What killboard features would you want?

[Anarius Faust]

I am currently working on a bit of a rewrite/reimplementation of the eve-dev killboards, mainly because I want my kb to do some things edk can't and I am bored atm. What I want to do is:

- A proper "personal" killboard, for all my chars
- Real user management, e.g. logging in for comments, managing your chars, etc.
- Better clustering algorithm for related kills
- Not rape the database like edk

So while I am at it, is there anything else you'd like to see from a killboard? I won't change much of the layout probably, I am not very good at layouting. Feature suggestions are welcome though.

[Paul Knuth]

Have a look at the eve-kill (http://failheap-challenge.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=633) thread in this forum, there are a lot of opinions about what features would be nice/suck.

[ashnazg]

- related kills - make it so that it shows three or even four parties if this many were involved in the fight? There are many threeways in EVE and currently they get kinda broke down to two parties... so basically add a 3rd column under related kills if the killboard detects a threeway. If that is even possible, that is. :)
- comments on related kills, so basically the possibility to comment on a whole fight.

[Anarius Faust]

Have a look at the eve-kill (http://failheap-challenge.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=633) thread in this forum, there are a lot of opinions about what features would be nice/suck.

Ah, I had a look at that, didnt notice besides all the whining about the hosting (which I can't really do much about) there is actually useful ideas somewhere in there :) Some stuff I found which I think would be doable/useful:

- Better search function, e.g. search for all Vindicator losses by Garmon and stuff like that. That should def. be doable.
- Merging Battles across systems.
- Better / Different Point system
- Solo kill/losses list

[Anarius Faust]

- related kills - make it so that it shows three or even four parties if this many were involved in the fight? There are many threeways in EVE and currently they get kinda broke down to two parties... so basically add a 3rd column under related kills if the killboard detects a threeway. If that is even possible, that is. :)
- comments on related kills, so basically the possibility to comment on a whole fight.

Detecting threeways and so on is doable, but not particularly easy. This is what I was calling clustering above. A first step would be to have people at least no longer appear on both sides of a battle :)

What I have been thinking about is the possibility to create a "battle report" manually, so you can just select yourself who fought whom when and where and you get a nice listing of all kills in a pretty format. You can then link it in your BR, people can comment on it, etc. That would be a lot easier to implement than the current "related" pages.

[illectro]

For lulz: achievements, preferably user defined.

Thing like "Can't stop the Rokh - get 5 kills in a rokh"
'loner - 10 solo kills'
'friends in high places - get a killmail with a faction navy providing assistance'
'say hello to my litte friends - get killmails with droneboats'

Completely pointless but, maybe worth some fun

[Rans]

people asking for achievs are literally faggots.

[Liptonez]

Things I want the most: Battle report comments, kills by system/region/security (especially wormholes).

A bling kills page would be sweet too. :D Other than that, a global kill overview that every KB but eve-kill has. Like, you can click jump freighters and it'll show all JF kills.

[xanral]

What I have been thinking about is the possibility to create a "battle report" manually, so you can just select yourself who fought whom when and where and you get a nice listing of all kills in a pretty format. You can then link it in your BR, people can comment on it, etc. That would be a lot easier to implement than the current "related" pages.

A manual battle report would be nice. My main issue is when there have been multiple unrelated fights in a system with differing numbers of people on our side.

[Airow]

edit: shit wrong thread... :facepalm:

[RoemySchneider]

people only getting %s of the kill according to damage, same for value
... until ppl realize their current 10:1 ratio is actually pretty shit

[Kenpachi]

For lulz: achievements, preferably user defined.

Thing like "Can't stop the Rokh - get 5 kills in a rokh"
'loner - 10 solo kills'
'friends in high places - get a killmail with a faction navy providing assistance'
'say hello to my litte friends - get killmails with droneboats'
Completely pointless but, maybe worth some fun

:psyduck: :facepalm:


people asking for achievs are literally faggots.
:obama:

[Gix Tyrionn]

Avg number of people on their killmails listed as a stat. Cuts how scrolling down the list.

