Scoring System Fix Idea #2 (Better idea than before)

[grizz441]

So here's my next stab at the scoring problem! READ UP

Minimum Missions Flown Formula would be as follows: You take your total rank# and divide it by variable Fm (Min Mission Factor) Fm will level off as your mission # goes up.
Fm will be a number that approaches 1 as your missions increase.  For example if you have only 10 missions flown, your Fm # will be like 0.5, If you have 30 missions flown your Fm # will be like 0.8 if you have 300 missions flown, your Fm will be 0.9987 or something.
The Fm curve would have to be opinionated at what HTC would deem "reasonable number of missions for a campaign" For example, 1 Mission a day would get you 30 missions, which would probably be good enough for like a 0.8 Fm or something.

Example 1: Amsoil21's Fighter Stats All Ranks Add up to 136.  Since he only has 14 missions flown, his Fm would be something like, 0.6 So you take 136/0.6 = 227 which would probably put him somewhere from ranked 8-15 in fighter.
Example 2: Take Steve's Fighter Stats All Ranks Add up to 180.  Since he has 137 missions flown, his Fm would be something like, 0.98 So you take 180/0.98 = 184 which would put him top 2 fighter.

Since you all hated my idea to increase the weights of points, what do you think of this idea?  This shouldn't penalize you for lack of flight time as long as you fly a very reasonable number of missions for a campaign.  It just really penalizes those who only fly in the range of 10-20 missions in a camp trying to score big

[Bruv119]

It would work. 

Whether HTC can be arsed to make the changes is another matter. 

heres another idea what about discounting bombers in fighter rank altogether?  That will solve all K/D, hit %, kill point,  problems and give a true fighter vs fighter rank.

[BlauK]

Would you then make a separate fighter vs bomber rank? I dont see why it should be separated. What is the point? Are the buff hunters somehow ruining the furballers' ranks? 

[Bruv119]

Would you then make a separate fighter vs bomber rank? I dont see why it should be separated. What is the point? Are the buff hunters somehow ruining the furballers' ranks? 

apparently so.   If you didn't read the 10 pages on the other thread.   

[Tr0jan]

So here's my next stab at the scoring problem! READ UP

Minimum Missions Flown Formula would be as follows: You take your total rank# and divide it by variable Fm (Min Mission Factor) Fm will level off as your mission # goes up.
Fm will be a number that approaches 1 as your missions increase.  For example if you have only 10 missions flown, your Fm # will be like 0.5, If you have 30 missions flown your Fm # will be like 0.8 if you have 300 missions flown, your Fm will be 0.9987 or something.
The Fm curve would have to be opinionated at what HTC would deem "reasonable number of missions for a campaign" For example, 1 Mission a day would get you 30 missions, which would probably be good enough for like a 0.8 Fm or something.

Example 1: Amsoil21's Fighter Stats All Ranks Add up to 136.  Since he only has 14 missions flown, his Fm would be something like, 0.6 So you take 136/0.6 = 227 which would probably put him somewhere from ranked 8-15 in fighter.
Example 2: Take Steve's Fighter Stats All Ranks Add up to 180.  Since he has 137 missions flown, his Fm would be something like, 0.98 So you take 180/0.98 = 184 which would put him top 2 fighter.

Since you all hated my idea to increase the weights of points, what do you think of this idea?  This shouldn't penalize you for lack of flight time as long as you fly a very reasonable number of missions for a campaign.  It just really penalizes those who only fly in the range of 10-20 missions in a camp trying to score big

Who gives a sheet about rank?!?!

Get rid of rank!
It ruins people and the game!

[thrila]

I couldn't agree more ginger, just say no to rank.

Below is a photo showing the effects of playing for rank on an AH user.  The first image is of someone who used to innocently shoot down planes, strafing gv's and rolling m3's into town.  The 2nd image shows the physical toll on her body after 1.5 years of playing for rank.  In addition to the physical effects the mental toll is immense with identified side effects including insomnia and paranoia.



Say no to meth... i mean rank

Me being an idiot aside, I can understand why people fly for rank/score.  I gave it a try years ago but got so frustrated at the silliest things i decided to stop focusing on it.

edit: would mf not give time flown a doubling effect on a persons rank? because points is largely tied to hours flown

[CAP1]

So here's my next stab at the scoring problem! READ UP

Minimum Missions Flown Formula would be as follows: You take your total rank# and divide it by variable Fm (Min Mission Factor) Fm will level off as your mission # goes up.
Fm will be a number that approaches 1 as your missions increase.  For example if you have only 10 missions flown, your Fm # will be like 0.5, If you have 30 missions flown your Fm # will be like 0.8 if you have 300 missions flown, your Fm will be 0.9987 or something.
The Fm curve would have to be opinionated at what HTC would deem "reasonable number of missions for a campaign" For example, 1 Mission a day would get you 30 missions, which would probably be good enough for like a 0.8 Fm or something.

Example 1: Amsoil21's Fighter Stats All Ranks Add up to 136.  Since he only has 14 missions flown, his Fm would be something like, 0.6 So you take 136/0.6 = 227 which would probably put him somewhere from ranked 8-15 in fighter.
Example 2: Take Steve's Fighter Stats All Ranks Add up to 180.  Since he has 137 missions flown, his Fm would be something like, 0.98 So you take 180/0.98 = 184 which would put him top 2 fighter.

