Single player effecting multiplayer

[B1GC]

Does anyone know that if any accomplishment done in single player will effect multiplayer. I know that beating higher difficulties of play in Socom II will gain you access to differnent charcters for use in multiplayer.

 

Is there anything like this in SW:BF, I know it wont be characters, but maybe help your rank or something of the sort?

 

Thoughts...

[Mountainforest]

I believe nothing was said about unlocking extra options if you play singleplayer. Something was said about a rank system I believe (and getting cool awards) but if the singleplayer efects your ranking... Haven't heared anything about that.

 

But it probably won't be the case. Star Wars Battlefront is a multiplayer game in the first place, so you probably won't be bothered with having to play singleplayer first.

[B1GC]

somewhat of a change in subject, how will the rank system work? Based on kills? team wins? spawn points held over time? I hope they utilize something that will somewhat prohibit people who just rank up...

[Mountainforest]

I believe nothing has been said about this either. I just hope that it won't be fully based on the numbers of kills you make, but that it is a little more inteligent. Hitting a plane with a proton torpedo launcher is difficult and should be rewarded. So is repairing/building/healing in a hostile envirement. I actually hope that all players will have a personal record with seperate points on piloting, heavy weps, assault etc. The list shouldn't be based on how much you have killed/healed, etc in total, but how good you're doing avarge. I mean that you should have a score and if you pilot (to take an example) less good then in games before, you score goes down (of course your pilot score shouldn't be lowered if you didn't pilot at all, or if you are playing alone). Otherwise the people who have played the game longer will have a higher score no matter what, though game experience might be another piece for you personal record.

 

To be short. I like an intelligent pointsystem, updating your score for different pieces of the game whenever you're playing. That way fellow assault teammembers will take commands and tips from somebody who's proven to be good as assault, and will fellow teammebres leave the planes if they see they have a big bunch of good pilots.

[B1GC]

u make some good points...but some things i dont like. I play socom II and with one person I have like 4000 kills and 2000 deaths. Then right next to me a guy with 300 kills and 450 deaths only he resuced a lot of hostages. I think that is bull**** personally. I think people should be rewarded with more kills over longer periods of time, they simply put in more hours and effort then someone who just started a name.

 

If I have been playing with a certain name for 5 months and have all these good stats (over a long period of time) I should be rewarded more than someone who just started (even if they have the same percentage of good stats - like kills vs deaths ratio)

 

Even if i have like 2000 kills and 2000 deaths i shoudl be a much higher rank then someone who has 100 kills and 100 deaths.

[singard]

If SW:BF is anything like the Battlefield games that inspired it, you'll get one point for a kill, three points for capturing a control point. I doubt there will be different point awards for destroying a vehicle (other than getting points for all the passengers you killed).

 

Also, I don't think players who put in more time should be rewarded more than other players. Ranks should be based on skill, not total play time.

[Mountainforest]

Originally posted by B1GC

u make some good points...but some things i dont like. I play socom II and with one person I have like 4000 kills and 2000 deaths. Then right next to me a guy with 300 kills and 450 deaths only he resuced a lot of hostages. I think that is bull**** personally. I think people should be rewarded with more kills over longer periods of time, they simply put in more hours and effort then someone who just started a name.

 

If I have been playing with a certain name for 5 months and have all these good stats (over a long period of time) I should be rewarded more than someone who just started (even if they have the same percentage of good stats - like kills vs deaths ratio)

 

Even if i have like 2000 kills and 2000 deaths i shoudl be a much higher rank then someone who has 100 kills and 100 deaths.

 

You probably misunderstood me. I'm not talking about the kill ratio compared to the death ratio. I'm just saying that if two people both make an average about 100 kills pro match, they should have the same score for killing, even if one of the players has played the game twice as often. I don't like the idea of counting a kill score on the number of kills you already made (you play a game and kill 10, play another and kill 5, score =15) but i like an average (score = 7,5) otherwise you can't really see if a player is good, or if he's just playing a lot.

[HolmstN]

Well, I would like to see something almost like an rpg. you gain points for doing what your good at. i.e. if your a pilot you get more points for flying then for killing with a blaster. likewise, if you destroy an at-at both ppl in ship get points for it. and if the pilot was pilot class, theyd get more points then the soldier manning the the tow cable. I doubt theyll include something like this, though.

[Virtuosis]

I like the rank system in SOCOM. It combines all that you've done and ranks you on it. It doesn't just show who the best killers are like in a lot of games are. It rates you on what your good at.

 

I like HolmstN's ideas though. That would be an ideal ranking system in my eyes, better than SOCOM. In fact I really like it haha. But I really doubt it will happen too.

[Son_of_the_Sith]

I hope they give us unlockable features;)

[B1GC]

You are right rank should be based mostly on your kill average per map, but...

 

Say I start a new character and then a have like a domninating day where I get mvp almost every time I play on this day and at the end of the day I have like 300 kils and like 50 deaths....my average will be very high. So this would jump me way up in the ranks. However, my average could fall if teh next day i play horrible.

 

I think you should gain a few extra points for maintaining an average over a period of time. Something like this would prevent someone else from just creating a character and going way higher then people with a similar average

[singard]

Maybe for the sake of statistics they'll do something like what's featured in Rainbow Six 3 and Crimson Skies for Xbox. RBS3 features the "ELO" system, where it's not just how many kills, but also your kill-to-death ratio and who you kill that effects your rank.

 

A low-ranked player fragging a low-ranked player gives a minimum score, but a low-ranked player fragging a high-ranked player gives a higher overall score. The higher-ranked player also loses more points if killed by lower-ranked players than by someone of the same or higher rank. This is similar for Crimson Skies (but I don't think they use quite the same system).

 

The problem with this is that higher ranked players start keeping lower ranked players from their games for fear of losing their rank. Eventually it makes the statistics meaningless, as higher ranked players are never forced to risk their rank status. This is a big problem with Xbox Live games, but I haven't encountered it much on PC or PS2.

[Mountainforest]

I don't like the idea that your rank has something to do with the other players in a game. I'd like that if you play less good then normaly, you're rank gets decreased, no matter what kind of persons you fight.

[HolmstN]

But even if you are at your best, if your playing w/ someone better than you, youll automatically seem not as good.

[Mountainforest]

But your sciore will be lower then the better person in that case.

[singard]

Personally, I hate all this stat stuff. And yet I still obsess over it!

 

Anyone remember the days when online games didn't have stats? You just played, and the only score that mattered was what you had for the current round. Now all those early newbie sessions in a game will haunt you forever and drag your overall rank down.

 

Sigh.

[Darth_ToMeR]

Originally posted by B1GC

You are right rank should be based mostly on your kill average per map, but...

 

Say I start a new character and then a have like a domninating day where I get mvp almost every time I play on this day and at the end of the day I have like 300 kils and like 50 deaths....my average will be very high. So this would jump me way up in the ranks. However, my average could fall if teh next day i play horrible.

 

I think you should gain a few extra points for maintaining an average over a period of time. Something like this would prevent someone else from just creating a character and going way higher then people with a similar average

I think this game will be like 'Enemy Territory', when the score return to 0 after the campgain over.

[Prime]

Originally posted by HolmstN

Well, I would like to see something almost like an rpg.

Please no.

[Virtuosis]

Darth I think he's reffering to keeping stats serverwide not just in a certain game. So their is a screen in the main menu where you can check it hopefully.