Bonus points for getting the same achievement again.

[Sen]

Excluding role based achievemnts and half/all roles ones, I think it'd be nice to get a small bonus for getting an achievement again.

Maybe 10% of the original achievement points or something.
It'd be nice to get some sort of reward for pulling out a Hammer & Nails or Forever Alone multiple times.

[SuperJack]

I would rather have new Achievements than having the old ones, again, for less.

[powerofdeath]

10831

[Sen]

10831

This.

I'd also love some new achievements (although I'm still missing a bunch), but I still think it'd be good to have a small reward for getting the ones that you already have. Particularly the ones which involve being the last survivor with a given setting or role.

[Unentschieden]

Some achievements are counterproductive to pleasant play or pure luck. Lets not try to encourage people to intentionally go for things like "A for Effort". There should be however a bigger pool of "performance points", awarded for correct/ballsy play. Why not have stuff like Doctors get a bonuspoint for every successful heal on non-hostiles?

[Slaol]

Can't support this. Achievements are achievements. After achieved they aren't a thing for more than boasting.

[Alamand]

I always thought it was stupid BG doesn't get a point bonus for getting killed protecting a target or vigi/jailor get bonus points for killing non-town and lose points for killing town, or citizens could get bonus points for preventing their death with their vest.

Really the number of ways the point system could be made better are endless, pity it will never happen.

[creedkingsx]

Here is the thing.
It is well known already that it is inefficient to reward people for something they want to do. Over time, people start to desensitize and want more things like this. I bet if the achievement, for example, had never happened, you wouldn't even be suggesting this. In reality, it is trying to reward people for playing the game and it gets to a point where you are no longer playing the game for fun, but playing the game for the reward, which is bad.
A successful game should never have a heavy influence on points. The more we emphasize them, the worse it gets. For example, the original Super Mario Bros. had points, sure, but nobody EVER paid attention to them. In fact, most of us probably weren't aware there were point when we were kids playing it. Yet, it entertained children longer than just about any $60 game can today.
So no, I don't agree with this.

^^

[Sen]

I bet if the achievement, for example, had never happened, you wouldn't even be suggesting this.
How would I suggest extra points for achievements if there are no achievements? >_>


A successful game should never have a heavy influence on points.
-prefer 20,000 points. :|

[creedkingsx]

How would I suggest extra points for achievements if there are no achievements? >_>


-prefer 20,000 points. :|

I don't agree with -prefer and blacklist existing. This comment was in regards to giving points to players for playing their role correctly. Specifically, in that thread, vigilante shooting a non-town. It applies here.