Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: JUGgler on February 07, 2011, 10:38:36 AM
-
How about any plane destroyed on pavement does NOT register as a kill, NO score fore it, NO name in lights for it and NO death, NOTHING but "wasted" ammo?
JUGgler
-
that would be awesome haha imagine all the :cry that would go on
-
good idea jugler... +1 :aok if it's possible...
-
+1 on this. :rock
-
Or you could take off at a different field if getting vulched is a problem. :bhead
-
In the DA sure. :aok In the MA it is the sport of kings! -1
-
Or you could take off at a different field if getting vulched is a problem. :bhead
:rofl :rofl :rofl you could still cherry at the edge of the runway, I just would like to poke my head out before I get aborted :aok
JUGgler
-
"Vulching is a reward."
Who said that? :P
-
So the vulchers will just wait until the enemy's wheels lift off the ground before pulling the trigger. The only change I see here would be more people trying to up off a capped field because there is no penalty while on the roll. But what about when people are landing? As soon as the wheels touch down, they're safe? Counts as no death, right? So what if some punk is landing his 163 dead-stick and you kill him on his landing roll? You get nothing and he keeps his perks?
-
Before I even up at a field I wait for my screen to catch up to see whats there. Why up at a field that has a bunch of vulchers at it? Some are fine with it and more power to em, especially the ones I'm vulching!
-
I killed 2 planes with 1 rocket yesterday...-1 just roll a wirble girlie
-
So the vulchers will just wait until the enemy's wheels lift off the ground before pulling the trigger. The only change I see here would be more people trying to up off a capped field because there is no penalty while on the roll. But what about when people are landing? As soon as the wheels touch down, they're safe? Counts as no death, right? So what if some punk is landing his 163 dead-stick and you kill him on his landing roll? You get nothing and he keeps his perks?
Correct, correct and correct, You see it will actually promote and bennefit everyone, more peeps would be motivated to up at capped bases more tards would get "easy" cherry kills.
The last point with example of the 163, I never said the dude on the pavement was safe, obviously he would be eliminated with his sortie being scored as a death. This is not to create a "safe zone". I like to think of it as more of an "anti tard" zone :aok
JUGgler
-
they got credit durin WW2 why not here, doesn't matter where ya die its just a game. quit :cry ok later :bolt:
-
I killed 2 planes with 1 rocket yesterday...-1 just roll a wirble girlie
1 plane can end this easy!
JUGgler
-
1 plane can end this easy!
JUGgler
True...
-
Why would you take off at a field that's getting vultched?
-1
-
How about any plane destroyed on pavement does NOT register as a kill, NO score fore it, NO name in lights for it and NO death, NOTHING but "wasted" ammo?
JUGgler
Hmm I guess I did say the dude on the pavement would be safe in so many words! :D
Well I would think most would prefer it to the silly vulching that goes on now.
IMHO
JUGgler
-
Because frustration and anger are what fuel combat? :D
-
they got credit durin WW2 why not here, doesn't matter where ya die its just a game. quit :cry ok later :bolt:
Do clarify that will you. Who got credit? The only crowd that got credit for ground kills was the 8th, and that was only as motivation to keep them diving into the ack. A lot of guys, and all but one of the USAAF Aces that were shot down, went down to ack attacking airfields.
9th, 15th, 5th, RAF, etc did not give credit for ground kills.
Of course those guys were really dying too and they didn't get a big attaboy and a message across the radio saying they'd landed 14 vulches.
-
Why would you take off at a field that's getting vultched?
-1
Personally I hate the long flight, also I'm very giving and am all about improving scores :aok. I just would like to get airborne before getting "the coat hangar" ;)
I also know for a fact that other 'like minded" peeps such as myself would up more often and have more fun if this change could be made. Thereby improving the experience and FUN of those peeps who frequent these situations on both sides :aok
JUGgler
-
Because frustration and anger are what fuel combat? :D
Then why do I laugh so much?
There are few so readily willing to fight at "TOTAL DISADVANTAGE" "most of the time" such as myself :aok
JUGgler
-
I just take-off from the closest field that is NOT getting vulched.
:noid
-
Guys who vulch (looking for combat?) are probably the same guys who cry about other guys taking "undefended" bases.
Ironic.
