Author Topic: Components of fighter score...  (Read 7958 times)

Offline Noir

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5964
Re: Components of fighter score...
« Reply #120 on: November 24, 2011, 10:49:37 AM »
spending a couple hours offline with ammo multiplier sent to 10 is a good gunnery training.
now posting as SirNuke

Offline Noir

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5964
Re: Components of fighter score...
« Reply #121 on: November 24, 2011, 11:06:56 AM »
also the planes with mixed ammo types are more prone to destroy your hit%...the spitfire mkIX is a good example. A 7mm hit counts as much as a 20mm hit in the %, but the 7mm's are much more numerous  :airplane:
now posting as SirNuke

Offline mtnman

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2438
Re: Components of fighter score...
« Reply #122 on: November 24, 2011, 02:43:51 PM »
also the planes with mixed ammo types are more prone to destroy your hit%...the spitfire mkIX is a good example. A 7mm hit counts as much as a 20mm hit in the %, but the 7mm's are much more numerous  :airplane:

How so?

I'm not necessarily disagreeing, I'd just like to hear the argument.
MtnMan

"Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not". Thomas Jefferson

Offline Noir

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5964
Re: Components of fighter score...
« Reply #123 on: November 24, 2011, 05:14:54 PM »
How so?

I'm not necessarily disagreeing, I'd just like to hear the argument.

Bullets of different calibers have different trajectories, meaning a shot that works for the 7mm's doesn't work for the 20mm's, resulting in quite a few bullets missing. The way around is possible too, 20mm's hitting but 7mm overshooting. 7mm tracers give false indications for leading, and seeing a lot of hit sprites you could think that you hit a lot but the enemy is undamaged.

Also having all that 7mm gives ideas of shooting 800+ out when the enemy is extending, which is very bad of course, because I don't think that even 1% of these bullets will ever hit anything (or you are a god).

Score wise in a spit I'd say not the fire the MG's, or put convergence on 200 on all guns and stick to close range shots.
now posting as SirNuke

Offline save

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2849
Re: Components of fighter score...
« Reply #124 on: November 24, 2011, 05:34:09 PM »
In another game , made by Hitech , kill streak was a factor many pilots fought for.

Is this hard to put in to the equation , or is it undesirable to fly without getting killed / captured ?

My ammo last for 6 Lancasters, or one Yak3.
"And the Yak 3 ,aka the "flying Yamato"..."
-Caldera

Offline mtnman

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2438
Re: Components of fighter score...
« Reply #125 on: November 26, 2011, 09:07:38 AM »
Bullets of different calibers have different trajectories, meaning a shot that works for the 7mm's doesn't work for the 20mm's, resulting in quite a few bullets missing. The way around is possible too, 20mm's hitting but 7mm overshooting. 7mm tracers give false indications for leading, and seeing a lot of hit sprites you could think that you hit a lot but the enemy is undamaged.

Also having all that 7mm gives ideas of shooting 800+ out when the enemy is extending, which is very bad of course, because I don't think that even 1% of these bullets will ever hit anything (or you are a god).

Score wise in a spit I'd say not the fire the MG's, or put convergence on 200 on all guns and stick to close range shots.


That's partially true, but the trajectory differences take too much blame IMO (which leads to the constant, ineffectual, tweaking in an effort to "fix" the problem).

When firing at convergence distances (with the various guns set to the same convergence) trajectory makes no difference at all.  At convergence, it doesn't matter if the various guns exhibit identical trajectories, or vastly different trajectories; they'll all shoot to the same place (but won't get there at the same time).

The problems come into play as soon as there is any apparent target motion to deal with.  The reason once again has less to do with trajectory, and more to do with time.  A cannon round and a MG round, fired at the same time and going to the same place, won't get there at the same time. 

The result is that a different amount of lead is required for each gun.  The cannon rounds (being slower) require more lead.  Essentially, it means that if your getting hits with more MG's on a crossing target, your lead is wrong to get hits with your cannons, and vice versa.  On a target that appears stationary (saddled up on an unsuspecting target, for example) that time difference doesn't matter, but on a crossing target it could mean missing in front of a target with your MG's (too much lead) while also missing behind your target with your cannons (not enough lead) on the same pull of the trigger.

Beyond that, if the pilot is pulling anything above 1G (i.e if he's turning) while he's firing he's going to exaggerate this effect.  This comes into play if he's trying to minimize apparent target motion by following his target through a turn.

At anything beyond convergence (as in your example) trajectory (which is a factor of time) comes into play.  But at that point it's really just taking a bad situation and making it worse.

From a Hit% viewpoint, firing at crossing targets is always bad.  It's worse if you have mixed guns.  In both cases though, firing at a crossing target is ok if you fire in short bursts with the correct lead (and proper aim).  If you fire a 1 second burst there's always going to be "waste" on a crossing shot.  There's really only a small window within that 1 second burst where hits are going to be possible (with either gun).  If it's a .25 second window, that means that .75 seconds of your 1 second burst are guaranteed misses (even with absolutely perfect aim).  This takes your potential Hit% down to 25% already. 

