Assists on scoreboard

[FRANK LAMPART]

It would be great if the scoreboard would show how many assists someone has so at least a support jedi/sith has something to brag about. I'm aware that a previous version showed assists on the scoreboard and I don't know the reason as to why it's been removed. I think this would be a great way to encourage team work as well.

 

[Cat Lady]

While I agree with showing assist on scoreboard wholeheartedly, I don't think it need any changes as for *when* to assign assist. It just takes into account damage-dealers in some time frame, and gives assist to the non-killing person who did most of the damage. Anything more could trap us in very strange chain of "dependencies".

 

[Gumba]

If you used force powers to CC the enemy before he dies, you always get the assist anyways.

 

[M@crobyte]

Great idea.

 

[Vitéz]

I have another opinion about the scoreboard. IMO neither the K/D ratio, nor the Assists points should be visible on the scoreboard at all. This is an objective based game mode, and showing the K/D/A units only encourages players to abandon their attacker/defender job, just to get better stat. I'm sure all of you is familiar with the situation, when the last defender runs away from the objective, just to preserve his/her own K/D ratio, or when the hacking process is interrupted by the team, just to let somebody else to kill the last defender. IMO there should be 3 units visible in Open, FA and SA mode:
- Objectives: This should be redesigned to give points to all living players in the team... for the attacker team, 10 points should be given if they win the match, and 3 points should be given if any secondary objective is done. For the defender team: 3 points should be given if they survive the first 3 minutes, another 2 points should be given if they survive the first 4 minutes, and 10 points should be given if they beat the attacker team. This should be the primary unit.
- Damage: Its what it says: how much dmg did a player do to the enemies... TK-ing would be negative double damage (so doing 1 dmg to an enemy'd be +1 points, but doing 1 dmg to a team mate would be -2 points).
- Knockdowns: You may realize it or not, knockdowns are very important parts of MBII, so I think it should be visible how many knockdowns happened... however I'm not sure it'd be a better idea to show how many knockdowns did a player do against others, or how many knockdowns did the player suffer...
Probably the classic K/D ratio should be visible on the Duel mode scoreboard, since that isnt an objective based game mode, and the K/D ratio is the most and only important unit there.

 

[Liniyka_xddd]

I have another opinion about the scoreboard. IMO neither the K/D ratio, nor the Assists points should be visible on the scoreboard at all. This is an objective based game mode, and showing the K/D/A units only encourages players to abandon their attacker/defender job, just to get better stat..

Wow, don't you think that's a bit... too much? I believe you are making the objective look more important than it really is. I mean, the objective is there to simply direct the player's attention and effort, and to give attacking team an option to end the round without hunting down every single enemy. But the main joy of this mod is still fighting. Getting those sick snipes, blowing up half of the enemy team with a nade, frying 3 solds to death with a lightning, etc, etc. What you want to do is like removing the k/d ratio from counter-strike. Sure, objective is very important in cs. But in the end, people play to shoot (and brag about their k/d), not to plant bombs.

 

[Vitéz]

With the very same logic, the objectives could be simply removed from the mod (because "players dont want to plant bombs"), and the spawn points could be changed to create more dynamic fights ingame. So basically we could say the objectives are holding back the players ingame. Thats not true. This mod is a Siege-TFFA hybrid, not TFFA. Thats why I suggested an idea where the Siege attributes (objectives) are just as important factors on the scoreboard like TFFA attributes (K/D/A). Nowdays if the attacker team does the objective, only 1 person gets points. Thats ridiculous, its a team effort, because its a team based game mode.
On the other hand, IMO the damage and the knockdown attributes are better represents the actual performance of the players, than kill and assist. For example if a gunner nearly kills another gunner, but the target runs away, but getting killed by another gunner 20s later, the 1st gunner doesnt get any reward, but basically he/she did the hard work. And its not a rare situation ingame. Damage and knockdown are permanent, and doesnt depend on others like the kill and assist (these cannot be "stolen" by a last hit or by a knockdown), so they represents the player's prerformance much better.
Edit: But I doubt this idea is worth to be implemented into the mod at all, because it wont change the attitude of a lot of players, who clearly dont care about the objectives, and at their worst: start to call "noob" those players who do care about the objectives.

