Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Lusche on November 23, 2012, 05:48:19 PM
-
A statistical analysis.
Attack mode is another area that should be adjusted. Meaning that ground attack should only be scored here to eliminate what some practice. Meaning they fly a few fighter sorties and then switch to attack mode only after that.
Such a request would not be made if the author wouldn't think that this practice is a bad thing for the game. In fact, it sometimes seems to be widespread knowledge that this is a widespread practice by pilots looking for a 'good' fighter rank, even being a necessity to get to the top?
Well is it? How widespread is it, and how effective?
To find out, I examined the time spent in fighter vs attack mode for all players flying in either mode in tour 153 as well as the tour winners (fighter) of all tours in this year so far.
First I sorted the pilots of tour 153 by fighter rank and noted the fighter/attack time ratio for the top 10, top 20, 50, 100 and so on until I got to rank 3000 (while there are a few hundred more ID's more, they didn't effectively took part in the game at all, so I dropped them)
(http://i1145.photobucket.com/albums/o507/Snaildude/fighter%20vs%20attack%20analysis/fgvattop.jpg)
Obviously the more "successful" pilots did fly less of their time in fighter mode - but the change is surprisingly low. 60% among the top 10 vs ~ 72% among the top 1000 pilots isn't that much of a difference. Which could easily be explained by the 'lesser' ranked (and supposedly often new pilot) caring less about flying attack runs on towns in fighter mode, while the 'better' ranked just take a tad more care in their mode selection.
But let's go into more detail: The top 20 fighter pilots of tour 153
(http://i1145.photobucket.com/albums/o507/Snaildude/fighter%20vs%20attack%20analysis/fgtvatttop20.jpg)
As we can see, the numbers are all over the place. Obviously there is no direct relation between time in modes and resulting rank. Some seem to "optimize" a lot, but others don't and even with ~100% sorties (and a lot of them) in fighter mode making it to the top 20.
But maybe it's a necessity for 'winning' the tour? Now here the data of the past tour winners:
(http://i1145.photobucket.com/albums/o507/Snaildude/fighter%20vs%20attack%20analysis/fgtvattwinner.jpg)
We have a tendency for low fighter to attack time ratios, but still there are some who don't seem to care a lot and still got the #1 spot.
So if i try to answer my initial question myself: No, it's not a very widely used practice, and it's much less a requirement of getting a 'good' rank at all. The individual player can be able to boost his ranking by a few notches by optimizing his fighter/attack sortie selection, but the gain is relatively low and apparently only interesting if he is definitely going for the number spot and needs every ounce of advantage he can get.
-
You must be really bored. :aok
-
You must be really bored. :aok
No, I'm just very a curious person. :)
It took only one B-29 sortie by the way... ;)
-
No, I'm just very a curious person. :)
It took only one B-29 sortie by the way... ;)
Its amazing what you can get done while climbing to 30K... At least its worked for me xD
-
You must be really bored. :aok
You must be really rude. :aok
-
Very cool stuff Luche as always :aok
-
Wow Lusche!
Thanks for taking the time to do that. I have often wondered if there was any real correlation between ranking and the often-heard claims that you based your topic upon, but have never taken the time to sort through the data.
If you don't mind me asking... How do you quickly compile your data into a usable format? Do the stat pages allow you to save the data into Excel or something similar?
-
You must be really rude. :aok
:huh Gives the guy a thumbs up for his work = rude. :huh
-
If you don't mind me asking... How do you quickly compile your data into a usable format? Do the stat pages allow you to save the data into Excel or something similar?
No, I had to write my own programs to get the data from there. I do grab the basic plane stats as well as the player scores after the completion of each tour, which takes a few hours all in all. I do all further work in openoffice calc (specific analysis, upading the grand plane stats 'database', looking for new trends and changes in gameplay)
-
I would suspect that the top pilots that fly a majority of their time in fighters, actually know how to fight, and the ones who have a low percentage of hops in fighter mode but rank high would be less likely to hold up to a DA skills "test"! :aok
:devil
:noid
Mark
-
:huh Gives the guy a thumbs up for his work = rude. :huh
Ignorant too, you must be quite the catch. :aok
-
Ignorant too, you must be quite the catch. :aok
:huh The troll is strong with this one.
