Points for Grens destroying armor plates

Why make it that complicated? X amount of damage = 1 point is simple and understandable.

 

Considering the gren starts with what? 3 rockets? So 250 damage seems fair.

 

Gren will have more ammoz in the next version...also a better RPG. On reflection, it may be better to discuss this later due to the fact that you may actually be able to catch fleeing tanks ^,^

 

The suggestion isn't limited to tanks actually and I personally would go with high damage numbers... like 400 damage on infantry and 500+ on tanks but yeah, keeping my fingers crossed for the next update.

 

Tanks go slower?

 

Demented:
No. RPG goes faster.

 

Dash my hopes why don't you.

 

Then there's the balance of "RPG Sniping". IMHO, the RPG should do a max of 70 damage on direct-impact, simply because it's not an infantry weapon (SEE: Ra, Ra2, Ra2:YR, Generals, Generals ZH; tanks do minuscule damage to inf). However, that discussion is for another time/place.

SnowDrakE;
500 damage on tanks for a point is too much. Unless, of course, it is cumulative like the engineer's building is (hop from building2building, building). Don't include a point for damaging infantry, as that will only promote misuse and idiocy.

 

Yeah, it's culmulative. And I said I wanted relatively high numbers due to preventing "misuse and idiocy".

Point farming should be more or less void if you need to do the equivalent of killing 4 people to gain 1 point for inflicted damage. But it will still give you a tiny assist bonus.

Same goes for tanks. If it's a large number, it's not going to change the current balance much, which is why this should be painless to integrate. If it works out good, the numbers may be tweaked later on.

 

Point farming is not a problem in Empires, because point farming is extremely boring. At the worst, people would point farm to get 40 points faster. If point farming were a serious problem in Empires, you would see more of it right now, because there are some really easy ways to do it currently.

 

So your argument now is that points are irrelevant? Why did you propose this in the first place?

Considering that I've won my fair share of games by myself with no help from anyone else, I'm pretty sure teamwork does NOT pay the bills in empires. Anyway, you're not going to win this argument by referring back to teamwork - if I'm in a squad, it doesn't matter who gets the kill, everyone gets rewarded for it. This change to the points won't encourage or discourage teamwork, it's just going to make people who like to minmax do stupid shit to squeeze a few points in here and there (like how the scout uses binocs to spot stuff that is going to die anyway to score a free point).

My argument isn't based on any human behavior, my argument is based on the fact that the points system should simply be an incentive for players to do what they should be doing anyway. This modification doesn't add anything, and in fact, it creates circumstances where the player is rewarded for things he should not be doing.

Flasche. Seriously. If you ever want to have another peaceful game with me on your team again, you need to STFU.

 

No, his argument is that people won't give up the game for points.

 

No it doesnt. It rewards players for shooting at tanks even though they won't get the kill. That is a good thing, and this is what you are unable to concede, because tanks with little armor left will be killed by someone else or run home to repair (a good thing for your team). If there's someone stupid enough to use this to whore points, instead of something better that already exists, he won't be capable of achieving much for you anyway and is probably scout 90% of the time.

Why would you jeopardize winning the game to whore points that go away when you lose? It makes no sense, no one will do it, calm down.

 

So you've commed, built all the buildings, took all of your team's refs, destroyed all of the enemy's buildings, got all of your team's kills, and killed the enemy CV by yourself? I find that hard to believe.

You may have been the most important player on your team doing most of the work, but that doesn't mean teamwork wasn't involved. If nothing else, your teammates provided cannon fodder to distract the enemy while you demolished their base/comm.

Also, do any scouts actually bother binoc spotting stuff before its gonna die to get points? It can certainly happen in theory, but I've never done it (because its a waste of my time and boring) and never seen any other scouts do it. This just reinforces the point that people don't play to point-whore, so giving points by damage won't cause any problems.

 

I used to whore points with the binocs, but I don' tplay scout anymore since the SMG2 sucks balls.

 

No... shooting at a tank without the intent of killing it is really stupid and that's exactly what this is rewarding. I'm starting to sound like a broken record, but the point system is a calculus which rewards people for doing things that they should be doing anyway. People shouldn't be randomly shooting at whatever tank happens across their screen at the moment, they should be vicious and vehement killers, never relenting, focusing on one tank until it or they are dead. A dead tank is a thousand times more useful to your team than a damaged one that got away. A lone engineer can fully repair a tank that has only taken plate damage in a matter of seconds. It takes longer for the gren to load up at an ammo box than it takes for an engineer to repair a tank to full health.

You keep talking like I'm somehow suggesting that people would go out of their way to whore points. This isn't at all what I'm suggesting. I'm saying that this would affect a player's decision-making process in small ways. Much in the same way that, from the game's perspective and independent of score, a scout that pulls his binoculars out to score points just before a building dies is wasting his time, as is an engineer who builds comm placed walls randomly just to get the points, or an engineer that decons a tank just to get the build points for it. This is the kind of thing that people do all the time merely because they want points. None of them see it as a "I'm doing this at the expense of our team's success" action, but that's exactly what it is. Because the act seems so minor they can justify it without a second thought, but let me tell you this kind of thing adds up very quickly, especially if you comm a lot and see how much people procrastinate all the time. Your proposed change would just add another one of these scenarios where the point system fails to provide people with the proper incentives to do things to progress gameplay, and additionally, it does absolutely nothing to enhance it. It's just a 'feel good' change without any real substance.

I reiterate: the gren is broken and needs to be fixed. Fucking with the point system is not the way to go about it.

Yes, I've had plenty of games where I was the comm and I basically did everything - building, killing, etc included. I may as well have had nobody on my team... at least nobody doesn't feed the other team points.

When I play scout, I farm points with the binocs. A lot of the other people I know do it too. I do anything I can to maximize points. A 40 point scout is way better than a 0 point scout. Anyway, glad to see you just totally ignored the crux of that paragraph and picked away at the crumbs.

 

If you're shooting at an enemy tank without your main intention being to blow it up I don't know what game you're playing. If you don't kill the enemy tank it will kill you.

2 points !> Your Life

Please, stop talking pickled, you're like chris, but without the saving grace of being correct most of the time. So you go from 'Correct asshole' to just 'asshole'

Add it to your sig if you want, hooray you're an asshole. Have a fucking medal.

 

Too much goddamn chestbeating in this thread.

Why the hell would people stop killing things all of a sudden when they get points via damage compared to killing?

A: "Look a tank!"
B: "Yay lets shoot it for points!"
A: "Don't forget to only shoot it once so we can ABUSE THE SYSTEM!!"
A + B: "HURRRRR!"

Don't make me point fingers. Activate brain first. Type later.

 

Pickled, this system isn't to encourage (and won't enc.) shooting tanks without the intent of killing them, unless your name is P_H. This system is to compensate grenadiers for their lack of usefulness, their inability to gain points, and their lack of incentive to shoot at tanks.
Regardless if you get points or not, a person who shoots at a tank shoots it with the intention of blowing it up. Empty said this also, and SnowDrakE has the right idea (kinda).

 

You could just as well ask yourself why there are people playing grenadiers with the current version, blowing tanks up while defending the base... if 3 people shoot a tank, only 1 will get a single point. With heretics logic, wouldn't it be much better for a single guy shooting at a tank because this way he will maximize his points? (less chance for killstealing)

This is NOT how it works.

People shoot tanks.

Others play with statistics.