Ok as Spadge pointed out in another thread (that he has now closed), I asked him repeatedly how the point system and scoring worked for the game that they have produced.

THE CALCULATION IS NOT ONE WHICH WILL MAKE ONE BLIND BIT OF DIFFERENCE. PLAY AND WIN AS MANY AS YOU CAN, MAKE KILLS AND CAUSE DAMAGE - THAT'S IT IN A NUTSHELL.

The above was his answer and 6-7 posts of trying to find out the answer. Are you saying that we are too stupid to understand it. The more evasive you are being, the more people will want to know.


So take this as a poll. One which he will prob close on seeing before it gains support.

Anyway, anyone that wants to know how the scoring system works, please sign below.


Kingdangler1

The XBLA version of Worms obviously isn't intended for rabidly competitive people. If it was, skill would mean more than the sheer amount of games played as far as the rankings go. It doesn't. If it was, only 1v1 games would count for rankings. If it was, the ranked scheme wouldn't have crates in it. If it was, the physics wouldn't be simplified to the point where everything feels like it was made of chewing gum.

So no, I don't want to know precise details about an equation that wasn't meant to be picked apart by people who care too much about the number next to their nickname on a website. I hate watching people stomp all over their karma wearing football shoes.

Ok as Spadge pointed out in another thread (that he has now closed), I asked him repeatedly how the point system and scoring worked for the game that they have produced.

THE CALCULATION IS NOT ONE WHICH WILL MAKE ONE BLIND BIT OF DIFFERENCE. PLAY AND WIN AS MANY AS YOU CAN, MAKE KILLS AND CAUSE DAMAGE - THAT'S IT IN A NUTSHELL.

The above was his answer and 6-7 posts of trying to find out the answer. Are you saying that we are too stupid to understand it. The more evasive you are being, the more people will want to know.


So take this as a poll. One which he will prob close on seeing before it gains support.

Anyway, anyone that wants to know how the scoring system works, please sign below.


Kingdangler1

You are plainly being completely judgemental here! Spade had just said exactly what the scoring system was:- Kills, Wins, Damage, and you're like; "Are you saying we're too stupid? Bleh bleh bleh, look at me, Oh spadge will close this as soon as he sees it meh meh meh."

Shut. Up.

Nobody wants to hear about a whiny kid telling the world what a big bad man Spadge is when he quite clearly isnt.

Also, remember to put question marks at the end of questions please.

yes, you now have the formula, more kills and less losses = higher skill rating, more damage = higher skill rating, better win/loss ratio = better skill rating, more games played = better skill rating. want me to repeat the formula? :P

also you should link to where you quote from.

While the young ruffian above is going about it the wrong way, one of his questions was quite valid.

do you get 100 point damage for punching someone in the water or not ?.

then again , your still going to punch someone in the water whether you get 0 damage or 100 anyway , so I suppose it doesn't really matter.

I suppose it counts as a kill, instead of the damage...

Wins and Kills are worth more then Damage, Spadge has said as much.

So even if it doesn't count as 100 damage (which would be nice to know), it's still a Kill which is worth the most anyway.

Sorry SPADGE.

I am not apologising because of some of the ignorant comments above. But because I was being irrational and I just got frustrated at the answers I was getting. I suppose I am one of these annoying people that like to know the mechanics of the game. And I am competitive, BUT, I also have fun playing the game. Just ask Brevv, BAD ASSSS ANDY, TASTYBLUNT, all guys at the top of the leaderboard. We are competitive, but we all have fun in the process. And KRD, if it wasnt supposed to be competitive, then why have ranked games?

I supposed you have answered most of my questions and that I would just like to say that you guys have done a great job. None of the glitches (I thought they were minor anyway) bugged me. And I thoroughly enjoy playing the game. But on this note, I would hope that you fix the airstrike glitch and was wondering if you had any plans to do this. I know that it is fair on both sides in the fact that both people can do it, but it kind of defeats the purpose of darksiding, etc. And takes the skill out of making people use grenades.

Anyway I am sorry for my rant and hope that you can accept my apology. I am not sure if you have much time to actually play much of the game now, but if you do I would like very much toget you a game sometime.

Oh sorry, one more question. Do 1v1 games count just as much as 4v4 games as far as rankings are concerned. Im just curious as I always play 4 player games, 3 at least as they are much more fun.

I hope you can accept my apology for being an ass and i look forward to your response.

If you look through that thread, most of the answers you got were not irrational, Spadge said, "If I can find the file, I can tell you...", so he looked for it, and he was trying to research the other stuff too.

Just because he is the manager of Team17 does not mean he knows all the games inside out. That's what the designers and programmers know most about. Try finding out their names and asking them.

If you look at my comment again Robowurmz, you will find that i said that 'I' was being irrational. I never said that the answers I got were irrational.

No, but you said they were ignorant. :p

But, apples and oranges, it doesn't matter. Let us all rejoice in the apologyness.

If you look at my comment again Grim you will find that i did not address anyone as ignorant. I did say there 'comments' were ignorant if thats what u mean.

Very entertaining thread, but lets be quite blunt here... getting a high ranking on the ongoing / monthly / weekly boards is nice but lightweight... what really counts is the true skill ranking. Why? some of you might ask indignantly??? Simply because even very medicore players who play a lot can get a high ongoing score but have no hope of getting a respectable True Skill score.
I think that Spadge mentioned somewhere that the ratio of wins to losses counts, but when you look at the leader boards some of the guys at the top lose a lot of games. If you take the top ranked players on True Skill and check their win / loss ratio (try finding them in the ongoing ranking to see this) then you'll get a sense of the difference between the two ranking systems.

My point = errrr, not sure really... is it mandatory to have a point though?

PS - is there anybody left out there who hasn't played Bad Ass Andy yet?

Doubtfull. But try these two guys as they are by far the best. Not just because they play a lot. But because they win a lot.

Brevv and Crook A1, I play a lot with. And these guys are by far the best wormers out there.

The formula itself is very abstract. You will not benefit from knowing it, other than win more, play more. It's not a simple ratio and you score additional points for kills and damage (in that order) and there's points for experience (playing). Priority is your wins and win-ratio.

But i've said all that before.

As for the trueskill stuff, there's a huge explanation on microsoft's site about how that's calculated. And no, I still don't get it...

There's nothing in worms t17 scoring charts (weekly, monthly and overall) that gives points for specific kill types and actions. It might be something we consider in future games though.

As for the trueskill stuff, there's a huge explanation on microsoft's site about how that's calculated. And no, I still don't get it...

link me please :)

http://research.microsoft.com/mlp/trueskill/Details.aspx

I personally think a rating system that complicated is a waste of time in itself when an infinitely simpler Elo [that's what most chess ladders use] does the job as well if not better than it*. Plus then there's the hard to overlook fact that in spite of the ingenious hypermathematics behind it, TrueSkill™ gave the best two people on XBLA Worms the rating of 33 while everyone else in the top ten got 32. As I've noted somewhere before, that's so sad it's not even funny anymore.

*Although apparently it cannot be modified to work for games with more than 2 players according to Microsoft. Although WA leagues did exactly that in the past. Anyway, at least on games like Worms, 1v1 games should be the only ones counting for rankings in the first place if precise representation of skill was what you were after.