[Wrack]

I want a good flexible search tool for finding kills based on all sorts of different parameters.

For example, these sorts of thing should be searchable:
- I want to find battlecruisers that I've killed in wormholes
- I want to find jaguars that were killed by solo ishkurs
- I want to find dead drakes worth over 200 mil
- I want to find dead capitals with less than 8 people on the KM

[Lana Torrin]

I want a good flexible search tool for finding kills based on all sorts of different parameters.

For example, these sorts of thing should be searchable:
- I want to find battlecruisers that I've killed in wormholes
- I want to find jaguars that were killed by solo ishkurs
- I want to find dead drakes worth over 200 mil
- I want to find dead capitals with less than 8 people on the KM

This so much this... Some sort of query like language would be nice (regex?) so you can do all sorts of wonderful things like get the stats of corp B to corp C in region x when corp A was not involved..

[Lusulpher]

-Distances from target when target agressed/died.
-Speed of target when aggression began
-Selected Orbit range of both targets
-Lowest HP of attackers who survived.

I too, would like to be leet. :oops:

[Sneakyfool]

Any kills with falcons on the killmail get zero score, or minus tbh :)

[Ralara]

I want a good flexible search tool for finding kills based on all sorts of different parameters.

For example, these sorts of thing should be searchable:
- I want to find battlecruisers that I've killed in wormholes
- I want to find jaguars that were killed by solo ishkurs
- I want to find dead drakes worth over 200 mil
- I want to find dead capitals with less than 8 people on the KM


And this is so retardedly easy.

Display killmails where $location=wormhole AND $shiptype=drake AND $value>200000000 AND $numberofattackers<3

etc. Could be done like google - a simple search (like what we have now) and an advanced search with dropdowns for what you want.

[Anarius Faust]

Better search is definitely something I want to do, all the queries you guys listed should be easily doable, I am thinking about a filter system like wowhead has it for example. A lot of that is dependent on your killmail archive though, I can't do much about that.

Good feedback so far, I will post some progress reports on how the coding goes :)

[Brimborium]

Sorting kills by "time of death", so you can better "guesstimate" the target calling after a fight. Reconstructing a fight just from killboard stats,is a tedious process, especially with larger battles.

[Don Pellegrino]

I would like the ability to set standings and/or to force entities to be on the left or on the right side of a battle report.

[depili]

I would like the ability to set standings and/or to force entities to be on the left or on the right side of a battle report.

This pretty much. Or atleast make it so that all of alliance X is on one side only (the side where most of them would be) and definitely no people showing up on both sides and killmails showing both as losses and kills.

[Dwergi]

Yeah, I'd like to be able to set my alliance and blues as the only ones appearing on the left. Anyone else would appear on the right. Explicitly specifying who's on which side (especially for three-ways) would be very awesome.

[Shin_getter]

I would like the ability to set standings and/or to force entities to be on the left or on the right side of a battle report.
+1 ,especially when aoe stuff is being use around.


Also, maybe some sort of machine interface for datamining purposes.

[joe space]

* search function at least as good as greifwatch. really good suggestions iirc. imho, the one thing that matters the most here is having easy access to solo-kills, like in greifwatch.

* point system at least as good as greifwatch. eve-kill point system is horrible. no points at all ever for killing POS mods oh my fucking god.

* battlereports at least as good as eve-kill. really like the idea of showing 3 ways accurately and forcing with standings.

* add "favorite engagements." an option to select your personal favorite battlereports to display at the top of your own personal page. something like the "highest isk kills of the week" thing on eve-kill, except it is selected by the player to appear on their personal page and it is not limited to recent kills. display wise, it could look just like the highest isk kills thing. it would display the highest isk kill of the engagement. When you click the link, however, it links to the engagement report. Would be extra cool if it could link to the killmail, instead of the engagement report, when only one thing was killed.

