PDA

View Full Version : Alternate Scoring. (OR: Make Players Move...)



SlartyBartFast
02-01-2005, 05:23 PM
Tired of the paint fling-fest and boring elimination games? Here’s an idea:

How difficult would it be to rig up a timing and detection system so that the exact time a flag is pulled and then hung is known?

Then, instead of giving points simply based on pulling and hanging the flag points could be calculated based on a decreasing scale.

According to the NPPL, the value of a flag pull is currently 32 points and a hang is worth 40 points.

Currently you can max a game by sitting around firing, eliminating the other team, leisurely pulling the flag, sauntering to the flag station, lounging about checking the carrier(**), then finally hanging the flag just before the game time running out. (Alright it’s an exaggerated description :p)

How about instead using the following scales (I increased game length to 8 minutes because the timing is less messy/annoying):

Flag Pull:
Segment [time elapsed] points
0 [0.000-4.000] 32
1/2 [4.001-6.000] 16
3/4 [6.001-7.000] 8
7/8 [7.001-7.500] 4
15/16 [7.501-8.000] 2

Then base flag hangs on time elapsed since the pull. Say give them half a game to complete a hang.
Flag Hang:
[time elapsed] points
[0.000-2.000] 40
[2.001-3.000] 20
[3.001-3.500] 10
[3.501-3.750] 5
[3.751-4.000] 2.5

The problem with this is that maximum flag hang points can be obtained even if the flag is pulled at the last minute in a game. Perhaps the maximum flag hang should also be a factor of when the pull was made.

If a timing system was used, the calculation can be as complex as you want and the ‘half-life’ of the flag hang could be calculated based on remaining game time. The points for the hang would be start at full value when the flag is pulled (40 points) and be reduced by half at the 1/2 (20 points), 3/4 (10 points), 7/8 (5 points), and 15/16 (2.5 points) of time remaining.

Now THAT would make you hustle if you pull the flag in the last minute. You’d have 30 seconds to hang the flag or lose half the value. :D Any remaining opposing players could have a dramatic effect on the outcome if they can even just delay the flag carrier.

Maximum points for a match would become rarer and more difficult to achieve. Ties much more unlikely. Teams would be forced to hustle. More of a risk of a tagged player hanging the flag ** (little time to check).

Of course another alternative would be a more evenly spaced ‘half-life’ using each fifth of the game instead of the exponential model I’ve outlined. But I like the fact that the rapidly decreasing model does allow some space/slack for when there are likely more players on the field and then hurries the end-game.

Another twist I’d like to see played out. Change the end of game rules to read:

18.02 A game will end by (i) a successful flag hang, (ii) the elimination of all opposing players on the game field, or (iii) 7 minutes after the start of the game.

That would add the option of a final remaining player on one side to “suicide” and finish the game before the hang occurs. Or sheer panic and confusion on the flag carriers team not knowing whether to shoot the last remaining opponent who is now running around after the flag carrier. Can’t say that would be easy to ref... :rofl:





** This is something I didn’t understand when watching local tournaments. What’s the penalty for hanging the flag if the carrier was infact marked? If the team making the hang did find a mark on the carrier what can they legally do about it? Surely changing carriers because of a hit would be an admission of playing on of the flag carier and result in a two for one. The game would be impossible to replay from the point the hit occured and the hang SHOULD be impossible to attain at that point.

My guess is it’s one of those nasty situations that is ignored by all refs...

Enemy
02-02-2005, 04:18 AM
if the flag hang is comitted bye a dead carrier then the pull obviously doesnt count and the game ends on elimination points only!! thats why it is better to check before you pull the flag not after or atleast thats what i understood from my last tourney.


also an interesting idea but too complex to understand for anyone that doesnt really know the rules yet scoring is hard enough to comprehend and you want to add to it!! ;)

SlartyBartFast
02-02-2005, 11:35 AM
also an interesting idea but too complex to understand for anyone that doesnt really know the rules yet scoring is hard enough to comprehend and you want to add to it!! ;)

I'm not sure anyone understands all the rules or how to apply them.

I would like to have comments on whether the time based scoring would make for a more interesting game or not.

Lohman446
02-02-2005, 11:53 AM
I have been trying to convince my team that, win or loose, all games should be over in two minutes.. push hard, you will succeed more often than not. It seems to me, in paintball, there is a natural advantage to being the aggressor and defensive teams seldom do exceptionally well.

SlartyBartFast
02-02-2005, 11:57 AM
I have been trying to convince my team that, win or loose, all games should be over in two minutes.. push hard, you will succeed more often than not. It seems to me, in paintball, there is a natural advantage to being the aggressor and defensive teams seldom do exceptionally well.

But, do you think a scoring system like the one I proposed would increase the aggresiveness of the games and have a positive effect?

Would it encourage more movement past initial positions? Or would strategy remain static.

TheTramp
02-02-2005, 12:23 PM
I REALLY like the idea of the game ending when either the flag is hung or one side is completely eliminated.

That would mix things up I'm sure.

OmniM
02-02-2005, 12:27 PM
We use a time scoring system here in Sweden in the Northen European Series.

The faster you end the game, more points you get. But we dont use flags, we use a stop button in the "flag"-zone instead.

Scoring as follows:
Time Stoppage: 50 pts
Within 2 min: 20 pts
Within 3 min: 15 pts
Within 4 min: 10 pts

... sth like that you mean?

trains are bad
02-02-2005, 12:44 PM
Games would improve if field got rid of the freaking back bunkers!

Most fields have at least two nice tall wide standups on the back and nothing but little cans and doritos up front. Wonder why teams play it safe?

