Originally posted by poopster
Catches the ball on a slant pattern from Urchin and runs with it...
First, K/D, K/S and K/T are valid score points..
Second, hit percentage is "iffy" at best, I mean, what difference does it make ???
Third, "points" are worthless and pretty much just show your time on line. If you fly until your skin is pasty that gives you some sort of rank ??
Ok, I agree and disagree here. K/D, K/S, and K/T are all valid scoring points, yes. Hit percentage is ALSO a valid scoring point, in my opinion. Remember, these categories mean nothing on their own, only in comparison with other people. And I know that rank doesn't really show how good someone is, but it would be nice if it did. So take someone thats average in everthing, then take someone thats average in everything but is a crack shot- I think he should be ranked a little higher. Thats why I feel it is a valid scoring area. Also, 'points' isn't really a worthless category- it does serve a purpose. I'll comment on it below though.
So..
Why not convert "points" to give you an average ENY value. Any kills register the planes ENY that you flew and is added as a "points" score. Get all your kills in a "40" plane, your points are 40. Get all your kills in a "20" plane, your points are 20. Wouldn't be dependent on sorties flown, and averages would be automatic on flying different planes. 400 sorties in a "20" ENY plane are still just "20"
Hit percentage is pretty much worthless so subsitute landing percentage in that slot. That would be taken from total fighter sorties flown. Fly 10 and land, 100 is your score, fly 200 and land 50, 25 is your score. How that would work as a multipler is the subject of more beers.
In that way, the plane you fly counts, landing sorties counts and you have a better score system more reflective of the difficulty involved.
[/b]
Points is kind of a 'catch all' category. Does flying more (as long as you get kills in proportion) lead to more points? Sure it does. Although, in my opinion, that is valid. Take a pilot that has a K/D of 5, a K/S of 5, and a K/T of 5. Now take a pilot with a K/D of 5, a K/S of 5, and a K/T of 5. So, this pilots should have the same rank, right? No (in my opinion). The first pilot had 1 good sortie, the second pilot has 200 kills. In my experience it is much tougher to maintain good 'stats' over an extended period than it is to have one good sortie and call it a month. So, how can you tell these pilots apart? The only way is to compare 'points'. The pilot with 200 kills will have more points, and therefore will (and should, in my opinion), have a higher rank.
The 'points' category also takes landing your sorties into account. Assuming the plane type has no impact (and I don't believe it does), a pilot who kills 5 guys and lands will have the same amount of 'points' that a pilot who kills 20 guys but dies does. That is why I don't think there needs to be a seperate category for 'landing'- it is already taken into account in both K/D and points.
It would require a sortie a day is needed to qualify. 23rd day of the tour requires 23 sorties to be scored.
It's so easy, just should have asked me 
Laterals to Urchin at the 35.... [/B]
I disagree here, I think everyone should be counted, no matter how many sorties you have. Again, the points category we have now ensures that even if you have 1 really killer sortie, you won't end up with the #1 fighter rank unless you can repeat the performance. The 'points' category is an equalizer both ways, in my opinion. Hitech and Company really designed a very elegant scoring system, in my opinion. The only thing I wished it took into account is the plane. Because, in my opinion, the plane plays a fairly large role in the 'plane and pilot' equation. It isn't all of it, but it does play a sizable role and should be accounted for.
I just think the 'easiest' way to implement it would be to include it in the points category, since it really wouldn't have a factor in any other category. I think a pilot that has a K/D of 5, a K/S of 3, and a K/T of 8 in a C.202 is more impressive than a pilot who has a K/D of 10, a K/S of 5, and a K/T of 10 in an La-7.
Some folks don't agree with me, I can understand that. I do enjoy a good discussion though, and I really think this would both give 'low-time' pilots a way to compete in the 'points' category (where being 'low-time' hurts the most) and give some of the less-used planes a wider audience.