* cross board comments. so if a comment was made on the corp board, you could see it on the alliance board or the public board. maybe with filters, or color indicators to show where the comment came from.

[joe space]

better stats:

* personal isk damage contribution. total isk damage for a kill divided by number of involved parties. for each kill and given as a total in place of the retarded and meaningless total isk damage.

* efficiency based on personal isk damage contribution. should be a nice revelation for fail blobbers to see just how bad they actually are.

* average number of pilot on killmails.

* average number of pilots on lossmail.

* "pilot value" (or something.) average number of pilots on killmails divided by average number of pilots on lossmails

[James Lyrus]

Pilot activity patterns - most common times to make a kill (weekdays/weekend). Or a loss. Estimate their timezone/prime time.

Regional activity - where people are most likely to be seen.
Usual gang composition (do they normally have 'backup' and how much?)
Most used ship types, and most recently seen/common fitting profiles:
On this ship, how often do they use one weapon type, vs. another - and a separate line for if they ever use the 'other kind' e.g. if it's a Muninn, how often do they use 650s or 720s, and have they ever autocannon fit.

Especially how often do they fit long point vs. web/scram, and MWD/dual prop/neuts.

Related kills. By gang, by region, and recently by pilot group. (e.g. what did this gang kill on their roam).

Pilot pimpyness factor - probability that the pilot is shitfit, Meta 4, T2, faction, deadspace.

Variable point scoring mechanisms, to allow reinforcement of pilot behaviours - so not always more points for soloing, and not necessarily more for blobbing.

Pilot skill profile - give what they've been seen using, estimate... not so much skill levels, but indicators for whether they can fly T2 ships/T2 weapons by race and sizeclass.
(Some kind of checky box that shows at glance if 'has been seen in' and with similar ones with weapons of each race).
Perhaps with a few 'starred' to show what favoured ships/races are. (also differentiating kills and losses).

For bonus points - estimate how tight their fit is, and thus how high their fitting skills.

Known associates - are there any other groups that have appeared in support of killmails.

Pilot balls - how often they've killed 'tougher' targets in smaller gangs/solo.

[SokoleOko]

Get rid of "weeks". Really, what retard came up with this idea?

[joe space]

words.

none of this please. except of course the function of being able to see how many kills you have in different ship types.

using killboards to get intel on others is useful, but it shouldn't be made so spergy that the average risk averse pilot will spend a half an hour before undocking while they devise the perfect counter to whoever is in space. with the stats changes/additions i suggested you could get a pretty good idea, at a glance, what size gang the enemy is usually in and whether or not they are half decent. if you need to know more than that, then you are boring.

letting people determine how their points are scored implies that blobbers aren't just pathetic bads who fail horribly at this game and should probably quit now and never look back and that their horribleness is somehow in the eye of the beholder, when it is actually an objective fact duh.

[Anarius Faust]

Really good feedback guys, definitely some things there that I will look into adding. edk source code really is some big pile of shit though :)

[Dwergi]

I want a "Top value kills" page on my alliance killboard, because I really love seeing that bar at the top change every couple of days. It's just a nice thing, and should be trivial to add (sort by ISK value).

[zangorus]

u get minus points for blobbing and ECM

[Raz]

-Distances from target when target agressed/died.
-Speed of target when aggression began
-Selected Orbit range of both targets
-Lowest HP of attackers who survived.


:facepalm:

[Lady Spank]

u get minus points for blobbing and ECM
FOTM handicapping too.

[ry ry]

being able to easilly create custom queries. a phrase builder would be brilliant and easy as hell to build in js.

perhaps even save the things (localStorage or cookies plz, nobody likes logging in no matter how many emails you get to harvest)

[Raimo]

better stats:

* personal isk damage contribution. total isk damage for a kill divided by number of involved parties. for each kill and given as a total in place of the retarded and meaningless total isk damage.

