Why %Hit????

[J_A_B]

K/D and K/S are the two most meaningless stats in terms of telling who is a "good" pilot.   Hit% doesn't mean a whole lot either, and neither does K/T.

Bottom line:   Scores are no indication of skill whatsoever.  

J_A_B

[DarkglamJG52]

Also remember the next equation ==>  - ping =  + % hits

[Dead Man Flying]

Originally posted by Load
It is sugar to flies. I knew some1 like you would post this. Save your work man. You are the first fly coming to my question.

Took me 5 seconds to type that.  No work at all.  How's that aim coming along?

-- Todd/Leviathn

[akak]

Originally posted by Load
Yeah, I know the answer...just to sink the spreaders.....is that all??

Mmmm...... I think % hit doesnt has to do with skills and it makes some pilots droping at low ranks. If you take %hit away from stats computing..some guys could go from 200th to top 30.

If you can have a K/S of 2.0 and %hit of 5% (which is very poor) something tells us that %hit nothing has to do with skills. We could add % of wasted wasted at stats, It would be the same. It doesnt make sense to me. Some people use a lot of deflection shots (very difficult to make) and % gets lower. some guys have poor conection and % hit drops dramatically.

Take %Hit away from stats!!!!

stats aren't an indicator of skill either so might as well do away with the whole thing.


Ack-Ack
479th FG - Riddle's Raiders

[MANDOBLE]

Scoring system has little or nothing to do with how good are you, but it is a way to keep track of your achievements.

For example, in my case, detailed score page is a jewel to keep track of how many La7 and Spit heads have I hung in the trophy wall, everything else is secondary

[BOOT]

Stats  ???  We have Stats ?
Points ???  We have points ?

I have never paid attention to ranking, Stats or Points. Neither in AH or AW...  Really most of the ranking boils down to how much time you spend in each phase of AH combat... ie; Fighters, Attack, Bombers, Vehicles, Base capture etc.  If you do well across the board in all phases you get a really good rank.  If you tend to stay in one area, ie; Fighters you can rank high in Fighters but low in overall rank...

I am more of the fight till you die tribe

[eskimo2]

For a lot of players, hit % is driven down by straffing fixed ground targets while in fighter mode.

eskimo

[Dead Man Flying]

Originally posted by MANDOBLE
Scoring system has little or nothing to do with how good are you, but it is a way to keep track of your achievements.

Mandoble hit this one right on the head.  Things like K/S, K/D, K/T, and hit percentage are only valuable when comparing you to yourself.  Only you know how you fly, how aggressively you engage, how often you vulch, etc.  In that sense, all of these stats are valuable for tracking one's progress over time given the same sort of flying style.

The problem when comparing any of them to one another is that every person flies a little differently.  Some fly more aggressively than others.  Some vulch more.  Some prefer to fly to live, and others prefer to fight until they die.  It's impossible to measure "skill" between different players with such disparate flying styles by going on stats alone.  In that sense rank is meaningless.

So why keep hit percentage?  Because it's a valuable measure for yourself in tracking improvement over time.  As it relates to rank... who cares?  Rank can be "gamed" on any of the categories anyway.

-- Todd/Leviathn

[eskimo2]

Originally posted by Dead Man Flying


Mandoble hit this one right on the head.  Things like K/S, K/D, K/T, and hit percentage are only valuable when comparing you to yourself.  Only you know how you fly, how aggressively you engage, how often you vulch, etc.  In that sense, all of these stats are valuable for tracking one's progress over time given the same sort of flying style.

The problem when comparing any of them to one another is that every person flies a little differently.  Some fly more aggressively than others.  Some vulch more.  Some prefer to fly to live, and others prefer to fight until they die.  It's impossible to measure "skill" between different players with such disparate flying styles by going on stats alone.  In that sense rank is meaningless.

So why keep hit percentage?  Because it's a valuable measure for yourself in tracking improvement over time.  As it relates to rank... who cares?  Rank can be "gamed" on any of the categories anyway.

-- Todd/Leviathn

Very well said!

Probably the best summary of the value of stats I've read.

eskimo

[wulfie]

I think the theory behind gunnery % affecting score is based on a couple of things:

1. In some aircraft, it is much easier to score kills if you don't care about conserving ammunition and you 'lay on the trigger' for every low % gun solution you get.