 

[Liniyka_xddd]

On the other hand, IMO the damage and the knockdown attributes are better represents the actual performance of the players, than kill and assist. For example if a gunner nearly kills another gunner, but the target runs away, but getting killed by another gunner 20s later, the 1st gunner doesnt get any reward, but basically he/she did the hard work. And its not a rare situation ingame. Damage and knockdown are permanent, and doesnt depend on others like the kill and assist (these cannot be "stolen" by a last hit or by a knockdown), so they represents the player's prerformance much better.
Edit: But I doubt this idea is worth to be implemented into the mod at all, because it wont change the attitude of a lot of players, who clearly dont care about the objectives, and at their worst: start to call "noob" those players who do care about the objectives.

Hmm, I actually agree with you on that one. Implementing that would be awesome, although I don't think it's gonna happen either.

 

[M@crobyte]

I have another opinion about the scoreboard. IMO neither the K/D ratio, nor the Assists points should be visible on the scoreboard at all. This is an objective based game mode, and showing the K/D/A units only encourages players to abandon their attacker/defender job, just to get better stat.

No. This isn't overwatch. Even if you remove it from the board, if someone is going to be greedy and try to get a kill, they will regardless of the amount of points they see on the scoreboard. This is a definition of what we would call catering to casual play. Hiding stats so people don't feel bad about bad gameplay. K/D actually helps determine the skill level of the enemy team and if certain players are considered dangerous or not. If someone is going 13/2 and there's only been 4 rounds played, I might be inclined to take him out first so he doesn't kill the rest of my team.

 

[Jeob]

I'm sure all of you is familiar with the situation, when the last defender runs away from the objective, just to preserve his/her own K/D ratio.

You missed the more annoying situation, when the last ATTACKER runs away/doesn't go to the enemy and we have to wait until time is up. At least when it's the defender, the round will end quickly thanks to the objective.

I always check kill/round first, and I don't really care about how much deaths the player have. I think kill/round tells the most about how dangerous someone is, having low death count in a long set usually means that they never risk it at low health/like to hide behind the team, but yes sometimes it means that they are indestructable monsters. In addition we have to take teams balance into account when judging by K/D. Like 13/2 K/D is something I sometimes reached as nadewhore ET in a stacked imp team, but in 20 rounds or more. Also my experience is that generally I get the same ratio of kill/round as both reb and imp (imp is slightly better cause DOTF), but my K/D is generally way better as imps, mainly due to them being the defender team (DOTF). Moreover I don't think there's much difference between 2 guys who have 20/4 and 20/10 in 10 rounds, especially if the 20/10 guy is in the attacker(/or loser) team, then I would even say that he's the better player.

Damage dealt would be a good indicator of player performance, arguably better than K/D.

 

[Vitéz]

Again, I dont want to remove the offensive performance unit from the scoreboard, I suggested an alternate solution to replace the Kill and Assist units with the Damage and Knockdown units. These give much more accurate information about the attacking performance of the players. Maybe the Knockdown unit could be further improve to also count Sonic, Fire and Pulse Grenades and Ion blob hits.
Its a common mistake by a lot of players that they dont "fear" against those who doesnt have 12/3 stat... maybe that player is a support (Jedi/Sith) who does more damage gameplay-wise to your team by not killing than any other player who do... but we can say this player is a Gunner with a secondary Frag Grenade, or with any other grenade type but TD... or a Clonetrooper with a blob.
About the "removing Death unit isnt wise" stuff... I agree. However the stat itself is totally inaccurate (in 2 rounds, 2+1 Soldier kills is +1 Kill, but 2+1 Soldier dies is +0 Death point; and the losing living defender players dont get +1 Death point) and even if it'd be fixed, it'd be still inaccurate gameplay-wise (getting +1 Death point by getting killed while protecting the objective is not the same as getting +1 Death point while the defender player is ambushing the attacker team, completly ignoring the objective, and maybe losing the match). So IMO it still requires some tweaking, and TBH a Time counter could give more information about the player.
Short version: IMO the current K/D(/A) system is totally inaccurate, and doesnt represent neither the offensive, nor the defensive performance of the players, thats why I suggested something else, what is obviously isnt perfect, and could use some tweaking. And of course there's the thing with the points for doing objectives, but I dont want to write the same thing about that again.

