How about a common-sense scoring system

[popeye]

Fly the Yak-9T, and you'll never see an assist.

[Makofan]

scoring?  *yawn*

[Turbot]

Kill stealers would love this change - the way it is is better.  As it is people are already shooting up burning planes.  I am not for anything that would encourage more of that.

[Wlfgng]

please don't 'fix' what isn't broken.

[BotaBing]

There are several aspects of the current scoring system that are poorly implemented, regardless of design or intent. It needs fine tuning.

If you think a tank that goes and camps a VH spawn point and then just "ditches" with no penalty and no kill for the victor once its damaged isnt broken, we have very different opinions of what is fun and fair.

[lazs2]

when deja makes sense he....  makes sense.  In this case.... he makes sense.
lazs

[Toad]

What Makofan said.

[Pongo]

You cannot tell from your side if the wing was nearly off from the previos damage.

But I do think that definatly dead planes..(wing gone, tail gone, engine on fire, etc)
should be dead....not killable by chasing for further damage to the carcus till something blows. even if they are on the ground..even if they are in the hanger..

[Widewing]

Originally posted by hitech
Try to implement what you are sugesting widewing, lets say a pilot has both wing tips shot off, one by player a, one by player b. the plane is still flyable and just before landing he crashes. Who gets the kill? Or he has the rudder and elevator shot off by 2 people, who gets the kill.

The way it is now is very easy to understand, the person who puts the most total damage (that being the total of wepon lethality) gets the kill.

(I have been trying to write this for three hours, but have interrupted by two Engineering design meetings and a Staff luncheon, so it's a bit tardy)

This is easy to score if we use the commonly applied standards of WWII. If the aircraft was not seen to crash, it can only be scored as damaged or, at best a probable. Since damaged aircraft carry no value, the answer is no one gets the credit. So, if no enemy aircraft is within visual range, no credit is given. If there are no witnesses to the crash, how can anyone be given credit?
Those were the general rules for most air forces during the war. Why not apply them here in the interest of historical accuracy, if not for logic.
 
As it stands now, if you have damage that precludes a safe landing, you need only fly beyond visual range and bail out. Yes, you suffer a death, but the enemy does not get credit for the kill, does he? I never see any indication in the message buffer that anyone receives a kill if I bail beyond visual range. By the way, that is how it SHOULD work.

However, if that damaged aircraft remains in the combat area, it can still be a threat to any aircraft foolish or unlucky enough to cross its path. I've killed an La-5 after losing a wingtip (F6F), because he was careless on the overshoot. So, regardless of previous damage, if the aircraft is still under controlled flight, the pilot who finally destroys the aircraft should receive credit. Either that, or split the kill equally between those who contributed to the eventual kill.

As the saying goes, "you're either pregnant or you're not". There's no such thing as 90% pregnant. That's why no credit was given for a "probable kill" during the war, because almost doesn't count.

To score based upon individual damage levels is unrealistic. Why? Because some very badly battered aircraft can and do return to base. Ultimately, the pilot who prevents the aircraft (and by default, the crew) from returning to base should receive the kill credit. The burden for securing the victory should be on the attacker to finish the job. Should he fail, for whatever reason, that aircraft is still viable and therefore, its destruction credit should go the pilot who actually eliminates the aircraft by reducing it to being incapable of controlled flight, either by catastrophic damage or the death of the pilot.  

My regards,

Widewing

[vorticon]

how about a whineless BB eh that would be real nice. its good as it is now tehres less of a chance of kill steals of course kill steals only happen to people who fire a few shots till there smoking in any way possible Then run of and dont finish the job os someone comes in and finishes it for them. SO STOP YOU WHINING mayby they should block stupid whiners who cant handle getting there tulips whooped.

