Tdm deaths matter


(The lMlan) #21

This would be optimal scoring for mvp to me in each game mode.

TDM, Execution, and Warzone - Needs to be based on +/- KD. (8 kills 5 deaths would be a +/- of 3)

Highest earns mvp…tie breakers go to more kills… if those are the same then more points.

KOTH - generally speaking this is the most correctly done with the current score system.

But, kills should be worth more while in or near the ring to promote attacking/defending the point.

Guardian - by far the worst with the current score system. Needs to have better points tied to assisting a leader to a kill, killing enemies near your leader, assisting killing enemy leader, and killing enemy leader.

The only bonus they give is for surviving as leader and who is to say it is the leader who “earned” those points that round…definitely needs tuning to determine a better mvp than killing a bunch of nobodies nowhere near either leader.

Escalation - Generally speaking this is the same as KOTH, except THE ORIGINAL HOME BASE RING CAP SHOULD NOT BE WORTH POINTS.

God I hate seeing some guy near the top because he can run to the easiest cap in the game while 2 people fight for the middle ring to get maybe 2 kills more worth of points or get killed and earn nothing and then lose position on the map.

Also the original Middle ground ring cap needs to be worth at least 1.5X points…controlling the middle is key and giving points to entice your team to help get it at the start would make those important battles bigger and not always lopsided to stacked teams.

That’s my two cents…I never trust score boards in objective based modes because I know who is doing good and who isn’t based on how the players look, who is moving with leaders, pushing the attack, and how often I get into battles with the same people by objectives.

Score isn’t everything…too many times I’m glad I bust out a lancer or snub on people to support them and end up with a down. I might get 20+ points and them 100+ points but if you don’t show up and get that extra damage in to force a down that enemy might just kill the other guy and nobody gets points for your team.

(Me0wMix CatFood) #22

In Guardian? The only map where I’ve seen guardian go excessively long is Blood Drive and you’d be absolutely right that evenly matched teams can often stalemate there. I’ve had 7 round matches on that map.

On most maps though, it doesn’t happen all that much. Might depend how you at it since it’s a strategy based mode and rewards tactics more than aggression.

One thing the helps against camping is that getting close to the enemy leader causes spawns to happen away from the leader. Teams that camp too long often lose map control and it eventually collapses on them. I’ve found the most talented guardian teams often rotate with their leader (depending on the map) whereas the good but not great ones just camp.

(API) #23

Most popular doesn’t mean that it’s good for the game. Fast food places are much more popular than healthy food places and those are still making everyone fat

(TheLastArchive) #24

I think you’re failing to understand the concept that the MVP is simply who got the most points, if you want MVP, then go kill more people. If you want players to be punished for dying, play Esc.

Ribbons you should be aiming for in TDM are Solid and maybe Vigilant.

(Krylon Blue) #25

MVP = Most Valuable Player

A player that goes 15-15 isn’t actually more valuable than a player that goes 8-1. I get where you’re coming from based on the fact that MVP is based off of overall score but the most valuable player isn’t always the top scorer. Granted, this could be said for any mode but it’s extremely obvious in TDM.

(Ektope) #26

Either the Ribbon name needs changing or TDM should score based on K/D ratio.

Here’s another situation:

Team mate one: 18 kills, 18 deaths.
Team mate two: 10 kills, 5 death.
Team mate three: 8 kills, 4 death.
Team mate four: 6 kills, 3 death.
Team mate five: 4 killed, 2 death.

While player one has KD ratio of 1.0, other team mates had 2.0.
Player one may have picked up more power weapons, killed the most, been involved in more action and may have prevented enemy players from getting power/pickup weapons that could have killed the team more.
It’s like player one risked more to push and die many times as a result, the most engaged player?
I know they’d have lower K/D than team but it’s easy to picture why they were Most Valuable Player.

MVP could be given to the player in match that killed the most instead.
I’m not sure if there’s another Ribbon like this.

