Ditching in the Water...

[BnZs]

...should not exist in my opinion. We don't have any floatplanes in this game. Thus a plane that goes down in the water is unquestionably a loss, and the pilot who forces such an action should get credit. Seen a few too many engine shot-out or half-winged planes manage this one. Occasionally something that gets a wing or tail blown off at real slow speed will get a ditch too.

Come to think of it, I'm kind of dubious about some of the ditches that go down on land too in some of the same circumstances. Maybe make the other arenas like the WWII dogfight arenas in that regard? (I.E. if you land off of base you get a "capture" and if someone shot you up they credited.)

While we're on the subject, as far as I'm concerned you could make the whole airbase available for successful landings. It just makes sense to me that if you can totally destroy an airplane on landing and still get a "land", then you might as well make the whole airbase available for such use.

[moot]

Land ditch "change" sounds like same as present except reduced range from friendly base to get a ditch.  Unless you're arguing that ditching (even shot up) from a stone's throw of friendly base oughta give capture.  Doesn't seem right.

[BnZs]

Land ditch "change" sounds like same as present except reduced range from friendly base to get a ditch.  Unless you're arguing that ditching (even shot up) from a stone's throw of friendly base oughta give capture.  Doesn't seem right.

Well, the water thing seems perfectly alright to me. The shot up thing is okay by me. You are probably thinking of a situation where one gets abit shot up, and is 25 miles away from the enemy and nearly a friendly base when they have to ditch from fuel mismanagement or something, and the enemy would still get the kill...and I agree that doesn't seem quite right. OTOH, I've seen too many instances where an engine out, half-winged, or otherwise badly maimed plane manages to crash land without getting killed and tower before the coupe de grace is administered...that to me seems a helluva lot LESS right. By any standard of any country in WWII, footage of such showing up on a gun camera would have led to a kill awarded to the fighter pilot, and without him having to strafe the grounded wreck to kill the pilot at that. To me, my idea would be the lesser evil.

[Krusty]

BnZs, the land ditch represents getting out of your plane and hiking back home to the airfield.

The water ditch represents getting out into a dingy, and being picked up by a rescue boat, going back to your home field.

They're the same thing, as far as representing elements from the real game.

If you mean "he shouldn't sit there floating forever" then I agree. I think there ought to be a time limit on how long they can ditch. That said, not all planes sunk right away. Some remained floating for quite some time.

[VonMessa]

Use taters 

Most of the time, it eliminates the ability to ditch.   

[moot]

I'd agree on the water thing except us not having sea recovery isn't WWII, yet the game emulates WWII without many WWII actors. E.G. ditches in friendly territory despite no ground recovery infrastructure.

Other than a plane going from airworthy to write-off on landing in under a second, I suspect there's no practical way to make kill assignment more accurate than it is.  How do you code for e.g. someone who saves some catastrophic damage with a ditch VS someone who just barely saves it from e.g. fuel error?  Someone who bobsleds it and towers out to deny kill VS someone who's let off with a mutual GF & <S> ?

[Krusty]

Regardless of recovery, the ditch is simply the safe landing of an aircraft in the field, with the pilot alive. That's a ditch in WW2 terms. They didn't always have to recover the plane, and they didn't always do it right away. It's more that the pilot was recovered than the plane.

[VonMessa]

Regardless of recovery, the ditch is simply the safe landing of an aircraft in the field, with the pilot alive. That's a ditch in WW2 terms. They didn't always have to recover the plane, and they didn't always do it right away. It's more that the pilot was recovered than the plane.

Exactly.

Ditching implies exactly what it says.  Putting or leaving it (airplane, car, ex-wife) in the ditch (side of the road, etc)

[BnZs]

Whatever the case with what the pilot who gets shot down's status, it denies pilots who by all logic and historical precedent should be awarded the kill for totaling an enemy aircraft.

Consider this...a pilot can theoretically ditch his wreck and walk back to the airfield, yes. He can also bail from his stricken plane over his field and be sipping a cup of joe in the O'club five minutes later...why should the pilot who shot down his plane be awarded a kill in the latter case but not the former?

To be perfectly consistent with the argument you guys are making, you'd have to *only* award kills in the game when the enemy pilot is killed or captured. This would would mean not awarding a kill on those who "bail successfully".