* efficiency based on personal isk damage contribution. should be a nice revelation for fail blobbers to see just how bad they actually are.

* average number of pilot on killmails.

* average number of pilots on lossmail.

* "pilot value" (or something.) average number of pilots on killmails divided by average number of pilots on lossmails

These

And yeah, much more detailed stats pages and searches overall (I'd agree, not too much of the shitty intel variety but all the interesting trivia from a pilots career)

[Lady Spank]

One thing griefwatch did right was letting you search by pilot and shiptype. I'm surprised it hasn't been implemented in eve-kill.

[joe space]

another stat (can't believe i forgot this one because it is the one i actually do in my head all the time when looking at apps):

* average points per kill (assuming points are well done - similar to greifwatch) but should exclude pods and shuttles and maybe noob ships

* average points lost per loss - should exclude the same.

* the "pilot value" score should really be the average points per kill divided by average points per loss and not what i wrote before.

[Lusulpher]

-Distances from target when target agressed/died.
-Speed of target when aggression began
-Selected Orbit range of both targets
-Lowest HP of attackers who survived.


:facepalm:

? :derper:

[Rivqua]

Here is one I don't think anyone has mentioned:

We commonly come into situations where it's a even fight (say 12 vs 12) and we don't lose their "primary". So we post the kills (say we killed 7 of them) and it easily looks like a 7 on 12 gank , when it was a even-tonnage fight. What I would like to be able to do here is for their primary (one of our pilots) to be able to upload his combat log, which would add their guys that didn't die, and also show how much our primary (that didnt die) tanked.

Then the KB would show a full stat of their fleet (assuming all 12 actually shot anyone on our side) and you would get a fun stat (this part is optional) of ~tanked 450K damage and didnt go down due to the pimp x-type shield booster ;) (obviously kidding about the module, as the KB can't know that).

[Surveyor]

Some way to get only 'recent' kills somehow the way it is with EVE-kill right now, just kills since the start of the year. It did help my crpmates realize i'm not unbeatable (dropped 5 places :psyduck: ).
This also applies to alliances *g*

[rndcursefgt]

-Distances from target when target agressed/died.
-Speed of target when aggression began
-Selected Orbit range of both targets
-Lowest HP of attackers who survived.


:facepalm:

? :derper:

go take a look into a killmail. the type of information needed for such stats is simply not available.

[Lana Torrin]

I would like to not be charged for viewing my kills.. So somehow managing to find free hosting and not using any of CCPs art assets would be in order..

[filingo]

most popular ship exploded

most popular ship at most damage

most popular ship at killing blow

most common item dropped

per day/month/6 months

:derper:

[Samp]

I would personaly like more done with comments. It would be nice to be able to see the most talked about kills. On most of the boards I've seen the only clue there's a dicussion going on comes when that kill is still on the front page.

I appreacate most of the time it's just slagging shit-fits or whatever, but review of what happened in a fight can be very usful for working out what went right or wrong. Being able to comment on battle reports also makes more sence than on individual kills sometimes.

Idealy I'd like to be able to comment on any 'page' generated by the killboard and for poeple using the service to know there is a page with some commentery available for them to lookat and maybe add to the discussion.

For example if I go and look at the value of the drops of all the kills I had in Lonetrek over a quater, vs my security status over the same period - and I could then comment on that query along the lines of 'See what I mean, this is why you don't need to rat Mr XXXX'. The killboard becomes a tool for those who are interested in data-mining to present that information to those who aren't.

[Lana Torrin]

I would personaly like more done with comments. It would be nice to be able to see the most talked about kills. On most of the boards I've seen the only clue there's a dicussion going on comes when that kill is still on the front page.

I appreacate most of the time it's just slagging shit-fits or whatever, but review of what happened in a fight can be very usful for working out what went right or wrong. Being able to comment on battle reports also makes more sence than on individual kills sometimes.