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_bimfoQyPn4U/SxNy3AIgUpI/AAAAAAAAKJ0/Iy10gIefD20/s400/20091119-pancakebunny.gif)
-
:O :O :O :O Pancakes? yum ! :x :x :x :x :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana:
-
Stats are great. Thanks Snail.
I'm wondering about time spent in fighter vs total time in game for Tour overall winners?
-
Snail I'm not sure but I think your data is screwed.
For instance tour 149 Bruv119 has 64hrs 39 mins total time but flew 15 hrs 40 mins in Fighter.
How is that less than 10% as per your last chart?
Just wondering if I'm reading it the way it's intended. :aok
Bruv wasn't fighter #1 in 149...#
The fighter #1 had ~8.5h in fighter mode vs ~82.5h in attack mode
-
Bruv wasn't fighter #1 in 149...
Yes I figured it out and changed my question :O
Awfully fast on that response. What was that under 2 mins? LOL
-
I'm wondering about time spent in fighter vs total time in game for Tour overall winners?
A kind of "what does it take to get overall #1?"
Tomorrow, ok? :)
-
A kind of "what does it take to get overall #1?"
Tomorrow, ok? :)
Yes Oh master stats snail, Tomorrow will be fine :lol
-
I would suspect that the top pilots that fly a majority of their time in fighters, actually know how to fight, and the ones who have a low percentage of hops in fighter mode but rank high would be less likely to hold up to a DA skills "test"! :aok
it was me finishing second with the low percentage.
We can hold that DA test anytime you would like
:aok
-
You must be really bored. :aok
Lmao! I just read this while having a smoke outside the bar n I busted out laughing. Get a life lol! :lol
-
Lmao! I just read this while having a smoke outside the bar n I busted out laughing. Get a life lol! :lol
You read this while having a smoke outside the bar? :ahand
-
Lmao! I just read this while having a smoke outside the bar n I busted out laughing. Get a life lol! :lol
Hmmmm all the trolls coming out of the woodwork?
-
No, I'm just very a curious person. :)
It took only one B-29 sortie by the way... ;)
I do stuff like that at work. I did a chart comparing efficiency by day of the week. Guess which days were the most inefficient? Oh we operate 7 days a week.
-
Lmao! I just read this while having a smoke outside the bar n I busted out laughing. Get a life lol! :lol
Yeah read this while having a smoke outside of a bar and then tell someone else to get a life! Just when I thought irony had limits.
-
I hope your B29 sortie was successful. It was interesting stats. Actually I didn't think it was like that. :aok
-
I'm wondering about time spent in fighter vs total time in game for Tour overall winners?
I have to thank you for that question, because it turns out to have an interesting answer:
(http://i1145.photobucket.com/albums/o507/Snaildude/fighter%20vs%20attack%20analysis/timewinners.jpg)
It's very apparent that the overall tour winners very the very most part did fly much less in fighter mode than in attack mode, seemingly "protecting" their fighter scores. On the other hand, as we have seen in my earlier posts, it does not make much sense, you can get a very good fighter rank without doing it that way.
But what's the explanation then? Two things come to my mind:
First, unlike the fighter tour winners I posted earlier, it's about much less players - almost all the tour wins with very little fighter mode flying are one and the same person. So it could be just his personal preference, and he possibly could have done it differently, with more fighter vs attack sorties as well.
And second, the attack mode has much more sub-categories to score in, which requires more 'work' and because of this possibly just more time than in fighter mode. I did a quick analysis of the highly ranked attack mode pilots of tour 153, just like I did with fighter pilots in my first posts. The results support it: The better ranked attack pilots averagely spend much more time in attack than in fighter mode.
So flying little time in fighter mode and much time in attack mode could not be for 'protecting' the fighter score, but for working on the attack score. But then we have to ask how many do that knowingly. I for one wasn't aware of this ;)
-
Nice Info, always wondered :aok
-
I wouldn't want to see the end of using attack mode as a way for fighter pilots to protect their precious scores. It is hard enough now to get other players to fight, without that it would be harder still.
-
I always wondered what that was all about :rolleyes:
-
Lushe, thanks for posting the chart for Time in Modes for the Overall Tour Winners. While reading through this topic I was wondering what was the minimum time you had to play to be competitive for a tour winner. It looks like slightly more then 48 hours.
-
stop looking at my scores :old:
I log less fighter mode because there are hardly any people online when I play. That would be the quickest way to ruin it flying around and not killing anything!