@Jeob
I wanted to say with the quoted part, that if the said last defender could also get +1 Death point by losing the round via objective, that'd be a reason to *not* run away, but try to win the match to the *team*. Thats something what could be changed, but we cant do anything about those attackers who abandon their job.

 

[M@crobyte]

Support stats don't matter if you fail to kill your opponent. You can get 100 knockdowns and only get 5 kills from it. Just because you knock someone down doesn't mean your team is necessarily going to kill the enemy either. Same goes for damage stat. You can have thousands of damage points but fail to remove the enemy from the picture. The current K/D system may not say much about defensive performance, but it speaks volumes to offensive regardless of whether they are kill stealing or not. I think the OP had a great to expand on the current system without having to completely change the scoreboard. Just replace "score" with assist.

 

[Vitéz]

You're wrong.

For example if a gunner nearly kills another gunner, but the target runs away, but getting killed by another gunner 20s later, the 1st gunner doesnt get any reward, but basically he/she did the hard work

DotF, Main Corridor. A Hero shoots a Mandalorian with Proj. Rifle, leaving the mando with ~10 HP and 10 shield, the mando runs away, and somebody else shoots the mando once a minute later, the mando only camped inside the throne room and absolutely didnt do anything because of the low HP. The player who did the last hit gets the kill, while the Hero gets nothing. How is this show the offensive performance? And its just the most visible situation when we're talking about 90% dmg what is not rewarded, there are a lot other, when there's less damage... for example when more than 2 players kill 1 target... 1 gets the kill, 1 gets the assisst, and the rest gets nothing. K/D ratio only represents who did the last hit, and who did the hit before OR the last knockdown. Unless we're talking about Duel mode, this doesnt represent the offensive performance at all.
The scoreboard is about to show the performance of the players. If a Jedi does 100 knockdowns, it should be acknowledged, regardless the team can kill the target or not. A knockdown can actually save team mates, prevent interruptions at hacking, etc. It wouldnt affect neither the score, nor the damage units, nor the place of the players in the ranking. Yet I think its a very important part of the game mode what is worth to acknowledged. The idea to replace score with assist is "silly". It means you'd like to remove the only unit what somehow affected by objective points. In a Siege-TFFA hybrid game mode... at this point I think this conversation is pointless

 

[M@crobyte]

You're wrong.

DotF, Main Corridor. A Hero shoots a Mandalorian with Proj. Rifle, leaving the mando with ~10 HP and 10 shield, the mando runs away, and somebody else shoots the mando once a minute later, the mando only camped inside the throne room and absolutely didnt do anything because of the low HP. The player who did the last hit gets the kill, while the Hero gets nothing. How is this show the offensive performance? And its just the most visible situation when we're talking about 90% dmg what is not rewarded, there are a lot other, when there's less damage... for example when more than 2 players kill 1 target... 1 gets the kill, 1 gets the assisst, and the rest gets nothing. K/D ratio only represents who did the last hit, and who did the hit before OR the last knockdown. Unless we're talking about Duel mode, this doesnt represent the offensive performance at all.
The scoreboard is about to show the performance of the players. If a Jedi does 100 knockdowns, it should be acknowledged, regardless the team can kill the target or not. A knockdown can actually save team mates, prevent interruptions at hacking, etc. It wouldnt affect neither the score, nor the damage units, nor the place of the players in the ranking. Yet I think its a very important part of the game mode what is worth to acknowledged. The idea to replace score with assist is "silly". It means you'd like to remove the only unit what somehow affected by objective points. In a Siege-TFFA hybrid game mode... at this point I think this conversation is pointless

If you didn't want to discuss it and thought it was pointless, you shouldn't of brought it up in the first place or bother replying. This is a forum after all. So, let's use your example with a twist.

Mando gets sniped and now has 10 hp/10 shield. Mando flies around through generator room, through hangar, and to main corridor. No one mentioned he was flanking. Why? Because communication is rare among most players (speaking from experience). That "weak" mando could have a ee-3 sniper or a rocket. Regardless, he's behind you and is going to get free kills or he's going to make you all turn around which is going to give people in the left corridor and T a free kill. So who was more effective? The sniper who got him down to 10 hp, or the mando who got behind your team and is now flanking you?

