Page 1 of 2
Best Critical Mass Commanders - View / Submit / Compare
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2005 11:51 pm
I have added a table of best critical mass commanders to my webpage athttp://www.btinternet.com/~boxzone/OtherGames/CriticalMass/Best_CM_Commanders.htm
The table shows the same information as the Critical Mass splash screen but with medals above eight and an added column for Kills/Mission.
I still have only a few submissions, I know there are a lot more (better) commanders out there so please submit me your RollOfHonour.dat file so that I can get them on the page.
Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2005 5:57 pm
Nice job with the table:)
Very good job.
Everyone likes comments:)
Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2005 9:02 pm
I'll submit my Roll of Honour as soon as I can get my old computer hooked back up to the internet. I haven't used it in some time.
Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2005 10:49 pm
I was expecting a load more rollofhonour.dat files by now.
As a result I have lowered the bar, anyone can submit and I will post their best commander.
Where are all you 100+ missions people?
These were the commanders I really wanted to see!
Posted: Sat Dec 17, 2005 8:55 pm
What do you consider the "Best" Commander to be?
Is it really the one with the most Gold Crosses?
Surely a 10GC 40MoCB commadner who has successfully completed 50 missions is better than a 11GC commander who failed 11 of his 22 missions?
But Success isn't everything.
Is Kills / Mission Important?
What about GC / Mission? Should this be considered?
I am trying to come up with an algorithm to rate commanders on more than just number of medals and would appreciate your thoughts.
Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 12:49 am
See my email with my current roll of honor file. Its a long way from the best I've had, but should give you something to compare with.
Posted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 8:43 pm
I don't think there is an overall 'best' commander. There might be the most decorated, there might be the most deadly, there might be the most succesful and a couple of more things. I don't think one single factor could measure a commander completely, as I know more than enough people in life who always look good in comparison but in no way I would even consider following their command...
Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 2:01 am
I agree with Kangaroo. However, if you simply mean "most successful" commander, then I would probably rate it on missions done. After all, if you survive the longest, then you're the most successful, aren't you?
Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 4:17 pm
Well, as you won't get court-martialed in Critical Mass you can survive quite a few missions by simply turning tail and running away from the battle... I consider the number of missions successfully completed more decisive.
Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 5:11 pm
Kills would choose most succesfull. I mean 400000000000 missions with no kills isent exactly good. 2 missions with 34342219472834693274 kills is good.
Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 5:25 pm
True, I think you're right. Successful missions is better.
Well, kills mean you're a better pilot and can shoot down many enemies, but if you kill a lot of enemies and fail the mission then you didn't really succeed, so I don't think you could base it solely off of kills.
Maybe a composite of like total medals combined with success ratio and missions completed?
Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 7:55 pm
What about victory rate+medal+kills. Something like that?
Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 11:18 pm
I didn't exactly mean what you call 'victory rate' (percentage of successful missions) but rather the absolute number of successes, as having 100% of your missions completed and getting killed after the first also isn't really the best performance ever.
Honestly I think enemies shot down are completely secondary as I consider the ultimate goal to end the war in victory and not to wipe out the entire other race, but that's really getting off topic.
Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 5:10 pm
Scratch what I was thinking... If we could come up with a nifty equation that used all the parts of the roll... that'd be cool.
Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 8:55 pm
how about % success*100 + kills/2 + points for medals?
this also rewards # of missions because of the kills and medals
or mayb successes*(% success*10 + kills/missions) + points for medals
these are completely random so i dont know how well they would work