As an old score Tard maybe I find it a little difficult to get out of old habits but when killing things hard and fast comes so naturally the rank system does its job by identifying them. I can search top 50 fighter pilots and 90% of them would give you a decent fight when it comes down to it.
-
I'd argue that the ratio of the time in Fighter to Attack modes is somewhat irrelevant to players who game the system. It's not about spending as little time as possible flying fighters, but rather only flying fighters when rewards are high and risks are low. If players find themselves in lots of high reward/low risk situations, they'll score more sorties as Fighter. Conversely, if they engage in a lot of high risk/low reward situations, they'll score more as Attack. Someone engaged in base defense, for example, would probably score that sortie as Attack given the high risk of dying to higher, faster, and more numerous enemies.
Of these top 10/top 100 players, how do their K/D ratios compare against fighters in Attack versus Fighter modes? How about K/T? I suspect these stats are a bit more telling.
-
Pretty neat information, Snail! Great job on the analysis!
#S#
Josh
-
Kind of surprised that the aces high system can’t track Fighter vs. Attack and it’s up to the pilot to make that selection. I’d say if an aircraft is not a Bomber specific and is carrying no bombs or rockets, then it’s a fighter. Once a fighter drops all it’s bombs and rockets, it’s a fighter.
-
Kind of surprised that the aces high system can’t track Fighter vs. Attack and it’s up to the pilot to make that selection. I’d say if an aircraft is not a Bomber specific and is carrying no bombs or rockets, then it’s a fighter. Once a fighter drops all it’s bombs and rockets, it’s a fighter.
In that case, a 110G with heavy gun package and no bombs/rockets would be scored as fighter?
#S#
Josh
-
In that case, a 110G with heavy gun package and no bombs/rockets would be scored as fighter?
Why wouldn't it?
-
Why wouldn't it?
I was thinking more along the lines of the cookie cutter NOE raids, etc... Usually, people use a 110G with heavy guns/no bombs to take out a town, meaning their sortie was an attack run. But under Traveler's system, it would be scored as fighter because of the loadout?
#S#
Josh
-
Of these top 10/top 100 players, how do their K/D ratios compare against fighters in Attack versus Fighter modes? How about K/T? I suspect these stats are a bit more telling.
I will take a look at that later, but I do know that attack K/D's and K/Hs are generally lower across the board because of the different mission profiles. "Attack" runs have a higher probability of being ended by ship or field ack, or in front of a Wirbelwind.
So I think it's hard to tell if the lower k/d in attack mode is due to players being more bold in combat.
-
I will take a look at that later, but I do know that attack K/D's and K/Hs are generally lower across the board because of the different mission profiles. "Attack" runs have a higher probability of being ended by ship or field ack, or in front of a Wirbelwind.
Is it possible to show how many of those flights scored as Attack ended due to ack or enemy gvs compared to flights scored as Fighter for the top 10/100 or so?
I ask because if it's true that players "game" it by scoring higher risk flights as Attack, then we should see little difference in their types of flying across these categories. In other words, they'd be scoring flights that could just as well have been Fighter but, due to the increased risk, they scored them as Attack instead. Thus we wouldn't expect to see them engaged in a great deal of actual "Attack," but rather fighter on aircraft combat as they did before. If they're actually engaged in a lot of Attack-like activities, then the notion that top players game the categories is probably off base.
-
Is it possible to show how many of those flights scored as Attack ended due to ack or enemy gvs compared to flights scored as Fighter for the top 10/100 or so?
Generally not, as I do not know if a sortie in a certain plane was scored under attack or fighter. Only sometimes we can tell from a players stats, for example when all his kills in fighter mode do match the kills in planes that can be flown in fighter mode only (Me 262, Ta 152H, ect.), but that's the exception.
-
In that case, a 110G with heavy gun package and no bombs/rockets would be scored as fighter?
#S#
Josh
I'm sure the code could be developed that ensured that bomber type aircraft could be accounted for. empty B17's would not be counted as fighters. I'm just suprised that it's not offered as an option to let the system score the flight as an attack or fighter. I fly the P38L and carry bombs and rockest and hit assigned targets, I always score it as Attack, when flying the L, and score it as Fighter when flying the J & G. But after I unload the P38L, it's a fighter and which I could score it as such.
-
But after I unload the P38L, it's a fighter and which I could score it as such.
So I should under no circumstances drop my bombs first on town and then strafe the remaining buildings...