Idealy I'd like to be able to comment on any 'page' generated by the killboard and for poeple using the service to know there is a page with some commentery available for them to lookat and maybe add to the discussion.

For example if I go and look at the value of the drops of all the kills I had in Lonetrek over a quater, vs my security status over the same period - and I could then comment on that query along the lines of 'See what I mean, this is why you don't need to rat Mr XXXX'. The killboard becomes a tool for those who are interested in data-mining to present that information to those who aren't.

I toyed with a layout for a killboard with an integrated forum for a while.. So posting comments on a kill would turn the kill in to a thread for people to discuss. With the idea of adding comments to a BR this would be even more awesome.

[Skjordr Longfang]

Hello there Mr Faust, long time no see.

[Don Pellegrino]

Lana, BC does exactly that already. The result is... interesting.

[Lusulpher]

-Distances from target when target agressed/died.
-Speed of target when aggression began
-Selected Orbit range of both targets
-Lowest HP of attackers who survived.


:facepalm:

? :derper:

go take a look into a killmail. the type of information needed for such stats is simply not available.

Call me when they make a 3rd party app that tracks this[99USD license not preventing]. Leetness shall be mine! :obama:

[Equium Duo]

You might of already thought or heard about this and I didn't read all of the thread! But when I was playing I'd always wanted a eve social diagram like the one someone created for kugu.com. Basicllay using the standings function (which I believe is public info??) Would that work to hen clump people together for battle reports??

[Resi]

better stats:

* personal isk damage contribution. total isk damage for a kill divided by number of involved parties. for each kill and given as a total in place of the retarded and meaningless total isk damage.

* efficiency based on personal isk damage contribution. should be a nice revelation for fail blobbers to see just how bad they actually are.

* average number of pilot on killmails.

* average number of pilots on lossmail.

* "pilot value" (or something.) average number of pilots on killmails divided by average number of pilots on lossmails

So much this, I want killboard stats that can actually tell me what sort of pilot someone is. As it is, Efficiency, kills and loss stats tell us nothing, you have to trawl through someones killmails to find out if they're pro or worthless blobbers.

[whispous]

You would also need somehow to filter that so people in 1000vs1000 dont show up as worthless blobbers by having a thousand corpies on the mails with them when actually it was a fair fight

[joe space]

You would also need somehow to filter that so people in 1000vs1000 dont show up as worthless blobbers by having a thousand corpies on the mails with them when actually it was a fair fight

you might be misunderstanding what a worthless blobber is. hint: it's any blobber

[Andrea Griffin]

Clean code. Yes, this is a feature. :D A good amount of the killboard code that I have seen in the wild is a real mess. This is why I've started on my own KB as well - but after coding all day at work I don't have much enthusiasm for it once I get home. Still, I'm working on it in bits and pieces. Here are some of the things I plan to include, feel free to pick and chose.

A good set of base libraries that could be used independently of a website.

A website that uses a templating engine, not a bunch of code mashed together with the HTML.

Dependency injection.

A plugin architecture. Perhaps I would like to add my own scoring system, or a "top 5 kills of the week" capability, or have a specific process run after every killmail submission (mail me if Nubbin loses another faction fit Ibis, or create a forum thread for each battle with 5 or more participants).

REST APIs.

An auto-generated image similar to that of BattleClinic, but allow registered users to upload their own background image and select what information will be displayed (and where it will be displayed).

Pricing information that keeps historical data, so that if a price is updated today it doesn't affect the value of a mail from 1 year ago.

Tracking of ransoms. Pirate corps need love too.

The ability to manually associate / disassociate kills from eachother. Automated related kills grouping is nice but it is impossible for the killboard to get it right 100% of the time.

RSS feeds. Kills, Losses, Kills and Losses, per pilot, per corporation, per alliance, etc.

Graphs! Graphs are cool, everyone loves graphs.

