Author Topic: fighter Ranking formula Modification  (Read 7760 times)

Offline Vinkman

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2884
fighter Ranking formula Modification
« on: January 22, 2014, 12:13:00 PM »
I proposed to Drop the hit% as part of the ranking system and replace it with Perk points Earned

Rationale:
Why hit% is a weak ranking metric
Hit% is really already accounted for in kills/sortie, and kills/hour. 
I will bet these are directly correlated to hit% and as such they do not provide a separate or unique discriminator.
It encourages behavior not really beneficial to game play. I.E holding fire until you are extremely close, even if that is not the best idea for mission out come. Or only attacking bombers at very close range.

Why Perk points earned is stronger metric
Perk points are racked up by killing more capable planes with less capable planes.
The P-40 pilot should enjoy a rank advantage over the SPitXVI pilot, if all other stats are Equal. Perk points are the only metric that accounts for that.
this would encourage better pilots to fly lower ENY planes which could help balance the gameplay in way that ENY never seems to achieve. And since it's voluntary, there's less whining.

Please vote yes!  :aok
Who is John Galt?

Offline Zoney

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6503
Re: fighter Ranking formula Modification
« Reply #1 on: January 22, 2014, 12:18:42 PM »
+1
Wag more, bark less.

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23870
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: fighter Ranking formula Modification
« Reply #2 on: January 22, 2014, 12:47:40 PM »
It encourages behavior not really beneficial to game play. I.E holding fire until you are extremely close, even if that is not the best idea for mission out come. Or only attacking bombers at very close range.


About all the great air combat tacticians have always emphasized the importance of getting close before firing. It's the standard recommendation traditionally given by most AH trainers as well ("Want to hit? Want to kill? Don't spray... get close")
Why would that be "not really beneficial to game play"?

 :headscratch:
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

Offline BnZs

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4207
Re: fighter Ranking formula Modification
« Reply #3 on: January 22, 2014, 01:20:51 PM »

About all the great air combat tacticians have always emphasized the importance of getting close before firing. It's the standard recommendation traditionally given by most AH trainers as well ("Want to hit? Want to kill? Don't spray... get close")
Why would that be "not really beneficial to game play"?

 :headscratch:

Hit% to a large extent favors taking some gun packages over others, some targets over others (bombers), and really, I don't think it should count in the rank. The kills are what counts, if a guy is getting the job done with a poorer aim then he's flying better, right? If a guy is flying a P-47 with the heavy ammo load to get several kills per sortie, why he's paying a weight penalty.

Perks per sortie OTOH as a ranking category., that is brilliant and fair. I've suggested the same thing myself. It would be another reward for flying something besides the "standard" rides, and we need all of those we can get.

+1
"Crikey, sir. I'm looking forward to today. Up diddly up, down diddly down, whoops, poop, twiddly dee - decent scrap with the fiendish Red Baron - bit of a jolly old crash landing behind enemy lines - capture, torture, escape, and then back home in time for tea and medals."

Offline Rogue9Volt

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 723
Re: fighter Ranking formula Modification
« Reply #4 on: January 22, 2014, 01:25:00 PM »
+1

Probably encourages people to be better shots too, and actually learn better tactics.
InGame:  SW9volt

-Born To Lose, Live To Win-
Recruiting Officer,125th Spartan Warriors.

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23870
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: fighter Ranking formula Modification
« Reply #5 on: January 22, 2014, 01:28:16 PM »
Hit% to a large extent favors taking some gun packages over others, some targets over others (bombers), and really, I don't think it should count in the rank.


That wasn't what i was questioning. He explecitely stated "getting extremely close" as being not beneficial to game play, and that's what I do not understand
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

Offline hitech

  • Administrator
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12339
      • http://www.hitechcreations.com
Re: fighter Ranking formula Modification
« Reply #6 on: January 22, 2014, 01:38:30 PM »

Please vote yes!  :aok


I vote no.

HiTech

Offline Aspen

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 692
Re: fighter Ranking formula Modification
« Reply #7 on: January 22, 2014, 01:42:18 PM »
Ok, thats one "no" and...oh wait...votes over :D
AMAX  in game

Offline waystin2

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10115
Re: fighter Ranking formula Modification
« Reply #8 on: January 22, 2014, 01:57:49 PM »
CO for the Pigs On The Wing
& The nicest guy in Aces High!

Offline Vinkman

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2884
Re: fighter Ranking formula Modification
« Reply #9 on: January 22, 2014, 02:19:14 PM »
I vote no.

