More scoring options

[shinygerbil]

Well, on the back of the shinyBonsai scandal, I propose that more precise scoring options become available. In particular, scoring when in a ceasefire, although more general options should be available. I am aware this is very similar to this thread, but I decided to make a new one to increase the attention.

Essentially, scores should be customisable, to avoid the nightmare that has recently occurred within the Unofficial Tournament. I suggest something like this:

Code: Select all

[StartPoints]
StartPoints    0

[NoAlliance]
Kills          2
Deaths         -1
Collateral     -2

[CeaseFire]
Kills          2
Deaths         -2
Collateral     -2

[Alliance]
Kills          0
Deaths         -1
Collateral     -2

In case it's not self-explanatory, I basically want to distinguish scoring depending on your diplomatic status with a player. So you score differently against a ceasefired player than against a genuine enemy.

Technically, the Collateral option is obsolete, but I've added it there just to be sure. These values should be stored in a text file, with some limits obviously. Note the change I've made: You now lose twice the points if a player you are ceasefiring with hits you. This, for example, will give a little extra deterrent to "exchanging populations" (i.e. you will make no overall gain in points, and waste your time and nukes on your partner-in-crime). It's still not perfect, as it just makes a genuine backstab of a ceasefired 'ally' all the more damaging. I suppose that's just more incentive to backstab and avoid being backstabbed yourself

Any thoughts? This is essentially the same as KingAl's suggestion, but with possibly less scope, i.e. just scores, rather than speed settings/unit settings. I just think that after the animosity flying around in the past week, something like this could be very useful.

sg

[xander]

Honestly, in tournament play, I think that there are easier ways to prevent that tactic from being used, if the organizers consider it to be a problem. For instance, you could simply use survivor scoring. A slightly more complicated solution would be to only allow one person per game to advance (thanks to bert for this idea). This would involve multiple games with the same set of players in a given round, but would also solve the problem.

While I would like to see more flexibility in the scoring system, but I don't think that extra categories of scoring need to be thrown in. I like the current system of Kills / Survivors / Collateral. I just wish that we could manually place values on those.

xander

[DeepQantas]

Hm.

You could still exchange populations. For example, by putting the silos into launch mode so they don't shoot down your friend's bombers and nukes.