Fun Fights Extinct?

[Guppy35]

We're not talking about score or the outcome of the fight.  We're talking about the effort put forth.  You seem stuck purely on the outcome.  If you truly find winning and lossing to be equal, would it be logical to assume you'd try equally hard to lose as you do to win?  If you try harder to win (and don't try to lose) it would imply you have more desire to win than to lose, and have placed a higher value on success than on failure.  Simply manuevering your plane to try to shoot your opponent (or to dodge his shot) implies a desire to not lose, and would seem to show that an equal desire to win or lose doesn't exist.

Numerical score can be easily manipulated, which is why we aren't discussing it here.  It really has no basis in my argument.  I'm talking about two opponents trying to beat each other.  Competition doesn't always require score.  Simply a winner and a loser.  If there is no clear cut victor score becomes more necessary.  In a 1v1 engagement the winner is pretty obvious, unless someone would care to argue that the winner has somehow lost, or that the loser has won, or that equal status is associated with winning and losing.  If we wanted to do that we'd have to set up a scoring system for the 1v1's so we could measure different facets of the 1v1 (or 2v1, or whatever).  I have no interest in doing that, although it could be interesting.  Again, it would be "score" so would probably be able to be manipulated...

I agree with you when you say "In point of fact, performance AH in no way is a "representation of how you perform in real life"." because you're talking about performance.  Performance can be measured in this game, and is based on outcome.  I'm talking about effort and desire, which aren't as easy to define or measure and aren't based on outcome, since the effort is applied before the outcome is known.

You bring up an interesting point with score manipulation.  I'd love to see  how "score manipulators" handle similar aspects in real life.  This is another area where a game simulates facets of real life.  How do those people handle themselves when "nobody's watching", and there aren't any consequences for < insert forbidden "C" word here >.  Equally interesting would be to see how those who refuse to manipulate their score handle similar real life situations.

The scenario's aspect is interesting too.  How would you feel if your teammates weren't trying to "win", or just didn't care one way or the other?

MtnMan

Interesting to use the Scenario aspect.  I think you'll find that many furballers are also long time scenario flyers.    In DGS the decision was made to not post the logs after each frame.  The emphasis was on the history and having fun trying to get into that history.  We'd all seen how 'score' could wipe out half of a scenario if folks saw they were 'losing' on points and gave up.

In the end DGS turned out to be a helluva scenario because no one knew for sure who was "winning".  It was about the 'mission' and doing the job you'd been given, not manipulating points to 'win' the scenario.  In the end my team 'lost' on points, but I doubt you'd find one Allied flyer who didn't have a great time.  The "win' was in the immersion, the teamwork, the effort.  We didn't go out to 'lose', but we also didn't 'game the game' to win.

I had 1 kill in about 12 hours of flying, and I'd fly that thing again in a heartbeat as it was that intense and that much fun for me.

[FiLtH]

 Hehe Im rook. We dont care    Its in our contract

    I do want to win a fight, and in events and stuff I try to be careful. But the day to day flying in the MA
I'd rather go out and take on a hoard and die trying, sometimes survive and feel real good about it, than rack up kills and never die. That doesnt do it for me. If it does for others thats great too.

   When it comes to the "war", I could care less who wins a map. My battles are local, be it a guy that shot me down in a WW and I just hafta go kill him, or a good fight with a couple of fighters around some less populated base, or a VH or CV I missed bombing because some Captain Nemo turned her at the last second and I wanna go back and sink it. Those are my battles. The rest is just a backdrop.

  

[mtnman]

In the end DGS turned out to be a helluva scenario because no one knew for sure who was "winning".  It was about the 'mission' and doing the job you'd been given, not manipulating points to 'win' the scenario.  In the end my team 'lost' on points, but I doubt you'd find one Allied flyer who didn't have a great time.  The "win' was in the immersion, the teamwork, the effort.  We didn't go out to 'lose', but we also didn't 'game the game' to win.

I had 1 kill in about 12 hours of flying, and I'd fly that thing again in a heartbeat as it was that intense and that much fun for me.

And that is exactly what I'm talking about!  It's about the effort put forth, and striving to succeed, regardless of the eventual outcome (whether it's a numerical score, the result of the "war", or whatever).  Winning or losing isn't the issue.  The effort is what matters, and is driven by desire.  The final outcome can have no bearing on the effort put forth, while the effort put forth can have a bearing on the outcome.

MtnMan

[Guppy35]

And that is exactly what I'm talking about!  It's about the effort put forth, and striving to succeed, regardless of the eventual outcome (whether it's a numerical score, the result of the "war", or whatever).  Winning or losing isn't the issue.  The effort is what matters, and is driven by desire.  The final outcome can have no bearing on the effort put forth, while the effort put forth can have a bearing on the outcome.

MtnMan

And when I plow into a sea of red cons in the old 38G I give it my best effort

I usually end up as 38 parts, but it's fun just the same!

