Home » General Discussions » Heated Discussions and Debates » Pointfix poll. Bug or Balance?
Pointfix poll. Bug or Balance? [message #414480] |
Fri, 18 December 2009 19:26 |
|
ChewML
Messages: 918 Registered: June 2008
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
What would you classify the original point system as? (meaning before a pointfix)[ 50 votes ] |
1. |
Bug, meaning not intended to be originally. |
32 / 64% |
2. |
Balance issue, meaning that it was created with the original point system on purpose. |
18 / 36% |
ITT: A poll with 2 distinct options.
If you vote option 1, you are saying that you think that the original point system was a bug (like a lot of other things in Renegade). AKA the pro-pointfix camp.
If you vote option 2, you are saying you think that the game was meant to give you a lot of points when sniping tanks, but doing very little damage, because of a balance issue. AKA the anti-pointfix camp.
This poll was made because of the other thread which didn't actually follow with the original discussion.
If you reply in this thread, this is what I ask that you include in you post:
1. A logical reason as to why you think that the point system was or was not intended to be how it is.
2. No derailing this topic please. Keep to is it or is it not a "bug".
3. No flaming, including insulting people's intelligence, and questioning people's sexual preference as this is not a thread about sexual ideas.
[Updated on: Fri, 18 December 2009 19:28] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Re: Pointfix poll. Bug or Balance? [message #414482 is a reply to message #414481] |
Fri, 18 December 2009 20:17 |
|
Spoony
Messages: 3915 Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
to put it bluntly, you can only think 2 if you ignore all the evidence. it's been conclusively proven that the point bug was never supposed to be there.
here's the thing that must be said:
at the beginning of the pointsfix debates, the entirety of the argument from the anti-pointsfix side was: "this was supposed to happen, it's not a bug". that was the only argument they felt was necessary; evidently they were convinced of it and they were also convinced that it was enough to close the debate.
it was soon proven wrong, and then the anti-pointsfix crowd basically split into two schools of thought.
1. people who refused to look at the evidence
2. people who did acknowledge that the pointsfix is the original renegade points system, but at that point decided that whether it was the original points system didn't matter at all anymore.
when they thought the opposite, they considered it the be-all end-all of the argument. when it was proven wrong, it suddenly became irrelevant. i'm sorry to say that people are not allowed to forget that they did this.
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
[Updated on: Fri, 18 December 2009 20:21] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Pointfix poll. Bug or Balance? [message #414485 is a reply to message #414484] |
Fri, 18 December 2009 20:51 |
|
ChewML
Messages: 918 Registered: June 2008
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
ELiT3FLyR wrote on Fri, 18 December 2009 21:43 | whoever said it wasnt a bug? why get rid of a bug that makes the game better?
ps. i just know zimmer fag or the likes will be like LOL LETS KEEP BLUESCREEN THNE?!!?!
|
You already lost... A. You admitted it is a bug, B. You already called someone a fag, C. You voted wrong, you said bug in post, but voted option #2...
I would suggest that you do not publicly represent the anti-pointfix camp anymore as you are not doing them any favors.
I had to catch myself like 3 times, I almost broke one of my own rules by making a remark about his IQ...
[Updated on: Fri, 18 December 2009 20:52] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: Pointfix poll. Bug or Balance? [message #414488 is a reply to message #414485] |
Fri, 18 December 2009 21:18 |
kadoosh
Messages: 90 Registered: April 2004
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
Chew wrote on Fri, 18 December 2009 22:51 |
ELiT3FLyR wrote on Fri, 18 December 2009 21:43 | whoever said it wasnt a bug? why get rid of a bug that makes the game better?
ps. i just know zimmer fag or the likes will be like LOL LETS KEEP BLUESCREEN THNE?!!?!
|
You already lost... A. You admitted it is a bug, B. You already called someone a fag, C. You voted wrong, you said bug in post, but voted option #2...
I would suggest that you do not publicly represent the anti-pointfix camp anymore as you are not doing them any favors.