(Krylon Blue) #27

The issue is still that player one made some poor decisions on when and how to engage a group of enemies. If he was fighting for the power weapons and died 15 times why would he be more valuable? If he was actually successful in keeping these weapons away from the enemy the odds are he wouldn’t have as many deaths. Instead, this player is selfish and cares about kills without caring about their teams overall success and then likely blames their team for the loss even though the “MVP” is the one to blame for the loss.

I must say we may be going too far into this non-issue anyway, lol. It’s not even about the MVP but rather the inability of random teammates to work together. This is why it’s either I have a group or I don’t play.

(OCBslim1s) #28

Wish I could say the same but truth is, that its hard to find people to play with these days.
I agree that the MVP with 15 deaths, who died 15 times trying to get the power weapons and failed doesn´t seem valuable but would he have died so many times if he had a support cast? Playing Solo is really sucking the fun out of it at times.


MVP stands for “Most Valuable Player.” In what world would a guy going 15 and 15 be the most valuable player in a team in which one of the players on that team had a way better efficiency rate with an 8.0 k/d. especially when the play mode is essentially a race of k.d. efficiency.


Oh I wasn’t saying whether it’s good or bad, just adding to the discussion that it’s the most popular game type especially as it was suggested to be removed. Removing the most popular game type (if this is still the case as there are no published numbers) would likely upset the player base even if they conceded it had it’s faults.

(l3ad Lieutenant) #31

It’s not as simple as all that. A player going 15_15 in a match is likely to have achieved a high K/D in at least one of the winning rounds. It is the aggregate of up to 3 rounds afterall.


I agree and I thinking about this the other night. I was wondering what a mode would be like if, rather than having 20 team lives, every member of the team instead had 4 lives each.
Or some kind of mixed mode where there were 10 team lives, once these were used then you fall back on 2 individual lives each.

I think both would add a really interesting element and could by right be a new game mode.


That is preciously why I don’t play Guardian. You could be the best player on the team, and yet get the lest amount of points. Which is actually the case most of the time. You can just forget about ranking any higher then Silver on that mode as well.


I think you can still rank well in Gaurdian despite your score. Rank change occurs when you defy the prediction. In Gaurdian, you only need to kill the leader and then the remaining players to win and therefore one team could have more points than the other and still lose.

For example, if a team dies many more times while trying to kill the leader but is successful, from my understanding, they will rank up if they were predicted to do worse. At the bare minimum a team would just need 15 kills (5 per round times 3 rounds). The other team could kill the other team an infinite number of times for an infinite score and still lose 0-3 and rank down especially if the team was predicted to go 3 - 0 instead.

I’m not a regular Gaurdian player but I would guess that one could rank up just as well in that mode as any other. It’s just that score isn’t tied to winning so much as the other game modes are but you can bring a lot to your team’s success without score and I believe the ranking system captures that because it looks at the combined ranks of the teams, who wins, and by how much.

(Ektope) #35

I think this could be pretty interesting indeed.
So everyone has to watch out for how many of their own lives they lose.
A possibly better alternative to TDM where lives are shared.


I can get behind this cause.



The idea sounds interesting but I think it would encourage an “every man for himself” kind of scenario. I believe the fact that the team shares a pool of 15 lives is supposed encourage teamwork.

“Hey if you lose a life, I’m essentially losing one as well so let’s work together to keep that to a minimum “

I’m willing to try this to see how it plays out though.

(Ektope) #38

It would probably help change play styles as well.
Some people think they can get away with losing up to 10 lives and constantly keep playing reckless in a team oriented sharing pool death match.
If someone is gonna keep dying and make the team suffer, it could be their own until they’re out for the round.
So when people look back through spectator cam after dying so many times, it could teach that there’s a limit somewhere.
It’s very unfair when you might get 10 kills and just one death until your team lost a round.
I’d blame it on my whole team for whoever wastes the most lives.

(W4rMunKey) #39

Hell I know i’m one of those who o,p is talking about. Sadly I’m trying to improve but damn it seems like when I look at some players and pull the trigger the gun does not go off, thought it was my controller, got brand new controller and same thing. Not locked in an wallslide animation or anything…

(Benallatrump911) #40