[NoBaddy]

We're not talking about score or the outcome of the fight.  We're talking about the effort put forth.  You seem stuck purely on the outcome.  If you truly find winning and lossing to be equal, would it be logical to assume you'd try equally hard to lose as you do to win?  If you try harder to win (and don't try to lose) it would imply you have more desire to win than to lose, and have placed a higher value on success than on failure.  Simply manuevering your plane to try to shoot your opponent (or to dodge his shot) implies a desire to not lose, and would seem to show that an equal desire to win or lose doesn't exist.

Once again, you are making assumptions.

I haven't seen anyone (prior to you) say winning and losing are equal. In point of fact, what I've seen here is people saying (as have I) that the act of fighting is more important to them than the outcome. From this, you have implied that this equates to a lack of desire to win. I have merely stated that this is an incorrect assumption.

The scenario's aspect is interesting too.  How would you feel if your teammates weren't trying to "win", or just didn't care one way or the other?

You question shows the flaw in your logic. No one has said that they don't try to win. They have stated that the outcome of an action (in the MA) is not important...to them. It is a HUGE leap to assume that these people aren't trying to win. You would be more accurate in saying that they are not afraid to lose, than they are not trying to win.

[Toad]

You would be more accurate in saying that they are not afraid to lose, than they are not trying to win.

Quite right; bravo, old chap; well said!

[NoBaddy]

Quite right; bravo, old chap; well said!

Toad!!!! Are you coming to the con??

[SlapShot]

We as a squad play mostly in the DA, and have grown almost to capacity. We are TA's Aerofighters, Inc. and most DA'ers dont like us because we actually stick together. With that said, most of us like the good fights. By virtue of sticking together though, we get perceived as bangers. If you'd like a 1v1 or 2v2, ask for one. Someone in the DA will oblige. I know I will, especially if you mention this thread. I love a good 1v1 or even a 1v2 in the canyons. Anyways, if you feel ganged by TA's, it might be best to check the map for a few reds that aren't all bunched up, and then pick your battles. Otherwise, ask for a duel, and a TA will oblige you.

Daddy

 

[Anaxogoras]

Once again, you are making assumptions.

I haven't seen anyone (prior to you) say winning and losing are equal. In point of fact, what I've seen here is people saying (as have I) that the act of fighting is more important to them than the outcome. From this, you have implied that this equates to a lack of desire to win. I have merely stated that this is an incorrect assumption.

You question shows the flaw in your logic. No one has said that they don't try to win. They have stated that the outcome of an action (in the MA) is not important...to them. It is a HUGE leap to assume that these people aren't trying to win. You would be more accurate in saying that they are not afraid to lose, than they are not trying to win.

These threads are full of people using the same words to mean different things.  Discussions about symantics suck, but sometimes they are necessary to clear the air.

This is something that needs to be cleared up:  Can I "intend to win" when I climb up into 5 bad guys above me who are in aircraft similar to mine? There comes a point when "intending to win" means you might really be cognitively impaired (maybe drunk) or don't know what you're doing.  In cases where there is no cognitive impairment, such a situation prevents the fearless pilot from intending to win, no matter what.

Pilot skill plays a roll here.  There are people here who can intend to win in situations where for me it would be laughable.

In any case, there are external limits on what we can intend to do; it's not only psychology.

When we put ourselves into situations where there is no chance of winning, we do not "intend to win," because our language prevents us from saying so in a meaningful way.  Still, I'm willing to admit that what a lot of you call fighting, or not caring about score, etc. is definitely still a case of intending to win.

[stickpig]

NB   

[mtnman]

Once again, you are making assumptions.

I haven't seen anyone (prior to you) say winning and losing are equal. In point of fact, what I've seen here is people saying (as have I) that the act of fighting is more important to them than the outcome. From this, you have implied that this equates to a lack of desire to win. I have merely stated that this is an incorrect assumption.

You question shows the flaw in your logic. No one has said that they don't try to win. They have stated that the outcome of an action (in the MA) is not important...to them. It is a HUGE leap to assume that these people aren't trying to win. You would be more accurate in saying that they are not afraid to lose, than they are not trying to win.

I've never said people aren't trying to win.  I've stated that I believe that they are showing behavior that leads me to believe that they do want to win, and don't consider winning as being equally desirable to losing. They may say "I don't care whether I win or lose", or "You shouldn't care whether you win or lose" but they're behaving in a manner inconsistant with that statement.  They're behaving in a manner that says (to me, at least)"I want to win, but it's ok if I lose" and "I'm going to try hard regardless of the outcome".  That's different from "I don't care".  My claim is that I believe when Corky goes into a swarm that although he expects to be shot down, he's going to try to not be.  He's making an effort to win, not to lose.  He's going about it in a very challenging manner, and I respect that.  I've stated that all along.  I hunt with a flintlock rifle, bow, and birds of prey for very similar reasons.

