We had a long thread on this. The point I was getting at in that thread was inline with what Stangs initial comments. The rank system only accounts for players that are trying for rank, or do all the things needed for a good rank. If the most skilled players always tried for a good rank, they would easlily rise to the top.
The difference between the mediocre pilot with a low rank and the hot stick with the high rank, is the mediocre pilot is playing Aces High as defined by scoring, and the hot stick is not.
Originally posted by hitech
This discusion is like 2 guys golfing. 1 guy wins (hence better at golf) the other argues that he is realy better because he can hit the longest drive.
---snip---
The system would still accuratly provide a measure of golf skill. But your players are no longer playing golf they are now playing a different game. And since your players are not interested in their golf score, they wouldn't even keep track.
So are you interested in playing golf, or do you just want to head to the driving range. Both are perfectly acceptible, but don't try tell the golfers they should forget about it and just go to the driving range instead, because in your view distance is the only TRUE method for messuring a golfers talents.
And since when did playing the game as designed become "gaming the game"?
HiTech
As far as accumulating points=good rank, look again. Point accumulation is only 1/5th of your score. "Death isnt a real issue"? Lets see kills per
death thats 1/5th. Kills per sortie, if you die before you get many kills thats another 1/5th. Kills per time, if you die alot you have to be spending more time in transit, thats another 1/5th. Points, with the death multiplier you only get 25% points for killed, crashed, or discoed, another 1/5th. That makes 4/5th of your score affected by deaths.