[whels]

Widewing,

if i ping u and u fly out of my visual range and bail, , i will still get the kill, if i havent died or landed and exited plane before u bail. there is no range limit on kill credit if u have been pinged.

the exception is if ur in your territory and land on the ground and exit(ditch) no one will get credit even if they pinged u.

whels

Originally posted by Widewing


(I have been trying to write this for three hours, but have interrupted by two Engineering design meetings and a Staff luncheon, so it's a bit tardy)

This is easy to score if we use the commonly applied standards of WWII. If the aircraft was not seen to crash, it can only be scored as damaged or, at best a probable. Since damaged aircraft carry no value, the answer is no one gets the credit. So, if no enemy aircraft is within visual range, no credit is given. If there are no witnesses to the crash, how can anyone be given credit?
Those were the general rules for most air forces during the war. Why not apply them here in the interest of historical accuracy, if not for logic.
 
As it stands now, if you have damage that precludes a safe landing, you need only fly beyond visual range and bail out. Yes, you suffer a death, but the enemy does not get credit for the kill, does he? I never see any indication in the message buffer that anyone receives a kill if I bail beyond visual range. By the way, that is how it SHOULD work.

However, if that damaged aircraft remains in the combat area, it can still be a threat to any aircraft foolish or unlucky enough to cross its path. I've killed an La-5 after losing a wingtip (F6F), because he was careless on the overshoot. So, regardless of previous damage, if the aircraft is still under controlled flight, the pilot who finally destroys the aircraft should receive credit. Either that, or split the kill equally between those who contributed to the eventual kill.

As the saying goes, "you're either pregnant or you're not". There's no such thing as 90% pregnant. That's why no credit was given for a "probable kill" during the war, because almost doesn't count.

To score based upon individual damage levels is unrealistic. Why? Because some very badly battered aircraft can and do return to base. Ultimately, the pilot who prevents the aircraft (and by default, the crew) from returning to base should receive the kill credit. The burden for securing the victory should be on the attacker to finish the job. Should he fail, for whatever reason, that aircraft is still viable and therefore, its destruction credit should go the pilot who actually eliminates the aircraft by reducing it to being incapable of controlled flight, either by catastrophic damage or the death of the pilot.  

My regards,

Widewing

[Midnight]

Widewing, the scoring couldn't be the way you suggest until the damage model is changed.

Let's say a 190A8 wing can take 100 points of hit damage before it departs the aircraft.

Let's say a 20mm puts 25 points of hit damage per round.

Let's say a .50cal puts 5 points of hit damage per round.

OK... You are in a SpitIX and score 3x 20mm hits on a 190A8's left wing. That wing now has 75 hit points, but with current damage modeling, nothing appears to be broken and the plane still flies as normal because it still needs 25 points of damage.

Now, I come along in my P-51 and score 6x .50cal hits on the same wing of the said 190A8. The wing now has 105 hit points and departs the aircraft.

Obiviously, you would want the kill, because you put more damage on that 190 than I did, even though we were unable to see that visually.

[SKurj]

my thots +)

A kill should be credited as soon as fatal damage is done...  enemy plane loses a wing, credit given to he who did most of the damage.  Even if plane is still floating down.
Plane loses tailplane... once again credit given to the person who did the most damage prior to the tailplane separating...immediately

if say i do just enough damage to remove a critical part, like the tailplane for example, that aircraft is still live currently until pilot bails or hits the dirt.  Leaving it wide open for someone else to swoop in and do just enough damage to steal it.

I don't really have a problem with kill steals, I just think the above would help silence the steal whines...

no more steals...

SKurj

[AKDejaVu]

To score based upon individual damage levels is unrealistic. Why? Because some very badly battered aircraft can and do return to base. Ultimately, the pilot who prevents the aircraft (and by default, the crew) from returning to base should receive the kill credit. The burden for securing the victory should be on the attacker to finish the job. Should he fail, for whatever reason, that aircraft is still viable and therefore, its destruction credit should go the pilot who actually eliminates the aircraft by reducing it to being incapable of controlled flight, either by catastrophic damage or the death of the pilot.

LOL!  You do realize you just came up with a "the last pilot to ping a plane should get credit for the kill" scenario don't you?

You need to stop thinking about how it did work in WW2, or how it should work here and start thinking about possible ways to make it work.  You say what should happen without actually thinking about what you just said.  Its getting downright silly.

AKDejaVu

[Mino]

I get only a small percentage of assists, system seems Ok to me.