Scoreboard Showing Kills

EnemyWithin · May 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (K'Ragg @ May 22 2003, 10:01 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> </span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Personally, I fall on the pro-scoreboard side of the fence. I would ask my opponents a question:
Do you think showing the scores will in fact hurt the team?</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Yes, I do. If people are pre-occupied with their own scoring, this isn't the game for them. Scoring is an indicator of alien killed, it has nothing to do with winning or loosing the game. the guy who goes around and build res towers and protects those from aliens and welds them helps the team a lot more than what the one who runs around radomly and racks up kills does. It just focuses peoples priority on the wrong things.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

In NS v1.04, I have seen <b>plenty</b> of marine rambos. They don't have a score board to gloat over, yet they still rambo. I also can't think of a game where an alien with a high frag count was hurting his team. IF you have a team full of frag-counters, that would be a bad thing as no one would go gorge <img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'> Fortunately, it seems that these players are in the minority.

Why does showing the scores automatically mean people will be "pre-occupied with their own scoring"? Also, why do people associate frag-counters with rambos? Since aliens tend to attack marines outposts, this would be the logical spot for a frag-counter to call home. Sit amongst the defenses and get some easy alien kills. Interestingly enough, this will be helping out your team. Even spawn campers (as annoying as it is) are helping the team.

The only problem I see with scores is the death count. Remove the death count to discourage people from "holding back".

Kill counter = good, positive re-enforcment "Yay, I'm doing good!"
Death counter = bad, negative re-enforcment "Why should I suicide that mine, it'll make my score look bad."

Macguyvok · May 2003

Question...... How about we settle this.. stark a new poll, *or thread for that matter* and ask simply, "Should scores be shown, or should they not be?"

That will answer that..... if u want u can explain that the "scores shown" doesn't mean all scores.. just "some form of scores to be voted upon later"

*shurgs* Then again.. flay will do what he wants to do.. and we have to live with it :-p

Incitatus · May 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (eggmac @ May 22 2003, 09:59 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Incitatus, you may have studied anything, but obviously you did not understand stochastic

To put it at its simplest:
option A: "remove all scores" --> "event A"
option B: "leave at least 1 score" --> counter-event to A
both make up the set of all possibilites, thus:
frequency of A + frequency of B = all voters

It does NOT matter of how many other events B consists and whether they overlap or not. We regard ONLY "no scores" <--> "at least one score" which exclude each other. And both together comprise ALL possibilities, because there is no other option (how could it?). That means that both together make up all voters.
So "100% - Probability of event A" = Probability of event B
--> 60% want at least one score to be shown.

Whether B can be divided up does not matter. You can divide A up as well. It does not matter whether you sum up all the other options, it's just that the excluded option of A is the counter-option, thus making up all the other possibilities.

As simple as that.  </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> 
No again you're compairing 2 options. I'm not saying the fault lies in the compairing.
The fault lies in the adding the upper 3 options together.

You can not add 3 alternatives together just because they SEEM the same.

"But come on, how likely is it that over one hundred of the people who voted for the various score-showing options would change their mind to no-scores if they didn't get their pet option? It's a rock-solid safe assumption to make that more of those who have voted prefer scores to no-scores."

Kavasa LOL!! By your own admission your entire argument rests on; I 'THINK' that's 'PROBABLE'
And you call that rock solid <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'> If you were to argue like that on any Social Science paper or Statistics paper
You would be laughed at and called a nublet (to use NS terms). You have NO idea about the statistical data
concerning your conclusions. Whether it is likely or unlikely I don't care. Untill it is statistically proven or analytically
reasoned it remains but a hypothesis. One that I nor you can possibly test and therefor unfit to be seen as fact
and unworthy of any conclusions.

The thing is I don't make any judgement on the basis of the poll apart from the fact that 1 alternative seems to be more popular
than the others, whatever that may be. The actual text of the alternatives doesn't matter.