But being bad from a Hit% viewpoint doesn't mean they're bad shots to take, it just means you want to limit them to very short bursts (my bursts are tiny on these shots; I view them almost as if I was firing a single-shot weapon rather than MG's.  When I flew CHogs a lot I was generally only firing 10-12 rounds in a burst).  Even that was a lot of waste, since I could generally only expect 1-3 rounds to hit my opponent in any one burst (less than 10% hits).  I actually find these are some of the best shots for me to take though (as long as I can hit with them) because even those little bursts will pick an opponent apart and demoralize him.

When it comes to a "mixed gun handicap" on these types of shots though, I'm not sure there really is one.  For starters, less cannon rounds are being fired, so have less effect on your hit% (even if they all miss) than the multitude of MG rounds.  Also, the cannon rounds will have more effect then the MG's if they do hit.

MtnMan

"Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not". Thomas Jefferson

Offline save

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2849
Re: Components of fighter score...
« Reply #126 on: November 27, 2011, 08:24:04 AM »
mntnman,

If you shoot @ 400 yards , shooting in a Fw90a5 vs a maneuvering target at least 2/3 of the bullets are waste , shooting with "all guns" pressed, shooting with the cannons on a 4*20mm Fw190a5 penalize you with 2*20 has really low trajectory , and the other 2*20 has better trajectory.

You can improve this by never shoot with  the 7.7mm's or shoot with only them, it that give few kills but you get higher fighter rating than if you shot the enemy down which is incredibly stupid imo.

The  way is to only take 2*20mm if you live with the fighter score , which renders a good  plane with different guns partly useless unless you want buffs

My ammo last for 6 Lancasters, or one Yak3.
"And the Yak 3 ,aka the "flying Yamato"..."
-Caldera

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23888
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: Components of fighter score...
« Reply #127 on: November 27, 2011, 08:44:56 AM »
You can improve this by never shoot with  the 7.7mm's or shoot with only them, it that give few kills but you get higher fighter rating than if you shot the enemy down which is incredibly stupid imo.


I think this is very much just academical.
In the end, these things have a rather minor impact on total fighter rating and ranking (that is, unless one is spending all his ammo on buildings all the time). One's fighter rank will not change much (if at all) just by choosing to use only secondary or all guns in a 190A5. in the big picture, other things have a much bigger influence.

And if one opts to "waste" a bit more ammo on difficult shots and thus lowers his hit%, it often can be easily offset by the increase in K/D, K/S and K/H at the same time. For example I used to take a lot of long range shots on crossing targets in the Tempest. Pulling the trigger early and sending out a good burst resulted in a lower hit% but resulted in additional kills. To exaggerate: My "effiency" as a fighter did rise while my hit % fell.
Generally, I do what is necessary to get the job done, and while I of course strive to improve my aim I don't make decisions with my hit% as a primary concern.

But I think this discussion has already become a very theoretical one, very much removed from the reality of MA combat and lost most readers long time ago  :D
 
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

Offline save

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2849
Re: Components of fighter score...
« Reply #128 on: November 27, 2011, 09:04:33 AM »
The problem , Lusche is that you fighter score will take a big hit with much different guns on your plane , I do not have the time to do the math , but the K/D should have much more impact than the hit%.
My ammo last for 6 Lancasters, or one Yak3.
"And the Yak 3 ,aka the "flying Yamato"..."
-Caldera

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23888
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: Components of fighter score...
« Reply #129 on: November 27, 2011, 09:18:38 AM »
The problem , Lusche is that you fighter score will take a big hit with much different guns on your plane , I do not have the time to do the math , but the K/D should have much more impact than the hit%.

Hit% is just one factor, and the resulting change in hit% rank # imho isn't that big in the overall context of fighter rank. Getting kills directly affects all other four: K/D, K/S, K/H, and score points. Taking such rather "extreme" measures to protect the hit % is akin to those players taking utmost measures to protect their k/d at the expense of everything else. And the "point of diminishing returns" does apply here, too. Finally, if your hit% changes notably just because you are using the BB guns or not, you are already a way above average shooter and thus the resulting % change will have little actual consequences on your hit% rank number - which is a relative one.

