|
Valience
|
Post subject: Re: Change To Team Score Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 6:28 pm |
AA Warrior |
|
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 3:20 pm Posts: 532
|
Well I certainly don't think that anything should require a team, since, while a lot harder, there is nothing wrong with being a loner. And that'd be completely unrealistic too, since you don't have to have a certain number of allies or something to research certain things... But what I do think should be done is team score should say what the score of a player with the combined net worth of the entire team would be. As it is, if a team wants to increase their score, all they have to do is donate to one of their smaller players. Because smaller players get more score for less wealth, their score is more important. Like this, it would be lower than their combined scores, but it would be a MUCH more accurate measure of a team's power. That way, you could compare team scores the exact same way you compare personal scores. As it is, a team could have more net worth than another, but if its wealth is distributed among its players differently, it could have a lower score.
_________________
|
|
|
|
|
Valience
|
Post subject: Re: Change To Team Score Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 1:29 pm |
AA Warrior |
|
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 3:20 pm Posts: 532
|
Well first, adding points to a team's score for good team work wouldn't really be a reward, since team score does absolutely nothing. Second, averaging the player scores will have the same problem I already explained that we've got right now. Third, working together as a team is very productive. The team shouldn't need extra incentive, not that anything that's been listed really is extra incentive. Also, score should be determined by net worth, NOT by planet numbers. If a player has 50 planets with 7T on 25 and .3T on 25, and the .3T planets are teamed, the team shouldn't get half that player's score. Net worth is what should be accounted for. If you wanted to do a team score that way, which I agree isn't a bad idea, you should take the total number of colonists on team planets, multiply it by 5 (cost per colonist), add to it the total ore on each planet, multiplied by the stand cost of ore, and then goods, and then organics, and then fighters, and then torps, all mulitplied by their respective costs. Then you should add in the costs of the total upgrades for planetary tech levels. Finally, you should add the total credits on the teamed planets. This should be the input variable for whatever the score function is. Also, people often use their ships as tools to aid their teams. This should somehow be accounted for (ie, counting some percent of the ship's total worth toward the team). Honestly, though, I still think my idea of keeping it simple is best, just cause it shows which team is strongest, with the strongest players, and without any score bias (ie, if a team has all its wealth in one player, that team's score won't be as good as a team with equal, well distributed wealth. This doesn't exist in my idea). Teams shouldn't need more score bonuses as a reason to help each other out, since working together is already more profitable, and therefore better for their collective score.
_________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
|