-
Of these top 10/top 100 players, how do their K/D ratios compare against fighters in Attack versus Fighter modes?
A very hasty look at the top 20 fighter ranked pilots of tour 153 and their K/D in fighter vs attack mode:
(http://i1145.photobucket.com/albums/o507/Snaildude/fighter%20vs%20attack%20analysis/fva.jpg)
For the record, the median K/D's for all players who did fly in both modes in tour 153 is ~ 0,6 in fighter mode vs ~0,4 in attack mode.
But as stated earlier the chart doesn't tell us that much. Some of the top 20 players did hardly fly any attack sorties at all. Also, all of those player's attack K/Ds are still way above the average player's ones.
Overall, it doesn't change the whole picture. We know that individual players will fly much more in attack mode then in fighter mode, but that can be for very different reasons. But as shown in my intital posting, it happens much less than commonly believed (and that's what I was looking for to find out), and it's also not really required or effective (this is only valid for LW. EW and MW are a totally different matter).
-
So I should under no circumstances drop my bombs first on town and then strafe the remaining buildings...
Exactly what I was getting at. For instance, a buddy and I were trying to take a base, and I strafed the remaining buildings down after I dropped my bombs in an F6. I understand what you're saying, Traveler, but I think the selection of whether or not you score it as attack or fighter depends primarily on what the player sees as their top priority (i.e. bombing buildings, ord, tanks, etc.. before engaging enemy aircraft). Theorectically, if a player's top priority is fighter cap, then they are not likely to carry bombs and are more likely to select "fighter." Of course, that is theoretically speaking, because I know some people that try to do what the original post was about.
#S#
Josh
-
Help me just a bit.
If I fly X number of missions in Fighter, then the balance of the month in Attack does this somehow boost my Fighter score? If so, I guess I should game it a bit. With my work schedule I tend to hover somewhere around the 50 mark, and if gaming it drops me to around the 20s bodabing!
Or I could do it the old fashioned way...
Back to 100% Fighter missions for me. Interesting discussion though. Is there some score benefit to doing it 50/50 or 60/40?
Boo
-
Help me just a bit.
If I fly X number of missions in Fighter, then the balance of the month in Attack does this somehow boost my Fighter score? If so, I guess I should game it a bit. With my work schedule I tend to hover somewhere around the 50 mark, and if gaming it drops me to around the 20s bodabing!
Or I could do it the old fashioned way...
Back to 100% Fighter missions for me. Interesting discussion though. Is there some score benefit to doing it 50/50 or 60/40?
Boo
Thats kinda what Lusche is trying to disprove.
If say you run 5 sorties in 30 minutes as a fighter and you collect say 35 scalps, land them all and only use 50% of your ammo. You'll be ranked very high. If you don't fly a fighter sortie again for the rest of the month, will it be good enough to keep your high rank? Your K/D is 30/1, your K/S is 7/1, your K/HIT% is way up there, and your K/H is 60/1. The only thing that sucks is your kills points.
With numbers like that covering all the sub categories except the points would it be better for you NOT to fly and maintain the top stop?
-
If say you run 5 sorties in 30 minutes as a fighter and you collect say 35 scalps, land them all and only use 50% of your ammo. You'll be ranked very high. If you don't fly a fighter sortie again for the rest of the month, will it be good enough to keep your high rank? Your K/D is 30/1, your K/S is 7/1, your K/HIT% is way up there, and your K/H is 60/1. The only thing that sucks is your kills points.
With numbers like that covering all the sub categories except the points would it be better for you NOT to fly and maintain the top stop?
35 scapls in 30 minutes would indeed be an awesome result. Only very few pilots can do this. We do have one or two with a K/H of 40-60 in fighter mode each month, but those usually did only one single sortie with 1-3 kills.
But let me take the hypothetical numbers of yours and see how that pilot would have ranked in tour 153: If we assumed a top notch hit% of 15 and the average number of points per kill, he would have ended up at rank 56.
The sub-ranks:
k/d 5
k/s 1
k/h 1
hit% 34
points 988
The supreme k/d, k/s and k/h results are more than offset by his lack in kills.
-
35 scapls in 30 minutes would indeed be an awesome result. Only very few pilots can do this. We do have one or two with a K/H of 40-60 in fighter mode each month, but those usually did only one single sortie with 1-3 kills.
