Kill to Killed ratio

[Dadsguns]

..... Those that stick around figure out sooner then later it's gotta remain fun, or they burn out too.

This should be in another thread, this sounds more like the true definition of burnout is because you have to "ignore all the lame stuff and play your own way because we all know hitech wont do anything about it but promote even more lame play".   

[The Fugitive]

That's the boat I'm looking to climb into now. Very few want to fight any more so my only real option is to HO everything in site, get in on the vulches learn to get the pick down better.

After all it's how the game is supposed to be play, right?

[Dadsguns]

After all it's how the game is supposed to be play, right?

Its clear, you play the game ANYWAY you deem fit and within what the game allows no matter how jacked up it will be.  Period. 
Manipulate an already manipulable scoring system(which doesnt mean anything  ), avoid all the combat you can avoid, join a multiple wing squadron and rule da planetz in a gigantic horde, 50 to 4 ratio is very acceptable, lets not even mention how jacked up the ENY system is and also does little to prevent the wow crowd..... so yes, ignore all that you know could be improved or that should be improved and let the lameness flow.... and have fun!     


 

[Patches1]

You can talk numbers all you want, but there are too many other things that go into it as well.  In the end as long as you are having fun, who the heck cares.

I have to agree with Guppy35 quite a bit about the above quote.

Back in TOD 97 (Late War) I had a Fighter K/D of 2.45 and an Attack K/D of 1.63...not very impressive...but reasonable overall.

In TOD 98 (Late War) I decided to improve my Fighter K/D, and I did, with a whopping K/D of 22...in only 10 sorties...<sarcasm> and a total flying time in Fighters of 4 hours and 56 seconds!</sarcasm>  They were the only sorties I flew in Fighter mode that TOD. And, if I recollect...most, if not all of my kills in Fighter mode were against Bombers; ultimately...it was quite stressful, actually, and reflected in the number of Fighter missions I flew trying to keep that high K/D ratio. I wonder how much more fun I could have had that TOD if I had not focused on Fighter K/D?

Subsequent Tod's found my Fighter K/D ratio falling to more normal K/D ratios for my skill level. If you check my scores from TOD 97 to TOD 102 you can almost see my thought processes from Tour to Tour regarding Fighter K/D. I was obsessed!  An interesting TOD stat was TOD 101...check the Fighter K/D and sorties flown in fighter mode against the sorties flown in Attack mode; I think it is a perfect example of what many have already said about scoring and the ease of becoming enamoured by score alone as a skill check.

So! Just for fun, this TOD, I decided to try to replicate my TOD 98 Fighter K/D. I won't make it! I was up to a 13 K/D in Fighter mode but lost a single engagement against another Fighter that sent my 13 K/D to a 6.5 K/D!   Fun is what you do to entertain yourself! Me? I'm having a blast!

[Guppy35]

This should be in another thread, this sounds more like the true definition of burnout is because you have to "ignore all the lame stuff and play your own way because we all know hitech wont do anything about it but promote even more lame play".   

I still find the fights that supposedly no longer exist.  The game still feeds my history obsessed imagination of being a cartoon WW2 pilot.  I figure the best way I can improve game play is by how I play, how I interact with other players, and by sharing what I can with other players in hopes that they'll find enjoyment in the game too.  For me that happens to be the history stuff since I'm much better at teaching that, then I am at teaching cartoon fighter pilot skills.

I've been through the burnout time, more then once, and it usually happens when I get too serious about the game and began demanding changes that I think will make me happier, when in fact that is on me to find with the many parts of the game that are here.  If in the end the feeling is that HTC needs to spoon feed the players the right way to play, then I shouldn't be playing anyway as I've lost my perspective on what Aces High is.

[grizz441]

That's the boat I'm looking to climb into now. Very few want to fight any more so my only real option is to HO everything in site, get in on the vulches learn to get the pick down better.

After all it's how the game is supposed to be play, right?