My belief is based on behavior that I've seen, heard, and interpreted.  If you haven't done the same, it doesn't mean I haven't.  I may mean you haven't experienced the same things I have (unlikely I think), or that you've interpreted things differently, or that you've failed to notice those things when you were exposed to them.  Are you assuming I'm basing my belief on behavior I haven't witnessed? The odd thing here is that you claim I'm wrong, but then make the same argument.  You're making an assumption if you think we'll interpret difficult to measure behavior the same way.  The odd thing is that we appear to agree, but you claim to disagree.

I stated that I feel the desire to win is a vital ingredient to a "good fight".  I stand by that.  There is no point, glory, or satisfaction in beating an opponent who doesn't want to win.  That is and was my opinion.  I took some flack for that, and explained why I felt that the desire to win is important in any competitive game.  Some people claimed to think it wasn't important to have a desire to win.  This is a competitive game.  If it wasn't, we'd simply be flying around and not trying to win.  I would wonder about anyone who gets satisfaction from beating an opponent who isn't trying to win himself.  I was explaining my own opinion, expressed in my own statement.  Are you claiming I'm making assumptions regarding my own opinion??  Again, odd.

I find it odd that you claim to disagree with me, but then show examples that support my arguments.  It makes me think you aren't comprehending what I've written.  That really is an assumption I suppose, but I don't have a lot to go on other than your statements.

MtnMan

[NoBaddy]

I've never said people aren't trying to win.  I've stated that I believe that they are showing behavior that leads me to believe that they do want to win, and don't consider winning as being equally desirable to losing. They may say "I don't care whether I win or lose", or "You shouldn't care whether you win or lose" but they're behaving in a manner inconsistant with that statement.

I'm sorry, I couldn't find a statement of yours that said you had seen this behavior and that was what you were commenting on.

See, (IMO) it's not possible to have a decent fight with someone who doesn't care whether they win or lose.  Can you imagine playing ANY game with someone who just doesn't care?  How boring and pointless...

This is your first post here and it was in response to Mensa posting that he just climbed to 5k and mixed it out...not caring if he lived or died. This is what I have been commenting on.

I find it odd that you claim to disagree with me, but then show examples that support my arguments.  It makes me think you aren't comprehending what I've written.  That really is an assumption I suppose, but I don't have a lot to go on other than your statements
 

Well, we do agree on some points. However, the gist of what you have been saying appears (in numerous instances) to be that don't care about the outcome aren't worthy opponents. Is that not what you said in your first post of this thread (quoted above)?

BTW, for the record....I don't care if I'm right or wrong...I just want a good argument. 
mtnman...it's all good...I'm just here for the floor show.

Stick...a big  bakatcha.

[NoBaddy]

This is something that needs to be cleared up:  Can I "intend to win" when I climb up into 5 bad guys above me who are in aircraft similar to mine?

In a word....YES.

I can name a few folks that have done so regularly. In doing so, they became some of the best in the game (in one case, his game was AW..not AH).

[Anaxogoras]

Pilot skill plays a roll here.  There are people here who can intend to win in situations where for me it would be laughable.

 

[mtnman]

Well, we do agree on some points. However, the gist of what you have been saying appears (in numerous instances) to be that don't care about the outcome aren't worthy opponents. Is that not what you said in your first post of this thread (quoted above)?

The gist would be that anyone who doesn't care enough about winning (the fight, not the war) to try his/her best to beat me isn't going to give me what I would consider to be a great fight.  Competing by itself isn't enough for me.  I need to do my best to beat someone who's doing their best to beat me to consider it a "great fight".  Both of us giving our "A" game. 

IMO, the statement "I don't care if I win or not" gives me the impression that they're not even planning to try their hardest.  As in, "I don't really care, so I wasn't really trying- after all, it's just a stupid cartoon plane."  I don't have any contact with the opponent, and am not able to read his face, body language, tone of voice, etc, to judge his level of intensity or effort.  Often, all I have to go on is text.  "I'm going to do my best, regardless of the final outcome" doesn't carry the same message as "I don't care if I win or lose" (IMO).  The "I don't care" implies a lack of interest, at least in my eyes.  Hence, I would consider the fight diminished, even if he indeed tried his hardest, because the impression that his text (which is all I have to go on...)gives me is a lack of interest (boredom).  It would be like winning a chess match against an opponent who was pre-occupied with the football game on TV, causing me to believe his head really wasn't in the chess game.  The game would be diminished in my eyes, at least compared to a game where we both gave our best, undistracted, intense effort.  A win wouldn't mean much to me in the first instance, where I could possibly lose in the second instance and still feel like it was a great match.

Does that make sense?  An example where the reward is measured by the effort given, rather than the result? 

When I see "I don't care if I win or lose" I'm immediately thinking along the lines of my opponent being more interested in the football game.  Or even that the next thing I can expect is "You beat me, but it doesn't matter, because I wasn't trying that hard" or "I let you beat me", or "I was drunk, that's why you beat me".  Believing that my opponent "doesn't really care" diminishes the fight for me.  Can you see why?

MtnMan