BG scoring

Comments

• SirGamesBond Member Posts: 5,373 ★★★★★

  May 22

  The rules are set. Same for you as well as your opponent.
  The KO bonus points are:
  2440 on first fight
  3028 on second fight.
  
  You got swizzoed.

  11
• PT_99 Member Posts: 4,836 ★★★★★

  May 22

  Your health is worth 15k points
  Enemy health is worth 30k points
  Time is worth 15k points.
  
  

  2
• Lokx Member Posts: 1,439 ★★★★

  May 22

  WhiteKnight said:

  
  
  
  In any other game mode, timing out is a loss... so how is it these guys win when they can't even get the defender down? Surely, getting the kill with decent ammount of health is better than timing out...
  
  Personally think there should be some KO bonus points or something

  I mean there is a KO bonuse. You got 30k points while your opponent only got 27. Secondly you need to think about it like this. If there was 1 min added to the timer. Your opponent would be able to defeat the opponent with more health remaining.

  5
• Unknown

  May 22 edited May 22

  This content has been removed.
• Unknown

  May 22

  This content has been removed.
• captain_rogers Member Posts: 10,149 ★★★★★

  May 22

  Well because you can almost nuke anyone in bg with herc at 1% health, while the opponent have to lose due to timeout despite having their attacker at 90%+ health

  1
• obsidiman Member Posts: 977 ★★★

  May 22

  I shot 7/10 from 2 point range in basketball and my opponent shot 5/10 from 3 point range, yet I lost. Shouldn't I get a bonus for having a better shooting % and get the win?

  6
• SummonerNR Member, Guardian Guardian › Posts: 13,181 Guardian

  May 22

  WhiteKnight said:

  
  ..so how is it these guys win when they can't even get the defender down?

  It's not that they COULDN'T beat your defender.
  It's that they would have needed just a little more time than the arbitrary time limit given.
  
  What if Time were limited to just 15 seconds.
  Whomever can do the most damage within that time.

  0
• xLunatiXx Member Posts: 1,442 ★★★★★

  May 22

  Joyfultiger56 said:

  Report the account and hope for the best.

  Nice alt account and troll

  2
• Unknown

  May 22

  This content has been removed.
• Unknown

  May 22

  This content has been removed.
• Skyfaw Member Posts: 205 ★★

  May 22

  Why do you expect to win when playing poorly? Don’t get hit and win next time.

  2
• Crys23 Member Posts: 844 ★★★★

  May 22

  I think time should get bumped up to 12k points. 2minutes, 120seconds. So I think 12k makes more sense than 10k.
  15k yes was too much, but 10k is not enough when compared to health

  1
• Unknown

  May 22

  This content has been removed.
• Skyfaw Member Posts: 205 ★★

  May 22

  WhiteKnight said:

  Skyfaw said:

  Why do you expect to win when playing poorly? Don’t get hit and win next time.

  In what world is killing the opponent playing bad? 🤣

  This world 🌎. How long you visiting stranger. You got a hit a bunch it’s not all about taking down the defender, finishing at a high health total is just as important.

  2
• Iamnike Member Posts: 273 ★★

  May 22

  I agree if you finish the fight and the other person doesnt you should win the round.

  2
• Unknown

  May 22

  This content has been removed.
• DNA3000 Member, Guardian Guardian › Posts: 19,844 Guardian

  May 22

  WhiteKnight said:

  In any other game mode, timing out is a loss... so how is it these guys win when they can't even get the defender down? Surely, getting the kill with decent ammount of health is better than timing out...

  I hashed this out with the devs long ago, with more or less the same perspective. The reason why scoring works the way it does is because the explicit intent is for BG to work differently than how content works elsewhere in the game, in order to allow BG metas to be more flexible. If it was all about killing the defender period, then that would place extremely high value on suicide burst attackers.
  
  But also, timing out is not actually always a "loss." Consider AQ. What's better: ending the fight at 50% health with the defender at 5% health and timing out, or ending the fight with 1% health and the defender dead? Actually, the former is better. You lose half health due to the time out penalty and will start again at 25% health with the defender at 5% health. That's almost certainly an easy win. On the other hand, killing the defender but being left with 1% health is almost certainly going to result in you dying in the very next fight unless you're Hercing an entire path. You stand a good chance or either losing that attacker, being forced to use a revive, or being forced to use health potions to heal them back up. The timeout situation is far better for the player overall.
  
  "Getting the kill with a decent amount of health" is a vague statement. We can't program the game servers to give you the win when you end the fight with a decent amount of health.

  3
• Unknown

  May 22

  This content has been removed.
• DNA3000 Member, Guardian Guardian › Posts: 19,844 Guardian

  May 23

  WhiteKnight said:

  DNA3000 said:

  WhiteKnight said:

  In any other game mode, timing out is a loss... so how is it these guys win when they can't even get the defender down? Surely, getting the kill with decent ammount of health is better than timing out...

  I hashed this out with the devs long ago, with more or less the same perspective. The reason why scoring works the way it does is because the explicit intent is for BG to work differently than how content works elsewhere in the game, in order to allow BG metas to be more flexible. If it was all about killing the defender period, then that would place extremely high value on suicide burst attackers.
  
  But also, timing out is not actually always a "loss." Consider AQ. What's better: ending the fight at 50% health with the defender at 5% health and timing out, or ending the fight with 1% health and the defender dead? Actually, the former is better. You lose half health due to the time out penalty and will start again at 25% health with the defender at 5% health. That's almost certainly an easy win. On the other hand, killing the defender but being left with 1% health is almost certainly going to result in you dying in the very next fight unless you're Hercing an entire path. You stand a good chance or either losing that attacker, being forced to use a revive, or being forced to use health potions to heal them back up. The timeout situation is far better for the player overall.
  
  "Getting the kill with a decent amount of health" is a vague statement. We can't program the game servers to give you the win when you end the fight with a decent amount of health.

  I see the whole keeping it different to other game modes etc but I feel the entire premise of drafting and facing off real people live does this; meaning the mechanic of getting the kill being most important doesn't need tampering with.
  
  And nothing needs to be programmed to give the win, simply adjust the scoring as was done with time, drop health down to 10k, or even 12k and time 12k, simply makes the 30k defender health the biggest factor and gives the win for being able to take down the defender rather than slow playing and chipping away their health slowly 🤷

  The devs feel differently.
  
  And to be fair, in this one specific regard the devs are not alone. There are just as many BG competitors that agree with the devs when it comes to scoring than disagree. When this was debated long ago on the CCP server, as far as I could tell there were equal numbers of players on both sides. But while there was disagreement about what was best, the vast overwhelming majority of players I''ve seen are willing to accept the scoring as is, and feel it is at least reasonable even if it would not be their first choice.
  
  When it comes to game design, that's no small accomplishment.

  1