But let me take the hypothetical numbers of yours and see how that pilot would have ranked in tour 153: If we assumed a top notch hit% of 15 and the average number of points per kill, he would have ended up at rank 56.
The sub-ranks:
k/d 5
k/s 1
k/h 1
hit% 34
points 988
The supreme k/d, k/s and k/h results are more than offset by his lack in kills.
Well in my example, he has 35 kills to the 1 death the HTC adds, his kill per sortie would 7 (5 sorties 35 kills) his kill per hour would be 70 (35 kills in 30 minutes) and his points would 988 we'll say.
Granted those numbers are pretty wild, but for a good pilot easy enough to get catching a few NOEs and popping low slow planes. Now if he did this at the beginning of the tour and never flew another fighter sortie how would it pan out?
It's a pretty darn good starting point and would rank him very high that first day. With many others flying lucky runs a single sortie with 5 kills say, or a couple with a few more would be the only guys who would come close in ranking. Now if he didn't fly any more sorties, all of his number would stay the same for the month. Other pilots would have to have unbelievable runs to catch his kill numbers but would easily surpass his kill points.
Is that how it would work or am I missing something? Your charts show it isn't rampant, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't work.
-
You must be really bored. :aok
Normally, that would be merely funny... but coming from a super mega-gaming-all-the-time-winner, it is exceptional.
I rike.
-
Granted those numbers are pretty wild, but for a good pilot easy enough to get catching a few NOEs and popping low slow planes. Now if he did this at the beginning of the tour and never flew another fighter sortie how would it pan out?
umm... :headscratch: In the message you quoted I just explained how it would pan out.
-
dbl post
-
Normally, that would be merely funny... but coming from a super mega-gaming-all-the-time-winner, it is exceptional.
I rike.
Normally, people give thumbs up when some one does a good job.
You Derp? Yeaaa, you Derp.
-
In order to make it a tad more difficult for the score ho's to game the system, might I humbly suggest tweaking the kill points sub-category even more since its the 1 sub category that is not so easily manipulated. I realize this may be opening Pandora's box but, how about adding a eny/perk modifier to the kill point scoring.
For example, much the way perk points are awarded, the kill points earned for kills in a 262, should be significantly less than that of a C 202. This would at least make the score ho's work a little harder for that precious ranking.
:salute Nishizwa
-
For the record, the median K/D's for all players who did fly in both modes in tour 153 is ~ 0,6 in fighter mode vs ~0,4 in attack mode.
But as stated earlier the chart doesn't tell us that much. Some of the top 20 players did hardly fly any attack sorties at all. Also, all of those player's attack K/Ds are still way above the average player's ones.
I expect anyone in the top 20 should possess a skill set that greatly exceeds that of the median player, so there's no surprise there. I agree that not much can be made of this (though that 30:1 K/D compared to roughly 2.5:1 for one of the players raises an eyebrow). We'd need to know just what the players are doing when they're in Attack mode, and since those data aren't available, we can't draw any definitive conclusions.
-
Might it be that the fighter jock score orientated pilit values his fighter mode score greatly but scorns all others?
Could it be that to "optimise" his fighter score he ups in fighter mode only when
-his eye is "in"
-the opposition is easy meat
-he has "help" ensuring his safety.
in this way attack score becomes a repository for the scores gained/lost when the odds in the arena are stacked against our fighter only jock.
I suppose the tendency for this fella would be high KD's/KH's in fighter mode but low KD's/KH's in attack.
I dont think I would be looking for him in the top 50 fighter ranks. I guess this type would tend to populate the ranks just below the upper echelons...........
-
;)
-
In order to make it a tad more difficult for the score ho's to game the system, might I humbly suggest tweaking the kill points sub-category even more since its the 1 sub category that is not so easily manipulated. I realize this may be opening Pandora's box but, how about adding a eny/perk modifier to the kill point scoring.
For example, much the way perk points are awarded, the kill points earned for kills in a 262, should be significantly less than that of a C 202. This would at least make the score ho's work a little harder for that precious ranking.
:salute Nishizwa
Agreed, 100%... and killing 100 Lancasters in a latewar cannon bird shouldn't be as lucrative as it is now...
I think giving ENY multipliers on all of the points (where applicable) wouldn't be a bad idea... although if lethality values were assigned to each plane that would be even better.
-
I find that 90% of the top 50 in overall score get :ahand .... the score system is crap, it does not truly reflect ones skill but rather skill at gaming the score... not their true abilities, period.
You hear all the time supposedly its meant for the individual to use as a tool for improvement yet its compared and ranked to others... they even reward them at the end of a tour with their name in lights... because yes, its gamed.
I have seen much better skills and had better fights from people ranked in the 100+ because they can actually fight and probably don't bother as I do with changing fighter/attack mode or even care about their overall score.
A score system that truly reflects a persons ability accurately is still a long way off, score each flight for what the outcome is regardless of what mode your in.
-
A score system that truly reflects a persons ability accurately is still a long way off, score each flight for what the outcome is regardless of what mode your in.
The score system perfectly reflects a persons skill at playing the game.
But it does not do a very good job at reflecting a persons ability a cooking.
HiTech
-
But it does not do a very good job at reflecting a persons ability a cooking.
I see what you did there, excellent! :rofl :rofl :rofl :aok
-
The score system perfectly reflects a persons skill at playing the game.
But it does not do a very good job at reflecting a persons ability a cooking.
HiTech
Bah...
Show me when Bighorn or Mar finished first in fighter.
For me, they are the etalons, based on the skill they handle theese cartoon aircrafts.
-
One bomber sortie gets you from 1000+ to 300-400. A couple of (timid) sorties in a Tempest/262 gets you to 50-100 fighter rank. Same with a Tempest/P51 in Attack. As for GV, wait till a good spawn camp happens. Voila, your overall rank is now in the sub 50s.
-
One bomber sortie gets you from 1000+ to 300-400. A couple of (timid) sorties in a Tempest/262 gets you to 50-100 fighter rank. Same with a Tempest/P51 in Attack. As for GV, wait till a good spawn camp happens. Voila, your overall rank is now in the sub 50s.
Ha ha ha really? What's the point of that?
Yes Mar is an uber stick. :salute
-
The score system perfectly reflects a persons skill at playing the game.
HiTech
If one defines the other then the reverse is also true.
Hence from this we learn that "the game" is perfectly reflected by "the score system".
-
If one defines the other then the reverse is also true.
Hence from this we learn that "the game" is perfectly reflected by "the score system".
Do you play "The game" or do you just fly in an arena?
HiTech
-
If one defines the other then the reverse is also true.
Hence from this we learn that "the game" is perfectly reflected by "the score system".
:aok
-
Do you play "The game" or do you just fly in an arena?
HiTech
And that my friends is THE question that answers all the others. Welcome to my epiphany. I realized years ago, I don't play the game, I just fly in the main arena.
-
And that my friends is THE question that answers all the others. Welcome to my epiphany. I realized years ago, I don't play the game, I just fly in the main arena.
ya, I use to try and fight in the Main arena, now I just HO :noid
-
I mostly fly the game, track my score. I flight strickly fighter unless I get into either ubber frustration or boredom then I will run some bombers into the ground.
With the game, the first squad I was in (for a few month) really pushed for the high score. The trick, among others included getting one base capture a month. The squad CO would almost daily ask if everyone had their base capture. And the easy way to get high points was to up a PT boat, drive it to a town and shoot up some buildings. These two events would drive the overall score.
Whatever...as with most scoring systems it accurately 'ball parks' pilots. Those fighters who get into the top-50 tend to be really good pilots. Hard to game that. Those that finish in the top-20 seem to be without question the best fighter sticks around. Ultimately it is the dueling ladders and squad dueling leagues that will sort it out.
Boo
-
ya, I use to try and fight in the Main arena, now I just HO :noid
I really don't have this problem at all. Sure people HO, and I will either HO back or try and avoid it, sometimes it works and others not so much.
Either way I really do not have a HO'ing problem in the MA at all. I consider myself a decent pilot, and I do see that newer or less skilled pilots will HO more frequently than better pilots. But if the better pilot is complaining about HO's in the first place...why did that pilot get into a HO situation frequently enough to warrant a complaint?
-
Those fighters who get into the top-50 tend to be really good pilots. Hard to game that. Those that finish in the top-20 seem to be without question the best fighter sticks around.
I wouldn't go that far. Getting into the top 20 fighter ranks absolutely requires a skill level way above 'average', but many of the 'best' still can be found with way lower ranks for various reasons.
But then, we would still have to define first what actually makes a good (or even best) fighter in the MA. Surely it's not simply about the best "duellist", because that's just using a subset of skills. ;)