For one example, three of the top 10 bombers last month did less than 30 sorties, having minimal impact on the war effort, beating out many players with hundreds of sorties.
The whole point of this thread was to adjust the metrics so that things like hit percentage arent so heavily weighed. I'm not sure why you think its some effort to help myself, I dont play bomber, im one of those guys in the top 10 every month wtih minimal effort because I'll WF a town every once in awhile. Adjusting the variables would hurt me.
Removing just the hit% calculation from the score would have a beneficial impact by allowing bombers to hit airfield targets without reducing their ranking.
I stand by my views on the gameness of the scores, with Bomber being easiest to game, Fighter 2nd, Vehicles 3rd, and Attack 4th.
My bragging typically comes when people like you just attack me for no reason, you just cant stand that someone who isnt even trying for rank is successful in this game. I'm bullied every month as a score chaser just for fighting the war the way the game was intended, defending and capturing bases and killing anyone who tries to stop me. Being a great well rounded player causes the rank to come without any need to game the stats.
You seem to think I dont take any risks, if you played at my time you would see i'm regularly the only person defending against 5 or more players and have no issues taking off at the field to face them...but you would take off from a different field and hover near the base at 20k hoping to get a 1v1 that you lose half the time.
I've had many great fights with the great fighter pilots in this game, i'm sure there is a mutual respect there, I dont need to ignore the war and treat the MA like the DA to appease you.
Looks like you activated your victimhood in attempt to protect your fragile ego as it aims for #1 across the categories.
I'm also pretty much the only one that side-eyes your claims of greatness - so ease off the persecution complex.
You seem to think I'm not capable, but again, don't confuse lack of effort with lack of ability. Just like I don't confuse ranking with skill.
You also seem stuck on rank as having broad appeal, when it doesn't - it never really did. The top ranked players, regardless of category, throughout AH history have always been about exploiting the scoring system to achieve it. Rank doesn't reflect organic playing when so many are exploiting the system across all categories.
I get it, you're new here.
And seeing as how you're new here, you may not realize that it's not going to change at this point. Let me assure it's not.
Back on topic. It's telling you think some buff drivers are going unrecognized but are unable to name any.
The top buffers pretty much have comparable stats, and if it's as easy as you claim, nothing stopping these alleged missing "greats" from doing that minimal needed while still doing what they do.
Why should a bomber target dar or ords or even enemy GVs or things that should properly be handled by jabos? You seem to want to punish bombers for doing their job in hitting appropriate targets - towns and strats. Several medium bombers also have attack scoring if they wanted to hit on-base targets, and this is the more appropriate scoring category. I'm kind of sure heavy bombers in ww2 didn't target frontline airfields.
Looking at the top 20 fighters for T303 - none of them are particularly helpful to the overall "war" effort. And of those top 20, none of them give me any particular trouble and some are fun actually fights, win or lose, like trogdor (who can be argued is the most organic scoring fighter rank -but he doesn;t really contribute a whole lot to the war) and fooftr (who exploits the system, but also has legit skills) but most are just targeting bombers for their scores or defending a base. (Is that helpful to the "war" - depends, did they drop first? Was it just done protecting "strats? against those strat milkers? Was the base actually "saved"?) It seems fighter scoring favors defending over attacking.
Can you even name these "greats" you've had fun fights with? Were they ranked?
There are numerous "fighters" who "contribute" more than these high rankers do, but rank lower because more sorties and deaths - should fighter scoring be adjusted to give actual contributors more weight as opposed to selectively exploiting scoring? I don't see you advocating removing hit % from fighter scoring or any other category. I don't score my sorties as fighter very often because I will either have eggs or be willing to strafe ground targets when needed. If anything, I may run a few fighter sorties just to get overall ranking down even lower if I'm in the mood to do so.
Again, don't confuse lack of effort with lack of ability - my ego is secure in this regard. You might want to work on yours.