Now I'm NOT talking about guys who are suppressing uppers at a base they are trying to take.
I'm talking about the "aces" that come in and do it and leave, with no other purpose than padding their score.
Whether or not HT says its "cool" I think its a sissy move.
-
Guys who vulch (looking for combat?) are probably the same guys who cry about other guys taking "undefended" bases.
Ironic.
Now I'm NOT talking about guys who are suppressing uppers at a base they are trying to take.
I'm talking about the "aces" that come in and do it and leave, with no other purpose than padding their score.
Whether or not HT says its "cool" I think its a sissy move.
Hand in hand.
Lemmings that continually up from a capped base that is obviously not being taken (i.e. town not damaged) have nothing to cry about.
Piss on the electric fence once, and possibly, one can blame it on the farmer for not giving a warning. Do it again right away, and whose fault is it now?
-
In the DA sure. :aok In the MA it is the sport of kings! -1
:aok
-
Hand in hand.
Lemmings that continually up from a capped base that is obviously not being taken (i.e. town not damaged) have nothing to cry about.
Piss on the electric fence once, and possibly, one can blame it on the farmer for not giving a warning. Do it again right away, and whose fault is it now?
Agreed.
But is STILL a sissy way to play.
The Lemmings comment is priceless. :rofl
-
Agreed.
But is STILL a sissy way to play.
The Lemmings comment is priceless. :rofl
I can't tell others what to do with their $15... but I CAN ridicule them for it :aok
-
Personally I hate the long flight, also I'm very giving and am all about improving scores :aok. I just would like to get airborne before getting "the coat hangar" ;)
I also know for a fact that other 'like minded" peeps such as myself would up more often and have more fun if this change could be made. Thereby improving the experience and FUN of those peeps who frequent these situations on both sides :aok
JUGgler
I understand that you can hate long flights, but as far as I understand taking off a base that's getting vutched (even if they let you get off the ground) will not improve your score. You will be snow, low, & outnumbered. Just take off a nearby base, take the 5min to fly to the battle and come in with an advantage, then land kills.
-
I understand that you can hate long flights, but as far as I understand taking off a base that's getting vutched (even if they let you get off the ground) will not improve your score. You will be snow, low, & outnumbered. Just take off a nearby base, take the 5min to fly to the battle and come in with an advantage, then land kills.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
QFT :rock
-
it's already been said: dont wanna get vulched, dont up where a vulch is in progress.. fly in from somewhere else.
personally, I just grab a field gun or an ostie and discourage them.
-
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
QFT :rock
:headscratch:
Quantum Field Theory?
-
Then why do I laugh so much?
There are few so readily willing to fight at "TOTAL DISADVANTAGE" "most of the time" such as myself :aok
JUGgler
That is when it's the most fun after all :)
-
How about any plane destroyed on pavement does NOT register as a kill, NO score fore it, NO name in lights for it and NO death, NOTHING but "wasted" ammo?
JUGgler
you mean do it like how battlefield:1943 does it?
if your kill someone on the carrier, you get no points for it.
but this wouldnt be 100% fair.
what about the bomber boys who are lucky enough to catch a plane on the runway when they drop there bombs. do they score a kill? ive done this atleast twice.
-
what about the bomber boys who are lucky enough to catch a plane on the runway when they drop there bombs. do they score a kill? ive done this atleast twice.
High altitude bomb vulches involve 100% luck, but are way more fun than the run of the mill "sitting duck ganged by three C-Hogs" type vulch.
-
High altitude bomb vulches involve 100% luck, but are way more fun than the run of the mill "sitting duck ganged by three C-Hogs" type vulch.
A few years back on my first ever bomb run (well the first after I learned to use the bomb sight), I missed the hangar (or what ever my target was) and hit a mission of 110s taking off for an NOE. :rofl
-
"Vulching is a reward."
Who said that? :P
Seeing as it hasn't been answered in three pages, I will do so. HiTech said that.
Besides, upping something silly like an A6M2 and managing to kill a few of the vultures is fun. I just always did it in something other than my regular rides so that I could clearly track my K/D ratio with my "real" ride separately from the "upped at vulched airfields" ride.
