Grant the "kill" to the last shooter

[Skyyr]

Doesn't pilot wound trump any plane damage? 

An example.  If I give the red a pilot wound but his plane flies off without a problem, then my fellow country man can take his wing off sending the red spiraling into the ground but I still get the kill.  Right?

No. I thought that it worked this way too (having read it previously on the forums), but I've been shot down twice this tour when pilot wounded and the kill went to a player other than who wounded me. And in both cases, the wounding pilot was still up and flying.

[Zoney]

I think that if the 99 "previous damage" didnt down the enemy plane, then NO he doesnt deserve the kill as the job isnt done : Job is to shoot down a plane, not to damage it. Without the guy who did the necessary remaining (1 or 100%) damage, the enemy plane would still be flying and dangerous.

You should be awarded the kill because u downed the plane, not because "u did more damage", thats obvious...

No, it's not obvious, its ridiculous.

[Interceptor]

Not "me", i just hear ppl everyday saying "wth, i got an assist and i just got his wing off?!" or "Damn, i got an assist after that long dogfight ?! I made him burn!" or "sorry, i think i got the kill, u deserved it... " , etc...

This is a good tip.

Now the real question is, who was Interceptor trying to shoot down when he failed to get the kill? 

[Interceptor]

The enemy plane was still flying, dangerous and fighting : ofc the one that shot AND made the wing finally come off deserves the kill : wing was still ON despite previous damage=job not done.

Well of course it was the last guy that shot since it was there when he fired and then the wing came off.  If, however it takes 100 50 cals to take off that wing and someone else has hit it 99 times do you think the guy that put one bullet in it deserves the kill?

[Zoney]

Hey Interceptor, I have proof that the guy who wrote the code and owns the game agrees with me, not you.


It's simple the system is not coded for what you are saying should happen therefore...................w ell..................

[Interceptor]

Hey Interceptor, I have proof that the guy who wrote the code and owns the game agrees with me, not you.


It's simple the system is not coded for what you are saying should happen therefore...................w ell..................

Wow, seems Skully7, in a previous post, was totally right about some here in this Forum...Sad but true.

See Rule #4

[Wiley]

Wow, seems Skully7, in a previous post, was totally right about some here in this Forum...Sad but true.

So anybody that doesn't agree with you is suppressing the discussion?  You've made your point, people have explained why they disagree.  At this point it's not discussion, it's just gainsaying.

Wiley.

[Interceptor]

When someone's  argument is "Ridiculous" and "anyway i know everything, i know HTC agrees with me so just stfu", then yes i think it is.

It's a"wishes" forum, i defend my point of view with valid points.

Anyway, im done. And for zoney, just think 2 sec about this : in WWII kills werent granted to the pilot who did the most damages on an enemy plane, it was granted to the guy that shot down the plane, whatever condition it was before.

So YES, i consider granting the kill to the guy who shot down the plane by doing the necessary remaining (or complete) damage so the wing finaly went off DESERVES the kill, it was like that in WWII, it would add realism, and many players ingame i spoke with are ok with that change idea.

So anybody that doesn't agree with you is suppressing the discussion?  You've made your point, people have explained why they disagree.  At this point it's not discussion, it's just gainsaying.

Wiley.

[Zoney]

 i spoke with are ok with that change idea.

Sir, I see no preponderance of players posting an agreement with you on this board.  This is a subject I strongly disagree with and I will voice my opinion as you have.  I've never once told you to shut up because I disagree with you.  If you are going to continue to voice your point of view then I am also.  Please do not misconstrue my rebuttal of "ridiculous" to be pointed at you as a person sir, just your idea.

[Drano]

At this point it's not discussion, it's just gainsaying.

No it isn't!

[Wiley]

in WWII kills werent granted to the pilot who did the most damages on an enemy plane, it was granted to the guy that shot down the plane, whatever condition it was before.

And why might that be?  Could it possibly be due to the fact that they didn't have reliable information to determine who did the most damage, and it was far easier to see that that plane was firing when the bandit went out of control and crashed, versus counting the hits made in the midst of combat?

In here, the system can tell exactly how many bullets you hit him with.  Why not apply that information to more accurately reflect the reality of what happened?

So YES, i consider granting the kill to the guy who shot down the plane by doing the necessary remaining (or complete) damage so the wing finaly went off DESERVES the kill, it was like that in WWII, it would add realism, and many players ingame i spoke with are ok with that change idea.

How does he DESERVE it when he did an amount of damage that wouldn't have killed it and the only reason he made the part fall off was because of the damage done previously?

He didn't earn that kill.  He was in the right place at the right time to finish the job, but he didn't do the most work.

No it isn't!

Yes it is!

Wiley.

[Skuzzy]

To the best of my knowledge, once an aircraft has been damaged to "100%" (i.e. a vertical stab comes off, an entire wing [not just the tip], the entire tail, both elevators, etc.), the damage stops being tallied for the contributing players (effectively, you can't do more than 100% damage). I've tested this extensively, hundreds of times, and this has held true.
<snip>

Bingo.  Once a plane is deemed dead/destroyed, no more damage will be assessed.

[Skyyr]

Bingo.  Once a plane is deemed dead/destroyed, no more damage will be assessed.

Here's a question I've been meaning to ask: Does shooting at a "destroyed" plane still contribute to a player's accuracy statistic? Or does the accuracy tally stop once the damage hits the determined threshold?

[hitech]

Here's a question I've been meaning to ask: Does shooting at a "destroyed" plane still contribute to a player's accuracy statistic? Or does the accuracy tally stop once the damage hits the determined threshold?

Accuracy is still tallied, but damage points are not awarded.

Also  the way we try set up the "Dead Plane" is if the plane is still controllable, and hence land-able it is not deemed as "Dead", hence a Pilot wounded plane would still score damage, because it could still be landed.

HiTech

[Ack-Ack]

Anyway, im done. And for zoney, just think 2 sec about this : in WWII kills werent granted to the pilot who did the most damages on an enemy plane, it was granted to the guy that shot down the plane, whatever condition it was before.

In most cases it would be a shared kill credit amongst the various planes that attributed to the shoot down.