Arr. Resisting the urge for a few jabs here.
AHAHAHAhahaHaHaHaHaH1!1!!11oneone Oh come on you seem to have a brain. That sentence is completely and utterly devoid of any meaning whatsoever. Lol I'm not some 12 neighbour kid. LoL that's funny ****.

eggmac · May 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Incitatus @ May 23 2003, 12:36 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> No again you're compairing 2 options. I'm not saying the fault lies in the compairing.
The fault lies in the adding the upper 3 options together.

</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>It does NOT matter of how many other events B consists and whether they overlap or not. We regard ONLY "no scores" <--> "at least one score" which exclude each other. Whether B can be divided up does not matter. </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

I did not reagard the upper options. There might be 2000 thousand other options, this does not matter. You only look at option "no scores at all, never ever" and its counter-option, which is "at least one score"

Ask your prof <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'>

Demonmerc · May 2003

Seriously just make it a freakin' server variable and default it at NS 1.04. Badda-bing no more bitching.

Fantasmo · May 2003

There's a pretty heated discussion raging in Firewater's Scoreboard Suggestion Thread in the beta forums too. Unfortunately it has deteriorated to a "We-don't-get-heard-so-I'm-not-making-suggestions" argument.

Back to the scoreboard issue Flayra basically summed up his opinion on scoreboards with;

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>My reasoning is simply this: it only matters who wins, not how many kills the team, or any member of the team, makes. Putting in player kills encourages people to play for kills (undeniably true, assume you agree). Putting in how many waypoints you follow, would encourage verbose and redundant waypoints, even at the expense of winning the game (a given).

It doesn't matter how many structures you build, how many waypoints you follow, or even how many resources you collect. It's who wins.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

To be quite honest I think there has been way too much heat flying around this issue. I think the energy can be better directed elsewhere in the beta.

Whatever they do with the scoreboard you will always have the 'status' console command. That will always let you get your frag count. If it bugs you to have to do it over and over then just do it once near the end of the game. I'm not sure why you would need to check your frag count over and over <i>during</i> the game.

I think Flayra's reasoning is the simple one. There is a percentage of players who are driven by frags, by removing both scoreboards there is less of a chance these people will take part in frag-racking tactics which ultimately ruins a game (especially pubs). I think you would lose more people if the marine teamplay game is full of Frag-Collectors, then if you just removed the scoreboards. (And it's not complete, 'status' is still available)

Both sides have relevent points. But the safe side when it comes to the dissuading rambos point is removal of both scoreboards.

eggmac · May 2003

Well, but he's wrong. It does NOT only matter who wins the match, it matters whether you have fun! And as it is partly an FPS game, gaining score is fun. Scores do not hinder teamplay, they give each individual feedback. T

kavasa · May 2003

Inc:
You're going to have to attack a few of my premises here. Your position, thus far, has been this:
1) You have "studied social science" for two years*
2) You think that you can't combine the first three options in the poll
3) It follows from 1 and 2 that the first three options cannot be combined

I don't especially have to respect that argument, as the truth of its premises is in more than a little in doubt, and its validity is nil. Just nil.

Here's my argument.
1) The first three options combined add up to more than the last option
2) It is reasonable to suppose that a majority those who voted a specific sort of score to be shown would prefer <i>some</i> scores be shown over no-scores
3) It follows from 1 and 2 that more people prefer scores be shown

I don't need to bother with this argument in especial. I could just say "a majority of those who voted did so for an option where the score was kept". <i>That</i> is undeniably true and at the <i>very least</i> means that if Flay is going to go with the vote, he needs to re-cast the vote in the "scores vs. no scores" wording. The above argument is intended to bypass that process, and I think the benefits of so doing are obvious.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>If you were to argue like that on any Social Science paper or Statistics paper You would be laughed at and called a nublet (to use NS terms).</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

First, as per the rules of the board, please try to avoid bs rhetorical jabs. And come on, this is so weak. You might as well have replaced the whole sentence with "you're wrong!"

