systems work in other organizations. If we do already have some kind of policy for this then great
. If not then it is at least worth discussion.