You have to be more clever then just going nose first into a furball expecting anything other than getting gang ho'd.  Learn to lure one or two away from the horde. Then fight them 10k away from everyone else.  If you fly into red and expect anything besides getting mercilessly slaughtered you are kidding yourself.  If you fly slow turny birds and expect faster, less maneuverable aircraft to let you kill them, you are kidding yourself.

[ink]

but Grizz they did it all the time for me.......:-) they think hell we got 5 or more friendlies to that lone hurri they get caught up in tryin to kill me first, and if im havin a good day before they know it there in the tower going" what the hell just happened" haha    love doing that.  my all time favorite activity in AH  :-)

[Zazen13]

Fugutive et al..

I am a new father so have very limited free-time nowadays. I do not care to spend it playing wack-a-mole on HUGE maps with more bases than players online at any given time. I am vehemently opposed to the whole map/game design implementation that systemically rewards players for AVOIDING combat.

When they made captures hard, I actually flew quite a bit a few months ago. Having the "path of least resistance" types fight for every base to the bitter end was exciting and is what AH should be. It was a great month and reminded me of the old days. Of course Hitech quickly reverted to EZ mode captures and sure enough , wack-a-mole is back with a vengeance. Chasing the same 30-40 self-gratulatory back-slappers all over the map just to have them evaporate at the first hint of any semblance of an actual fight isn't my idea of fun...

[Yeager]

Chasing the same 30-40 self-gratulatory back-slappers all over the map just to have them evaporate at the first hint of any semblance of an actual fight isn't my idea of fun...

Thats a solid argument you make there Zazen and what that I am sympathetic with.  I think the nub of the matter is that for every person who views the game along similar lines as yourself there are going to be 30-40 self-gratulatory back-slappers taking unopposed fields to win the war.  HTC is a business and they will do what any smart business does.  Make money.

[Lusche]

Fugutive et al..

I am a new father so have very limited free-time nowadays. I do not care to spend it playing wack-a-mole on HUGE maps with more bases than players online at any given time. I am vehemently opposed to the whole map/game design implementation that systemically rewards players for AVOIDING combat.

When they made captures hard, I actually flew quite a bit a few months ago. Having the "path of least resistance" types fight for every base to the bitter end was exciting and is what AH should be. It was a great month and reminded me of the old days. Of course Hitech quickly reverted to EZ mode captures and sure enough , wack-a-mole is back with a vengeance. Chasing the same 30-40 self-gratulatory back-slappers all over the map just to have them evaporate at the first hint of any semblance of an actual fight isn't my idea of fun...

The recent changes have brought back more combats than before. During the "hard" capture time, the enemy often quickly gave up when resistance appeared. Now they are more confident and press on the attack... not always successful. Offpeak maps are always small now, and the caps switch has been delayed so that you do not end up on an empty map with 20 players anymore.  There is much less opportunity to avoid resistance overall, (no empty 2nd arena).
Yes, a few players can sneak a base once again, but that means they also try to, with the 100% town rule and no flag the hordes simply became bigger and bigger.

[The Fugitive]

I see things are getting better here and there, but the biggest problem is still the players. As Yeager said the 30-40 self-gratulatory back-slappers bring in more money than the few hard core fighter/strategist types. It's up the the "horde" leaders to cut back on the horde. Send 10 to one base, and 10 to another creates two fights and breaks up the horde. But as long as the "horde" leaders continue to need 20+ guy for a capture you'll see the same style of game play we have now.

[Zazen13]

The recent changes have brought back more combats than before. During the "hard" capture time, the enemy often quickly gave up when resistance appeared. Now they are more confident and press on the attack... not always successful. Offpeak maps are always small now, and the caps switch has been delayed so that you do not end up on an empty map with 20 players anymore.  There is much less opportunity to avoid resistance overall, (no empty 2nd arena).
Yes, a few players can sneak a base once again, but that means they also try to, with the 100% town rule and no flag the hordes simply became bigger and bigger.