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Untill it is statistically proven or analytically reasoned it remains but a hypothesis.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Whatever. Certainty, especially in the social sciences, doesn't exist. In fact, this is exactly what you do in the social sciences: look at the data and offer an interpretation of it.
I have offered an interpratation of the data. If you don't think that interpretation is reasonable <b>then say so</b>. Because I am sorry but going "but but you can't DO THAT" does not cut the mustard, sir. Neither does "ho ho! Don't you realize that it is mathematically possible you are incorrect?" cut any other kind of condiment.

If you've got a problem with my second premise, then say so. My argument is simply that if someone wants a specific sort of score to be shown, they'll prefer having a score to no score.

Let's state this in different words by way of a thought experiment. Imagine the way each of the people that have answered this poll will look at it. The person from option one will vote "show scores" because no scores being shown is obviously incompatible with keeping it identical to 1.04 scoreboard. The option-two person will vote "show scores" because, again, no-scores is incompatible with his final goal. The third-option person will vote - well, I'm sure you can see the trend by now.

The jig is up, sir. You <i>must</i> answer that last paragraph. You failed to consider, in your initial objection, that the two options are exclusive and exhaustive. The person who voted for some kind of score to be shown can not reasonably be imagined to go to the other camp because that would betray the goal he has already revealed.

*WOW TWO YEARS! FEAR THE MIGHTY UNDERGRAD! What<i>ever</i>, man. To posit that a whole TWO YEARS makes you more than a little teeny tiny bit more reliable than Joe Schmoe re: statistics applied to in a <i>shockingly simple</i> high-school level problem is to state it succintly <b>completely wack</b>. You need to drop that posturing **** and just <i>argue the point</i> or maybe <i>admit you were wrong!</i> omg omg omg admit being wrong? Inconceivable! I both love and hate arguing on the interweb.

Mercior · May 2003

I don't really understand the point of this - you can always check your score by typing "status" in the console. So you can always see your score, even if the scores dont show up on the scoreboard!

Now I understand a lot of people (newbies) won't know this and will only ever use the scoreboard so I do think marine scores should be hidden in public modes to keep them from running off frag hunting, and kept on in alien modes to encourage them to kill marines <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'>

In tournament mode both team scores may as well be shown because (most) clan players know how to check them without the scoreboard - its just an added nuisance if they dont show up.

KRagg · May 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (EnemyWithin @ May 22 2003, 05:33 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> In NS v1.04, I have seen <b>plenty</b> of marine rambos. They don't have a score board to gloat over, yet they still rambo. I also can't think of a game where an alien with a high frag count was hurting his team. IF you have a team full of frag-counters, that would be a bad thing as no one would go gorge <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'> Fortunately, it seems that these players are in the minority.

 </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> 
No, which is why I also think it'd be a good idea to completely remove the name of the killer for deathmessages in both console and the killshot message. If you know you're good, that's what counts, isn't it?

I'll give a more specific example. I frequently practice res denial as alien. You won't see any of the people who cares about their score do that. I also tend to be quite high on the scoreboard on a good day, but at the same time, I'm probably also killed most, but that's a sideeffect from the way I hunt.

Now, it *is* generalizing some, but you can't really get away from it, but the idea is to win or loose as a team. I do a ton more for the team if I'm killing res nodes than if I spent the same time just killing marines. Maybe a better measurement would be how much res you've gained your team and you've caused the other team to loose?

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Why does showing the scores automatically mean people will be "pre-occupied with their own scoring"? Also, why do people associate frag-counters with rambos? Since aliens tend to attack marines outposts, this would be the logical spot for a frag-counter to call home. Sit amongst the defenses and get some easy alien kills. Interestingly enough, this will be helping out your team. Even spawn campers (as annoying as it is) are helping the team.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

A valid point, but the closer you are to the hive, the bigger the chance of getting a frag from an alien returning to the battle-field, I gather. Which in turn leads to spawn camping, which should only happen if you're taking down the hive.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>The only problem I see with scores is the death count. Remove the death count to discourage people from "holding back".</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
I think loosing gear/evolutions is more of a discourager than others seeing how much you've died, ie it's the death itself, not that it's shown.

