Author Topic: have a min number sorties for rank to count (Read 2732 times)

handy169 · « **on:** October 16, 2006, 07:57:12 AM »

i was thinking .. looking at some of these people that have high ranks.. alot of them have low or no sortis hardly.. so it reminded me of something.. Baseball. in the game of baseball when they are determining batting average .. they set a minimum number of at bats in order to qualify to be put in the batting average lead.. so lets say its middle of the season and the guy leading the league in batting average is .350 .. and they call up a guy form the minors and goes 5 for 5 making his average 1.000 . now based on AH2 rules and standards that guy that went 5 for 5 would be ranked number 1 .. over the guy that has gone .350 for the season .. which is why they set a min of at bats to qualify fo be in the batting average lead. and i think this same concept would work with AH2 .. set a minimum number of sorties based on a average of everyone.. not have someone that just picks oppurtune times to get kills IE vulch, spawn camp, cherry pickand be able to have a better rank then someone that actually goes out and fights. and makes those people have to actually play and up sorties to keep there ranking. if they are really that good then they should still be ranked where they are. and since its based on the average of all. noone can say its unfair that they cant get that many sorties to be qualified for the rankings. just my 2 cent based on what i seen in the stats provided

scottydawg · « **Reply #1 on:** October 16, 2006, 09:51:01 AM »

If I cared about scores (aside from charting my improvement or lack thereof) I would agree with this post.

Kurt · « **Reply #2 on:** October 17, 2006, 01:10:27 AM »

Does it really matter in the brave new world where people are padding their scores by getting captures in basically empty arenas?

The new MA has completely FUBARed the statistics. You just can't have one score covering 3 arenas when one of those arenas is managing only 40 players on a Friday night.

Scores never meant anything anyhow, and it is more true than ever right now.

The only purpose (as scotty pointed out) is to track your stats (not ranks) for personal reasons.

Jeez, two months ago my current stats would have resulted in a sub 500 overall... Today, over 1000... Because tons of people are padding.

handy169 · « **Reply #3 on:** October 17, 2006, 05:04:20 AM »

well you got people camping TT and spawns ranking up 50-60 kills a land. hell the other day i personally saw us land over 400 kills between 9 people. camping a spawn. hell i had over 300 kills myself over 2 days at that same spawn in about 10 sorties. hell i know i personaly died 90 times in about 5 minutes from rooks vulching a field. they count towards scores but doesnt mean they are as good as brag to be. i have over 1600+ death. 1200+ of them i never even had a chance to take off/move before dieing. went straight form tower to runway back to tower. granted thats my fault for doing it. but not being a score potato. i am defending my field. and if there was not ranking. i guarentee noone would even bat a eye at it. even with 1600+ death i am still 700ish ranking.. so just imagine how much better my ranking would be if i had gotten off the ground or been able to move my gv before dieing and not vulched. the ranking system is so flawed and shows really how good someone really is or isnt.

scottydawg · « **Reply #4 on:** October 17, 2006, 05:59:47 AM »

handy,

I think the answer to that is a spawn randomizer, where it dumps you near, but not AT, the spawn point randomly.

handy169 · « **Reply #5 on:** October 17, 2006, 11:13:56 AM »

oh they randomly spawn .. cant hide when you got 20 people sweeping the spawn sites.. and doesnt help on a runway ..

scottydawg · « **Reply #6 on:** October 17, 2006, 12:13:04 PM »

Oh, I didn't know... I hardly use GVs except for base defence. Sorry

cav58d · « **Reply #7 on:** October 17, 2006, 12:14:15 PM »

Who cares about rank...

scottydawg · « **Reply #8 on:** October 17, 2006, 12:16:03 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by cav58d
Who cares about rank...

Lotsa people, apparently, thus the shade accounts, hecklacious vulching and killstealing, etc. etc. ad nauseum.

handy169 · « **Reply #9 on:** October 17, 2006, 02:27:05 PM »

who cares about rank? all those that have it. cause if they didnt care about rank they would up fighter, bombers, GVS to protect a capped based. but again most of those that are ranked are score padders and camp spawners and runway vulchers.. an example.. i think 99% of my deaths to SHAWK if not all of them have been from him vulching me or camping me . i dont think one has been in a 1 on 1. and hes killed me alot. i would rank someone hire that killed me the same amount of times 1 on 1 then him. and thats where real rank in the game is flawed. you cant tell a good fighter from someone that just vulches and camps and kills while engaged in another battle or someone that fights you 1 on 1

SAS_KID · « **Reply #10 on:** October 17, 2006, 11:56:55 PM »

your eating your own heart out about this. Don't bother with the stats.

handy169 · « **Reply #11 on:** October 18, 2006, 12:01:51 AM »

i am not eating my heart out .. simply pointing out that these people with high ranks arent as good as the numbers tell it .. you take al vulches and camped kills from these guys and they dont have nothing . as far as the minium number of sorties.. it goes without saying. anyone can go out in one sortie in each type rack up 20-30 kills and be ranked number 1. i would rather someone that plays everyday be ranked higher then that person that just plays oppurtune times to get max kills to bolster his rank

scottydawg · « **Reply #12 on:** October 18, 2006, 06:11:33 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by SAS_KID
your eating your own heart out about this. Don't bother with the stats.

SAS,

I think the stats can be very useful, not in overall ranking, but for example, in hit percentage or kill/death ratio. Good to chart improvement, or lack thereof.

Flayed1 · « **Reply #13 on:** October 18, 2006, 08:40:06 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by handy169
who cares about rank? all those that have it. cause if they didnt care about rank they would up fighter, bombers, GVS to protect a capped based. but again most of those that are ranked are score padders and camp spawners and runway vulchers.. an example.. i think 99% of my deaths to SHAWK if not all of them have been from him vulching me or camping me . i dont think one has been in a 1 on 1. and hes killed me alot. i would rank someone hire that killed me the same amount of times 1 on 1 then him. and thats where real rank in the game is flawed. you cant tell a good fighter from someone that just vulches and camps and kills while engaged in another battle or someone that fights you 1 on 1

Hey don't forget Shawks ever so impressive, hang wayyyyyy high in a Chog, wait for a slow guy trying to climb up to actually try and get a fight from him and then the ever so impressive pick and run back to alt. OVER and OVER and OVER again, untill he gets 5 or so kills and run home....

The only time i've actually encountered Shawk down low in a good old fight he was coming off of a CV attacking a shore gun. I went after him and after a turn or 2 he ended up making a newbish type mistake and pulled up directly into my guns.... After that it was a fairly average fight I died, he died...

Over all I would say Shawk is about an average pilot, he just knows how to work the system to make it look like he is better rank wise.

killnu · « **Reply #14 on:** October 18, 2006, 11:08:06 AM »

yea, all those high rank tards can do nothing but vulch and camp. They cant beat anybody in a 1vs1, thats why they vulch. lame I tell you, lame....the whole lot of them. I guarentee if 04329492 got off the runway he would clean Shawks clock in a 1vs1. Heck, only thing lamer than high ranking vulchers who suk are those who whine about ranks when they say they dont care about rank.