I had to catch myself like 3 times, I almost broke one of my own rules by making a remark about his IQ...
|
owned?
|
|
|
Re: Pointfix poll. Bug or Balance? [message #414491 is a reply to message #414484] |
Fri, 18 December 2009 21:29 |
|
Spoony
Messages: 3915 Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
ELiT3FLyR wrote on Fri, 18 December 2009 21:43 | whoever said it wasnt a bug?
|
check my reply.
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
|
|
|
|
Re: Pointfix poll. Bug or Balance? [message #414495 is a reply to message #414484] |
Sat, 19 December 2009 01:26 |
|
GEORGE ZIMMER
Messages: 2605 Registered: March 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
ELiT3FLyR wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 04:43 | whoever said it wasnt a bug? why get rid of a bug that makes the game better?
ps. i just know zimmer fag or the likes will be like LOL LETS KEEP BLUESCREEN THNE?!!?!
|
Ha, didn't even comment in this and I'm already getting called a fag.
Anyways, definitely a bug. Evidence aside, it's just buggy in nature. It's also a pretty damn big balance issue- it's giving people who know of it an advantage over those who don't. This is a terrible way for any form of gameplay, and I guarantee Westwood would not have intended for it to be this way.
Toggle SpoilerScrin wrote on Sat, 24 January 2009 13:22 |
cAmpa wrote on Sat, 24 January 2009 12:45 | Scrin, stop pming people to get the building bars.
|
FUCK YOU AND THIS SHIT GAME WITH YOUR SCRIPTS!!! I HAVE ASKING YOU AND ANOTHER NOOBS HERE ABOUT HELP WITH THAT BUILDING ICONS FEATURES FOR YEARS, BUT YOU KEEP IGNORING ME AND KEEP WRITE SHIT, SO BURN YOU AND YOUR ASSLICKERS FRIENDS, THIS TIME I'M NOT COME BACK!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Pointfix poll. Bug or Balance? [message #414510 is a reply to message #414508] |
Sat, 19 December 2009 10:02 |
|
Dover
Messages: 2547 Registered: March 2006 Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
R315r4z0r wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 07:33 | I don't think it's a bug nor do I think it was implemented for balance reasons.
I think it was just a scoring oversight on EA's part.
|
Yeah. That would make it a bug.
DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 | Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
|
|
|
Re: Pointfix poll. Bug or Balance? [message #414512 is a reply to message #414480] |
Sat, 19 December 2009 10:06 |
|
I will moderate the fuck out of this topic. I expect some nice logical replies from the anti- and pro- pointsfix camps. Then we can leave the damned thing alone. Hahah, hahah, ha. Ha.
Renguard is a wonderful initiative
Toggle Spoiler
BBC news, quoting... |
Supporters of Proposition 8 will argue California does not discriminate against gays, as the current law allows them to get married - as long as they wed a partner of the opposite sex.
|
halokid wrote on Mon, 11 October 2010 08:46 |
R315r4z0r wrote on Mon, 11 October 2010 15:35 |
|
the hell is that?
|
[Updated on: Sat, 19 December 2009 10:06] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Pointfix poll. Bug or Balance? [message #414525 is a reply to message #414510] |
Sat, 19 December 2009 11:31 |
|
R315r4z0r
Messages: 3836 Registered: March 2005 Location: New York
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
Dover wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 12:02 |
R315r4z0r wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 07:33 | I don't think it's a bug nor do I think it was implemented for balance reasons.
I think it was just a scoring oversight on EA's part.
|
Yeah. That would make it a bug.
|
No, a bug is an unintended side effect of doing something else. For example, changing the armor type of a vehicle to let it be more resilient to something else, but at the same time screwing up the balance with another vehicle using the same armor type. Or a line of code used to amplify a graphical technique that accidentally conflicts with something else causing crashes or black screens.
This issue was just a forgotten balance addressing. It was just so subtle of a problem, so tiny, so unimposing, that no one noticed it until years after the retail version was released.
It's like forgetting to buy a certain item when you went out shopping.
[Updated on: Sat, 19 December 2009 11:36] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
Re: Pointfix poll. Bug or Balance? [message #414529 is a reply to message #414525] |
Sat, 19 December 2009 11:52 |
|
ChewML
Messages: 918 Registered: June 2008
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
R315r4z0r wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 12:31 |
Dover wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 12:02 |
R315r4z0r wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 07:33 | I don't think it's a bug nor do I think it was implemented for balance reasons.