Speed_2_Dave · May 2003

wow, you guys revived an OLD post. OLD. Here's the numbers as any normal human will see it (I'd like to argue that I'm unbiased. I don't care if we keep scores or if we all get scores, although I voted in this thread many moons ago, I can't remember my vote, so don't expect a miscount b/c I was trying to support my choice.

in regular play
Marines Score_____Aliens Score
YES-___173_____444
NO-____579_____308
Total-__752_____752

in tourney mode
Marines Score_____Aliens Score
YES-___351_____444
NO-____401_____308
Total-__752_____752

Now, don't call me a math major (I'm a CS), but I'm pretty sure that all of my numbers add up correctly, and if we go by the good ol' scoreboard vote, the MAJORITY of the people voted for aliens, but against marines. Remember, I don't give a whale's tutu about what happens, and could care less if the score is removed, but those are the cold-hard facts, documented as correctly as anyone would ask in a lab report. Having done my deed, I'll just sit back and hope you guys realize that extrapolating data from this chart is pointless as it is much too old, and will doubtlessly change as the days go on.

Please let this thread die, thank you.
[edit] all of my pretty spacing is auto-destroyed, so I apologize for the sloppiness of the list. I tried to fix it without a table, but forgive me for not learning how to use the CODE tag.[/edit]

EnemyWithin · May 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (K'Ragg @ May 22 2003, 11:48 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> No, which is why I also think it'd be a good idea to completely remove the name of the killer for deathmessages in both console and the killshot message. If you know you're good, that's what counts, isn't it? </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
I was going to post about deathmessages as well <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'> I actually think that deathmessages cause more "anti-team" behavior than scores. People love to get knife or parasite kills. Does this mean I think they should be removed? Nope. Why? Because its fun! This is a game after all, and deathmessages and scoreboards are fun.

I just dont think that a scoreboard will change the way people will play the game. If someone is really that "frag" oriented, they will still play the game the same way with or without the scores showing. Someone who enjoys camping the spawn will still camp the spawn.

It just seems to me that removing the scores will remove the only useful feedback that is currently supplied by the game. <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif'>

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I frequently practice res denial as alien. You won't see any of the people who cares about their score do that.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Agreed, but how many times have you had trouble getting help taking down RT's? It does happen, but on the servers I play in I just tag the RT, announce it on voice, and soon skulks are swarming it.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I do a ton more for the team if I'm killing res nodes than if I spent the same time just killing marines.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

But this is easier and more effective if some other skulks are out there actually attacking the marines head-on and preventing their expansion.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I think loosing gear/evolutions is more of a discourager than others seeing how much you've died, ie it's the death itself, not that it's shown. </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

I was thinking mainly of skulks and lvl 1 marines. As an alien in pub games, I find that most of my deaths occur at the 1 hive level as a skulk. It isn't uncommon for aliens to start the game 6/10 at hive 1 and then end the game 20+/12.

Basically, I just don't see how removing the scores will change the way people play the game. Idiots will still be idiots. Rambos will still rambo. People will play the game the way they like to play it regardless of a scoreboard. Therefore, the only people being effected by removing the scores are the majority (60% <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'>) of players that enjoy the feedback. <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif'> I feel like we are being punished because a small minority of players like to brag about their scores. <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif'>

R3D_BllU_IV_be · May 2003

I voted for showing all scores. Kills, deaths but whith<i>(aussi)</i> stats for building builded, building destructed, marines parasited, healing's gauge, ...

Sorry for my english, i speak french usually.

Twex · May 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Now, don't call me a math major (I'm a CS), but I'm pretty sure that all of my numbers add up correctly, and if we go by the good ol' scoreboard vote, the MAJORITY of the people voted for aliens, but against marines.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
If the developers had drawn the same conclusion from the numbers as you, this thread would not be as hot. However, Flayra closed and redirected a different thread here, referring to the poll as a majority vote against any kind of score display.
</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>To be quite honest I think there has been way too much heat flying around this issue. I think the energy can be better directed elsewhere in the beta.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
If you look only at the surface, this debate might appear like much ado about nothing. The topic is so hot because it touches a core conflict that has always been boiling in the community, tearing it apart into to camps:

Is NS a TeamDeathmatch with a few extra features, or did it create a new genre by making strategy/teamwork/whateverelse more desireable than plain old fragging?