I swear they structure it that way so they sell lots of paint.

There is no variety in painball fields.

I like to see crazy setups. As long as the field is symetrical it's still fair.


AND another thing that pisses me off is when fields are structured such that you are very unlikely to pull the flag without eliminating the whole other team. If that's the case, why have the flag? Why not just give the flag hang points to the winning team?

trains are bad
02-02-2005, 12:58 PM
Here's a field for ya. rough but you get the idea. The circles are 7' cans and the squares are little blocks, triagles doritos.

You want movement? Ha. This field makes laning down the center OTB about useless, with no advantage to staying in the back. Angles change fast and communication very important as you can't see across the whole friggen field. Plus it is concevable that a team could run the flag with the other team still in. But alas paintball is devoid of feilds with the capital and balls to take any risks or innovation whatsoever.

It's like there's this unofficial 'format' for a paintball field that fields are afraid to deviat from.

SlartyBartFast
02-02-2005, 02:08 PM
I REALLY like the idea of the game ending when either the flag is hung or one side is completely eliminated.

That would mix things up I'm sure.

And it would be easy to add without any technology required.

SlartyBartFast
02-02-2005, 02:21 PM
We use a time scoring system here in Sweden in the Northen European Series.

The faster you end the game, more points you get. But we dont use flags, we use a stop button in the "flag"-zone instead.

Scoring as follows:
Time Stoppage: 50 pts
Within 2 min: 20 pts
Within 3 min: 15 pts
Within 4 min: 10 pts

... sth like that you mean?

Now THAT sounds really cool. :cool:

Are the rules for that series available on the web? (and in English? :p )

But that approach does eliminate a "middle" target and points related to the flag pull.

NukeGoose
02-02-2005, 02:25 PM
Ending the game when all the players from one side are eliminated (before the flag hang) would be completely ludicrous. The last player could just stand out in the open and mow down anyone who tried to hang the flag without worry of getting shot... not my idea of a good game. Remember that the last player for a team has a gun too. You'd have to freight train 2 or 3 players to the flag station and hope that the flag carrier can make it unmauled, while his buddies take a pelting.

I do agree with the increasing points for quick flag hangs though. That'd make it more interesting.

SlartyBartFast
02-02-2005, 02:37 PM
Ending the game when all the players from one side are eliminated (before the flag hang) would be completely ludicrous.

Hilarious, perhaps. Ludicrous, well that's a matter of opinion.

Perhaps bonus points for total eliminations based on time as well to balance the equation.

jamescell
02-02-2005, 03:49 PM
Awsome idea, I LOVE it!

SlartyBartFast
02-02-2005, 04:09 PM
Complicating scoring further:

Eliminations are worth more the quicker in the game they're made.

tyrion2323
02-02-2005, 04:11 PM
Ehh...

Sounds like an artificial way to create hyper-fast games. Strategy and tactics are a big part of these "paint fling-fest and boring elimination games." With extremely tight time limits, it would become an all-out rush for the flag.

The NXL is already plenty fast and exciting, and NPPL is extremely fun to play, due to its fast breaks and game-openers.

I say keep things the way they are.

mag88888
02-02-2005, 04:22 PM
tyrion, you live in Vermont? eh. where specifically? im around Burlington.

SlartyBartFast
02-02-2005, 04:38 PM
Sounds like an artificial way to create hyper-fast games. Strategy and tactics are a big part of these "paint fling-fest and boring elimination games." With extremely tight time limits, it would become an all-out rush for the flag.

I'm not denying there's a strategy. It's just that the strategy is static:

1- Break and run to initial positions.
2- Ensure other team doesn't pull flag.
3- Eliminate other team.
4- Pull flag.
5- Hang Flag.

At least that's all I saw at the tournaments I watched.

The only thing that mixed it up were when the occasional last man standing made a desperate attempt to pull the flag.

The only drive at the beginning of the game is to find cover and then attempt eliminations. The flag isn't even a consideration. As someone else mentioned: why even bother with them?

If the scoring was balanced between quick flag pulls and hangs versus quick eliminations then each team would have to fix an objective in addition to breaking and finding cover. Cover the flag and go for eliminations or cover your runner and go for a pull then push hard for a hang. Or, go for a quick pull and then pull back defensively and play an elimination game.

tyrion2323
02-02-2005, 05:04 PM
Slarty,

That certainly hasn't been my experience with tournaments. Of course, I'm not a pro, so I'm not usually playing in the big leagues; however, I've played many a tournament in which the securing of the flag half-way through the game actually placed us in the top three.

I think my resistance to the idea stems more from the face that the NPPL and NXL that I've been seeing has been extremely exciting. Watching Ollie Lang make fantastic tape runs gets my heart racing. Watching XBall is about as exciting and straightforward as I've experienced, though I do enjoy the chess-like strategy of NPPL a bit more.

Perhaps an alternative league, built up on the local level, would be a good breeding ground for your scoring system. Since it's on the local level, you might even see some new styles that the pros haven't uncovered...

I dunno, just a thought.

mag888888 - I live in Essex.

Loud Tim
02-02-2005, 05:54 PM
ive heard this before from some of the old originbal s.o.b.s and i think someone patented it or something close to it. but where is beemer when you really need him

SlartyBartFast
02-02-2005, 06:02 PM
the old original s.o.b.s

:confused:

Who?!?

mag88888
02-02-2005, 08:10 PM
Tyrion-sweet, i live in essex too. i said burlington just in case you lived in southern vermont and had no clue where essex was. most people know burlington better than essex. so where do you play? ive been to colchester, wiliston oasis(closed now), not much else. are there any indoor places around here?