I think it was just a scoring oversight on EA's part.
|
Yeah. That would make it a bug.
|
No, a bug is an unintended side effect of doing something else. For example, changing the armor type of a vehicle to let it be more resilient to something else, but at the same time screwing up the balance with another vehicle using the same armor type. Or a line of code used to amplify a graphical technique that accidentally conflicts with something else causing crashes or black screens.
This issue was just a forgotten balance addressing. It was just so subtle of a problem, so tiny, so unimposing, that no one noticed it until years after the retail version was released.
It's like forgetting to buy a certain item when you went out shopping.
|
1. It has already been proven to be caused by an error in code = bug. Reference Carrier's post in the other thread.
2. It likely subtle at first, because what person would start to play this game and think first to go snipe a harv? Nobody. Later on though someone was prolly just being bored and started shooting at it one day when there where no other targets, or maybe they missed there intentional target and hit it a few times. Then they realized, "Hey I just got a lot of points for that lols... I SHOULD DO THIS MORE OFTEN TO GET MVP". And so the bullshit spread like the black plague infecting every n00b that couldn't use a tank.
|
|
|
Re: Pointfix poll. Bug or Balance? [message #414533 is a reply to message #414480] |
Sat, 19 December 2009 13:15 |
|
R315r4z0r
Messages: 3836 Registered: March 2005 Location: New York
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
Well, tbh... I've never payed attention to points. I mean, I look at the scoreboard every so often to either check my position in the ladder or to check to see if I'm hitting my target at the edge of my range (score will change if I hit something). But I don't think I've ever noticed the exact number values that have changed or taken note.
But then again, I don't play in clan matches and I don't have a need to do so, so don't take what I say to heart.
However the reason why I responded was to reference something you said:
Quote: | It likely subtle at first, because what person would start to play this game and think first to go snipe a harv? Nobody.
|
Me, actually. I've been guilty of doing such pointless tasks simply because of force of habit. It's rather hard to explain, but for as long as I can remember, shooting certain armored vehicles with a ramjet gave off this feeling of satisfaction. The same sort of feeling when you fire at a helicopter or buggy... except you don't notice the physical damage. It's sort of like satisfying a habit or an itch. Actually, it really isn't specific to a ramjet. Any infantry, other than engineers. I'll waste autorifle clips of firing at a light tank because I think I'm actually significant damage to it. (some damage is better than no damage, right?)
I have caught myself wasting ammo on such vehicles and then asking myself what was doing that in the first place. (Sort of catching yourself staring into space.)
When I say 'certain armored vehicles,' I mean more specifically the Light tank, the Stealth tank and the Harvester. For some reason it feels like I should shoot them with the ramjet. It sounds stupid, I know, but there just so 'shootable' that it's hard to resist lol. (This does not go for other vehicles like Medium tanks, flame tanks, ect as they don't give off that same feeling of accomplishment that the Light tank and stealth tank do.) I've ever since stopped it, however, since I learned about the point imbalance (which was rather recently, I might add. I never noticed the point issue until someone brought it up on these forums).
But to get to my point, I'm saying you shouldn't put it past you that someone might just shoot the vehicle just because they might have the urge to do so. Don't assume and try to apply your own reasoning as to why they are doing it because most of the time you will be wrong. Something doesn't have to be logical for it to happen. People are illogical, no matter how much you might not believe so, most of the tasks people perform every day have no logical meaning to them and yet people do them anyway. My communication teacher says to never attempt to understand other people; you will waste your life away. Before you try to understand other people, you first have to learn to understand yourself.
[Updated on: Sat, 19 December 2009 13:27] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Pointfix poll. Bug or Balance? [message #414606 is a reply to message #414543] |
Sun, 20 December 2009 01:15 |
|
Spoony
Messages: 3915 Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
Toggle Spoiler1. ARGUMENT FROM CODE
This is the formula for calculating points.
vehicledamagemultiplier * rawdamage * warheadmultiplier / warheadmultiplier
If you know anything about maths it's not hard to see the problem here. The same variable is multiplied into the equation and then immediately divided again. This is, quite simply, nonsense. It's clearly a mistake.
