valid Kill still given if the enemy self-destructs

[wolverine848 13,097]

1 hour ago, DieselPlatinum said:

And what is causing them to splash themselves?

Why do you keep asking questions to which you already know the answer?

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

14 minutes ago, wolverine848 said:

Why do you keep asking questions to which you already know the answer?

Just answer my questions. You'll see where I'm getting at.

[wolverine848 13,097]

52 minutes ago, DieselPlatinum said:

Just answer my questions. You'll see where I'm getting at.

I know exactly where u are getting at. 

Tank A is non-splasher.  Tank B is splasher.    A damages B.

A gets close to B because THAT IS A STRATEGY.

B can either hit back and self damage, or not.  B hits back and dies due to self-splash.

So what if A did not make the kill. They set up the situation for B to be destroyed.

It's no different than if A does 90% damage to B, and As team-mate finished is off.   = ASSIST.

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

1 hour ago, wolverine848 said:

 

A gets close to B because THAT IS A STRATEGY.

 

It is a strategy, but it's just one strategy.

 

Strategies always have downsides. In this case the down side is that you could risk losing the kill and points due to increased chances of them self destructing. This down side is perfectly balanced. No need to change it.

[sensei_tanker 3,098]

15 hours ago, Maf said:

Topic merged

Nice, you basically posted the exact same idea as the one you posted 2 years ago 

I completely forgot about making this topic. I guess my brain hasn't developed in over 2 years xD

13 hours ago, TheCongoSpider said:

I would have wanted it as an assist rather than a kill.

I'm accepting this as a solid compromise if I can't persuade others to make it the full kill. 

11 hours ago, DieselPlatinum said:

Simple solution, just don't charge at them. Otherwise those turrets should be compensated with more points for killing you while you're within their safe zone that is is equal to their turrets splash radius.

 

10 hours ago, DieselPlatinum said:

Just don't get in close. Besides this idea will just encourage people to ram instead of using actual skill.

 

See a splash turret? No worries, ram it, you get points for it anyway.

 

This idea is like saying, that since Vulcan OH, we should get points when it dies because we made it OH.

 

Just a really lazy way to get points IMO.

One of the most effective strategies at fighting splash turrets is to rush them. I'm trying to win, but I shouldn't be penalized for using an effective strategy by making me lose points. Anyways, it isn't my fault if they kill themselves (by accident or on purpose) and the player shouldn't be punished for this either ways. I think it's fair that if someone self-destructs, I get credit for it (or at least an assist)

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

2 hours ago, sensei_tanker said:

Anyways, it isn't my fault if they kill themselves (by accident or on purpose) and the player shouldn't be punished for this either ways

You rush them and then get mad because they self destructed. No wonder why I lost faith in humanity. Either stop rushing them or just suck it up buttercup and move on. Simple solutions that everyone chooses to ignore these days.

 

Is everyone on the enemy team a splash user? I highly doubt it.

[1M4U 72]

Yes I absolutely agree to this idea. It's just so dis-advantageous to players using non self-destructive turrets. The enemy will just self-destruct and then somehow exp given to them after dealing damage to the other party.

[Gauss-Hornet 489]

In strategic gameplay, everything has its pros and cons. If you rush someone using a splash damage turret, you can be sure that you are surely taking down the enemy, either by their self destruction or by your damage. If you don't survive, then they don't, too. The downside is that you can't be sure to get a kill or exp for that action, since they may die from their splash, sometimes taking you down too.

I guess an assist would be a suitable compromise. 

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

7 hours ago, 1M4U said:

Yes I absolutely agree to this idea. It's just so dis-advantageous to players using non self-destructive turrets. The enemy will just self-destruct and then somehow exp given to them after dealing damage to the other party.

Then don't get in so close to them. 

[miguelduarte13 22]

21 hours ago, wolverine848 said:

If you did 90% of the damage?  You actually did something, no?  It exactly the same thing as getting an assist.  You damage the target and someone else finishes it off.

And when are you going to "self destruct not to give points to enemies"?  DM?  That's not even part of MM anymore, so that does not apply to like... 90% of the battles that happen.

 

Well i know that DM is not part of MM anymore and i wasnt even talking abt DM but i was talking abt all other modes , if i kill my self it means that i actually dont want to give points to a enemy then i go back to my base on full HP while the other guy is probably on low health, and abt what you said abt the 90% damage you're right but you didnt kill him and nobody killed him so you didnt do anything you just helped him to self-destruct so you only wasted time.

[wolverine848 13,097]

1 minute ago, miguelduarte13 said:

if i kill my self it means that i actually dont want to give points to a enemy

WHY?   Who cares if it is non-DM battle mode.

 

And you just contradicted yourself.

"so you didnt do anything you just helped him to self-destruct"

[miguelduarte13 22]

17 minutes ago, wolverine848 said:

WHY?   Who cares if it is non-DM battle mode.

 

And you just contradicted yourself.

"so you didnt do anything you just helped him to self-destruct"

How am i contradicting my self ??

What i said is what really happens let's speak abt a football match if team A completly dominates the whole game but at the end team B wins ( the one who didn't do anything) he's the one that wins the match and gets the 3 points , just cuz team A dominated the whole game doesn't mean they earn the 3 points.

Is the same thing in tanki let's say what you said if you do 90% of the damage that's right cuz u really did 90% but at the end the  player with a splash turrent can be smarter and just self-destructing , and sometimes he doesn't self-destruct because he doesn't what to give you XP  but just cuz he knows that he's going to die so he wants to go to his base ASAP and not wasting more time.