Actually, I see the exact opposite is the case. The harder a base is to take the longer it takes. If a base capture takes sufficiently long that defensive support can arrive from an adjacent base then a real fight may become a real possibility. If captures are so fast that the only possibility of mounting a defense is to lift from the base under direct attack, the hoarders are rewarded with not only a quick steamroll capture , but several>many vulch kills to boot. The vulch kills encourages "tag-a-longs" not directly interested in the capture itself, but the score padding of vulching. This increases both the size of the offending horde and the general "lameness" of the gameplay experience for all involved.

I do agree however on HUGE maps, that regardless of the difficulty of captures globally, there is very little incentive to push the attack or defense for that matter. When there are 300 other bases on the map with no vigorous defense, it's logical, albeit excruciatingly boring and tedious, to just reload and pick another base for yourself and your 40 closest friends to steamroll.

Hordes per se aren't the problem...lopsided hordes are the problem...


The beauty of the small maps is every field is valuable and worthy of vigorous attack and defense, on huge maps, that is almost never the case.

[Tyrannis]

What is a good fighter kill to killed ratio. What is average.
I have been playing for about five months and almost 1 to 1 kill to killed. Is that good bad or about avg.

Thanks for the input.

the best K/D ratio is the one you dont pay attenchian too. play to enjoy the game. not worry about what a clipboard with numbers say.

[Lusche]

Actually, I see the exact opposite is the case. The harder a base is to take the longer it takes.

In theory, yes. Practically there is a limit to that. make it too easy, and no one can and will defend anymore. Make it too hard and you will quite often not see a prolonged attack, but an aborted one in case any serious opposition shows up. There is a limit to the stamina and stubborness of the attackers. One may lament about that, but that's how people are

A prime example for that was the EW arena. After we got the new big town, not only the general population, but the number of kills (=combat!) in particular went down drastically. (charts will follow). It simply was too hard now, so people stopped trying and went elsewhere. When we got the flags in town, not only the milkrunners came back but also the number of kills skyrocketed again (relatively spoken).

The effect on LW wasn't as drastically, but very noticeable. Another point was than with a greatly reduced capture rate, there was almost no more map rotation and no more won wars. And if we like it or not, this is a very important part in gameplay and long time player motivation, especially for newer players.
Somewhere there is a (blurry) line between, "Come on guys, one more try" and "Screw that, we don't have a chance". I might add that we still don't have as many base captures as we used to have over the years, mostly due to the changed arena format.

***

I can imagine a gameplay setup in which the individual base capture is much harder to accomplish, but you have to make a lot of other adjustments on several levels (from map design to war victory conditions) to make that work without too much overall frustration

[Zazen13]

The effect on LW wasn't as drastically, but very noticeable. Another point was than with a greatly reduced capture rate, there was almost no more map rotation and no more won wars. And if we like it or not, this is a very important part in gameplay and long time player motivation, especially for newer players.
Somewhere there is a (blurry) line between, "Come on guys, one more try" and "Screw that, we don't have a chance". I might add that we still don't have as many base captures as we used to have over the years, mostly due to the changed arena format.

***

I can imagine a gameplay setup in which the individual base capture is much harder to accomplish, but you have to make a lot of other adjustments on several levels (from map design to war victory conditions) to make that work without too much overall frustration

I have no doubt that you're insight into those motivated purely, or at least mostly, by the "winning the war" is superior to mine. I am a circa '90 AW refugee. I played on the same map or two for over a decade. Give me a map that encourages , rather than discourages, air combat and you can leave it up until the end of time as far as I am concerned. Put a map up and/or a ruleset in place that seems to be designed specifically to make actual combat less likely and I'll just go play another game...I simply don't have the time to spend what little of of it that is discretionary in a vain attempt to coax the shy lil' capture bunnies into persevering long enough to create real air combat.