BF2S Forums More Points for Capturing Difficult Points, Killing Better Players

High ranks mean time not skill....

Last edited by majorassult (2006-07-13 15:06:35)

Thanks for the posts.  Pertaining to those who achieve rank by living in front of their computers, I think earlier posts that speak to efficiency or proficiency ratings on being a better warrior versus a simple time-whore TEAMED with this idea would make it way better.

I have played against some decent (some nice guys that know they are OK at best) Colonel's and some marginal Generals.  I know you have to obviously be pretty good to get to that level.

As long as you play for fun that's fine BUT I remember the days of playing, similar to today, Rainbox Six and to have a war with the best of the best was completely challenging, awesome and hilarious when I SCREAM at 3AM saying BULLSHIT, waking up my ex-wife!

I enjoyed each line of that critique.  Most of that was based on what would make the game, overall, a lot better versus getting reps. of killing the same people.  Kill them all I know.

lmfao.

Understood BUT again, they should use as they do in Halo and other games, proficiency methods to rank, not time in grade.  In the real military, just because you have been in a role forever, does not give you a guaranteed bump in rank & grade.

It's an anti-tard layer of internal protection.

majorassult wrote:

High ranks mean time not skill....

Not always true...

I have played against some great players with high rank and f-ing complete cocks but such as life.  Like with the BOC Squad I played with last night.  Completely cool guys exfept for one (his clan knows this guy was a jag-off) but one was a Colonel, sucked, bitched, called people names for almost nothing (especially when they killed him) and he got his from even his own team.  No respect gives you no respect.

I would have loved to kill him for NO POINTS, just like Tom Cruise in The Last Samurai.  "I would gladly kill you for free."

Fight the Power.

Last edited by mgtd1138 (2006-07-13 19:21:39)

As to getting more points for capturing harder points?  Nah.  The reward for that is earning your team a more valuable base and crippling the enemy.  As for more points for killing higher level players?  Hell no.  It's so hard to decide what makes a player better.  Rank means virtually nothing, as many have pointed out.  And even individual stats are hard to discern.  Good Kill Death raios could be the result of excellent piloting, but then the person can't groundpound for shit.  People could have high SPM, but mostly as a result of statpadding or command time.  It's far too difficult to actually determine the quality of players, so the idea is inherently flawed. 

More points for certain strategic objects and adding more destructable assets?  I'm kind of a fan of that.  Mostly because medics and support get easy bullshit points for just tossing packs around, and medics get two points for reviving...while Assault, Antitank, and Snipers(though they do have guaranteed-kill claymores now) can't even get team points, engineers have to sit there and twist a wrench around for an hour for a CHANCE to get one measly point, and special forces have to hoof it across the level, sneak behind enemy lines, and use 2 C4 to blow up assets, when you only get 5 to begin with and there are at least 4 assets to destroy, often times 5.  Though at least Spec-Ops can take both vehicles and infantry with a fair amount of proficiency.

What I really think you should get extra points for is destroying vehicles...or at least air and armor.  It takes infinitely more effort than taking out an infanty foot soldier, but gets the same amount of points.  Come on now...taking out a jet, gunship, tank, or APC is NOT equal to taking out a foot soldier running around like a chicken with his head cut off, and the game should reflect that.

majorassult wrote:

High ranks mean time not skill....

High rank means they havent been outside in a year :p

Not like me... Honest.....