[wolverine848 13,097]

9 minutes ago, miguelduarte13 said:

doesn't self-destruct because he doesn't what to give you XP

WHY DO YOU CARE????

You are not competing with them for xp.  This makes no sense at all.  None. 

[sensei_tanker 3,098]

I shouldn't be penalized for using the most effective strategy. It's like getting an F on a test even though you got all questions correct because a fellow classmate didn't show up to take the test on the same day. It has nothing to do with the other player's behalf, it's all about whether the player gets what he or she deserves.

[featwasath 267]

Actually when I'm in a 1vs1 fight with a thunder or a magnum and we're pretty close to each other and I can't run to any cover, I just run to that thunder or magnum & stay push them with my tank. I'm using railgun + LCR so proximity combat isn't my thing. But I do this when it's clear that I'm losing this 1vs1 fight. That way, the enemy receives a good portion of splash damage from its own turret & about half the time the it dies with the same shot that kills me. In lucky times, the enemy dies with its own splash damage while I still have some HP left. I consider this as FAIR FIGHTS

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

2 hours ago, sensei_tanker said:

I shouldn't be penalized for using the most effective strategy.

Neither should those that made a dumb mistake. But that's just how life is. We should just accept it and deal with it.

[sensei_tanker 3,098]

14 minutes ago, DieselPlatinum said:

Neither should those that made a dumb mistake. But that's just how life is. We should just accept it and deal with it.

What is this dumb mistake that you speak of? Who is being penalized for being dumb here?

[Gauss-Hornet 489]

Here's (what I think) is the summary of DieselPlatinum's argument, just so that there aren't so many confused responses. I may be wrong in my interpretation, though. (Most likely )

You ambush an enemy using a splash turret

= You want the opponent to deal self-damage so that they die easily

= You're responsible whether they self-destruct trying to defend themselves 

Since it's your decision to rush them, you must choose between staying away (or away from where their turret's facing) and trying to kill them or rush them and risk losing the kill.

I kinda support this reasoning, but an assist won't hurt.

[wolverine848 13,097]

1 minute ago, Gauss-Hornet said:

Here's (what I think) is the summary of DieselPlatinum's argument, just so that there aren't so many confused responses. I may be wrong in my interpretation, though. (Most likely )

You ambush an enemy using a splash turret

= You want the opponent to deal self-damage so that they die easily

= You're responsible whether they self-destruct trying to defend themselves 

Since it's your decision to rush them, you must choose between staying away (or away from where their turret's facing) and trying to kill them or rush them and risk losing the kill.

I kinda support this reasoning, but an assist won't hurt.

I understand what Diesel is getting at.  I just disagree.

Self-damage is one of the negative aspects of equipping that kind of turret.  Those aspects should not be applied as a negative to the opposition.

Getting close to a splash turret is a legit strategy to help destroy them.  Losing out on some score because they self-destructed to me makes no sense.

[TheCongoSpider 8,942]

I'm torn. Ultimately, I won't mind if sensei's idea is implemented, and I won't mind if the current system stays the way it is. If anything, like Gauss-Hornet said, an assist won't hurt. 

[miguelduarte13 22]

22 hours ago, wolverine848 said:

WHY DO YOU CARE????

You are not competing with them for xp.  This makes no sense at all.  None. 

I don't care if they self-destruct you are the one who cares 

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

1 hour ago, sensei_tanker said:

What is this dumb mistake that you speak of? Who is being penalized for being dumb here?

 

1 hour ago, wolverine848 said:

I understand what Diesel is getting at.  I just disagree.

Self-damage is one of the negative aspects of equipping that kind of turret.  Those aspects should not be applied as a negative to the opposition.

Getting close to a splash turret is a legit strategy to help destroy them.  Losing out on some score because they self-destructed to me makes no sense.

 

59 minutes ago, TheCongoSpider said:

I'm torn. Ultimately, I won't mind if sensei's idea is implemented, and I won't mind if the current system stays the way it is. If anything, like Gauss-Hornet said, an assist won't hurt. 

Ok fine, I'll accept the idea on ONE CONDITION: the person is not punished for self destructing. They don't lose battle points, they don't lose a kill, and they don't gain a death from self destructing.

The only penalty they should receive is losing the spot on the map they were on as well as their mines that they planted disappearing.

[wolverine848 13,097]

27 minutes ago, miguelduarte13 said:

I don't care if they self-destruct you are the one who cares 

Well then what does this mean?

"sometimes he doesn't self-destruct because he doesn't what to give you XP"

19 minutes ago, DieselPlatinum said:

 

 

Ok fine, I'll accept the idea on ONE CONDITION: the person is not punished for self destructing. They don't lose battle points, they don't lose a kill, and they don't gain a death from self destructing.

The only penalty they should receive is losing the spot on the map they were on as well as their mines that they planted disappearing.

Agreed.

[miguelduarte13 22]

14 minutes ago, wolverine848 said:

Well then what does this mean?

"sometimes he doesn't self-destruct because he doesn't what to give you XP"

 

Well just cuz someone self-destrcuts doesn't mean he won't let you have 15 xp it just depends on why the guys decided to self-destruct.

[wolverine848 13,097]

5 minutes ago, miguelduarte13 said:

Well just cuz someone self-destrcuts doesn't mean he won't let you have 15 xp it just depends on why the guys decided to self-destruct.

I quoted you.  Never mind.