We have a scoreboard ?

[Buginator]

Since people have said that knowing what your enemy is up to is cheating, we are tossing around the idea of putting "flags" or perhaps something else in that space.
The flags could be animated, and or start to glow when a player is doing very well...

Here is a sample screenshot.

What say you all ?

[Berg]

I'd prefer to have flags as seeing what your enemy is building always seemed to be a bit of a cheat to me.
Regards Berg

[WarTux]

Meh. IMO, seeing what your enemy is building isn't "cheating." In fact, if you're against decent players, 90% of the time all you'll see are cyborgs.

[KenAlcock]

I could care less about what the scoreboard shows for each player. The only useful thing about showing a unit is that it lets you know which MP opponent has units left so you can wipe them out and finish the game already.


Until the scoreboard can actually show accurate scores, it's fairly useless to me, except to transfer power and units to a teammate.

[alto1234]

I'd prefer to have flags as seeing what your enemy is building always seemed to be a bit of a cheat to me.
Regards Berg

it is a bit of a cheat. i'd prefer anything that doesn't magically give away intel.

Meh. IMO, seeing what your enemy is building isn't "cheating." In fact, if you're against decent players, 90% of the time all you'll see are cyborgs.

false, decent players don't build cyborgs 90% of the time. magically seeing what your enemy is building is in fact cheating - how was this intel acquired? can i use this method to magically reveal parts of the map or at least have a technical counterpart like a comsat station? (i don't want that in warzone, just illustrating a point.)

I could care less about what the scoreboard shows for each player. The only useful thing about showing a unit is that it lets you know which MP opponent has units left so you can wipe them out and finish the game already.

showing units actually gives away a lot of intel; just because you don't care about that intel doesn't mean it's not valuable.

Until the scoreboard can actually show accurate scores, it's fairly useless to me, except to transfer power and units to a teammate.

i think the scoreboard should show a K:D ratio (kill/death) for buildings and units similar to how you can flash the scoreboard in some first-person shooters. the scoreboard flash is left enabled even in professional competitions for games like counter-strike, so i'd guess it doesn't reveal too much vital information. you can see who's doing well but not specifically what they're doing, producing, etc.

example:
Name | K:D Units | K:D Buildings
alto1234 | 100:34 | 5:1
that would mean I'd killed 100 droids so far, lost 34, killed 5 buildings, and lost 1.

[Zarel]

Idea: Units are shown if you have no Command Center. Flags are shown if you do.

One more incentive to make a Command Center.

P.S. We already have much nicer-looking flags in the game setup screen - why aren't we using those?

[Dalton]

putting "flags"

Yes put flags, showing the units takes away a major part of the game, scouting!

I could care less about what the scoreboard shows for each player. The only useful thing about showing a unit is that it lets you know which MP opponent has units left so you can wipe them out and finish the game already.

It is all about countering your enemies units so it is actually a major part of the game currently it is like free scouting.

Idea: Units are shown if you have no Command Center. Flags are shown if you do. One more incentive to make a Command Center.

There is almost no game you will not make a Command Center since you need to design units and want the Mini-Map.

[Zarel]

There is almost no game you will not make a Command Center since you need to design units and want the Mini-Map.

It's for near the end of a game, where you've taken out someone's base but they still have some units and structures left somewhere.

[alto1234]

There is almost no game you will not make a Command Center since you need to design units and want the Mini-Map.

It's for near the end of a game, where you've taken out someone's base but they still have some units and structures left somewhere.

then don't enable endgame magic, players can use vtol scouts and mop up... \

[Buginator]

Idea: Units are shown if you have no Command Center. Flags are shown if you do.

One more incentive to make a Command Center.

P.S. We already have much nicer-looking flags in the game setup screen - why aren't we using those?

We are not using bitmaps.
Those are special flags.

[NoQ]

I like the idea. Those units are spoiling. I like Zarel's idea about no command center, too; though it's unrealistic, it is removing a lot of annoying work (you beat an enemy with a mg viper wheels rush, and then have to wait till VTOLs to find his last tank?)

[JDW]

... it is removing a lot of annoying work (you beat an enemy with a mg viper wheels rush, and then have to wait till VTOLs to find his last tank?)

Agreed. But what if the last unit is a truck which the (almost) defeated player may use to rebuild his base?

[NoQ]

Agreed. But what if the last unit is a truck which the (almost) defeated player may use to rebuild his base?

Then he'll eventually build a command center and we'll know it, that's all.

[Zarel]

We are not using bitmaps.
Those are special flags.

erm... be more specific?

[3drts]

1) It is not cheating, it is a purposefully coded game feature available to everyone by default with no special tricks to get to.

2) It may be the weakest form of an exploit, if the developers initially just thought having a player's avatar be one of their units was cool, but didn't actually intend for it to replace scouting in many cases.

3) There are many form of "game magic" that add to gameplay (like units that don't run out of fuel or ammo, etc). This certainly alters gameplay - If I do not intend to rush, I may keep a close eye on the screen, and only start producing units once I see the enemy has done so.
Removing this feature would make early game rushing easier, as it would be easier to catch players unaware.
Same goes with VTOLs, many players won't put up AA until they see enemy VTOLs built (but still, with the research time for vtols to be effective, one should have researched some AA even if they didn't construct any before the enemy made VTOLs)
It also removes strategy, particularly that related to scouting.
Does the feature add to gameplay? thats hard to say, it certainly *alters* it, and reduces the viability of certain strategies (early rush/vtol rush), and the usefulness of others(scouting).
But many strategy games are plagued by people crying about being rushed, I'm not sure an "anti-rush feature" (or at least "possible rush forming - feature") should be removed.

4) I'd like to see the # of kills displayed, though this might be detrimental to FFA games, it would allow easier assessment of which side came out ahead after a Clash.