Campaign support, with mails automatically being added depending on their belonging to a specific corp, alliance, or the kill having happened in a particular region. Pilot stats on a per campaign basis.

Some useful stats, such as "average friendly pilots on a killmail" and number of solo and small gang kills (with the number of pilots that defines "small gang" being configurable). Similar stats for losses.

[Andrea Griffin]

Something else that I've been wanting, but is above and beyond my analytic ability, is a dynamic point system. If ship X is getting a lot of kills and few losses (Dramiel, for example) then killing an Omen with a Dramiel would produce fewer points than using something histoically less effective (and Ibis). But, in order for that to work you would need a very large data set to mine. Then you get into calculating the point values for multiple ships in the same fight, and it gets ugly very quickly.

I'm sure that there's some brilliant mathematician out there that could make a good attempt given good data.

[Lana Torrin]

Something else that I've been wanting, but is above and beyond my analytic ability, is a dynamic point system. If ship X is getting a lot of kills and few losses (Dramiel, for example) then killing an Omen with a Dramiel would produce fewer points than using something histoically less effective (and Ibis). But, in order for that to work you would need a very large data set to mine. Then you get into calculating the point values for multiple ships in the same fight, and it gets ugly very quickly.

I'm sure that there's some brilliant mathematician out there that could make a good attempt given good data.

If flying shit ships and getting kills got more points than flying good ships and getting kills I might actually be ranked well... (Moa fleet of doom!!)

[Dwergi]

Surely it kind of self-adjusts? Abstractly, if you have ships given "point values" individually, and the quality of a kill is the sum of all point values doing the killing compared to the point value of the ship killed. Eg. a Taranis vs. a Taranis would give a "kill quality" of 1. A Dramiel vs. a Taranis would give a quality of <1 and vice versa.

The point value of a ship can then be calculated as the average points that that ship has killed per death, but it gets tricky with stuff like supercarrier ganks and other asymmetric warfare. If there's 2 ships on the mail, what proportion of the kill points should be assigned to each? One way would be to make it self-referential and use the ship values themselves to determine the proportion. Eg. if a Nyx is 1000 and a stealth bomber is 5, then the stealth bomber scored 0.5% of the value of the kill. This scales up nicely as well - putting 3 titans on a mail would assign a Hurricane that also participated a tiny fraction of the value of that kill.

Having a "ship value" metric could also easily show trends in the meta-game, with terrible ships having a low point value for dying a lot and killing very little. Eg. if you lost an Atron 100 times and got 10 kills, the points value of the Atron wouldn't be the average value of the kill, but 10% of that because 10 were lost for each kill. I think that pretty fairly evaluates the effectiveness of a ship. You might also need to scale it by frequency of use - terrible ships aren't used, so won't show up on many killmails, and that should be reflected in the points value, along with points decay over roughly a month.

Making it dynamic would be pretty fantastic though, because there's always complaints about BattleClinic's static evaluation of a solo kill in a Pilgrim being worth the same as a solo kill in a Curse, despite that not being remotely true.

Just some rambling ideas, there's a lot of details that would need to be worked out yet.

[BLEURRRRGH]

Battle-reports recognise standings (entered via. API?) so friendly fire incidents don't cause the battle-report to fuck up.

[Frug]

Here is one I don't think anyone has mentioned:

We commonly come into situations where it's a even fight (say 12 vs 12) and we don't lose their "primary". So we post the kills (say we killed 7 of them) and it easily looks like a 7 on 12 gank , when it was a even-tonnage fight. What I would like to be able to do here is for their primary (one of our pilots) to be able to upload his combat log, which would add their guys that didn't die, and also show how much our primary (that didnt die) tanked.

Then the KB would show a full stat of their fleet (assuming all 12 actually shot anyone on our side) and you would get a fun stat (this part is optional) of ~tanked 450K damage and didnt go down due to the pimp x-type shield booster ;) (obviously kidding about the module, as the KB can't know that).