Both are hypothetical situations, but the one who is more dangerous is the one who gets the kill, not the one who "almost" did. In your situation, you are under assumption that the mando is going to camp the throne room. People who understand how this class works knows they can get above, and behind enemies much faster than any other class.

This support point system that you are suggesting is full of flaws and provides less important info than the current scoreboard. Instead of re-writing a new scoreboard, just build upon what is already there. And if we were to take a poll about who many people care that they have 1000 score versus 0 points, I am willing to bet that the majority of the community doesn't care as it doesn't provide any useful information. The person with the most kills is more than likely going to have the highest score anyway. MB2 can be played as an objective based game or as elimination.

 

[Vitéz]

I said the conversation is pointless, because you basically dont care about the things I say, you quote one sentance (an example) from my text, and start to analyze it, totally unnecessarily. I said Damage and Knockdown are better units to present offensive performance. I said some examples, why is the current system unfair. Let me quote an example: "when more than 2 players kill 1 target... 1 gets the kill, 1 gets the assisst, and the rest gets nothing". Since we're talking about a team based game mode, we can say this happens quite rarely. You say my examples are "hypothetical situations". They are not. I simply cant say anything else about this.
"People who understand how this class works knows they can get above, and behind enemies much faster than any other class. " People who can hear the working jetpack's sound effects can know the position of the mando without any experience or map knowledge, making an ambush like you said quite ineffective, especially with 10 HP and 10 shield. If you say the knockdowns is not an important factor in MBII, and it doesnt represent somehow the offensive capabilities of a player, then I think you dont know what are you talking about (maybe never used Push or Frag Grenade?). And if we'd take a poll about what the community wants, everything would be nerfed into hell, because its always others fault if somebody is a bad player... and we'd have like 6 different saber systems from the past 1 year.
And no, MBII cant be played as either an objective based or elimination based game. Best example: Jedi Temple FA. Almost all Jedi goes to kill the clones (elimination based game) and simply lose the game, because the Assassin Clone does the objective. You have to play it as *both* Siege and TFFA... thats a huge difference. Thats why I suggested to upgrade the scoreboard to show the points from objectives as well, also give points for offensive progress and for successful defensive as well. But - just to show how everybody acknowledge that MBII isnt TFFA - this part of my text was fully ignored by everyone.

 

[M@crobyte]

Let me quote an example: "when more than 2 players kill 1 target... 1 gets the kill, 1 gets the assisst, and the rest gets nothing".

Just because its not a stat on the scoreboard doesn't mean the team doesn't benefit from that enemy no longer being a threat. They don't need an irrelevant score to show they contributed. They will know if they did, and so will their team members around them.

People who can hear the working jetpack's sound effects can know the position of the mando without any experience or map knowledge, making an ambush like you said quite ineffective, especially with 10 HP and 10 shield.

If we are using the dotf map as an example, you can't hear a mando coming from hangar in main (unless someone was waiting with the door open, which never happens unless you are already expecting a flank). The mando isn't going to fly into the main corridor without checking to see if someone is in "unknown" first. And unless you are playing with someone who is using a voice chat and/or your team actually does decide to call off the enemy flanking you, you aren't going to know until its too late. All the members in my clan can easily get kills regardless of their hp and they will gladly exploit the thought of "oh he's got low hp so he's not a threat."

If you say the knockdowns is not an important factor in MBII

Where did I ever say this? I said it doesn't need to be a stat on the scoreboard. I play as a double nading ET and jedi/sith. I know all about knockdowns and their importance. And, unless a dev says otherwise, they aren't tracking this as a stat in MBII. Which means they would have to come up with a script to track this information. So, why waste time creating a new script to track information that doesn't even matter instead of using what is already available on the scoreboard?

And no, MBII cant be played as either an objective based or elimination based game. Best example: Jedi Temple FA. Almost all Jedi goes to kill the clones (elimination based game) and simply lose the game, because the Assassin Clone does the objective. You have to play it as *both* Siege and TFFA... thats a huge difference.

