Please stop this HO thing!

[AKSeaWulfe]

 

Originally posted by funked:
[B
Negative.  The Luftwaffe counted Allied planes that were shot and forced to crash land over the Continent as kills.  I'm pretty sure the other countries scored them the same way. [/B]

Okay, I guess this where it gets interesting. Because I'm prety sure that, in the BoB, german pilots who saw damaged planes descend and probably land/ditch were only credited with probables or damaged. This was over england of course, where confirmation was difficult. I suppose over the continent during this time period ditches/landed planes(both crash landed or just landed but damaged) were counted as victories because they could be confirmed. I suppose a simple algorithm could be created for this kind of confirmation. if they land in their own country, no credit for a victory unless someone is within icon range. If they don't land in their own country then you get credit for it.. of course it would have to be a ditch in your country to get a definite kill. Otherwise a ditch in another country other than his or your own(depending if we stay with the current 3-country system or not), then you'd need a friendly within icon range to get credit for a victory. This would of course require a lot more CPU power on the server's part, or maybe a second server networked to the current one(unless HTC is already running more than one server networked together) to process the data involving this credit system. This is probably the best solution and most realistic. But probably not very feasible, atleast not at this day in age. Maybe a year down the road. Oh well, ideas like these get put on the back burner but eventually we get the hardware to run 'em.
-SW

[Ghosth]

Well Ditches are a tough nut to handle no matter what you do with them.

Ignore them & you add to the fly/die/respawn syndrome. Yet I don't think they should be scored as a kill. After all the Pilot is going to walk away.

Since the FE is already tracking your position, it hopefully wouldn't be that hard
to score it based on location.

Ideally it would be scored based on damage/hits it took, with a modifier for location.

Clip......................... ......

A thought from someone new to AH. Why not get more realistic. If you don't land it, you don't get credit.

------------------
Apache
++Renegade Nation++

clip......................... .......

Yes Apache I saw your post (& agreed with it)
I had already come to the same conclusion.
Perhaps I expained the consquences better.
Or maybe I just used the right buzzwords  

Point is I'd really like to see this tried in the SE arena. I think it's the best place for testing development of ideas like this.


------------------
Maj Ghosth
XO 332nd Flying Mongrels


[This message has been edited by Ghosth (edited 04-05-2000).]

[Apache]

Agreed Ghosth.
Salute

------------------
Apache
++Renegade Nation++

[Dingy]

 

This whole debate is pointless. Two people that know they are going to die are arguing over who gets the kill.
If it really concerns you, figure out new better ways to avoid it.

Other than that, this thread is simply an argument over why someone might have a better k/d ratio.

BOOYAH!!  Perfect reply AKDeja.  

Without pontificating, I can summarize my thoughts as thus; In a HO, if both planes die, award both planes kill.  HOs can be avoided, let the sonofasqueak try to HO me.  I jink, he misses, hes toast.  If he gets a lucky ping, good shot, I jink sooner next time.

OUT.

-Ding

[wolf37]

hiya all:

to start with, drop this stupid idea of haveing to fly back to your base and land to get credit for a kill, remember, if you are not on the runway when you exit plane, its a ditch. the guys that go out and shoot down two or three planes in some great dogfighting, get screwed when they are out of ammo and somebody chase's them down and boom, your three kills are gone. the vulching will become the only fighting in the game, and those defending need only kill somebody once and all there credits are toast. the dog fights will be less, you shoot somebody down and run for home because you want your credit. good luck getting an escort for your c47, the escorting plane gets a kill and turns for home because he want to make sure he gets his credit for the kill, c47's better take about 10 guys for escort duty. over all, really stupid idea, and for you that dont know, in WWII a dead pilot still got credit for his kills if he had a witness to report it, at same time in WWII, pilots that made kills with out a witness to back it up, did not get credit, unless a ground unit found the trashed plane for proof. so if you want to be as real as it was in WWII, no witness, no kill, weather you make it back or not.

