Elo rating system

[YoMama]

- I still believe securities should be penalized for killing someone away from the president. It's ok in some situations, but in most of them it's not. You can say it's a way to pressure them to head to the president

I'm in a Rustler and can be both far away and close while being within ~10 seconds of the President. SoLoD jumps off my car when I'm President to sacrifice himself because Terrorists only seem to know how to DM people right in front of them, instead of driving by them and continuing to follow the President. Your system doesn't award points properly.

- If you don't lose points when killed, what would prevent Mr. X and his friend from making a deal to kill each other so they both earn points? And also, how would cops and civilians lose points?
- I don't think terrorists should lose more points the longer they take to kill the president. That would cause players who are concerned about their Elo to vanish from terrorist class as soon as there's a president who will presumably take long to kill (someone camping on a NRG or in a very remote area, for example). Also, if it was like that, terrorists would still be penalized if they killed the president but took too long. I don't think it's fair.

To be honest, I just don't want people to feel that there is any penalty for dying, so they'll actually do things like bodyshield the President (something few people apart from me seem to do). Yes, maybe terrorists would leave the class, but you think they wouldn't if they knew they were about to lose 7 points?

- I would penalize for sniper or chainsaw use, but not that much... you're suggesting 60-70% penalizations, that's a lot. It's not that easy to get a kill with those weapons.
- If points were given for giving damage, then points should be substracted for taking damage. Otherwise, what would Mr. X and his friend from damaging each other and refilling at armor, so they both earn points?

You can hit people with snipers from extremely far distances and take down a lot of health, which in my opinion makes them unbalanced. Saws stop you from moving once you're being hit with one. Just the fact that they are constantly used should tell you that they give an advantage. I see snipers in close-range fights now too, which is ridiculous.

You're also right that no kill penalties mean farming is possible. I think the way to avoid this while eliminating a fear of death would be to eliminate the kill rewards, but then you begin to neuter the system.

All of this discourages people to play the game mode, which I assume was one of the goals for this system,  and instead shifts the focus onto gaining elo. Yes, the numbers can be changed, how elo gained can be changed but at the end of the day, gaining elo will be the target and players will want to do that in the easiest and least tiring way possible.

The man has a point.

[Aksel]

Elo rating system is methode for calculating the relative skill levels of players in competitive games this would work in chess and some esport games (cs:go , league of legend Overwatch ect)  it was created to make sure that players will face another team in same level skills, to make game comptitive! so everyone would have fun.

but for what will we use elo points in server? its a nice idea but scripting it would take too much énergie and time.


this elo system would work under one condition, only if server is forcing players into a class  so terrorist and cop/sec should have close elo points. and in this case Server should punish if a cop was close to a terro w/o fighting him and opposite thing

[Satvik]

-1 we dont need it, its good as it is

[Carg]

Yeah but why would some terrorist try to kill the pres and get 7 points when he can try killing civs & cops way faster and easier, it will just make more ppl to stop following their duty.

[Faro0s]

The idea is pretty good but I don't think it is worth of implementing it in ptp since ptp is unique in its gamemode. I will give +1 for giving it a try although it seems to be a time consuming task.

[YoMama]

Maybe this could be reworked so it's points per class- so you get a certain amount of points for following your /duty (except Civilians and Vice). Then in /stats, you'd have a President score, a Security score, a SWAT/Police score, and a Terrorist score, all based on /duty. So based on my original post:

President gets points for:
- his survival time
- if he kills attackers
- how far away the terrorists are
- winning

Security get points for:
- being near the President for a certain proportion of time
- damaging attackers while meeting the condition above
- more points the longer the President survives
- sacrificing themselves while meeting the first condition so the President survives longer

Police/SWAT get points for:
- damaging attackers anywhere
- the same points the Security get for doing what the Security do.

Terrorists get points for:
- how quickly they kill the president
- killing the president
- more individual points to those who contribute to damaging the President.

All points would be factored by the cumulative points that the opposing teams/players have.

[Madman]

Pls dont ruin the gamemode.if u wanna add ths suggestion,most of ppls will be terror and all of them will just attack president so ofc he will die and the map will change sooner as ever.

[YoMama]

Pls dont ruin the gamemode.if u wanna add ths suggestion,most of ppls will be terror and all of them will just attack president so ofc he will die and the map will change sooner as ever.

I'm not sure you understand the gamemode.

[Madman]

Pls dont ruin the gamemode.if u wanna add ths suggestion,most of ppls will be terror and all of them will just attack president so ofc he will die and the map will change sooner as ever.

I'm not sure you understand the gamemode.

Stop lying,ok ?
xD.ik the gamemode well

[Jonne]

This is an interesting idea, but I think this is a bit too extensive. I'd go for something a bit simpler, that could maybe replace the current scoring system (the scores you see when you press tab), since nobody really pays attention to those scores. Maybe in the long run we'll work something out like this, but I think it'll be closer to this suggestion.