The developers and original PTs (understandably) view it as the latter, the veterans as the former. Their fundamental disagreement is mirrored within the rest of the public community.

Incitatus · May 2003

Lol dudes I'm not making this **** up.
What you are doing is contradicting basic social science method.
Which has been around for decades .f not centuries.

I'll try and explain it in a simpler way because avasar isn't getting it.

You can not add up 1 2 and 3 and then compair with 4.

Why? -> Because a vote for 1 does not automatically mean a preference of
2 over 4. In the same way a vote for 3 does not automatically mean a preference
of 1 over 4. A vote for 3 ONLY means a preference of 3 over 1, 2 and 4. Therefor it is
logically incorrect to in any way combine options within a poll.

I can't believe you're having so much trouble with this. This is basic stuff.

Again the only thing you can argue is that out of the 4 options number 4 is the most popular.

Whether it is likely or not that combining the options would lead to some sort
of realistic picture of the situation has absolutely no meaning at all. Because it
can not in any way be tested and therefor is void.

Come on this is social method 101. Again this is not stuff my crazy brain is imagining.
I'll see if I can find some quotes in my old books for you.

But dude let's drop this. Your not going to convince me in any way and I'm not going to convince you.

Nemesis_Zero · May 2003

Rule #143 of online discussions: Never contest a student of a subject in said subject unless you happen to be a <i>very</i> skilled layman <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'>

tjosan · May 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Incitatus @ May 23 2003, 04:54 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Whether it is likely or not that combining the options would lead to some sort of realistic picture of the situation has absolutely no meaning at all. Because it can not in any way be tested and therefor is void.
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
You've made one mistake here though, it CAN be tested if Flayra makes another poll, thus it is not void. It IS a logical assumption that there is a high probability that another poll with the options

A. Show no scores
B. Show scores

would show better and more reliable results.

[Edit]A slight change in the suggested poll.

a_civilian · May 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (tjosan @ May 23 2003, 06:57 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
A. Show no scores
B. Show scores

would show better and more reliable results. </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Actually, you would get the most reliable results from two different polls:

Poll one:
Show alien scores
Hide alien scores

Poll two:
Show marine scores
Hide marine scores

tjosan · May 2003

Yes of course, but that's usually not an option <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'>

Eats · May 2003

This whole poll is ridiculous.

Why did Bush Sr. lose out to Clinton? Cause Perot stole votes.
Why did Gore lose to Bush Jr? Cause the Green Party stole votes.

Not to start a big thing about the presidential elections, just trying to make a point that splitting votes makes elections in general very bias.

This entire poll shows nothing because it is being taken in an extremely bias way. Trying to draw any real conclusions from it is silly.

the only thing that can really be said is that more people want some scores showing then people that don't, but thats pretty vague.

eggmac · May 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Incitatus @ May 23 2003, 11:54 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Lol dudes I'm not making this **** up.
What you are doing is contradicting basic social science method.
Which has been around for decades .f not centuries.

I'll try and explain it in a simpler way because avasar isn't getting it.

You can not add up 1 2 and 3 and then compair with 4.

 </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> 
You are ignoring my commenst for the third time now. You do not have the slightest clue about stochastic. Please re-read my posts and then ask what you didn't understand.

Incitatus · May 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (tjosan @ May 23 2003, 10:57 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> </span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Incitatus @ May 23 2003, 04:54 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Whether it is likely or not that combining the options would lead to some sort of realistic picture of the situation has absolutely no meaning at all. Because it can not in any way be tested and therefor is void.
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
You've made one mistake here though, it CAN be tested if Flayra makes another poll, thus it is not void. It IS a logical assumption that there is a high probability that another poll with the options

A. Show no scores
B. Show scores

would show better and more reliable results.

[Edit]A slight change in the suggested poll.  </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> 
True, I completely agree. Flay can test it but we can't.
But untill then we can not base facts or conclusions on it.
And most importantly we can not act on it.

eggmac I already answered you.

