Author Topic: Ditch Parameters. (Read 1539 times)

SD67 · « **Reply #15 on:** January 18, 2008, 05:38:59 AM »

And I'll be right there to give you some of the welcome home to mother earth lovin'... After one or two passes to let you get around to it of course

Ack-Ack · « **Reply #16 on:** January 18, 2008, 01:08:12 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Lusche
I never have failed to ditch with enemies around when in friendly territory. I have never got any credit for a ditching enemy when inside hios friendly territory.
Some people do though confuse "inside own radar range" with being in "friendly territory". It's strictly based on distance to closest base/CV.

In your example it's probably a lag issue. You write that he continued to strafe you. So he did kill you on his FE while you jst seemd to make it on your's.
Happens to me a lot when towering out of Ostwinds when bombs are falling.

Never said he continued to strafe me since he wasn't in guns range yet when I exited, I said he was turning around to make a strafing pass as I was cruising to a stop dead stick after ditching.

No, I know the difference between in the radar coverage zone and friendly territory and it happened in friendly territory.

Anaxogoras · « **Reply #17 on:** January 18, 2008, 03:38:06 PM »

Ack-Ack, what your'e giving is some rare counterexample that we don't know how to explain. That still doesn't invalidate the general rule that ditching in friendly territory = no kill.

hubsonfire · « **Reply #18 on:** January 18, 2008, 04:14:05 PM »

Since no one has, so far, backed up their experiences with film, or offered something from HTC, then declaring that one claim defines the parameters, while another is simply anecdotal and defies comprehension (merely because it conflicts with the first theory) isn't necessarily accurate.

No offense to anyone, and I'm not saying that this didn't happen, but the claims of "this happened to me, and this is how it works" are often repeated on these boards, and are often wrong. Film or something concrete would be much more useful in this instance.

Anywho, I would like to see all planes abandoned in the water scored as kills, and I would like to see one overall change in the damage model/kill scoring- a plane that is damaged to the point that it cannot be flown (entire wing, tail section taken off, all control surfaces removed, etc) scored as a kill. (This is an idea that's been discussed in the past, mostly with regards to kill stealing, but I digress)

This type of change could easily extend to the ditching parameters- a plane capable of getting its gear down and coming to a stop intact aside from some damage to the engine or fuel tanks is one thing, and seems a reasonable candidate for a ditch. A plane that is shot to pieces at low alt and survives the impact, or one that ditches in the trees, tearing off both wings and the tail section is quite another. If they score a kill for a proxy, or when a pilot bails, even from an intact aircraft, why not score one when the plane is shot apart and falls to the earth, as it was done in reality?

Imagine seeing this in an AAr

"24 Nov 1944. Fired upon a P38, observed hits across entire plane. Fire erupted from both engines, at which point I fired another short burst, removing both wings and the entire tail section from the craft. Both my wingman and I witnessed this plane plummeting into a stand of trees, tearing both engines and fuselage booms off in a horrific ball of fire and smoke, at which point the charred, perforated, and crumpled pilot compartment slid across a road, coming to rest against the front porch of a farmhouse outside Kaiserslautern, at which point there was a small explosion, and the remains of the plane disintegrated. I claim no kills."

That's perfectly normal in here, which doesn't seem very logical to me.

Murdr · « **Reply #19 on:** January 22, 2008, 10:33:27 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by hubsonfire
If they score a kill for a proxy, or when a pilot bails, even from an intact aircraft, why not score one when the plane is shot apart and falls to the earth, as it was done in reality?

Quote

Originally posted by hitech
You can not award the kill at the time of damage. The outcome of the flight has still not been determined. The odds are he will crash and die,but that is not always the case.

But I have lost wings at times near ground and ended up with a ditch by luck.

Here is a perfect example of what HT is saying

"The outcome of the flight (or fight in this case) has still not been determined."

hubsonfire · « **Reply #20 on:** January 22, 2008, 11:25:21 AM »

If you ping a plane, and the pilot bails, it's a kill. If you shoot the wings off, and the pilot bails, it's a kill. If you shoot the wings off, and the thing crashlands, it's a kill when the pilot .efs in certain places. If you're just flying along, see another plane, and the pilot bails, it's a kill. In other places, the pilot can crash, leaving the plane completely destroyed except for the cockpit tub, and it's not a kill. If you shoot the plane down and the pilot dies in the crash, it's a kill. If you just happen to be nearby when someone crashes, it's also a kill, even though you had nothing to do with it.

So, in some instances, the criteria for scoring a kill is killing the pilot. In others, it's separating the pilot from the airplane, even though the pilot survives. In others, it's the pilot ending his sortie. In no circumstances is it dealing so much damage to the plane that it can no longer fly, which is sort of the point, isn't it?

You're saying the current setup is the most reasonable? I think not.

Murdr · « **Reply #21 on:** January 22, 2008, 12:13:35 PM »

So you have no comment on the specific issue I addressed in my posted?

hubsonfire · « **Reply #22 on:** January 22, 2008, 12:30:13 PM »

This is the Wishlist, and this is my wish. I'll watch your film in a moment if it's so important to you, although it does not render my opinion worthless, or incorrect.

FWIW, he didn't end up with a ditch by luck, he wrote the game that way. He ended up with a ditch because he coded the game to not give kills when the aircraft is shot down, or when the pilot exits the plane in certain places. It had little to do with luck.

hubsonfire · « **Reply #23 on:** January 22, 2008, 12:40:26 PM »

That's it? I see Goobman A) being stupid, and B) trying desparately to get that kill that the system would otherwise not give him, despite him having shot you down.