It should be:
vehicledamagemultiplier * rawdamage * warheadmultiplier
^ The pointsfix is a simple alteration of the formula into the formula above.
The missing warhead-multiplier is why certain weapons get extraordinary points for doing unremarkable damage. With the bug fixed, the following two statements become true:
1. points gained for attacking vehicles are directly based on how much damage is done, and the cost of the target. Makes no difference what weapon you use to attack it.
2. points gained for repairing vehicles is half what the enemy gets for attacking them (exactly like structures)
2. ARGUMENT FROM INCONSISTENCY
there are essentially three different types of target in this game that can be attacked normally. infantry, vehicles, and structures.
-WITHOUT THE POINTSFIX-
vs green health buildings: points = damage
vs red/yellow health buildings: points = damage
vs green health vehicles: points does not = damage
vs red/yellow health buildings: points = damage
vs green health infantry: points = damage
vs red/yellow health buildings: points = damage
why on earth should this one out of six be different? what sense does this make?
with a building, you get a set amount of points for killing it no matter you use to kill it.
you get 750 points for killing a powerplant (assuming it isn't repaired) whether you nuke it, get a tech in there, hammer it to dust with an arty, or roast it with a flamer.
you get 35 points for killing a technician (again assuming he isn't 'repaired'). Doesn't matter how you killed him, whether you run him over, shoot him in the face with a sniper rifle or med tank shell, or pistol him.
and the same is true for red/yellow health vehicles. when a med is over half dead, you get points for how much damage you're doing to it, regardless of what weapon you're using to do that damage.
so anyone who challenges the assertion that the pointsfix is the intended points system must answer these two questions.
1. why vehicles? why not infantry and not buildings?
2. why only when the vehicles have green health? why not when they have red/yellow health?
3. ARGUMENT FROM INSURMOUNTABLE PROBABILITY
after the pointsfix was implemented and when we were testing it, i noticed something interesting.
here are the killpoints you earn for blowing up a vehicle, assuming they aren't being repaired.
Mammoth Tank: 150
Harvester: 100
Apache/Orca: 90
Stealth Tank: 90
Medium Tank: 80
Flame Tank: 80
Chinook: 70
Light Tank: 60
APC: 50
MRLS: 45
Artillery: 45
Hummvee: 35
Buggy: 30
do you notice anything about these figures? if you don't, let me make another list. this one is how much each vehicle costs.
Mammoth Tank: 1500
Harvester: n/a
Apache/Orca: 900
Stealth Tank: 900
Medium Tank: 800
Flame Tank: 800
Chinook: 700
Light Tank: 600
APC: 500
MRLS: 450
Artillery: 450
Hummvee: 350
Buggy: 300
when a vehicle is killed, it yields points to the tune of 10% the vehicle's cost. give or take one point for rounding, this is also true for infantry (except free infantry, for obvious reasons, and also the Nod Rocket Soldier due to an unrelated coding mistake) - eg a tib sydney (150) gives 15 points upon death, a hotwire (350) yields 35 points.
not only this, but the kill-bonus also follows the same pattern as tanks. 50% of the points are gained for bringing your target to the brink of death, and the other 50% for the actual kill.
now, here's the point. I noticed this AFTER the pointsfix was identified and coded. nobody noticed these figures until the testing period, when it was used on the jelly server, n00bstories, blackintel, and spoonysrv. let's put aside all other arguments for the pointsfix being the true intended pointsystem for a moment.
to believe that the pointsfix was unintended, you HAVE to believe that all these numbers magically lining up into 10% of the vehicle cost is a complete coincidence. stop and think about this for a moment. EVERY vehicle in the game suddenly has its kill-points set to 10% of its cost, the same ratio as infantry have always been, AND vehicles now follow the same 50-50 ratio between damage and the kill bonus. Think how improbable this must be if it were an accident. The odds against it must be absolutely enormous.