Since you all hated my idea to increase the weights of points, what do you think of this idea?  This shouldn't penalize you for lack of flight time as long as you fly a very reasonable number of missions for a campaign.  It just really penalizes those who only fly in the range of 10-20 missions in a camp trying to score big

grizz......no offense, but STOP being an engineer in here please?
those of us that have to fix engineers screw ups day in and day out tend to not think too fondly of them. they tend to change things that don't need changing. something that works very very well, for 30 years, suddenly gets changed because an engineer has to keep himself employed.
 the scoring system works well as it is. it seems to be a compromise that htc came up with, seeing as not everyone CAN fly a lot.

 in your above example, you're punishing those that cannot fly a lot. in that example, a pilot that is actually better would suffer in the rankings, if...say for instance......he could only fly 20 hours in a month, as compared to a pilot of lesser skill that could fly 80 hours a month.
 no matter what you do, someone WILL find a way to "game the game", just as they do now.

 others have said it........the only way to eliminate scoretardlets, would be to stop with the tour stats, or eliminate the scoring system all together. i look at the score page for one thing and one thing only.......i like to see how well i'm hitting, so i check my hit % fairly often....especially when i play around and change convergence.

anyway...........that's my two cents...which with todays prices don't get me much, does it?
 

[CAP1]

Would you then make a separate fighter vs bomber rank? I dont see why it should be separated. What is the point? Are the buff hunters somehow ruining the furballers' ranks? 

nope.......just an engineer being.....well........an engineer...

[uptown]

someone is spending wayyyyyyy too much time thinking about rank 

[ghi]

All the  games have a win goal ,  from old chess, poker, criket, socer to most sophisticated online games.
In AH that "win goal" and i'm not talking about win war only,was totally eliminated ,after they made bases uncapturable, 40% capture from both teams, arena split and all those strat factories,HQ  without any effect on other team, no wonder raids like 96Delta did this week don't happen anymore:
SO, the game looks like a basketball game where the baskets were removed and there's nothing left to promote the fight beside this childish score system , stacking kills and vulching shades.

[crockett]

What are you talking about with missions? Those gay NOE hoarde fests or are you just calling a regular sortie a mission?

I still think the idea I had a few months ago of taking away the scoring aspect for vulching by doing away with scores for the kills within 30 seconds of the player spawning. All the little score tards wouldn't have a clue as to what to do if their vulching didn't pad their rank. Heck it might even  start to show the score as actually relating to the skill of the player vs who can vulch the most.

[BaldEagl]

Well, I'll admit, it's better than the last idea.

[Kazaa]

All the  games have a win goal ,  from old chess, poker, criket, socer to most sophisticated online games.
In AH that "win goal" and i'm not talking about win war only,was totally eliminated ,after they made bases uncapturable, 40% capture from both teams, arena split and all those strat factories,HQ  without any effect on other team, no wonder raids like 96Delta did this week don't happen anymore:
SO, the game looks like a basketball game where the baskets were removed and there's nothing left to promote the fight beside this childish score system , stacking kills and vulching shades.

It's been said before Ghi, but isn't that just the truth.

Now I didn't take winning "the war" to seriously at all back in the day, but it sure was so much more fun then what we have at the moment.

I'm sure most of the vets or the ones which are still here can agree with me that the old MA beat what we have now hands down.

I just fill sorry for the people who didn't get to experience the old MA.

[BiPoLaR]

Now I didn't take winning "the war" to seriously at all back in the day, but it sure was so much more fun then what we have at the moment.

I'm sure most of the vets or the ones which are still here can agree with me that the old MA beat what we have now hands down.

I just fill sorry for the people who didn't get to experience the old MA.

I agree 110 %
Bring back the old MA

[CAP1]

I ONLY REALLY FLY MIDWAR, Although i'll probably venture into latewar a little next tour.

 something, i've been noticing though, is there are some lw guys comming to mw....in particular, the 80th headhunters. in the last few days, i've had multiple fights aginast them. i've lost each and every single fight. but at the same time i won each and every single fight. know why/? because like me, they don't seem to give a dam about their scores.(although they are good) they come in there, and fight. they;re fun fights. they don't get cocky when they beat ya, they just fight ya when ya come back. in fact, soulss was trying to give me a couple pointers on mistakes i was making in the merge.

 THAT's what this game is about. why can't we have more like them in here? i normally avoid multi-con fights, as i know for fact i'm gonna get ho'd. i came into a 3vs one a few times the other night, as i knew it was shuffler and a couple of his guys.....and as i suspected, just good fun fight.

 oo...and for those that think score is soooo important, i did go and look at my rank. all the times i died to their guns, barley hurt my rank, whch i think reinforces tht the scoring system is fine as is. only fix is to remove it. or at least stop putting peeps names up in lights on the home page.

 go in the game, grab a cartoon plane, fight another cartoon plane, chat, bs, and click the fly button, and get another free cartoon plane. keep having fun.

<<S>>