It's a matter of perspective. If there's a historical precedent, let's see it. If your only basis for arguing that the best system is the current system, is that you once got a kill after being shot down under the current system, you're wasting time trying to convince me.

Murdr · « **Reply #24 on:** January 22, 2008, 01:08:11 PM »

So you think Goobman should have been magically awarded a kill for taking the tail off an enemy plane seconds before dying? No opportunity to report a kill, no friendlies to confirm the alledged kill...That doesn't sound realistic either.

SlapShot · « **Reply #25 on:** January 22, 2008, 01:23:55 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by hubsonfire
If you ping a plane, and the pilot bails, it's a kill. If you shoot the wings off, and the pilot bails, it's a kill. If you shoot the wings off, and the thing crashlands, it's a kill when the pilot .efs in certain places. If you're just flying along, see another plane, and the pilot bails, it's a kill. In other places, the pilot can crash, leaving the plane completely destroyed except for the cockpit tub, and it's not a kill. If you shoot the plane down and the pilot dies in the crash, it's a kill. If you just happen to be nearby when someone crashes, it's also a kill, even though you had nothing to do with it.

So, in some instances, the criteria for scoring a kill is killing the pilot. In others, it's separating the pilot from the airplane, even though the pilot survives. In others, it's the pilot ending his sortie. In no circumstances is it dealing so much damage to the plane that it can no longer fly, which is sort of the point, isn't it?

You're saying the current setup is the most reasonable? I think not.

The problem with the current logic is that the code can only assign a "single" outcome and they are ... ditch ... capture ... kill.

I could be wrong, but a kill in WW II was recorded when a plane was taken out of the fight ... be it by killing the pilot ... damaging the plane to the point that it could fight anymore ... or blowing up the plane.

If HT could award both a ditch or capture to the pilot, depending upon the circumstances, that is sitting in the cockpit on the ground alive and a kill to the person that caused that condition, that would be the ideal solution to the problem.

Also, if he could set a parameter that above a certain altitude, if a plane suffers a complete loss of 1 or 2 wings or a complete loss of the tail, the kill is awarded immediately ... this would quell the "kill stealing" of the helplessly floating plane syndrome.

hubsonfire · « **Reply #26 on:** January 22, 2008, 02:01:05 PM »

To pretend that you earned a kill by being shot down in such a place as to have a convenient shot on a wreck, and to maintain that Goobman didn't, even though he'd already taken you down is patently absurd. Your "issue" is simply a farcical event that only happened because he wanted the kill he'd legitimately earned. Whether or not he would have lived to claim it isn't really a concern in this scenario. We know what happened.

Quote

If HT could award both a ditch or capture to the pilot, depending upon the circumstances, that is sitting in the cockpit on the ground alive and a kill to the person that caused that condition, that would be the ideal solution to the problem.

Also, if he could set a parameter that above a certain altitude, if a plane suffers a complete loss of 1 or 2 wings or a complete loss of the tail, the kill is awarded immediately ... this would quell the "kill stealing" of the helplessly floating plane syndrome.

Agree completely. I don't even know if the altitude parameter is required. I would think that when a plane is fired upon, and shot to pieces, then falls from the sky, that those in attendance would describe that plane as "shot down". HTC can and does track all of the shots fired, damage dealt, victories scored, etc. Why do they choose to ignore what would be legitimate kills in the real world, while awarding kills for things which wouldn't be? That's what I fail to understand.

Murdr · « **Reply #27 on:** January 22, 2008, 02:23:06 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by hubsonfire
Whether or not he would have lived to claim it isn't really a concern in this scenario.

Yes, it is. You argue that HiTech should change his kill award system to more closely match historical scenarios. If a plane was shot down, and there was no ability for the shooter to claim it, then it wouldn't be recorded. Realistically that sortie panned out as it should have. I lived, I had a friendly on hand to confirm the kill, and the opponent could not have claimed a kill.

You don't really want realism. You want some minscule percentages of kills that you feel would have been earned in real life to be awarded to you. What about the rest of the system? Are you willing to be awarded probables? You would be happy with damaging an enemy to the extent their time of powered controlled flight is limited, but being unable to collect a kill if their sortie finishes outside an arbitrary range of you? Because the system in place already heavily leans toward awarding kills.

It doesn't matter how long ago, or how far away you are from an enemy when their sortie ends. If you damaged them during your current sortie, did more damage than anyone else, and they bail, capture, disconnect, or crash, you get the kill. I don't see any realism complaints about that, and I believe that is far more common place than the 'ditch out' scenario. Realistically, you could not claim those kills. Are you willing to give those up for the ability to claim the oddball ditch out?

Murdr · « **Reply #28 on:** January 22, 2008, 02:38:13 PM »

Btw, here is that quote in it's entirity

Quote

Originally posted by hitech
You can not award the kill at the time of damage. The outcome of the flight has still not been determined. The odds are he will crash and die,but that is not always the case.

But I have lost wings at times near ground and ended up with a ditch by luck.

What would be possible is that no more lethality points are tracked once certian componets fail. The plane could still be shot and more damage done, but no kill award tracking would be done, you still must stay living until the hit plane exits flight.

Been thinking about implementing this for a while, it just hasn't moved to the top of the list yet.

HiTech

hubsonfire · « **Reply #29 on:** January 22, 2008, 03:50:07 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Murdr
You want some minscule percentages of kills that you feel would have been earned in real life to be awarded to you.

Quote

Originally posted by Murdr
My thought is, if I can deny someone a kill by making it back to friendly territory I will.

Quote

Originally posted by Murdr
Where is the immersion or fun in attempting to rtb if anything short of stoping on the runway gives someone a kill...

So Murdr, I'm the one trying to weasel every last bit out of my stats, huh?