When flying the A-5 (and I had tours with a lot of A-5 usage), I too usually shoot with the MGs 151/20 only. But that's more a matter of philosophy and general firing discipline, but has little actual consequences on my hit% and none on on fighter rank that I have ever noticed.
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

Offline Debrody

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4487
Re: Components of fighter score...
« Reply #130 on: November 27, 2011, 09:20:17 AM »
but the K/D should have much more impact than the hit%.
are yo sure?
Guess an AH full of 20k 190s, tempons, ponies, running from the first sight of danger 2 times worse than nowadays (already pretty bad tho)
Now think about it, how much fun it would be?
IMO the current system is pretty decent. It still favorizes picking much enough...
 :salute
AoM
City of ice

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23888
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: Components of fighter score...
« Reply #131 on: November 27, 2011, 09:43:55 AM »
Ok, I did a practical check with my Fighter Rank Oracle.

I entered my Tour 138 fighter scores (because they had not been that extremely high as my more recent one). I had to lower my hit% from the actual value 15.7% down to 10% - a reduction by about 1/3rd! - to have any impact on my fighter rank at all, and it was still very minor.
This is what I meant by diminishing returns - if you are such a good shot that fire primary/secondary/all guns will make a notable difference on your absolute hit% value, it will have a lesser impact on your relative hit% ranking, and much lesser impact on your overall fighter ranking.


There is one thing that has the biggest impact on your scores: Getting kills.

« Last Edit: November 27, 2011, 09:47:05 AM by Lusche »
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

Offline BaldEagl

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10791
Re: Components of fighter score...
« Reply #132 on: November 27, 2011, 09:58:28 AM »
Ok, I did a practical check with my Fighter Rank Oracle.

I entered my Tour 138 fighter scores (because they had not been that extremely high as my more recent one). I had to lower my hit% from the actual value 15.7% down to 10% - a reduction by about 1/3rd! - to have any impact on my fighter rank at all, and it was still very minor.
This is what I meant by diminishing returns - if you are such a good shot that fire primary/secondary/all guns will make a notable difference on your absolute hit% value, it will have a lesser impact on your relative hit% ranking, and much lesser impact on your overall fighter ranking.


There is one thing that has the biggest impact on your scores: Getting kills.



Yeah but anything over 10% is a very high hit% rank to begin with.  Go to an average player and change theirs from 4% to 6% (same type of % change) and tell me what happens.

As to mixed guns I find flying Spits with 4x.303's improves my hit% over flying Spits with 2x.50's even though the Hispanos/.50's have closer trajectories than the Hispanos/.303's.  The vast majority of my kills are crossing shots and typically I rake the target from nose to tail mostly straight down the fuselage and typically get a pilot kill and an explosion.  I also find that type of full plane form shot improves my hit% rather than hurts it.  My hit% drops markedy on straight six shots on a level but smaller target.
« Last Edit: November 27, 2011, 10:03:29 AM by BaldEagl »
I edit a lot of my posts.  Get used to it.

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23888
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: Components of fighter score...
« Reply #133 on: November 27, 2011, 10:23:08 AM »
Yeah but anything over 10% is a very high hit% rank to begin with.  

The difference is that in my opinion it's only this kind of shooters where such in depth fiddling and minor tweaks actually have an impact. Just as with setting convergences - you need to be at a certain level before meticiously adjusted settings make any sense at all.
Telling a (low) average player to hold his fire until at close range, or to teach him a few ways how to saddle up better would imho have a much more radical impact on his hit%.

But of course that's an opinion I can't prove ;)
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

Offline Vinkman

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2884
Re: Components of fighter score...
« Reply #134 on: November 28, 2011, 07:49:55 AM »
Kovel, I think you may be confused on how the scores are calculated.  It's not a mathematical calculation between player A and player B stats that decides their rank.  It's a simple comparison.  One is doing better overall than the other, that's all.

It's just a comparison ranking.  Back to this-  %hit      7.66 (368)         5.26  (850)  Player A is ranked 368 because 367 players are shooting more accurately than him.  Player B is 850 because 849 players are shooting better than him.

Player A is being rewarded because he's doing so well compared to his peers (not mathematically).  Player B isn't rewarded nearly as much, because he's not doing nearly as well compared to his peers.

It's only a 2.4% increase in accuracy between player A and B, but that small amount allowed a lot of other players to slip in between them.  Player A has a better rank because he's beaten out almost 500 players by increasing his Hit% slightly.

I think all the Kovel is saying (and I've thought the same thing myself) is that hitting with 5% of your bullets, isn't statistically different than hitting with 7% of you bullets. IT's difficult to make an argument that if player B had landed an extra 2 out of 100 bullets, his other stats would improve.

So one could argue that a statistically irrelevant change in hit percentage, can make the difference between being 114th and 50th.  While it is a side effect of flying K4  (or other 30mm planes) that your hit percentage goes up (because those pilots learn to fire from very close range) it can't be said that every 2% difference in hit% was created by employing better ACM to get in close.

I think he makes an effective point that hit% could be over rated as a "who's the best pilot" indicator.  But even acknowleging that, I'd leave it the way it is.  :salute
« Last Edit: November 28, 2011, 07:59:11 AM by Vinkman »
Who is John Galt?