HiTech

Well you're the boss.  :salute

HiTech,
Can you provide a basic reasoning for hit% over Perks? Thanks.
Who is John Galt?

Offline Randy1

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4216
Re: fighter Ranking formula Modification
« Reply #10 on: January 22, 2014, 02:42:05 PM »

That wasn't what i was questioning. He explecitely stated "getting extremely close" as being not beneficial to game play, and that's what I do not understand

The high performance planes like the Las, P51s or a spit 16s to name a few  have an advantage here for sure.  They can close fast and get closer where a slower plane might have  to take a shoot at 600-400 because that is as close as you can get all things being equal.  Get in close is not always an option.

If you take out the newbie prone P51 do the faster planes have a better hit percentage?  If they do, then the OP's point is valid. 

Then you have to cross other bridges.  I can live longer in a faster, smaller plane than I can in say a P38.  Should I get a break for choosing a plane that is easy to hit.  I think not.

I was going to+1 one this one but I have talked myself out out of it.
-1  A mute point after the HT vote but still that is how I see it.

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23870
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: fighter Ranking formula Modification
« Reply #11 on: January 22, 2014, 03:29:32 PM »
The high performance planes like the Las, P51s or a spit 16s to name a few  have an advantage here for sure.  They can close fast and get closer where a slower plane might have  to take a shoot at 600-400 because that is as close as you can get all things being equal.  Get in close is not always an option.

If you take out the newbie prone P51 do the faster planes have a better hit percentage?  If they do, then the OP's point is valid.


If anything, faster planes have a lower hit%. Higher speed mean they rarely can saddle up and generally fire at longer ranges. Less aim time, More snap shots, more shooting at rather bad angles.


Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

Offline Skyyr

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1769
Re: fighter Ranking formula Modification
« Reply #12 on: January 22, 2014, 04:02:09 PM »
Hit% to a large extent favors taking some gun packages over others, some targets over others (bombers), and really, I don't think it should count in the rank. The kills are what counts, if a guy is getting the job done with a poorer aim then he's flying better, right? If a guy is flying a P-47 with the heavy ammo load to get several kills per sortie, why he's paying a weight penalty.

This, not to mention that hit % favors prolonged turnfights which result in tracking shots. A pilot using energy tactics will rarely having tracking shots and will instead typically have snapshot opportunities. Snapshots are not an issue to the person utilizing them, but penalizing a pilot who fires a half a second early to make sure his rounds hit a target who's flying at a 90* deflection doesn't logically make sense.

This also doesn't factor in that these stats are inherently biased towards planes have a higher number of smaller caliber guns (read P51's, P47's, etc.). A pilot who misses the first .250 seconds of his burst and adjusts to hit his target will have more on-target time than the pilot flying a plane armed with cannons. For example, a P51 pilot who shoots for .250 seconds, missing, and then adjusts his aim to hit his target, hitting them for 1.25 seconds, has a hit rate of 83%. A pilot flying an LA-7 might also miss for .250 seconds, but any plane they hit will barely last half a second against a constant barrage of 20mm's, let alone 1.25 seconds. This means that even if both pilots have the exact same accuracy, the cannon rounds have less on-target time (as they do more damage and destroy the target quicker). This means that cannon-armed planes shoot less to destroy the same targets that MG-armed planes do, making their misses have a functionally higher stat weighting.

All of that being said, I don't feel like it's game-breaking or even a huge issue, but I don't understand why hit % is used when it's not directly tied to overall performance. Just my .02

« Last Edit: January 22, 2014, 04:05:16 PM by Skyyr »
Skyyr

Tours:
166 - 190
198 - 204
218 - 220
286 - 287
290 - ---

nrshida: "I almost beat Skyyr after he took a 6 year break!"
A few moments later...

vs Shane: 26-9

"Some men just want to watch the world burn."

Offline Randy1

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4216
Re: fighter Ranking formula Modification
« Reply #13 on: January 22, 2014, 04:40:19 PM »

If anything, faster planes have a lower hit%. Higher speed mean they rarely can saddle up and generally fire at longer ranges. Less aim time, More snap shots, more shooting at rather bad angles.




I see your point and bow to that aspect of the discussion but I think you overshoot my point if one considers an equal E state for all planes.  If you can not close, you spray and pray. 

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23870
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: fighter Ranking formula Modification
« Reply #14 on: January 22, 2014, 04:43:03 PM »
I see your point and bow to that aspect of the discussion but I think you overshoot my point if one considers an equal E state for all planes. 

But that's a very theoretical one that doesn't happen that way in the arena. And my initial question actually still stands  :D
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman