Rank modification

[Vinkman]

Background:
 Currently the scoring system has no weighting for the plane (or vehicle) you fly. So killing 100 planes in a Tempest is scored exactly the same as killing 100 planes in a P-39 or a hurricane Mark I. By ignoring the plane type in the scoring system, you create an incentive to fly Tempests, La7s, Pony, F4U-4, F4U-C if you play for rank. I would think flying around in a P-40 and shooting down lots of Ponies, and La7s should yield you a higher rank than flying around in a pony killing lots of P-40s. That seems logical and intuitive to me. Currently they are both ranked the same. 

I think Hit% is practically a random number generator when it comes to ranking. Very small changes create huge changes in rank. 7.39% might be ranked 300th while 7.51% moves you up to 200th. Plus, the metric is essentially redundant, as kills per hour and kills per sortie are strongly affected by your hit%. If most of your bullets miss, then you can't kill many planes per ammo load, this forces you to land repeatedly to either re-arm or to get a new plane causing lower kills per hour/sortie. I also feel it is biased to planes with less dispersed guns. I think P-38s and K4s have an inherent advantage over a P-47 or similar plane with the guns spread out along the wings. There is only a single convergence point for a Jug, so any plane inside that distance, or outside that distance, by design, is missed by a percentage of the jugs's bullets. This also is affected by the plane's relative orientation. If a Jug is dead 6 o'clock but rotated 90 degrees to a bandit who is not at the convergence point, it's guaranteed, that 50% -75% of the bullets will miss the bandit. A P-38 for example is not affected by the orientation and can still land 100% of it's fired rounds, as can a bf-109.  With only a few decimal points making a difference on hit%, the plane you fly may be a bigger discriminator than how good a shot you are.

Proposal:

Replace Hit% with Perks Earned in the Rank system.

Rationale: Since Perk points are earned on damage and kills that are ratio-ed by the plane (GV) ENY, they are naturally normalized to plane matchups.



NOTE: While I respect those that loath the scoring system, please refrain from commenting about how score is irrelevant. If you don't play for rank, or score, then this thread is not for you. 

[coombz]

I would like my rank modified to #1 so I can write the word 'poo' with CV course plots

Thank you

[Lusche]

I agree with the background and the basic wish - plane choice should be reflected in score/ranking.

But I disagree on the hit% part and don't want to remove that. My modification for the proposal is less radical and very simple: Just factor the plane ENY into score points gained. ENY 40 plane gives you 100%, ENY 5 only 12.5% of the max score points gained.


 

[Vinkman]

I agree with the background and the basic wish - plane choice should be reflected in score/ranking.

But I disagree on the hit% part and don't want to remove that. My modification for the proposal is less radical and very simple: Just factor the plane ENY into score points gained. ENY 40 plane gives you 100%, ENY 5 only 12.5% of the max score points gained.


 

I had thought about that too, but I think that would require a new calculation, where as Perks is already calculated. simply adding it to the list would achieve the same thing, I believe, with less work. I also like the idea of having the absolute score based on real damage shown. If you divide by ENY then it would look like the tempest pilot killed less stuff which is not really true. But I could live with it the way you suggest as well.

Why do you like hit%? I've seen pilot (A) with a lower rank in all catagories by a fair margin than Pilot (B) except for a few point difference in hit% and pilot (B) ends up with a higher rank. Why does hitting a bandit with 8% of your bullets instead of 7% make you a better pilot than someone who killed more planes, had a higher kill ratio, and scored more points? What's you thoughts on this Lusche? 

[Karnak]

I recall one month when I checked my score stats and was shocked to find myself ranked #17 in accuracy.  I am a horrible shot in general, but that month I had simply been encountering a lot of bombers and consequently looked like one of the best shots in the game to the scoring system.  Also, as you noted, things like the Mosquito don't shotgun their ammo all over the sky.

[Lusche]

Why do you like hit%? I've seen pilot (A) with a lower rank in all catagories by a fair margin than Pilot (B) except for a few point difference in hit% and pilot (B) ends up with a higher rank. Why does hitting a bandit with 8% of your bullets instead of 7% make you a better pilot than someone who killed more planes, had a higher kill ratio, and scored more points? What's you thoughts on this Lusche? 

More points or a better K/D don't make you a 'better' pilot either

And the statistical distribution and effect on rank is very similar all across the board. It's the same with K/D, at relatively low k/d's a minor increase can result in a big increase in sub-rank, while at high K/D's the net gain is less and less: Raising your k/d from 1 to 2 will boost your sub rank a lot, going from k/D 10 to 20 has almost no effect. With hit % it's the very same way.