This sounds like a lot of work, but I think a way to post "unofficial" participants might be good enough? Like if we claim to have certain ships involved, they could appear as grayed out or otherwise labeled as participants added by us to indicate who was present.

Some KB's have a "scout" mod which shows who the scout was. The not-dead primary sounds similar to that.

[Frug]

Oh, also, while you mentioned "not rape the database" in your OP (sounds like that would be lovely)..

Along the same lines, the image files should really be a few big sprites, rather than over 9,000 images. Automating that would require some fancy image processing trickery to put them in a grid on a sprite but my god that would ease the image issues.

[Fara]

http://EVEolution.de/brdoc/?tiny=9980703

Probably the cloeset running solution to what you guys want most ;)

[ry ry]

http://EVEolution.de/brdoc/?tiny=9980703

Probably the cloeset running solution to what you guys want most ;)
oh! now that look cool. nice one.

edit. only works for eve kill though

http://www.nooooooooooooooo.com/vader.jpg

[W0wbagger]

http://EVEolution.de/brdoc/?tiny=9980703

Probably the cloeset running solution to what you guys want most ;)

yeah was just gonna post this - only thing that's annoying is that I cant find away to separate the "unknown group" ie no alliance. - can be handy in fw fights when its a clusterfuck


and yeah a decent search plz!

[joe space]

n1. but honestly never going to put in the effort to fix a battlereport unless i can do it on the killboard.

w regard to a dynamic point system, i think it's an interesting idea but not going to work as the primary point system, not least of all because it will get too complicated and start to look like nonsense the more parties are involved.

what might be really cool is a dynamic point system as a secondary point system, and which only considers solo kills. this secondary point system could take into account previous fights between the ship types at issue, the liklihood that the solo'r killed other ships in the same engagement, and even the ranking of the defeated player. (i wouldn't, however, take into account the ranking of the opposing player when determining how many points are lost during an engagement for a couple reasons.) a point system like this, and the corresponding rankings, might even incentivize solo'ing if it caught on.

[Samp]

Just thought of somehting else; the ability to handle clusterfucks. Like this one http://www.corcoranstate.com/?a=kill_related&kll_id=192406 in fact this was a threeway but the KB can't handle it and just ends up putting everyone on every side.

[Templar Dane]

Split points between involved parties.

Something worth 300 points shouldn't give everybody involved 300 points.

10 people = 30 points each
100 people = 3 points each

Or maybe divide by damage dealt. 47% damage = 47% of the points...that's right, fuck you falcon pilots.

The idea is to penalize blobbers. ATM if you want to be at the top of your killboard you pretty much have to join up with the blobs and whore on a lot of kills. I've seen people show up for fleet fights in drakes with ungrouped launchers and fofs....

Oh, and cut npcs from the involved parties #. So many solo kills showing 2 involved parties...I like my skulls. :cry:

[Reed Tiburon]

Split points between involved parties.

Something worth 300 points shouldn't give everybody involved 300 points.

10 people = 30 points each
100 people = 3 points each

Or maybe divide by damage dealt. 47% damage = 47% of the points...that's right, fuck you falcon pilots.
First suffers from the problem that (like every similar method) the biggest point drop is from 1 person involved to two people involved.

[joe space]

[quote="Templar Dane":1bz6qh5u]Split points between involved parties.

Something worth 300 points shouldn't give everybody involved 300 points.

10 people = 30 points each
100 people = 3 points each

Or maybe divide by damage dealt. 47% damage = 47% of the points...that's right, fuck you falcon pilots.
First suffers from the problem that (like every similar method) the biggest point drop is from 1 person involved to two people involved.[/quote:1bz6qh5u]


first, yes ofc you have to divide by parties involved. not dividing by parties involved makes point systems completely meaningless.
and the fact that your points are halved as soon as there is another person on the killmail makes perfect sense.

second, BC and greifwatch already do this pretty well.