K/D: then vs now

[Anaxogoras]

A squad mate of mine who used to fly AW saw me land 9 kills in a P-38L the other night.  None were vulches, but I'm sure the majority were picks , and maybe I had to work for a couple of them.  He mentioned that it was very rare for someone to get 9 kills in a sortie in AW, and that he sees it a lot in AH.  I had to admit that the same seems true for WB.  I can't remember getting 9 kills in a single sortie then unless I was vulching.  5 or 6 would have seemed like a very big pull.

I also remember that K/D ratios among the top pilots were much lower.  I can remember the score pages that ranked everyone, and the top 20 or so for K/D were around 4:1 or 3:1 (vics, garn, drex, etc.).  You had to have at least 20 sorties to be in the score pages.  In AH right now my K/D is 6.59 and I am 54th in that category, and my flying is nothing special.  Back then, I tried very hard to have a K/D ratio at 3:1, and most of the time couldn't get above ~2:1.

To me the difference has to be the $.  I used to get billed ~$100/month, and sometimes more.  Anyone who didn't learn quickly enough to achieve some kind of success would have dropped out quickly for the privilege of paying by the hour to have their butt kicked all over the arena.  Previous flight sim experience would be a requirement to have any hope of the money being worthwhile.

So, is it true?  Are K/D ratios much higher in AH for a merely decent stick than they were in AW or WB?  Should we go back to an hourly rate?

[RumbleB]

simple, there are more players. more bad players to kill.

[Anaxogoras]

simple, there are more players. more bad players to kill.

Other things being equal, there would be more good pilots, too.

[Chalenge]

Why dont you visit the wishlist forum and ask for an hourly rate arena and see how well it goes over? 

[RumbleB]

Other things being equal, there would be more good pilots, too.

there are more good pilots but you're way more likely to run into the influx of easy targets. there are more hordes going. battles shift and all of a sudden youre with the flock and getting kills.

There are more easy targets to shoot it's quite simple.

[Lusche]

Other things being equal, there would be more good pilots, too.

But all other things are not being equal.

Higher turnaround of players, more players playing for short time vs a few very experienced stick playing this for many years. The top sticks don't run into each other that often anymore.
Much fewer players = more 1 vs 1. Much more players = much bigger battles, much increased importance of overall SA. Specific style of palying "Picking / E fighting /playing safe" etc is getting more efficient.
Also, the number of players knowing about WWII air combat and air combat tactics before joining an online game was much higher 10-20 years ago. For many of us "old" people it was an hobby/field of interest long before any computers were capable of running a flight sim

[grizz441]

First, I'd say your presumption is correct that it is easier to score more kills in Aces High than Airwarrior.  Here are the three biggest reasons in my opinion.

1) Damage model: Concentrated bursts into a specific region of a plane will cripple it.  A good shot can easy kill an enemy using very little ammo.  In Air Warrior it was all or nothing IIRC.  You had to pump ammo into them until they exploded, otherwise their plane would fly as 100%.  Took a lot more ammo to kill a guy on average.

2) More ammo in aces high.  More cannon, more 50 cals IIRC.  If you are a good shot you can rip wings off with less than 5% of your ammo.

3) Less parity in skill.  So many bad pilots flying around making for easy kills.  Not to say there weren't bad pilots in air warrior but if I had to throw out arbitrary percentages, I would say 75% of the pilots sucked in AW and 95% suck in Aces High.   

[Anaxogoras]

All or nothing damage model?  That must've been interesting.

I should point out that there were exceptions.  I remember that deft once had a 100+ kill streak in a P-40E... Man he used to tick me off!  He would kill my 109 even if I started with a mountain of altitude above him.

[grizz441]

That's all written with as much accuracy as my hazing air warrior memory will allow.

[Boozeman]

First, I'd say your presumption is correct that it is easier to score more kills in Aces High than Airwarrior.  Here are the three biggest reasons in my opinion.

1) Damage model: Concentrated bursts into a specific region of a plane will cripple it.  A good shot can easy kill an enemy using very little ammo.  In Air Warrior it was all or nothing IIRC.  You had to pump ammo into them until they exploded, otherwise their plane would fly as 100%.  Took a lot more ammo to kill a guy on average.

2) More ammo in aces high.  More cannon, more 50 cals IIRC.  If you are a good shot you can rip wings off with less than 5% of your ammo.

3) Less parity in skill.  So many bad pilots flying around making for easy kills.  Not to say there weren't bad pilots in air warrior but if I had to throw out arbitrary percentages, I would say 75% of the pilots sucked in AW and 95% suck in Aces High.   

Totally agree. The same principles apply to Warbirds as well.

[Anaxogoras]

I just remembered another reason for why K/D ratios were much lower, and this one has to do the with the scoring system:  In warbirds there was no attack category.  If you wanted to go suicide-porking it counted toward your fighter stats.

2) More ammo in aces high.  More cannon, more 50 cals IIRC.  If you are a good shot you can rip wings off with less than 5% of your ammo.

In Warbirds the 6x.50 cal armament was anemic, at least in the earlier versions of the game.  You had to put about 2 seconds of sustained fire on a target to bring it down.

[Steve]

I just remembered another reason for why K/D ratios were much lower, and this one has to do the with the scoring system:  In warbirds there was no attack category.  If you wanted to go suicide-porking, or actually fight, it  counted toward your fighter stats.

bingo and fixed a little.

[Anaxogoras]

Ohhhh, snap!

[Ack-Ack]

All or nothing damage model?  That must've been interesting.

I should point out that there were exceptions.  I remember that deft once had a 100+ kill streak in a P-40E... Man he used to tick me off!  He would kill my 109 even if I started with a mountain of altitude above him.

It wasn't all or nothing in AW and if your friend had tough times landing multiple kill sorties in AW it was because of how he flew not that AW was harder to score kills in.  IIRC, my ratio in AW was about the same as it was in here, around 5-6 kills per flight.

The damage model wasn't visibly represented in AW as it is in AH.  The only visual signs you did damage were the smoke trails but that doesn't mean things like flap, landing gear, ailerons, elevators, hydraulic systems couldn't be damaged.  You just didn't see the visual representation of the damage.  

It was also far easier to score a kill in AW because of the hit bubble.  You didn't have to hit the plane with your rounds, just anywhere in the hit bubble.  Some planes had a larger hit bubble than other planes, like the P-38J, which had the largest hit bubble of any of the fighters in AW.  The hit bubble on the Lightning was the same size of a bomber like the B-17.  Now, imagine having a hit bubble that large and flying in a furball over VOD.

So was it easier or harder to score kills in AW than it was in AH?  Easier.


ack-ack

[hitech]

It could not have anything to do with the rearm pads?

HiTech