Talk:Scoring - Revision history

Zombie: /* TFTD */ My opinion.

2016-05-09T03:59:30Z

TFTD: My opinion.

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:59, 9 May 2016
Line 132:		Line 132:

	Any opinions? [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom\|talk]]) 03:17, 7 May 2016 (UTC)		Any opinions? [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom\|talk]]) 03:17, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

			:I vote to create the page as I think there are enough differences in scoring between the games to warrant it. --[[User:Zombie\|Zombie]] ([[User talk:Zombie\|talk]]) 03:59, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Magic9mushroom: /* TFTD */ new section

2016-05-07T03:17:31Z

TFTD: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:17, 7 May 2016
Line 126:		Line 126:
	==Captured aliens==		==Captured aliens==
	Okay, I'm hereby challenging the "captured alien" points as they're written. In my game I have had five captures so far - a Reaper, a Floater Navigator, two Floater Engineers, and a Sectoid Leader. The Navigator and Engineers were in the same mission, so I don't know what I scored for those, but I scored 0 points for capturing the Reaper and 10 points for capturing the Sectoid Leader. This is in direct contradiction with the point values and explanation given. [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom\|talk]]) 03:02, 30 April 2016 (UTC)		Okay, I'm hereby challenging the "captured alien" points as they're written. In my game I have had five captures so far - a Reaper, a Floater Navigator, two Floater Engineers, and a Sectoid Leader. The Navigator and Engineers were in the same mission, so I don't know what I scored for those, but I scored 0 points for capturing the Reaper and 10 points for capturing the Sectoid Leader. This is in direct contradiction with the point values and explanation given. [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom\|talk]]) 03:02, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

			== TFTD ==

			I'm wondering if we should make a "Scoring (TFTD)" page. While the basic mechanics are the same, there's a few differences in numbers (among other things, the lose-the-game cutoff differs on high difficulties) and the Artefact Sites have new scoring mechanics.

			Any opinions? [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom\|talk]]) 03:17, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Magic9mushroom: top level heading absorbs all further headings; cleaning this up

2016-04-30T03:05:30Z

top level heading absorbs all further headings; cleaning this up

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:05, 30 April 2016
Line 70:		Line 70:
	:::''the game starts with two UFOs at once, and only one of them is guaranteed to be working in your first bases' region of operations.'' I'm aware of that. I'm not talking about the first day of the game, and I'm not simply forgetting to count one as you suggest. I also have total coverage with HWDs and seen the score behavior I describe above. (I have played xcom more than once in the many years I've had it.) I can also tell when the score has changed and when it '''has not''' changed so I know and can account for ufos and can discount undetected bases. (Score can't be flat with an alien base.) In different games I've seen the aliens score quickly in rapid jumps that isn't explained by 1 point per 30mins or 2points per 30mins while landed*. I do know how to read the graphs and I don't only look at total score. I break it down by region. I'm not going to miss another UFO in the same region as my main base with a HWD and 2 interceptors buzzing around looking for it. I'm certainly willing to accept that a crashed ufo is worth 0, but I've seen behavior in the score not explained by [[Scoring#Alien Scoring\|the known chart]] and not explained by undetected activity.		:::''the game starts with two UFOs at once, and only one of them is guaranteed to be working in your first bases' region of operations.'' I'm aware of that. I'm not talking about the first day of the game, and I'm not simply forgetting to count one as you suggest. I also have total coverage with HWDs and seen the score behavior I describe above. (I have played xcom more than once in the many years I've had it.) I can also tell when the score has changed and when it '''has not''' changed so I know and can account for ufos and can discount undetected bases. (Score can't be flat with an alien base.) In different games I've seen the aliens score quickly in rapid jumps that isn't explained by 1 point per 30mins or 2points per 30mins while landed*. I do know how to read the graphs and I don't only look at total score. I break it down by region. I'm not going to miss another UFO in the same region as my main base with a HWD and 2 interceptors buzzing around looking for it. I'm certainly willing to accept that a crashed ufo is worth 0, but I've seen behavior in the score not explained by [[Scoring#Alien Scoring\|the known chart]] and not explained by undetected activity.
	:::BTW *The 2 points while landed ''per 30 mins'' is not listed on [[Scoring#Alien Scoring]].--[[User:Brunpal\|Brunpal]] 20:55, 5 August 2008 (PDT)		:::BTW *The 2 points while landed ''per 30 mins'' is not listed on [[Scoring#Alien Scoring]].--[[User:Brunpal\|Brunpal]] 20:55, 5 August 2008 (PDT)
	=Test results=		==Test results==
	I've discovered something while watching the score closely. A battleship on a harvest mission '''got points soon as the ufo took off'''. The landed ufo at 18:25 had 60 points in China at ~18:35 it took off and at 18:45 China had 90 points. It quickly flew off the Earth and maybe hit 1 or 2 half hour ticks. It may have scored an extra point or 2 world wide but wasn't able to see any measurable difference in the graph before OR after it left detection. It only landed the once. It got no extra points for landing, but did tick up points at 2 per 30mins while on the ground.		I've discovered something while watching the score closely. A battleship on a harvest mission '''got points soon as the ufo took off'''. The landed ufo at 18:25 had 60 points in China at ~18:35 it took off and at 18:45 China had 90 points. It quickly flew off the Earth and maybe hit 1 or 2 half hour ticks. It may have scored an extra point or 2 world wide but wasn't able to see any measurable difference in the graph before OR after it left detection. It only landed the once. It got no extra points for landing, but did tick up points at 2 per 30mins while on the ground.
	*'''Therefore an alien harvest mission counts as success as it takes off.''' Leaving the geoscape doesn't matter at all for score. Hopefully I'll encounter a harvest mission where an ufo lands multiple times to test if it's the first or last time it takes off, or every time it takes off.--[[User:Brunpal\|Brunpal]] 21:19, 6 August 2008 (PDT)		*'''Therefore an alien harvest mission counts as success as it takes off.''' Leaving the geoscape doesn't matter at all for score. Hopefully I'll encounter a harvest mission where an ufo lands multiple times to test if it's the first or last time it takes off, or every time it takes off.--[[User:Brunpal\|Brunpal]] 21:19, 6 August 2008 (PDT)