2. It is a sign of a high degree of gunnery skill when you can fire a (short) burst of gunfire and a very high % of your fired rounds impact an aerial target that is not flying in a straight line. One of the best feelings for me in AH is when I fire on a tough snapshot, and I am actually sweating the timing, and the first rounds of the burst hit the nose of the target and the last rounds of the burst finish somewhere along the fuselage.

Having said that - what everyone else said in this thread is basically true. lazs is right - gunnery % is very easily 'manipulated'. Score categories are used by most (including me) as a way of tracking various trends in AH as performed by the tracker.

I think the reason for gunnery % affecting score a little may be an attempt at a deterrent - a way of assigning a little negative feedback for the person who would 'empty the clip' at 999 yds. in hopes of landing 1 or 2 'magic bullets'.

I don't know if it 'works' or not. The tough thing about it is that sometimes you would be flying 'smart' and/or 'realistically' to burn your ammunition on a shot at 999 yds. - 4 miles from the English channel, your buddy is in a P-51D and a Bf 109 is in gun range. You are going to blow thru and keep screaming for England. Your buddy is starting to dive for safety. I'd fire at very long range - scare off the Bf 109 or keep him distracted for the couple of seconds it takes your buddy to make his diving escape...

What I'd be interested to know is if there was fewer rounds fired per sortie in AH since they instituted the gunnery % affecting the score.

A good way to look at it is this - take a good gunner. Put him in the F4U-1D. Barring vulching, killing PT boats, all kills scored are bounces vs. unsuspecting targets, etc. - if he burned all his .50 BMG ammunition for 4 kills on sortie #1, and burned all his .50 BMG ammunition for 11 kills on sortie #2 - *theoretically* he was working harder for each kill on sortie #2. He was putting more work into setting up higher % gun solutions, he was 'sweating the timing' more on snapshots, etc.

But I agree with another post - the main use of scoring categories is for you tracking you in various different ways.

It would be damn interesting to see what happened to K/T, K/D, and K/S if all kills vs. targets spawned for less than 3 minutes or so were disallowed (with regards to stats), wouldn't it? When I first started playing AH I was surprised a few times at how someone ranked so high in the fighter category could be such a pushover in a real contest of maneuver and gunnery.

Mike/wulfie

[Load]

Nice posts. I even agree with last Dead Famous flying´s post...which is a nice point of view.

Now I feel better to see that %hit doesnt has to do with skills. Even as Dead Flying said....Any stat has to do with skills. I knew he had some better to offer than acussing me of "score fanatic".

Sorry for the flies thing, Dead FF. That greed makes me die a lot in MA .

[AKcurly]

Originally posted by Hristo
Not all planes have same accuracy of their guns. 109, for example, can hit much further away than 190, compensating for its poor punch.

Hristo, why do you say that?  I'm not really arguing [don't know enough about the subject to argue] but in Aces High, my experience has been exactly the opposite!  For me, the d9 has been fairly reliable out to 400-450 yards while the 109 guns (for me!) are not.

Finally, assuming you are correct, was that true in "real life" or are you talking about Aces High planes?

curly

[senna]

The 109s guns have poor range in my opinion a true test of discipline to make it connect. The 190A8s guns R way undermodeled. While at the same time I'm tired of spitfires literally flying cicles around me again and again. Today I battled a sticky spit that flew three circles around my roll axis then shot me down. That was a total joke.

True story...

[Fester']

I am more of the fight till you die tribe

Diatribe?  

[Hristo]

My experience is that I can hit at further ranges in 109 than in 190. Of course the 190 can saturate air with shells and you might get the kill, but usually I consider 109 more accurate.

109 has more clearance below the center of crosshair, even if you elevate head position in the 190. This means you can still see a target which would be obstructed by the nose in 190.

Usually, I manage to nail 350-450 yds snapshots more easily in 109. I even compared 109G-6 with MG152/20 to 190A-8 with 2 MG151/20s. Simply, I did much better in 109 considering snapshots. I never felt that I was missing one cannon. My convergence was always 350 yds.

I'd attribute this to the following:

- higher RoF
- no convergence issues
- more room below the crosshair center
- very close placement of guns, all hitting the same spot

OTOH, wing cannons in 109 never helped me much.

While flying the 109, my hit % was 12-15% most of the time. And I rarely vulched, 109 was not well suited for it.

In 190 I was happy when it was 7-8%, with quite a lot of vulching in that score.

In both cases I almost never attacked anything else but airplanes - no tanks, hangers or such.