@Amanieu
The scoring system is based on damage done not by killcount of the players or the structures.
An RC has 910 hp.  So mauling the RC will give you a modifier multiplied by the hp of the RC.  Meanwhile, if you kill a turret, you get the hp of the turret (180) multiplied by the modifier.  So you will get a score the reflects the usefulness of the structure you destroyed.  Larger, more important structures have more hp, thus killing them will make your score higher.
The same is true for slaying bigger aliens.  If a human does 400 damage to a rant, you get 400 multiplied by a modifier.  You would have to kill 16 dretches to equal the score you get for killing 1 tyrant.
As far as aliens killing humans, I will have to ask Lakitu about coding a way around this.  The problem is that human armors reduce damage dealt.  So naked's actually become better targets than bsuits.  That would definitely be considered a flaw.  I'll have to find out if there is a way to record damage dealt instead of damage recieved before the modifier.  It takes 3 headshots from a rant to kill a suit.  It would definitely be better to make a bsuit worth 600 and a naked worth 100.  The only problem with this method is that if a human has 4 hp and you headbite him for 96 damage, I could see 92 damage that isn't doing anything inflating the score.  So I need to ask Lakitu how the damage dealt from aliens to humans is tallied up. 
SD modifier wouldn't be bad, feasibility is the concern with it though.
Marked decon and the rarity of the event of intentional base TK make me not care so much.  I really hate it when people decon with a weapon instead of a ckit or a granger.  To cite one instance.  X has destroyed the overmind with his goon.  Y calls a vote to kick X for decon.  Vote passes so I extend the kick into a ban saying "decon" and make it for like 6 months, after I checked the buildlog.  So, 15 minutes later, Z says "where did X go?"   My response was that I banned him 15 minutes ago for TKing the overmind.  Z's reponse "we asked him to do that, we were moving the base."  Me "son of a bitch..."

@Rend
There are times when people are legitimately broke and better off staying near the base.  There shouldn't be a penalty if there's a need.  I can see making one if it's an absurd amount of time but the people who are going to wrack up a high score are the ones that leave the base and attack the enemies' base.  So it's not really an issue.

@Navi
I agree and somewhat disagree.  It wouldn't be hard to add, just another thing to balance.  Feeders should be penalized, but if deaths causes people's score to go negative, it might result in camping because they don't want to die anymore.  I've always said, "I'd rather feed and die than camp."  And I'd rather see people go out and attack and feed and die than camp.  This is the kind of thing that I would like to poll but I would probably leave that poll for tremulous.net. 

Well I think it is better to not count deaths into the score, so you will only lose points if you camp.
Also there are cases when camping without getting credits can be legitimate, such as when a rant is attacking the base, the humans will shoot at it but it will go away if it has a too low health, without anyone being able to kill it and get credits.
Also I think camping time should not be measured relative to the RC, but instead to any turrets/tesla/tubes/hives/trappers nearby (I used the turret/tesla range to determine if the human was in range in my radioactive turrets patch)

Nothing here is hard from a code standpoint. It may be difficult to get adopted by players and by devs, but the hard parts of coding it are things I solved in my own experimentation toward this end quite a while ago. It can even be done fully-serverside, with the exception that the column will still say "kills." Sorting works fine, as does showing the B only to people on the same team. That's all easy.

Your damage questions are also easy. I can get damage before or after modifiers from locational damage and armor. I can also get it with or without counting "overkill" damage.

Really all your problems here are political, not techncal.


Obviously I'm for such an idea though. It's a more practical version of what I tried to do myself without the things that made it impractical ( building scores and ALL numbers were only relative to your team), which is why I still have 90% of the code for this just laying around unreleased and unused. I don't think that gameplay changes alone will address the social problems inherent in this game and the kill counter is the most fundemental thing that must be changed to see a real improvement there.

Another advantage of not showing the number of kills is that people will not be able to boast about it 

@Medic: I know you already know this, but although it gives admins a bit of a harder time, but it was more efficient to destroy friendly buildings than to deconstruct due to the timer delay in between decons. For the most part, this is solved with mark decon anyways so it does not make much of a difference.  There will be instances where the builder(s) will forget to mark one or two structures, but I'm sure if a passing player takes it out, not many will care.

If they're camping, they're racking up negative points for friendly fire anyways by hitting teammates and nearby structures.

After thinking about it for a few minutes, it loses the point of having  there in the first place.  I'll throw it out on the table anyways.  For penalizing feeders, we could not subtract points if their score is zero or negative.

I misinterpreted you, sorry.

Thanks for the input, I am going to add a few notes to the bottom of my proposal and post it on tremulous.net.

For those who don't know, or want to see/continue discussion there, the forum post is here.

Man, just one thing to note. I'm sure you already know this, but I want to remind you.

Medic: if you post it on tremulous.net, it will be flamed. We get used to having this nice near-hand-picked community on the MG/Pure Tremulous site. Around here, we actually think.

What I'm trying to say is: try to not let the flaming idiots of trem.net upset you. Though, knowing you, I think that won't be an issue.

True. But atleast Lava is being supportive of Medic's ideas.

Well, I was chatting with some people in the trem channel on IRC and I'd say most people won't btoher reading it because it's too long for them to read.  Hopefully, this fact will attract the people who I actually need to read it like Lava, Timbo, and Norfenstein.  But I'm not so worried.  If the idea fails, well then it just wasn't meant to be and I'll scratch it off the "to do" list.

I've seen how people respond to long posts.  They'll read the first few sentences and then spam the thread with "OMFGD I NEEDZ MAH KILLZ U CUNT TAK TAT AWAY!!!!!eleventyonetwo

Another suggestion: Subtract points from anyone that says click at the end of the game

About the click issue: Maybe have a (client-side) CP that says "Please click when you are ready for the next round", which can be deactivated but is on by default.

No, the main issue with the readying thing is that it requires 100% of the people. Set it to 80% or something, and all the issues go away.

Requires 100% of the people, or like 60 seconds.  Even if nobody clicks, the game moves on eventually, and all the people who whine "clikc" as soon as the scoreboard comes up make me long for a way to lengthen it while I take a sip of my favorite beverage.

But if we want to continue that discussion, I'll split this off so the scoreboard topic gets its deserved attention. :>

Ohh nice idea with the Please click thing.