next, everybody talks about not getting there kill because they went HO and they know the con they shot at was dead, or going to have to bail, but they blew up and the con got the kill. well im sure there are a lot of peaple here who chase a fighter all over the sky, close to the ground, doing loop t loops, rigzagging, chase the money around the barrel, and shoot him up good, you see his wing rip off, hes out of controll, it's a kill, but before he bails or blows up, you get hit from behind and you die. you just lost your kill, not do to a HO, but because you where busy with the guy you where chasing that you did not see the second con show up, screw the HO topic, i want my kill i just work so hard to get, but no way bud. and a lot of you know this to be tree, you have been there, and some even have whined at who ever just shot them down. * you bastered, we where having a good fight and you just jumped in and ruined it* tough cookies, you got screwed out of your kill and it does not matter if it was not a HO, you deserve the credit do to you, but untill this problem is resolved, keep an eye on your 6, and fly with a buddy. a would a knight please fly with me, i'll try to behave myself. dont say it, i know, not a hope in hell. lol

i hope this gets worked out soon.

blue skies all

[eskimo]

The problem with recording kills in WWII was a matter of proof.  Pilots were probably confused, or they exagerated, or perhaps even lied, but still it was hard in many cases to confirm what really happened.  We are lucky enough, however, to have the ultimate proof of a kill, a computer that is able to see and record all.  There is no reason not to use it's abilities to their fullest potential.  In WWII they used whatever means to best determined what had actually taken place in combat.  Had they had a direct link to God's eye, I bet they would have peeked.  

Under the current score system, I am often willing to enter a 1 v 3 fight with only 11 rounds and 3 liters of gas.  My attitude often is: What the heck, I already got 1 or 2 kills, maybe I'll get another.  
The bottom line is that the scoring system should encourage people to engage, not run.

Making things as absolutly realistic as posible should not be the ultimate goal of a flight sim.  Otherwise most of us would fly around for months without even seeing an enemy plane, and once we died we would never be allowed to fly in that sim again!

eskimo

[funked]

SeaWulfe

I agree the territory should determine if a kill is awarded for a safe ditch or not.

However your estimates of the CPU power required are way off.  It is a quite simple matter to determine the location of the ditched aircraft when the pilot exits.  The CPU usage increase would be trivial.

[funked]

Eskimo you are absolutely correct!

[AKSeaWulfe]

 

Originally posted by funked:
However your estimates of the CPU power required are way off.  It is a quite simple matter to determine the location of the ditched aircraft when the pilot exits.  The CPU usage increase would be trivial.

I suppose, I honestly don't know the current algorithm for placing aircraft on the map for the server. I know all the server has to do is send and recieve data packets that already have information on location already coded, so the server acts more or less as a switchboard. However, I was thinking about how many times people ditch and how many they ditch and how many do it at any single time. Then it has to decipher where the ditch was, if it was in enemy or friendly territory, and if there was someone else around there to see it if it was in enemy territory. I just figured this would be a lot of things for the server to decide, unless they code it for the client's side to decide whether or not it was in friendly or enemy territory and if there was a friendly around to see it if the ditch was in enemy territory. Maybe the algorithm for doing this isn't nearly as complicated as I'm thinking it is. Well, actually it's not complicated at all. I just thought that, lets say 100 people were on the server, then lets say every time on person ditched, there were five or six that ditched at the same time. Now the server has to go through the data that contains locations and decipher the location of the ditch(friendly or enemy). If it's friendly, server stops there and you get the kill. If it's enemy, then the server has to continue on to decide whether or not a friendly was around to see it. (I'd say icon range at the very least, but would be more inclined to say the friendly has to be within 3K of the enemy ditching. Maybe this isn't as much work as it seems on paper(or atleast having to do so many calculations for each ditch in any given second), but I don't know. At the very least I'd say this won't be available for another couple versions. Code, debug, test etc. While working on more important things(voice comms, new planes, vehicles, perhaps adjusting damage model?, adding cool new features etc). So far I have no complaints about the game, and I enjoy it a lot. I find the scoring issue to be the most trivial of all matters right now, but I guess it's just a matter of who wants what when.
-SW