It most certain that a new poll with these 2 options would have a much more reliable result.
But as I said before I think this poll was worded this way intentionally.

EnemyWithin · May 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Incitatus @ May 23 2003, 09:54 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> You can not add up 1 2 and 3 and then compair with 4.  </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> 
I don't think Eggmac is doing this. I think he is simply saying that if 40% voted for "no scoreboard", this means that 60% did <b>not</b> vote for "no scoreboard". Since it seems we are getting "no scoreboard" at the moment, Flayra has gone against the wishes of 60% of the voters that did not want "no scoreboard".

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Again the only thing you can argue is that out of the 4 options number 4 is the most popular.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Option 4 was the most popular vote, but it doesn't have the support of the majority.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>But as I said before I think this poll was worded this way intentionally.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

That might very well be the case. It seems that the developers want "no scoreboard" and getting 40% of the voters to agree with them was enough justification to do it.

CrouchingHamster · May 2003

Dear god, is this argument <i>still</i> going on?

It's a scoreboard .

Please discuss something else..?

<i>Anything</i> else?

PseudoKnight · May 2003

One reason this is still being discussed is because on top of forumers desiring a scoreboard with informative stats on it, we also believe that something as simple as having the kills/deaths (or whatever the Devs decide is most appropriate for NS) would get new players to come back after playing NS for the first time and endeavor to increase their skill. Enhanced skill will improve a team's chances of winning. Also, you can't deny that having more players is a bad thing.

Okay lets consider this:

One: Flayra keeps scores invisible. No one can see their individual stats or the stats of their teammates. People who like stats are ignored. New players who like stats don't continue to play NS. People who don't like stats either don't care or are happy for getting things their way under the guise that it promotes teamwork in those individuals that favor deathmatch style gameplay. (which I believe to be untrue)

Two: Flayra makes scores visible and possibly works out a more accurate score system that applies to skill in NS. People who like scores are happy and use this feature to gauge themselves especially in cases where they lack criticism or tips from their teammates. People who don't like stats ignore the scoreboard numbers and feel that the score is encouraging rambos. NS still has other gameplay mechanisms to discourage ramboing, and who says ramboing increases your score? New players get caught up in improving themselves based on the scoreboard stats and continue playing NS.

Flayra can even make it so players aren't ranked by kills like it is now. Why not display the numbers when the server is already keeping track of them? There is no <b>proven</b> reason behind hiding the scores, just speculation.

<b>An appeal directly to Flayra. You want NS to be friendly and fun experience for new players? This is a strong motivation in many of your changes to the game. A scoreboard with helpful stats on it would make the game more friendly and fun for new and old players alike, IMO.</b>

CrouchingHamster · May 2003

The point I was aiming at was more "why do you care so much?"

It's a scoreboard. It has no direct relevance to the outcome of the game.

Team "A" wins, or Team "B" wins.

All other stats are irrelevant.

This is of course simply a personal opinion, much like yours.

1.1 in testing, major new gameplay features on the way, new maps to scamper around in, surely you can find something more <i>important</i> to argue about than a scoreboard?

Y'know, something that actually affects the gameplay?

Roobubba · May 2003

Well if I can throw in a bit of common sense.

I voted for 4, mainly because I was unsure of the poll when I saw it.

I though "proposed 1.1" MEANT no scores, and I was going to vote for that. I'm glad I didn't, as I realised afterwards that was the <i>previously</i> proposed 1.1 system.

As for arguing the validity of the poll - I suggest instead you ask a simpler question:

<b>WHEN 1.1 COMES OUT AND YOU HAVE TRIED IT.... Is the lack of scores a major issue to you</b>

The developers have a MASSIVE headache with the sheer amount of grief they receive from people who aren't playing 1.1 compaining about this or that change. I SERIOUSLY suggest that everyone, WHATEVER THEIR OPINION ON THIS MATTER takes a BIG breath and stops thinking about it. You want this game before Christmas, right? Well stop hassling the developers on MINOR issues. If it turns out that everyone hates not having the scores, and the developers decide to put them back in, it's an infinitessimally SMALL job, involving no hassle.
For the moment, let them do what they're doing (I was going to say their job, but unless everyone has forgotten these people aren't being paid to do this, the game has arisen from personal endeavour and continues to grow from that).

