I like CTF though rarely play it, mainly in the scrum fold.

Though for diversity and the ego fullfilling enticement of seeing "rankings" I expect I'll be playing it more.

I have some questions about the scoring criteria. Perhaps it has been spelled out somewhere before, if so please direct me.

I understand the individual scores are essentialy a battlemode scoring system of kills versus being killed.

Does Points scored, time of possesion, takeaways have any effect on the individual scores/

Likewise do they have any effect on the site ranking scores?

How about negative behavior like killing ones own teammates, takeaway from teammates, cliff diving with or without scrum, killing oneself?

I see many ctf players focus on who has the highest individual scores versus team scores and wondered how that plays out in the ranking criteria.

Thanks!

Baba

The in-game scores that you see are almost entirely different from the way the rankings are calculated. If you scored (in-game) 30 or so, then the score it gies you for stage one of the ranking process is liable to be in the hundreds. This is because far more weight is given to goals scored and enemy player kills etc. And a smaller weighting is given to the multiple occurances of steals and passes etc.

Time of possession will only take-away from your score if it bears no relation to the number of goals you score. If for example you are the flag carrier for 80% of the game but only score 2% of the total goals scored then yes, you will lose points as that would tend to illustrate incompetence while carrying the flag.

Individual scoring is a little more complicated than the in-game display. To calculate the rankings, more points are awarded for player kills than for bot kills. Extra points are awarded for killing the flag bearer and preventing enemy goals etc as well.

In CTF, the in-game individual scores are (by contrast) very simplistic.

The individual will get a point for scoring a goal OR for being around your own goal area when your team scores a point (thus assumed to be a defender). You also get a point per kill, and lose one per death (if killed by the enemy) You lose a point for killing a team mate, and you lose a few points if you dive with the flag.

The team score is purely based on goals scored. Nothing will deduct a point from this, and nothing else will add to it.

The team score is what matters in the game, the personal score is purely for some kind of basic visual feedback on who was the most involved and useful player.

When I had no individual scores, people complained, when I made them purely goals, people complained and stole the scrum from each other. When it was just goals and defenders who scored, people complained that the attackers didnt get points for kills. CTF is a game of offence and defence. Which hopefully the current scoring system reflects. The individual score that you get in CTF is not used in the rankings, however, the stats that were used to create that in-game score are used for the ranking (but with more weighting and more accuracy). Far more factors are used for the ranking scores than the in-game scores.

-Z-

That addresses my questions rather well, thank you!

Baba

Wow, pretty complicated... I'd like to present what I think is a legitimate argument... B)

Take a look at the # of games played? I mean, Dan MacDonald has played 166 games and has a score of 708... Because he has the highest total score, he's in 1st place. But MajorPain managed a score of 672 out of a mere 5 games...

Doesn't that make MP the highest scoring player per game on average? With that being said, I ask you, who is a better CTFer, Dan Mac, or MP? I'd have to say Major Pain...

Last edited: Thursday, January 08, 2004 at 8:56:07 PM

708 is dans average over 166 games

672 is MPs average over 5 games.

Taking that into account, Dan is shown to be the better player, and consistently so.

In no way saying that MP is not a good player, for to the contrary, he is a good player, however It is not too difficult to have 5 lucky games, it is however, highly unlikely that you would have had 166 lucky games.

-Z-

Oh ok, so the score is an overall average... I was thinking it was obtained and accumulated per game. Which would give MP about 134.5 points per game and Dan Mac about 4.25 points per game... I guess the more you play the harder it is to obtain a high score... Is that right?

Still a little confused... :o :[

Think of it as a ranking, not an actual Score.

Thanks nate, but I'm still a little confused as to how the ranking is calculated...

How about you just weigh the # of games won against the # of games played... And create a "Win Ratio". That's how I used to keep track of my Individual Scrum Production...