Objective Medal

yeti_c · Post by **yeti_c** » Wed Sep 24, 2008 6:48 am

Medal Title: Mission Man
Medal Description: Medal for winning by Objectives.
Why this medal should be awarded: X number of Objective unique defeats (i.e. 8 player would glean 7 unique kills - as per other medals)

C.

BluU · Post by **BluU** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 2:49 pm

I want to suggest a new medal.
One will get it by accumulating unique defeats by reaching game objective rather then eliminating the rest of the players in the game.
I think the game logs already hold that info, so there will be no need to start counting wins from 0, like we had when the random medal was introduced.
On top of introducing a new medal which will make all of us medal hunters happy

, it might encourage the map designers to create new maps with game objective. Such maps according to my honest opinion add some twist to games.

SaviorShot · Post by **SaviorShot** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 3:22 pm

Always down for new medals =]

Post by **Dukasaur** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 6:27 pm

Would be nice!

Sniper08 · Post by **Sniper08** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 7:13 pm

im all for medals but with this one i see a problem in ppl holding others hostage in order to get the obj to get uniques

DoomYoshi · Post by **DoomYoshi** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 7:23 pm

Sniper08 wrote:im all for medals but with this one i see a problem in ppl holding others hostage in order to get the obj to get uniques

Explain?

Sniper08 · Post by **Sniper08** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 7:27 pm

DoomYoshi wrote:
Sniper08 wrote:im all for medals but with this one i see a problem in ppl holding others hostage in order to get the obj to get uniques
Explain?

the game is already won , both players know who is gonna win but instead of going for the kill and ending the game the player who is winning decides to go for the obj holding the other player hostage while he does.in a speed game this can drag on for a while on certain maps.

DoomYoshi · Post by **DoomYoshi** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 8:08 pm

Sniper08 wrote:
DoomYoshi wrote:
Sniper08 wrote:im all for medals but with this one i see a problem in ppl holding others hostage in order to get the obj to get uniques
Explain?
the game is already won , both players know who is gonna win but instead of going for the kill and ending the game the player who is winning decides to go for the obj holding the other player hostage while he does.in a speed game this can drag on for a while on certain maps.

Ok, I see what you mean. I can imagine a similar problem in tournament games that provide a perk for objective victory.

BluU · Post by **BluU** » Wed Jun 13, 2012 1:20 pm

I understand your concern, but I'm not sure that expected unsportsmanlike behaviour should decide changes in the game.
Anyway, a way around it is to say a unique win will be counted only if achieved within 20 rounds. Yes people will still be able to hold their rival hostage, but it wouldn't be for long.

patrickaa317 · Post by **patrickaa317** » Wed Jun 13, 2012 11:08 pm

If your teammate achieved the objective, I assume it would count towards your medal?

BluU · Post by **BluU** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 10:29 am

patrickaa317 wrote:If your teammate achieved the objective, I assume it would count towards your medal?

sure. you win as a team you lose as a team.

Sniper08 · Post by **Sniper08** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 10:42 am

BluU wrote:
patrickaa317 wrote:If your teammate achieved the objective, I assume it would count towards your medal?
sure. you win as a team you lose as a team.

not in team trench but thats an argument for another thread.

DoomYoshi wrote:
Sniper08 wrote:
DoomYoshi wrote:
Sniper08 wrote:im all for medals but with this one i see a problem in ppl holding others hostage in order to get the obj to get uniques
Explain?
the game is already won , both players know who is gonna win but instead of going for the kill and ending the game the player who is winning decides to go for the obj holding the other player hostage while he does.in a speed game this can drag on for a while on certain maps.
Ok, I see what you mean. I can imagine a similar problem in tournament games that provide a perk for objective victory.

yup that happens in tournaments but most ppl are forgiving as they know its a medal for one win but with this idea you need to do it for multiple games so its more prone to piss ppl off as a result. like i said im all for medals but this one has problems.

patrickaa317 · Post by **patrickaa317** » Thu Jun 14, 2012 8:37 pm

BluU wrote:
patrickaa317 wrote:If your teammate achieved the objective, I assume it would count towards your medal?
sure. you win as a team you lose as a team.

Figured as much but might make the historical data mining a giant pain in the butt since the log only gives one player the credit...

YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS - player1 held the For the Win objective

Could be wrong, I'm not a data mining expert by any means but how can you tell if the above was a standard, dubs, trips, or quads game to give appropriate credit to teammates.

BluU · Post by **BluU** » Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:39 am

2012-06-11 08:54:07 - francisco514 held the Holding both thrones for one round objective
2012-06-11 08:54:07 - BluU, francisco514 won the game

If CC were able to award me with the win and with the points for the win, It would be possible to give me the medal.

patrickaa317 · Post by **patrickaa317** » Fri Jun 15, 2012 2:24 pm

BluU wrote:2012-06-11 08:54:07 - francisco514 held the Holding both thrones for one round objective
2012-06-11 08:54:07 - BluU, francisco514 won the game

If CC were able to award me with the win and with the points for the win, It would be possible to give me the medal.

Theres a difference in existing functionality and accessing old data to apply this too. Not a coding expert but my experience is either it'd be a pain in the ass or it would be a manual review.

chapcrap · Post by **chapcrap** » Fri Jun 15, 2012 3:16 pm

patrickaa317 wrote:
BluU wrote:2012-06-11 08:54:07 - francisco514 held the Holding both thrones for one round objective
2012-06-11 08:54:07 - BluU, francisco514 won the game

If CC were able to award me with the win and with the points for the win, It would be possible to give me the medal.

Theres a difference in existing functionality and accessing old data to apply this too. Not a coding expert but my experience is either it'd be a pain in the ass or it would be a manual review.

I think it depends on how it is set up. For this, I think they would be able to back date the medal.

However, it seems to me like lack isn't necessarily in favor of creating medals that can be backdated. That's not any insider info or anything. Just what it seems like to me.

greenoaks · Post by **greenoaks** » Fri Jun 15, 2012 7:11 pm

i don't like this. a win is a win.

it shouldn't matter that you got it by -

total troop count in a round limit game
eliminating all players
achieving an objective
someone else killed your target
the other player no longer held a crucial territory and was eliminated

as i said, a win is a win

agentcom · Post by **agentcom** » Sat Jun 23, 2012 2:12 pm

I disagree with GO, above, and really liked the idea ... until I got to the second post. DoomYoshi has a good point. The worst medal hunting practice that is out there now is the "abuse" or "misuse" (according to some) of the foe system. I think that the potential for hostage holding here is a more grave threat.

I think this should be done only if the C&A mods are OK with dealing with the potentially more hostage holding claims.

That said, I'm not entirely certain that (1) this would result in a drastic increase in hostage holding; (2) that the increase would be of concern to most players; or (3) that the C&A team couldn't deal with it.

On point 3, I would think that NOTING people for this behavior and then WARNING them for a second offense would allow them to sift through these pretty quickly and effectively deter the behavior.

I like the medal, I think the problems are manageable, but I think it would either have to be implemented as a trial run with a real possibility of removing it later or it would need the acquiescence of the C&A team.

nolefan5311 · Post by **nolefan5311** » Tue Jul 03, 2012 5:58 pm

As far as holding a player hostage, Player B either cooperates and allows Player A to achieve objective, or Player B does not cooperate and misses three turns in a row, thus spoiling Player A's chance of obtaining the objective. Might cause some issues with a players turn taken percentage as well.

x-raider · Post by **x-raider** » Tue Jul 03, 2012 9:53 pm

Yes, would drastically change in-game play. At the moment, the most medal-hunting players do is create games with different (sometimes abnormal) settings.
The only game setting this changes is the choice of map; once in the game, people looking to get this medal would play differently.

A good idea to start but has bad implementations.

Does "back date the medal" means to give people who already have this medal at the time it is released the medal automatically?
I hope not, because that would just be stupid...

koontz1973 · Post by **koontz1973** » Fri Jul 06, 2012 12:33 am

Great idea, lots of maps have objectives and it might get the map makers to make a few more.

babagonosh · Post by **babagonosh** » Sun Jul 08, 2012 4:31 am

Re: New Medal - Game Objective
by Sniper08 on Tue Jun 12, 2012 7:13 pm

im all for medals but with this one i see a problem in ppl holding others hostage in order to get the obj to get uniques

I agree......people would start taking other people hostage.
I play 50-100 games at a time.....once A game is over I just like to finish it quickly so i can focus on the rest of my games