Scoring.ranking idea for MAs

[scottydawg]

Here's an idea for scoring/ranking in the MA's.  Don't know if it would work, and it might have some really undesirable unintentional consequences, but here goes...

The score/rank of the enemy you shoot down factors directly into the score you receive for shooting them down, which factors into your rank.

For example, if you shoot down someone who is ranked 1000-2000, you would receive less score/points than for someone ranked 1-200.  I'm not talking about perks.

One intended consequence is that it would paint a target directly on the backs of the highest ranked players... we know how they get their rank.

Another intended consequence is that it would make killing shade accounts and other gamey tactics for score virtually pointless.

Okay, flame on.  It's just something that popped into my head tonight while playing whack-a-mole in the AvA with the Avengers (I'm gonna like those guys).  personally I could care less about my own score/rank and hardly play in the MA's anymore, but thought it was an interesting idea that might level the field and make rank less of a cherry-picking and milkrunning exercise and more of an actual fight that's worthy of attaining.

Now lets poke some holes in it.

[bustr]

In WW2 score was kept by the number of confirmed kills along with you liveing. So for fighters make it the number of kills that you actually return to base and land alive each month. If you die with 20 kills, those done't go towards your end of the month score. Score whoring&timid flying will have a new meaning.

But still give the overview of max kills when someone goes to the pilot score page. Just make the only kills that count are the ones you lived to bring home alive. It might make it easier to tell who vulches a shades account or who dosent have a life outside of Aces High.

[Marshal]

One intended consequence is that it would paint a target directly on the backs of the highest ranked players... we know how they get their rank.[/B]

The only problem I see with your plan is how do you know who you are fighting? If HTC does not put their name in red then you do not know who it is until you shoot them down(or they shoot you down). Unless you want to ask on 200 first.
200: Hey Spit at 12000 feet above A19 who are you?

[CAP1]

Originally posted by bustr
In WW2 score was kept by the number of confirmed kills along with you liveing. So for fighters make it the number of kills that you actually return to base and land alive each month. If you die with 20 kills, those done't go towards your end of the month score. Score whoring&timid flying will have a new meaning.

But still give the overview of max kills when someone goes to the pilot score page. Just make the only kills that count are the ones you lived to bring home alive. It might make it easier to tell who vulches a shades account or who dosent have a life outside of Aces High.

i actually like this idea........but can you imagine?? go to 10k alt, and there'll be a whole bunch of ponys, fw's, la's and jugs up at 20k....and above them, more of the same...........till you have the bunch at their ceiling, stalling in level flight:rofl



sorry........just couldn't resist.......i actually respect quitea few of yas in the ma's...........but this is fun too!:D


<>

[Latrobe]

That might be a little unfair for when I'm on. Somehow my rank went down  to the 60's and 50's this tour, and I always fight until I run outta fuel, ammo, or plane. 90% of the time I run out of plane before anything else, and looking at my sorties I've died a whole lot more than I've landed.

This all means (lets see if I an word this right) Whoever shoots me down gets a large score boost, I sure ain't the best pilot around .

[Ghosth]

Actually it would be interesting to try for a tour.

I like the part about having to land your kills for them to count.

But would that make people even more reluctant to fight?

I love how it would totally do away with vulching a 2nd account.
I'm not sure HT would love the lost income though.

Worth a try in my opinion.

[Ghastly]

Why bother to change it?  

If you take a poll, you'll find that 99.9997% of the pilot's in AH don't care about rank any way. {grin}

[rod367th]

only problem is top rank guys not best pilots.  look at top fighter pilots  they at 1000 or more ranks because they just fight in fighters. so mostly u get rewarded for killing those going for score not for thier ability. Few top ranks are in top 10 but they  no where near best fighters in game.  and Only way to find best pilots using a duel would be 202's that way its no 1 shot wonder kills. Dueling with any plane with cannons is like haveing sex for first time alone. feels good for bit but sense of accomplishment is short lived.....

[scottydawg]

Originally posted by rod367th
only problem is top rank guys not best pilots.  look at top fighter pilots  they at 1000 or more ranks because they just fight in fighters. so mostly u get rewarded for killing those going for score not for thier ability.

Exactly my point.  See my first intended consequence. If it worked both ways, being shot down by a very low ranked player would reduce points for a top ranked player more than being shot down by another top ranked player.  The entire point being that the skill level would be rewarded moreso than the cherry-picking timid scorepotato tactics.

This could be also adapted for bombers to alter the target score for bombs based on the number of enemies within icon range at the time of the bomb hits, as well as successful mission completion (i.e. less points for pork and auger, this has been discussed ad nauseum in other threads as well).

Also I don't know if the eny vs eny has any impact on any points besides perk points, but that also might be an interesting factor as well.  More rank points for shooting down an LA-7 in a P-40B than another LA-7.