The bonus of this is that you'll help speed up the process of releasing 1.1, as the developers won't have to spend hours trawling through garbage threads like this one. A further bonus, is that by speeding up the game's release, we won't have too many more of those "Hurry up with 1.1 I can't wait any more" threads we've seen.

Please, take heed of what I've said. Give the developers a break to do what's they're best at, which they're doing for your benefit.

Accept that there are some arguments (like the marine blood one), that WILL NOT BE RESOLVED. If the decision were to go the other way, then it's just different people who'll be waving their arms in anguish.

Lastly, RELAX!

Roo

Optikal · May 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CrouchingHamster,HiddenElvis @ May 23 2003, 09:35 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> The point I was aiming at was more "why do you care so much?"

It's a scoreboard. It has no direct relevance to the outcome of the game.

Team "A" wins, or Team "B" wins.

All other stats are irrelevant.

This is of course simply a personal opinion, much like yours.

1.1 in testing, major new gameplay features on the way, new maps to scamper around in, surely you can find something more <i>important</i> to argue about than a scoreboard?

Y'know, something that actually affects the gameplay?  </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> 
I feel as if you are ignoring everyone's post. The entire point is to get stats and scores to the people who care and want to see them BECAUSE it is a competitive game. If you don't care about them then just don't look at them all these theories about how scores affect teamwork are total crap. Marines still rambo all the time.

Winning is not all that matters. All other scores are NOT irrelavent. It's strictly your opinion that winning only matters and as for the 40% that don't want scoreboards it's only because you guys can't get a good score. It's like fat people saying that the real beauty is on the inside.

Roobubba · May 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Roobubba @ May 23 2003, 09:37 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Well if I can throw in a bit of common sense.

I voted for 4, mainly because I was unsure of the poll when I saw it.

I though "proposed 1.1" MEANT no scores, and I was going to vote for that. I'm glad I didn't, as I realised afterwards that was the <i>previously</i> proposed 1.1 system.

As for arguing the validity of the poll - I suggest instead you ask a simpler question:

<b>WHEN 1.1 COMES OUT AND YOU HAVE TRIED IT.... Is the lack of scores a major issue to you</b>

The developers have a MASSIVE headache with the sheer amount of grief they receive from people who aren't playing 1.1 compaining about this or that change. I SERIOUSLY suggest that everyone, WHATEVER THEIR OPINION ON THIS MATTER takes a BIG breath and stops thinking about it. You want this game before Christmas, right? Well stop hassling the developers on MINOR issues. If it turns out that everyone hates not having the scores, and the developers decide to put them back in, it's an infinitessimally SMALL job, involving no hassle.
For the moment, let them do what they're doing (I was going to say their job, but unless everyone has forgotten these people aren't being paid to do this, the game has arisen from personal endeavour and continues to grow from that).

The bonus of this is that you'll help speed up the process of releasing 1.1, as the developers won't have to spend hours trawling through garbage threads like this one. A further bonus, is that by speeding up the game's release, we won't have too many more of those "Hurry up with 1.1 I can't wait any more" threads we've seen.

Please, take heed of what I've said. Give the developers a break to do what's they're best at, which they're doing for your benefit.

Accept that there are some arguments (like the marine blood one), that WILL NOT BE RESOLVED. If the decision were to go the other way, then it's just different people who'll be waving their arms in anguish.

Lastly, RELAX!

Roo  </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> 
Just because I think EVERYONE needs to cool off I'm repeating this.

No-one pay attention to the comment above this, just RELAX, BREATHE DEEP and ALLOW THE DEVS TO MAKE THE NEW GAME!

Nemesis_Zero · May 2003

Note by the way that scores are shown in tourny mode.

Scoreboard Showing Kills

Comments