Magic9mushroom at 03:02, 30 April 2016

2016-04-30T03:02:38Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:02, 30 April 2016
Line 123:		Line 123:

	[[User:Spike\|Spike]] 15:39, 9 August 2009 (EDT)		[[User:Spike\|Spike]] 15:39, 9 August 2009 (EDT)

			==Captured aliens==
			Okay, I'm hereby challenging the "captured alien" points as they're written. In my game I have had five captures so far - a Reaper, a Floater Navigator, two Floater Engineers, and a Sectoid Leader. The Navigator and Engineers were in the same mission, so I don't know what I scored for those, but I scored 0 points for capturing the Reaper and 10 points for capturing the Sectoid Leader. This is in direct contradiction with the point values and explanation given. [[User:Magic9mushroom\|Magic9mushroom]] ([[User talk:Magic9mushroom\|talk]]) 03:02, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Spike: /* 1,2,3,4 against 1 UFO -AND- Scoring for Stunning Civilians */

2009-08-09T19:39:57Z

1,2,3,4 against 1 UFO -AND- Scoring for Stunning Civilians

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:39, 9 August 2009
Line 106:		Line 106:
	Can someone test this out for us?		Can someone test this out for us?
	... yes. Those skyrangers have a LOT of HP. [[User:Jasonred\|Jasonred]] 23:35, 26 February 2009 (CST)		... yes. Those skyrangers have a LOT of HP. [[User:Jasonred\|Jasonred]] 23:35, 26 February 2009 (CST)


			:Just found this comment - I did indeed to the "1 Avenger, 2 Avenger, 3 Avengers, 4" test. Well sort of. I was seeing how long the Avengers take to get shot down, rather than how long the Avengers take to shoot the UFO down. Here's a link to the stuff.

			[[Talk:UFO Interception#Survival Time of Multiple Attackers]]

			It's not the most rigorous of tests but it's not totally sloppy either. YMMV, as they say. [[User:Spike\|Spike]] 15:39, 9 August 2009 (EDT)

			==Stunning Civilians==

			''"Yes Major, I've met some stunning civilians in my time... now where was I? Oh yes. Review of the advisability of the use Stun-type weapons on civilians in a terrorist-type situation, for their own protection, obviously. The fact that it '''hugely''' simplifies X-Com's tactical situation during the Op is just an added bonus, don'tcha know?". ''

			It looks like when you stun civilians, you do not get the "Civilian is Saved" bonus, but neither do you get the "Civilian Killed by Aliens" penalty nor the "Civilian killed by X-Com" penalty.

			''"In conclusion, Major, it seems the Powers-That-Be would really prefer we just let the darned civvies wander about as they please, right in the middle of our Op! Outrageous! How can we be expected to save the world, working under conditions like this. I ask you!"''