Maybe you are not quite understanding the difference between an objective and elimination based gameplay so I'll explain:

Objective based - Means there is one more or points in which a team must hack/destroy/hold to win.
Elimination based - Means winning by killing the enemy team.

Considering you can do either to win the round means MBII is both objective and elimination based. You don't HAVE to play as either or. That's what makes MBII great. Jedi temple is no exception and this is my favorite map to play on both sides. Cin Drallig just murders the enemy team with his bh movement speed and force speed.

Have a screenshot of 30 round match in Jedi Temple (not 1.4):

You may be one of the people that assume that just cause Flinch was added, it means gunners can automatically win against a team full of saberist. Don't forget the fact that people still have to aim and be able to hit the enemy for it to work. Winning rounds depends on the skill of the players on each team and this is still being proven today even in 1.4.

 

[Vitéz]

Spoiler

With the very same logic, the player statistics shouldnt be visible on the scoreboard. The only thing what matters in MBII is that which team wins the round, so player statistics are irrelevant. And irrelevant statistics shouldnt be visible. K/D/A can be used to determine who are the better players, you said that. Couldnt Damage and Knockdowns be used for this as well? I still believe that Damage is a better unit than Kill, and Knockdown is better than Assist. There's nothing bad about having a different opinion, but just because I have a different opinion, why should it be wrong? I mean it'd have the exactly same reason as the current K/D/A system. Of course we can say the the K/D/A system already exist, so it doesnt need coding and stuffs like that, but we're talking about an idea, right? Nothing more... at least this is what I believe.

If you're in the hangar, you can hear everything what happens in the imp spawn, what is the way of our poor mando in this scene. If a mando flees from the imp side of the main corridor, goes into the imp spawn, side corridor, gen, hangar, and reaches the reb side of the main corridor undetected, I think we can say the rebs are kinda... "careless". And I think thats the kindest word I can say about this reb team. And dont be mistaken, I never said our 10 HP 10 shield mando is not a threat, its capable to kill anyone, but supposing nearly equal players, its kinda likely that the mando will get shot once. That 1 shot is enough to kill the mando, getting a full kill. While the Hero, who did the 90 HP and 90 shield dmg gets nothing. Thats why I think it'd be a better idea to use the Damage unit: to reward all player who inflicted damage to a target. Of course the one who kills can still get points to the Score (or to the Objective) unit, just like it works nowdays.

This support point system that you are suggesting is full of flaws and provides less important info than the current scoreboard.

You're right, you didnt said its not important, you said less important. Sorry. And again: I thought its clear, but I'm just discussing an idea, and the only the idea itself, not the possible work behind it, because neither me, nor you wont create that code/script/etc., so it'd be "silly" for us to argue about this.

About the game modes: thats what I said in my previous post. Let me quote it: "you have to play it as *both* Siege and TFFA." You said before this: "MB2 can be played as an objective based game or as elimination.". Maybe its a fault of my translating abilities, but I believed that you said "either...or". And I'm pretty sure I didnt said it with any word that "either...or", I said "both". So I dont understand your point here, but I guess it was a simply translate error. And I absolutely dont understand how your stat on JT goes to this conversation, but... okay... gz to your stat... I guess.

And about the "flinch" and "gunners can automatically win against Jedi" part is totally not understandable for me. I did not talk about this at all. I brought up JT as an example, because it has a great objective, and I said that a careless defender team can be easily beaten by a simple attacker, so the "play MB either Siege or TFFA" stuff isnt valid, we have to play it "both Siege and TFFA", not "either...or".

 

[M@crobyte]

There's nothing bad about having a different opinion

Nope. Nothing wrong with that. I think we've discussed everything that needs to be said regarding this topic.

 

[AgentGibbs]

2 assists = 1 kill again problem solved.

ps. knockdowns = an assist so there's your stat for that, as for the damage instead of kills idea that's just dumb imo because I agree with macro an opponent that is alive no matter the hp is still a danger I can't count how many times I have seen someone on the server have <10 hp and kill 5-6 people winning the round which means that tanked sniper shot earlier means nothing to your team which is what your proposition is to me (to try to keep track of how much you help your team).

 

[Derek Jeter]

2 assists = 1 kill again problem solved.