One of the new additions to archer assault was that at the end of a game, there would be rankings (1st, 2nd, 3rd). They're based off of who had the highest kill streak. In my opinion, I think that the end rankings should be based off of how many kills each player got by the end of the game instead of their highest kill streak.
A reason for this is because a team could be at an unfair advantage, caused by a game not being full or players leaving during the game (example, 4v2), which would make it easier for the team with more players to kill the other team over and over again, resulting in a kill streak. But, if a player on the team with less players happens to kill more players throughout the game, not in a row due to facing multiple players at once and dying, overall they played better.
Another problem is having a team that doesn't really know how to play. In this example, you'd be on a team with people who don't exactly know what they're doing, or just aren't that good at the game. Therefore you could be facing an entire team on your own. But, you could also be killing the other team's players frequently. In any case where you're at a disadvantage (having less players on your team), you would most likely be dying more frequently.
For example, in this game, I counted the overall kills each player got by the end of the game:
(3 people in 1st, 1 person in 2nd, 1 person in 3rd)
1st: TheImperfect - 31 kills, kill streak of 8
MYR_Portodos - 14 kills, kill streak of 8
NKTGWTG - 9 kills, kill streak of 8
2nd: colemonsterboy - 5 kills, kill streak of 3
3rd: TheGreenArrow2 - 7 kills, kill streak of 2
As you can see, there's a large gap between one of the 1st placers and the other ones (more than double the kills). Also, the 3rd placed got more kills than the 2nd placed.
In conclusion, I'd like to see the final scoreboard at the end changed from highest kill streak to overall kills
A reason for this is because a team could be at an unfair advantage, caused by a game not being full or players leaving during the game (example, 4v2), which would make it easier for the team with more players to kill the other team over and over again, resulting in a kill streak. But, if a player on the team with less players happens to kill more players throughout the game, not in a row due to facing multiple players at once and dying, overall they played better.
Another problem is having a team that doesn't really know how to play. In this example, you'd be on a team with people who don't exactly know what they're doing, or just aren't that good at the game. Therefore you could be facing an entire team on your own. But, you could also be killing the other team's players frequently. In any case where you're at a disadvantage (having less players on your team), you would most likely be dying more frequently.
(3 people in 1st, 1 person in 2nd, 1 person in 3rd)
1st: TheImperfect - 31 kills, kill streak of 8
MYR_Portodos - 14 kills, kill streak of 8
NKTGWTG - 9 kills, kill streak of 8
2nd: colemonsterboy - 5 kills, kill streak of 3
3rd: TheGreenArrow2 - 7 kills, kill streak of 2
As you can see, there's a large gap between one of the 1st placers and the other ones (more than double the kills). Also, the 3rd placed got more kills than the 2nd placed.
In conclusion, I'd like to see the final scoreboard at the end changed from highest kill streak to overall kills