I may be way off base here but I thought it was an interesting idea that could lend more credibility to the scoring/ranking system than it currently has.  Let's face it, most people have at least a passing interest in the competitive aspect of the game and the ranking system was ostensibly designed to place a concrete set of number metrics to that end.  If it's worthless in measuring real skill as opposed to gamey tactics, it's pretty much a waste of time and effort.

[scottydawg]

Originally posted by Ghosth
Actually it would be interesting to try for a tour.

I like the part about having to land your kills for them to count.

But would that make people even more reluctant to fight?

I love how it would totally do away with vulching a 2nd account.
I'm not sure HT would love the lost income though.

Worth a try in my opinion.

I don't know that requiring landing kills for them to count would have any sort of positive effect.  I believe it would reward timidity and cherry-picking instead of tactical ACM and SA.  Most likely the current system for scoring landed and non-landed kills works pretty well in promoting a balance between suicidal attacks and smart flying.

Originally posted by Latrobe
This all means (lets see if I an word this right) Whoever shoots me down gets a large score boost, I sure ain't the best pilot around  .

Only if they are a very low ranked player. Other high-ranked players would receive a much lower boost, ostensibly because their skill level is much higher and the fight would be more even.

Originally posted by Marshal

The only problem I see with your plan is how do you know who you are fighting? If HTC does not put their name in red then you do not know who it is until you shoot them down(or they shoot you down). Unless you want to ask on 200 first.
200: Hey Spit at 12000 feet above A19 who are you?

As far as I can think this through, the name is much less important than the skill level of the opponent, which would come out very quickly in a fight...  as I see it, the higher ranked players would assumedly be the more skilled ones and would be more difficult to win against.  Knowing their name is much less important that knowing your SA, E-state and theirs as well when fighting an enemy.

Note on terminology:  When I say "high ranked" I mean the ones who are highly ranked, i.e. the best-ranked players.  Low ranked means the ones down at the bottom, like 4000 etc.  This can be confusing as the terms are used interchangeably throughout the forums.

[The Fugitive]

I don't think there is any way to make a scoring system that is fair and accurate.

Counting only kills that you land will make for more timid pilots, and what about those players that don't get to log a bunch of hours in a tour? 20 hours of flight compaired to some in the 100-150 hours area, just can't even it out, you would have to use percentages again which brings in the manipulation in scoring again.

The getting more points for a higher ranked enemy has promise, but I think tracking all that info word be a pain to code. I like that it would draw everyone toward the area reported to have one of those score potato high rankers Funny seeing everyone chase these guys that aren't really top fighter pilots just to get the hight scores LOL!!

The only scores I watch are my hit%, and my K/D both of which I'm never happy with  

[Oldman731]

Originally posted by scottydawg
For example, if you shoot down someone who is ranked 1000-2000, you would receive less score/points than for someone ranked 1-200.  

I like this idea.  It enshrines the concept that Oldman kills don't count.

- oldman

[scottydawg]

Originally posted by The Fugitive
I don't think there is any way to make a scoring system that is fair and accurate.

The getting more points for a higher ranked enemy has promise, but I think tracking all that info word be a pain to code. I like that it would draw everyone toward the area reported to have one of those score potato high rankers Funny seeing everyone chase these guys that aren't really top fighter pilots just to get the hight scores LOL!!

I agree that there is no way to make a perfect scoring system, the concept that I am thinking about makes it more fair and more accurate in representing the actual skills that should be valued in a combat oriented game (notice I did not say combat simulator).

The second point you make (in my mind) is self-correcting.

I don't think it would be hard to 'coad' at all, a simple multiple inversely proportional to the nme rank applied to the score of killing the nme (maybe adding in the eny imbalance of the planes)

I have trouble expressing mathematical concepts in English.

killpoints=int((myrank/nmerank)+(nme_eny/my_eny))

Hell, we could even throw in a factor to account for hording by counting the number_of_friendlies/number_of_nmes within icon range @ time of kill, i.e. less points for your kill if there are ten of you and one of them within icon range (or some other settable distance like 3K).  That could conceivably promote fair fights, i.e. 1v1 and even increase your kill points if you are in a bad tactical situation and get a kill.

so

killpoints =int(modfactor1(myrank/nmerank)+modfactor2(my_eny/nme_eny)+modfactor3(nbr_nme/nbr_friendly)

I think we're beginning to skirt a conceptual area where people will start complaining that it is 'forcing people to play a certain way'.  I would argue that it instead rewards a style of play that espouses skills such as plane mastery (i.e. eny imbalance modifiers), ACM, and SA instead of other tactics such as alt-monkey/cherrypicking, hording and other forms of unbalancing gameplay.

[thndregg]

Heh, why not? We've been "guinea pigged" before.

[Dichotomy]

I see where you're going with this Scotty and I think it's a great idea.