[Babalonian]

Sorry to chime in on an excellent conversation, but you should stop beating around the bush if you're going to go this deep into figuring out a new formula.  A rewrite is a rewrite, through and through, don't speculate on there being any limiations you don't impose intentionaly (it's those unintentional ones that we're tryign to figure out and speculate on).

My point IE:  The tempest being over-negatively impacted by divided ENY to total damage points inflicted - why not offset it with a variable in the equation that takes into the equation the number and type of objects destroyed, their variety/type, etc.  Bombers take more damage than fighters.  A town building takes less damage than an ord bunker, which takes less damamge than a FH, which takes less than a CV, etc..  Shouldn't be any surprise to anyone that a Tempest or F4U-1C is dropping P51Ds with an average of a few rounds or AAAs with only a couple each.

[Vinkman]

More points or a better K/D don't make you a 'better' pilot either

And the statistical distribution and effect on rank is very similar all across the board. It's the same with K/D, at relatively low k/d's a minor increase can result in a big increase in sub-rank, while at high K/D's the net gain is less and less: Raising your k/d from 1 to 2 will boost your sub rank a lot, going from k/D 10 to 20 has almost no effect. With hit % it's the very same way.

yes but that's in statistical terms only. I think the difference is "noise", not anything tangible.  If you are landing 8% or 7% of your bullets, it is effectively the same when it comes to killing planes. 20% vs 50% would be a big deal, but 7% vs 8%? The computer can be calculate it,  but it's equal weight to the other factors as a discriminator is very very over inflated. It seems to me anyway.  

[Lusche]

yes but that's in statistical terms only. I think the difference is "noise", not anything tangible.  If you are landing 8% or 7% of your bullets, it is effectively the same when it comes to killing planes. 20% vs 50% would be a big deal, but 7% vs 8%?

Buit the very same applies (more or less) to all other categories. You could say the very sam in K/D, where 0.5 to 0.8 gives you a big jump in sub rank as well - in last tour that would have changed your sub-rank by about 600! For a big number of players that would come down to just a few kills more or less.

[ToeTag]

The original reason for ENY was to balance sides.  Would this affect the out come of the wish?  I am all for a difficulty factor playing into rank as I almost always fly higher ENY planes.

[Tilt]

You could just add perks earned / lost as another sub rank in each category.

It would add a bias whilst not masking or corrupting the other data.

e.g 6 x 2 sortie b29 milk run missions and 3  captures via c47 will usually land a player in the top 5 bomber slots even if he lost a B29...........  however add the perks earned sub rank and that lost b29 really starts to hurt...........


I suppose we then start to discuss whether it should be perks earned/lost total or average/mission. etc etc etc

[Vinkman]

Buit the very same applies (more or less) to all other categories. You could say the very sam in K/D, where 0.5 to 0.8 gives you a big jump in sub rank as well - in last tour that would have changed your sub-rank by about 600! For a big number of players that would come down to just a few kills more or less.

What I'm saying is 1% in the hit% is a random act of god, out of control or effort of the pilot. But 1% is, relatively speaking, a 10% in category score. Compare that to the effort to change your k/D by 10%, or shooting down 10% more planes, and they are not equal efforts.

[kvuo75]

What I'm saying is 1% in the hit% is a random act of god, out of control or effort of the pilot. But 1% is, relatively speaking, a 10% in category score. Compare that to the effort to change your k/D by 10%, or shooting down 10% more planes, and they are not equal efforts.

need lusche's hit % stats, but i'm pretty sure once you're over 3% youre in the top half???

it is not random. it is discipline.

[Lusche]

Compare that to the effort to change your k/D by 10%, or shooting down 10% more planes, and they are not equal efforts.

Getting 10% higher K/D can get you a higher sub-rank boost than getting 10% higher hit %. It also seems to me that you are directly comparing number sizes that are not comparable. Going from hit% 7 to 8 is not just "tiny", it's an increase by 14%. It would be the same as if your K/D was going from 7 to 8.



Addendum:

I just checked the actual tour 153 K/D and hit% of all players. In fact, getting much smaller relative improvements in K/D than in hit% did boost you way more.

[WWhiskey]

Just an observation about GV score,, if I never fire a wirble, Osti, or a machine gun,  my hit percentages are a good bit higher, yet that would contradict what I feel is good game play,, IE a player refuses to up a wirble to help another player for fear of his score being reduced by hit percentages,, I don't know what the answer is tho,  I'm sure not recalling anyone saying Richard Bong wasn't one of the best aces because he spent to much ammo,, kills should count as a bigger factor than accuracy. IMO,,  and I agree that ENY could be used to help with this,,
a P-40 pilot will have a lower accuracy rating and a good bit harder time getting a two or three to one kill ratio than a typhoon pilot, and a jug pilot has no chance at all,LOL. 120 rounds per second is a lot of lead every time you pull the trigger