[VonMessa]

Whatever the case with what the pilot who gets shot down's status, it denies pilots who by all logic and historical precedent should be awarded the kill for totaling an enemy aircraft.

Consider this...a pilot can theoretically ditch his wreck and walk back to the airfield, yes. He can also bail from his stricken plane over his field and be sipping a cup of joe in the O'club five minutes later...why should the pilot who shot down his plane be awarded a kill in the latter case but not the former?

I'm only offering opinion now, but I would venture to think that a ditched a/c could possibly have some usable parts left (avionics, etc) whereas one that was bailed from is less likely to be salvageable?

I don't know, personally.

[FLS]

When Robert Johnson crash landed his shot to pieces P-47 at his airfield long after the FW-190 turned away out of ammo was he shot down?  The German deserves credit for damaging the aircraft and probably claimed a kill but Johnson flew it home.

I lost half a wing last night in a P-51 and had a few unintended aileron rolls returning to base but I got it down on the field and rolled to the runway before I lost my gear and most of the other breakable parts. It would not have been as much fun if the whole airfield counted as a landing.

A ditch in enemy territory counts as a kill now doesn't it? But should a ditch in friendly territory, on water or land, because you were out of fuel or missed the runway or the edge of the base be a kill for anyone because they pinged you once or were flying overhead? There were a lot of non-combat losses in the war that would count as kills in AH, like crashing with a no damage bullet hole. So some ditches that should be kills aren't, and some things like discos are kills when they shouldn't be, but they need to be for game play reasons to avoid abuse. Kill awards weren't perfect in WW2 and I don't see how they can be better in AH. You can change the system but you would just shift the circumstances that give you an unrealistic outcome.

[BnZs]

I lost half a wing last night in a P-51 and had a few unintended aileron rolls returning to base but I got it down on the field and rolled to the runway before I lost my gear and most of the other breakable parts. It would not have been as much fun if the whole airfield counted as a landing.

Well, I don't see how much it adds to fun. Basically, it makes no sense to me that you can be taxiing an undamaged plane around and accidentally end up in some spot where you can't turn around, for whatever reason (too close to a building, engine out, whatever) and get a ditch, while you can totally destroy a plane on and get a land as long as you keep the wreckage on concrete. For the sake of consistency and common sense, I'd say just make the whole field landable. Hmmm...this would also add an interesting element to vulching. Uppers could taxi pretty freely on the whole field, and if they were merely damaged by the vulcher, bring her to a stop and get a land. I'd like this change I think. Not arguing its "more realistic", just think it would be good. Might encourage abit more upping under the vulch.

A ditch in enemy territory counts as a kill now doesn't it? But should a ditch in friendly territory, on water or land, because you were out of fuel or missed the runway or the edge of the base be a kill for anyone because they pinged you once

Don't like this possibility, but I think its a lesser evil than someone landing their shotup wreckage and towering, denying a kill to one who definitely earned it.

or were flying overhead?

Hopefully the issue of getting proxies on unpinged, ditching planes could be taken care technically.

There were a lot of non-combat losses in the war that would count as kills in AH, like crashing with a no damage bullet hole. So some ditches that should be kills aren't, and some things like discos are kills when they shouldn't be, but they need to be for game play reasons to avoid abuse.

Proxy kills exist because if you mah-noover another plane into the ground you deserve the kill, and if they didn't, some people would quite possibly auger to deny other players their kill. On that note, no one is going to deliberately *try* to put only hole in your plane in the hopes that they get a kill, anymore than they try to earn an assist...they are going to try to put it down. On the other hand, many players will deny what should by all rights be a kill to the other play by ditching and towering.

Kill awards weren't perfect in WW2 and I don't see how they can be better in AH. You can change the system but you would just shift the circumstances that give you an unrealistic outcome.

I realize there are negative and positive aspects to any practical system, I happen to believe what I've suggested would represent improvement.

[Pigslilspaz]

Use taters 

Most of the time, it eliminates the ability to ditch.   

always works for me 

[BnZs]

always works for me 

I've seen an extremely slow hurricane float down to the water and ditch after having an entire wing blown off by a tater actually...

[Krusty]

That's not the ditch code, IMO. That's the "crash" code. 2 totally different things IMO. Ditch code is fine by me so far, but I'd like to see some slightly more realistic crash impacts (sometimes you see a carcass survive crazy stuff and deny you a kill).