IIRC, according to HTC the "judgement" is dealt out in the way that the guy that records most damage on the particular target is determined as the person who shot it down.
The alternative method to this is determining kills by who caused destruction of vital structural surfaces absolutely required for flight. Once the particular destruction of certain flight surface occurs, all further damage are neglected in the 'count'. Ie) once a plane loses a wing, someone else can come by and shoot the crap out of it and take it apart, but it won't count as anything.
The pros of this alternative is that the person who dealt the final blow to the target, so it cannot maintain flight any longer, will be determined as the person who shot it down - as it would in real life. The "vital surfaces" that are destroyed may be;
a) both H-stabs destroyed
b) V-stab destroyed (both V-stabs, in case of the P-38s and simular craft)
c) one complete wing destroyed(since some planes can fly with half-wing, only the destruction of one, full wing should count)
d) caused one fuel tank to ignite
The cons of this alternative is that;
a) somebody could deal 99% of damage required to kill one of those 'vital surfaces', and yet, someone else might do the last piece of straw which breaks the back. This is problematic in multi-plane chases, when 3~4 friendlies chase one target. Someone could do 99% of damage, but the people who spray over his shoulder has a good chance of getting the kill - thus, this method might promote shoulder-shooting and other simular annoyances.
b) this method cannot account for other 'shotdown' situations such as augers or ditches. Since an augered target basically killed himself, no kills will be awarded to a person who might be at least partially responsible for the incident.
ie.: when you shoot at a Mustang and rip out half-a wing... the Mustang can still retain flight with one and one-half a wing. You go in for the kill, the Mustang tries to maneuver, and he spins augers. This will not be counted as a kill for anyone.
ie2.: what happens if someone deems his plane is flyable, but too much damaged for further combat, and then decides to bail? In reality, if a plane is flying, but the pilot is forced to bail out due to damage and fear of death, the guy who caused it would be awarded a kill. In this case, the current method would be much better.
Would this alternative make more sense?
Would its cons weigh heavier than the cons with the current method?
