Supply scoring category

[haggerty]

Currently taking vehicles or c47 to supply bases and strats hurts your score.  Performing this crucial function should not hurt your chances of competing for top scores.  The vehicle scoring categories are obviously focused on killing and doing damage, each sortie running supplies takes down your average per category putting you behind another player who refuses to run supplies.

[JunkyII]

Dear God no...you already get too many perks for running supps

[Lusche]

Performing this crucial function should not hurt your chances of competing for top scores.

Unless you are constantly running supps and doing not much else, it hardly does. Besides, going for a true 'top score' is a deliberate decision. If you really wanna be#1, you might have to sacrifice a bit for it

[pallero]

I had same idea few years ago.

http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,329088.msg4311376.html

[haggerty]

Dear God no...you already get too many perks for running supps

I dont want any perks for running sups, I want running sups and flying a storch and c47 to not hurt your ranking.

[Bruv119]

is he serious?   

I can't tell whether this is stinky bait.... 

[wil3ur]

Actually, I like this idea...  Then we can shame people based on stats for not participating!   

[haggerty]

Unless you are constantly running supps and doing not much else, it hardly does. Besides, going for a true 'top score' is a deliberate decision. If you really wanna be#1, you might have to sacrifice a bit for it

You shouldnt have to sacrifice, it shouldnt be part of the score.  If I'm number 1 in vehicles or bombers I don't want to have to avoid flying a storch or supplying a strat because it will knock me down to #2.  Per sortie stats are so important for the top ranks, as it stands now the top players hurt themselves by doing grunt work.

[Zoney]

You shouldnt have to sacrifice, it shouldnt be part of the score.  If I'm number 1 in vehicles or bombers I don't want to have to avoid flying a storch or supplying a strat because it will knock me down to #2.  Per sortie stats are so important for the top ranks, as it stands now the top players hurt themselves by doing grunt work.

But but but..........everyone is equal.  All score chasers are operating under the same rules.  If they can do it and be better than you score wise than they are simply beating you.  You may be #1 in buffs BECAUSE the #2 guy is playing more of the game by running supps, or C47's to capture a base. 

[Lusche]

You shouldnt have to sacrifice, it shouldnt be part of the score.  If I'm number 1 in vehicles or bombers I don't want to have to avoid flying a storch or supplying a strat because it will knock me down to #2.  Per sortie stats are so important for the top ranks, as it stands now the top players hurt themselves by doing grunt work.

Then you could also say: "I want to fly a Boston, but that will hurt my bomber rank #1" (or a P-40C, for fighter rank)

Going for #1 is a very special task all by itself. It's you deliberately playing the rank game and that could possibly prevent many things that one could consider "fun" or important. For example, babysitting a maproom at a WF town will 'hurt' your vehicle score the same way. If empty sorties bother you that much, you could not do that either.

[Lusche]

But but but..........everyone is equal.  All score chasers are operating under the same rules.  If they can do it and be better than you score wise than they are simply beating you. 

This 

[haggerty]

But but but..........everyone is equal.  All score chasers are operating under the same rules.  If they can do it and be better than you score wise than they are simply beating you.  You may be #1 in buffs BECAUSE the #2 guy is playing more of the game by running supps, or C47's to capture a base.

exactly, if this change is made we are still operating under the same rules, except the ranks will be a more accurate representation rather than hurting the all around player.

[haggerty]

Then you could also say: "I want to fly a Boston, but that will hurt my bomber rank #1" (or a P-40C, for fighter rank)

Going for #1 is a very special task all by itself. It's you deliberately playing the rank game and that could possibly prevent many things that one could consider "fun" or important. For example, babysitting a maproom at a WF town will 'hurt' your vehicle score the same way. If empty sorties bother you that much, you could not do that either.

I still fly early war planes even though I am high ranked, but supply vehicles and support planes have no real combat ability, you can't adapt and use your skills like you can in a high eny plane.  These things should not be considered as part of your combat scores.

[The Fugitive]

exactly, if this change is made we are still operating under the same rules, except the ranks will be a more accurate representation rather than hurting the all around player.

LOL!!! did he say "more accurate representation" of ranks? 

[haggerty]

LOL!!! did he say "more accurate representation" of ranks? 

yes, it would be great to not have the ranks so easily gamed