i like the idea for there being a score for the battle that you are in but the way it is warking i dont agree with i think there should be more of a unit kill score witch would give you so many points for every unit that you kill losers and winners would score but the one who kills the most would score more this would incourage ppl to fight more and not just sit back and biuld

As I stated to you before I don't agree with this way either.. I'll explain why.

In my opinion, any system that encourages having LOWER power is a flawed system. You don't play Battledawn to get low power, you play Battledawn to get high power, big armies, etc etc. No matter whether it is an army from a sub who has 500 range units anti your chassis or the top player you are fighting who has 500 range units anti your chassis, I think you should be rewarded equally for killing those units. Of course with the added option of not awarding score when killing those with a power level of under 40 or 50.

100% with Milanos...

I like it!

This new battle score is beneficial for the action.
Now, "the watchers" will have worst rank at the end of ERA.

The idea behind the concept is nice, but the concept itself when implemented into BD is flawed at almost every aspect.

yeah, you could tweak it so that its not just a directly 1/2 power limitation, and ratio's to how much you gain/lose from battle, but it still comes down to the fact that its taking value away from the score boards...

BD is not a game about every individual battle, and we dont need a score telling us how much fighting you've done in a round. Victory in BD is achieved by controlling the relics, and maintaining that position by having map control.

Yeah, this may help individual players, on the lower end of the spectrum, jump up in ranks around their friends because they caught a squad or 2 of a high-ranked player off-guard... but in the grand scheme of things, all it REALLY does, is distort the rankings of high-ranked alliances after the first war. It'll turn out that A) The winner gets loads of score, because they didn't get many losses (thus they keep their units AND a score boost), or B) It was a close war, and both sides lose most of their armies. The winner, which barely won, gets a small score boost, but it wont matter, because an up and coming alliance with an army will prolly wipe them out.


With score being so closely tied to combat, and now being based on troops killed vs lost, it is too similar to power. In order to separate it from being so similar in effect to power, it would most likely end up imbalanced (similar to the effect of the initial implementation of Battle Score --no loss).
The more you balance it, the less useful it will be for anything, except for the lower-ranks...even then. Lower ranks would just lose the score they gain at first useful combat


With long-term vision, i can see how this would go...So i'm saying no....

hat scoring system exactly?
was changed several times, now i donno anymore who get score for what.

generally love score system idea, but it need to be tweaked more.

I believe the current version is that as long as the person you attacked has 50% of your power or more, your score is the amount of soldiers killed - the amount of soldiers you lost.

Its A Great Update that Rewards Players who Play and not just Sit and build fleets.

One thing that needs to changed is the Conquer = Power. That is not Real Power but more like Potential power it Tricks you into thinking you have more Power then you do and Deceives Attackers

Leave Power to Army Size

that is great indeed, but now if we kill an enemies army right before an era ends the killed enemy can get more score and beat us to rank 1?

no one in their right mind that thinks of what i just wrote ould vote to keep this new system, it is useless and unly rewards the most inactive!

I like the idea of score. But I feel that power should not matter in it. If you have 200 power and some one attacks you and only has 70 power, then you should still get score from it. I mean you are taking loses for the battle so its only fair. Losing 200 units in a battle that you win and getting no score for it I feel is not fair.