Originally posted by AKDejaVu
And to adress the unwarranted whining voiced by yourself...
Does the last ping that "renders the pilot incapable of flight" get the kill? Come on widewing.. you need a system here. You need a system that determines exactly who deserves a kill.
Does the pilot that is on an enemy's 6 and has just put 30 rounds into him as someone else swoops by and pings him once getting that critical damage to register deserve the kill?
Remember.. the system has to be able to determine wether or not its deserved. Your system does not do that... you just move to a different scenario for the whines to occur in.
Now.. when 4 people are spraying at the same target... the one that does the most damage doesn't necessarily get credit... its the one that does the last damage.
This type of crap happens when you take one specific scenario and use it to justify global changes to the game.
So you had a 4 assist sortie. BFD. Either come up with a solution for every situation or just shut up. Right now all you've done is come up with a way to have the scenarios you described in the initial post work in your favor without regard for how they'd affect the rest of the arnea.
AKDejaVu
Before I posted my original comments, I was certain that my ol' pal AKDejaVu would hold true to pattern and argue, "it's good enough the way it is." You did not let me down.
Indeed, whenever
anyone offers suggestions to improve game play or realism, you seem ready to rush out and pee on their flowers. I have never seen anyone so determined to defend the status quo who does not work for the government, or do you work for the government?
I understand your loyalty to HTC. However, I am only suggesting that there is room for improvement. Furthermore, anyone suggesting that there no room for improvement is obviously too easily satisfied.
So, to simplify, I will specifically offer suggestions in numerical order.
1) All kills should be awarded to the pilots who's actions actually caused the enemy aircraft to become unflyable. If several pilots shoot at and hit, and destroy a target plane, no one gets a kill. They all get an assist. However, perk point pecentages are divided by amount of damage inflicted. No perks or assists are awarded after the aircraft becomes unflyable. Therefore, no kill stealing. Vehicles may require different rules.
2) An aircraft that eventually crashes as a result of damage will not be credited as a kill unless it crashes within visual range of an enemy (any enemy belonging to the same nation as the shooter). If no one sees it crash, how would you know it did? A death is credited to the pilot, but no one gets a kill, or an assist. That is how it worked in the real world. Moreover, this is supposed to be a history based sim, right? Should a damaged aircraft escape and be attacked by another pilot, it is considered viable and kill credit goes to the pilot who finally destroys the aircraft. Assists will be credited those who damaged it. Examples of this situation appear in the lead post. Remember, if it can return to base safely or have the ability to drop bombs or shoot, it's still fair game.
3) No proximity kills will be awarded for a kill by AI ack.
4) No proximity kills will be awarded to aircraft not in flight. (this still preserves the "maneuver" kill).
5) If two planes kill each other, both will receive kill credits. This silliness of losing your kill because you baled first, or hit the ground first doesn't make the grade. Dead is dead. Recall that this is a history based sim. When WWII pilots shot down enemy aircraft, but failed to return themselves, those who witnessed the kill always made sure that credit was given upon their return from the mission. If there was a mid-air collision between an American and German aircraft, the American still received credit for the kill. No one watched to see who baled out , or crashed first. A destroyed enemy aircraft is still destroyed regardless of who did what after that fact.
Now, I'm sure that there are areas that I have not covered. However, if HTC wishes to hire me as a consultant, I'll be happy to consider their offer. But, as a paying customer, I have the right to voice my dissatisfaction with aspects of the game and suggest ideas to rectify what I believe to be problem areas in game play. Some may not like it, but that, I'm afraid, is their problem. I can also accept that my suggestions are not easy to program, and hence the current system is the best for the current technology. Sometimes concessions in realism must be made to facilitate game play. However, I cannot ever accept the statement that "it's good enough". In this industry, good enough is never good enough for long. Obviously HTC knows this because they, more than any other like provider, constantly strive to improve their product. I only ask, that as they improve Aces High, that they consider changes and improvements to the scoring system. And gentlemen, it's not just I who have concerns about various aspects of the system, it's a commonly expressed complaint.
My regards,
Widewing
