Penalizing deaths on the ladder is crappy design

[C4miner]

Penalizing your ladder ranking from dying incentivizes selfish play, camping, turtling, lack of aggression, hugging.  All the annoying aspects of Renegade multiplayer.  Death in Renegade should be CELEBRATED.  It means you are TRYING.  You are PUSHING.  You are DOING SOMETHING.  And in many cases, dying is actually OPTIMAL PLAY (using your own remotes to kill yourself and get back to base quicker).

Prove me wrong.

[karmai]

Also you shouldnt get nearly as many points for repairing buildings.  That means your bent over backwards in base and it encourages afk repping.

But the ladder is long standing.  I think leave the all time the way it is but improving the monthly ranks would be cool to see.  Maybe more of a modern ranking system that favors your win loss percentage over other useless stats

 

Edited January 9 by karmai

[cooldude7]

As a person who dies a lot, I very much agree with this sentiment. (overall K/D of 0.93)

[Itai795]

On 1/9/2026 at 2:27 AM, C4miner said:

Penalizing your ladder ranking from dying incentivizes selfish play, camping, turtling, lack of aggression, hugging.  All the annoying aspects of Renegade multiplayer.  Death in Renegade should be CELEBRATED.  It means you are TRYING.  You are PUSHING.  You are DOING SOMETHING.  And in many cases, dying is actually OPTIMAL PLAY (using your own remotes to kill yourself and get back to base quicker).

Prove me wrong.

Promote this guy to the head of Renegade.

 

I was thinking, about a year ago, about the idea of creating a new ranking algorithm that takes into account only these factors:

- Your time in the match

- Team actions [win/loss, building destruction, and perhaps vehicle kills and inf kills, etc].

The idea is that any action your team takes as a team, not individual actions, adds to your ranking points, with respect to how much time you've spent in game up to that point. The reason to look on the entire team and not individuals is because it's just not possible to tell who contributes to that positive/negative outcome and who hasn't*. Therefore, the algorithm has to assume each team member contributes equally, and when averaging over time, the ranking points would correlate with actual impact.

* Example: Three players could kill the HoN with 3 meds, but they had 2 hotwires who repaired them and 1 sniper that covered the engs.

 

But nobody was willing to give me the actual stat files that are needed :(

[Xylaquin]

You could just make it a positive-reinforcement algorithm, with the most high-valued actions getting more points.

Killing people would still gain points, but repairing tanks would gain even more for example.
This way, you'd simply have to decide what actions contribute more, what you value most. The consensus is probably objective-accomplishing team contributions.

Off the top of my head, that might look something like this (most points to least points):

Successfully detonating a beacon on the pedestal
Destroying a building
Damaging the MCT
Killing someone with proxy mines (encourages/awards those who mine entrances?)
Repairing tanks / repairing players
Destroying tanks
Damaging buildings
Killing infantry
Repairing buildings

Why is repairing at the bottom you ask?

• People already naturally want to repair buildings to keep that building's function, there's less need to incentivise people with points here
• The nature of the repair gun means that a player repairing at the MCT would rack up massive points if you made each repair gun "shot" gain a bunch of points, so on paper the repairing of buildings should actually be low. In practice, since the repair gun will be fired at the MCT for a at least a few seconds, the engineer is going to get a fair share of points anyway.
• Discourages afk repping

Why is damaging the MCT considered way better than damaging the building in general?

• Because a bunch of engineers rushing to an enemy MCT is much more of a teamplay gamble/potential game changer, than an arty point whoring for half an hour.
• Again the nature of damaging a building means that lower points will stack up anyway, so that arty will be awarded for his contribution, it's not like the low points discourages playing the game

 

[MarcPoulet]

Isn't all that in Blacky's top secret code ?