			[[User:Spike\|Spike]] 15:39, 9 August 2009 (EDT)

Jasonred at 05:35, 27 February 2009

2009-02-27T05:35:52Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:35, 27 February 2009
Line 105:		Line 105:
	It doesn't seem like that, to me. I suspect that the UFOs get to fire at all your ships at the same time. Cunning evil bastards.		It doesn't seem like that, to me. I suspect that the UFOs get to fire at all your ships at the same time. Cunning evil bastards.
	Can someone test this out for us?		Can someone test this out for us?
	... yes. Those skyrangers have a LOT of HP. ~~[[Jasonred}}~~ [[User:Jasonred\|Jasonred]] 23:35, 26 February 2009 (CST)		... yes. Those skyrangers have a LOT of HP. [[User:Jasonred\|Jasonred]] 23:35, 26 February 2009 (CST)

Jasonred at 05:35, 27 February 2009

2009-02-27T05:35:26Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:35, 27 February 2009
Line 101:		Line 101:

	:: I must concur that you can indeed "attack" a UFO with an unarmed Skyranger in the plain vanilla non-X-Comutil games. Back in my n00b days, I used to send them out against UFOs to soak up some damage to give the interceptors a fighting chance. They have more hitpoints than the Interceptor. Though since discovering that the fire rate vs. individual interceptor varies independently of the interceptor's range to the UFO (say if you had two engaging a UFO at the same time, one at aggressive firing range will get attacked a lot more frequently than one at cautious range), I'm beginning to wonder if they ever did split their attacks. Oh yeah the Skyranger's also the last ship you want in a dogfight, since it can't really keep up, but still... -[[User:NKF\|NKF]] 23:15, 26 February 2009 (CST)		:: I must concur that you can indeed "attack" a UFO with an unarmed Skyranger in the plain vanilla non-X-Comutil games. Back in my n00b days, I used to send them out against UFOs to soak up some damage to give the interceptors a fighting chance. They have more hitpoints than the Interceptor. Though since discovering that the fire rate vs. individual interceptor varies independently of the interceptor's range to the UFO (say if you had two engaging a UFO at the same time, one at aggressive firing range will get attacked a lot more frequently than one at cautious range), I'm beginning to wonder if they ever did split their attacks. Oh yeah the Skyranger's also the last ship you want in a dogfight, since it can't really keep up, but still... -[[User:NKF\|NKF]] 23:15, 26 February 2009 (CST)

			Yes... I wonder about this myself. Must check how much damage is received when I attack a battleship with 1 avenger, 2 avengers, 3 avengers, 4 avengers. In theory, 4 avengers kill a battleship in 1/4 the time taken by 1 avenger. Therefore, the battleship should only perform 1/4 TOTAL damage, compared to 1 avenger. Therefore, on average, 4 avengers should receive 1/16 damage EACH.
			It doesn't seem like that, to me. I suspect that the UFOs get to fire at all your ships at the same time. Cunning evil bastards.
			Can someone test this out for us?
			... yes. Those skyrangers have a LOT of HP. [[Jasonred}} [[User:Jasonred\|Jasonred]] 23:35, 26 February 2009 (CST)

NKF: /* Destroying Larger Craft and Skyranger Being Shot Down */

2009-02-27T05:15:11Z

Destroying Larger Craft and Skyranger Being Shot Down

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:15, 27 February 2009
Line 99:		Line 99:
	As for the multiple aircraft, I was hoping that the UFO would start to crash land, and be hit by the Fusion Balls in mid-air. Similiar to how mounting 2 Fusion Ball Launchers instead of 1 will let you destroy a large scout instead of forcing it to crash land?		As for the multiple aircraft, I was hoping that the UFO would start to crash land, and be hit by the Fusion Balls in mid-air. Similiar to how mounting 2 Fusion Ball Launchers instead of 1 will let you destroy a large scout instead of forcing it to crash land?
	[[User:Jasonred\|Jasonred]] [[User:Jasonred\|Jasonred]] 22:10, 26 February 2009 (CST)		[[User:Jasonred\|Jasonred]] [[User:Jasonred\|Jasonred]] 22:10, 26 February 2009 (CST)

			:: I must concur that you can indeed "attack" a UFO with an unarmed Skyranger in the plain vanilla non-X-Comutil games. Back in my n00b days, I used to send them out against UFOs to soak up some damage to give the interceptors a fighting chance. They have more hitpoints than the Interceptor. Though since discovering that the fire rate vs. individual interceptor varies independently of the interceptor's range to the UFO (say if you had two engaging a UFO at the same time, one at aggressive firing range will get attacked a lot more frequently than one at cautious range), I'm beginning to wonder if they ever did split their attacks. Oh yeah the Skyranger's also the last ship you want in a dogfight, since it can't really keep up, but still... -[[User:NKF\|NKF]] 23:15, 26 February 2009 (CST)

Jasonred: /* Destroying Larger Craft and Skyranger Being Shot Down */

2009-02-27T04:10:03Z

Destroying Larger Craft and Skyranger Being Shot Down

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:10, 27 February 2009
Line 95:		Line 95:

	The larger craft? No, because as soon as the UFO goes over 50% damage, it crash-lands. Shooting more guns at it will simply make it crash faster, since the faster you shoot, the faster you get above 50%, but you're still incapable of dealing out more than 460 damage in a single attack, which means you aren't able to breach that rather large gap between 49% damage and 100% damage. As for the Skyranger, in order for it to be able to intercept at all, a craft must have a hardpoint on it(even if no weapons are mounted.) A Skyranger in a default game can't even be sent to intercept a UFO, as it has no hardpoint. XComUtil will give the Skyranger a hardpoint by default, thus allowing it to intercept UFOs and shoot them down and get shot down. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft\|Arrow Quivershaft]] 21:34, 26 February 2009 (CST)		The larger craft? No, because as soon as the UFO goes over 50% damage, it crash-lands. Shooting more guns at it will simply make it crash faster, since the faster you shoot, the faster you get above 50%, but you're still incapable of dealing out more than 460 damage in a single attack, which means you aren't able to breach that rather large gap between 49% damage and 100% damage. As for the Skyranger, in order for it to be able to intercept at all, a craft must have a hardpoint on it(even if no weapons are mounted.) A Skyranger in a default game can't even be sent to intercept a UFO, as it has no hardpoint. XComUtil will give the Skyranger a hardpoint by default, thus allowing it to intercept UFOs and shoot them down and get shot down. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft\|Arrow Quivershaft]] 21:34, 26 February 2009 (CST)

			NO, you can always launch a skyranger to intercept a UFO. In fact, you SHOULD often do this, since it's better to start tailing it before it lands, rather than wait for it to land first. I just checked, you can definitely do so. The only problem is that just about any UFO can outrun your skyranger.
			As for the multiple aircraft, I was hoping that the UFO would start to crash land, and be hit by the Fusion Balls in mid-air. Similiar to how mounting 2 Fusion Ball Launchers instead of 1 will let you destroy a large scout instead of forcing it to crash land?
			[[User:Jasonred\|Jasonred]] [[User:Jasonred\|Jasonred]] 22:10, 26 February 2009 (CST)

Arrow Quivershaft: /* Destroying Larger Craft and Skyranger Being Shot Down */ Must preview!

2009-02-27T03:35:18Z

Destroying Larger Craft and Skyranger Being Shot Down: Must preview!

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:35, 27 February 2009
Line 92:		Line 92:

	:Hmm... can you destroy those craft by assigning multiple craft armed with Fusion Ball Launchers at them? Assuming that you get simlutaneous hits?		:Hmm... can you destroy those craft by assigning multiple craft armed with Fusion Ball Launchers at them? Assuming that you get simlutaneous hits?
	As for the skyranger, it CAN get blown up, quite easily... just set your skyranger to Aggresive Attack... despite not having weapons, it will close in to point blank range, and will soon get shot down. [[User:Jasonred\|Jasonred]]		:As for the skyranger, it CAN get blown up, quite easily... just set your skyranger to Aggresive Attack... despite not having weapons, it will close in to point blank range, and will soon get shot down. [[User:Jasonred\|Jasonred]]

	The larger craft? No, because as soon as the UFO goes over 50% damage, it crash-lands. ~~Throwing~~ more guns at it will simply make it crash faster, since the faster you shoot, the faster you get above 50%, but you're still incapable of dealing out more than 460 damage in a single attack, which means you aren't able to breach that rather large gap between 49% damage and 100% damage. As for the Skyranger, in order for it to be able to intercept at all, a craft must have a hardpoint on it(even if no weapons are mounted.) A Skyranger in a default game can't even be sent to intercept a UFO, as it has no hardpoint. XComUtil will give the Skyranger a hardpoint by default, thus allowing it to intercept UFOs and shoot them down and get shot down. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft\|Arrow Quivershaft]] 21:34, 26 February 2009 (CST)		The larger craft? No, because as soon as the UFO goes over 50% damage, it crash-lands. Shooting more guns at it will simply make it crash faster, since the faster you shoot, the faster you get above 50%, but you're still incapable of dealing out more than 460 damage in a single attack, which means you aren't able to breach that rather large gap between 49% damage and 100% damage. As for the Skyranger, in order for it to be able to intercept at all, a craft must have a hardpoint on it(even if no weapons are mounted.) A Skyranger in a default game can't even be sent to intercept a UFO, as it has no hardpoint. XComUtil will give the Skyranger a hardpoint by default, thus allowing it to intercept UFOs and shoot them down and get shot down. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft\|Arrow Quivershaft]] 21:34, 26 February 2009 (CST)