4. ARGUMENT FROM BALANCE
Quite simply, why should one get points when one is not doing damage? Shooting a heavy tank with a ramjet or an auto rifle achieves nothing.
With the pointsbug fixed, every method of gaining points is something which demonstrably helps your situation in the here and now. Damaging the enemy, repairing an ally, or disarming c4 and beacons. That is all.
Look at maps like Walls Flying. It is a simple matter to get some ramjets on the wall. They can strip any enemy vehicle in the field for huge points - and they can do it in almost complete safety, and they can scarcely miss no matter how good or bad the sniper happens to be. So we have an automatic method of gaining huge amounts of points despite no skill, no teamwork, no risk, no venture into enemy territory, and no actual achievement. Alarm bells ringing yet? It becomes rather unwise to move out with vehicles at all. What sense does this make? How can anyone think this is good for balance? Westwood were no fools. They did make some oversights, but they would never have chosen to do something as stupid as this.
Another example. Field. It has been a common thing for GDI teams to "let the WF die" when Nod pounds it with artillery. Common sense would seem to indicate that GDI deserves to lose a game like this. If they can't kill a few Nod vehicles, Nod is clearly the better team. They either have better tank skills or they have better teamwork, or both. So why should GDI get the victory just because they decided to let a building go and then camp in base? Many games like that have been won without the Nod base taking a scratch; without GDI even holding the field for more than a couple of minutes. Good balance?
In a nutshell, the points bug penalises offensive play, and rewards defensive play in some rather odd ways. Players involved with the beta test, such as Crimson and Spotelmo, have testified to the fact that the designers definitely wanted to promote aggressive play.
It also means that individual score is incorrect too, which will have a negative impact on the official ladder (on top of the negative impact of the 'wrong' team winning). Players who achieved less may earn higher scores and thereby more rank.
5. ARGUMENT FROM WESTWOOD
no matter how high all the evidence piles up, quite a few people looked at it all and said it didn't prove anything (makes me laugh, to be honest). they said they would never believe it unless someone from westwood said it. (bit like a creationist saying he won't believe evolution is true until he hears it from god)
A while ago, Tom "LordMot" Spencer-Smith appeared on the official Renegade forums to say hi to the community and promote his new game. He was the online lead for Renegade; in other words, he was in charge of beta testing Renegade (and Sole Survivor)
I asked him about the pointsfix, i.e. whether Westwood intended it, blah blah.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v284/MaidenTy1/lordmot1.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v284/MaidenTy1/lordmot4.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v284/MaidenTy1/lordmot5.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v284/MaidenTy1/lordmot2.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v284/MaidenTy1/lordmot3.jpg
This completely corresponds with everything myself, Crimson and BlackIntel have been saying. It wasn't intended, it was a mistake that wasn't noticed in time.
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
|
|
|
|
Re: Pointfix poll. Bug or Balance? [message #414812 is a reply to message #414533] |
Mon, 21 December 2009 01:22 |
|
Crimson
Messages: 7429 Registered: February 2003 Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars) ADMINISTRATOR |
|
|
R315r4z0r wrote on Sat, 19 December 2009 13:15 | Well, tbh... I've never payed attention to points.
|
You don't have to pay attention to points to be affected by this bug. As you undoubtedly know, points = credits, and surely you have made purchases with credits that you wouldn't have earned doing the same action on a fixed server.
So, let's say that you're down to your barracks and the other team has you pinned. You can't leave your base without dying, they are sending wave after wave of vehicles after your barracks. Your engies/hotties are getting credits (at half the rate of the enemy) for repairing the barracks, but your Mobius and PICs are killing the stanks/ftanks and getting so much extra money, that they are able to replace their character when they fail to dodge the several snipers surrounding the base.
This never-ending loop continues... Nod has plenty of income from their attacks so they don't have to let up on them. GDI makes stupid money from shooting tanks that they can keep a good stock of PIC and Mobius despite heavy sniper cover. Unfortunately, GDI's unbalance and bugged point growth eventually overshadow's Nod and now the team that was pwnt to the max wins that map.
This can not stand, surely.
I'm the bawss.
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat Nov 09 17:01:31 MST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01577 seconds
|