-
“The great defense against the air menace is to attack the enemy's aircraft as near as possible to their point of departure.” By Winston Churchill
Therefore vultching is OK :aok
-
This is a great idea, but IIRC HiTech said vultching was a reward for getting to that point in the base domination structure.
-
no sry
-
I actually back this idea. Apparently many of my fellow players can't understand that letting them get gear up gives them a sense of hope that will cause them to keep upping and dying whereas blowing them away before the engine even starts just makes them quit.
+1
-
Yes, because base captures are really SO believable when uppers can't be killed while on the ground, eh?
You'd have people gaming it... And it is a gamey excuse of a rule because you don't like being shot down on takeoff.
The solution has already been stated, but I'll repeat it: TAKE OFF SOMEWHERE ELSE!
-
You could still kill uppers if base taking was the objective...just wouldn't get a kill for it.
Yes, because base captures are really SO believable when uppers can't be killed while on the ground, eh?
You'd have people gaming it... And it is a gamey excuse of a rule because you don't like being shot down on takeoff.
The solution has already been stated, but I'll repeat it: TAKE OFF SOMEWHERE ELSE!
-
I actually back this idea. Apparently many of my fellow players can't understand that letting them get gear up gives them a sense of hope that will cause them to keep upping and dying whereas blowing them away before the engine even starts just makes them quit.
+1
I agree that it's a good idea to let them up because it gives them hope and you can vulch them more. I don't think the game needs to change. Players get rewarded for flying smarter. This is currently true for vulchers and victims. I see no reason to dumb it down.
-
Yeah, it's a great idea..... Let's protect the silly people who up from a capped field and than want to moan & groan about it.
Typical American attitude.... Protect the retarded people! :aok
-
it's already been said: dont wanna get vulched, dont up where a vulch is in progress.. fly in from somewhere else.
personally, I just grab a field gun or an ostie and discourage them.
But doesn't doing what you say, waste time? Botht he time to fly there, and the time the vulchers have to wait for a new target?
All people are asking the vulchers is...wouldn't it be better for all [including the vulchers] if they were just a little more patient? Calling someone stupid for upping, is not really understanding that point. :salute
-
But doesn't doing what you say, waste time? Botht he time to fly there, and the time the vulchers have to wait for a new target?
All people are asking the vulchers is...wouldn't it be better for all [including the vulchers] if they were just a little more patient? Calling someone stupid for upping, is not really understanding that point. :salute
Thank you vink! ;)
If the cap turns into a "silly vulch" I will just move on to the next horde, but if there was reason to think I could get 'wheels-up" I would continue to up therebye improving the fun for all!
I am here only to help everyones scores, I would just like a "reach-a-round :aok :neener:
I am astonished at how many peeps defend the "wheels down" vulch! :huh :huh :huh :rolleyes: :bhead
JUGgler
-
I think its fine the way it is.
Why deprive the Vulchers of the "combat" they so crave.
-
You could still kill uppers if base taking was the objective...just wouldn't get a kill for it.
Now here is a man capable of critical thought!
Yes you could still vulch up a storm, the only difference is you would NOT get credit for the kill. I don't see much wrong with this idea. It is still easy enough to scoop up those willing to launch 50' from the end of the runway, Honestly how many ACES do folks need to have in one hand?
JUGgler
-
You don't need aces when your opposition is willing to go all in on deuce seven off suit repeatedly.
-
Yeah, it's a great idea..... Let's protect the silly people who up from a capped field and than want to moan & groan about it.
Typical American attitude.... Protect the retarded people! :aok
Actually, it's more like, "Protect the normal, functioning people from doing retarded things"
-
You don't need aces when your opposition is willing to go all in on deuce seven off suit repeatedly.
And some obviously are, up untill it is impossible then they take their money elsewhere!
The "cherry horde " is at a particular base wouldn't it be nice if they could take more of my money rather than have me move on?
JUGgler
-
In so many strange ways..... That makes good sense.
Actually, it's more like, "Protect the normal, functioning people from doing retarded things"
-
A few years back on my first ever bomb run (well the first after I learned to use the bomb sight), I missed the hangar (or what ever my target was) and hit a mission of 110s taking off for an NOE. :rofl
You lucky bastage! I keep hoping and praying to find a mission upping on the runway. :pray
I did try to vulch a 1/2 dozen 51Ds upping together once. My uber TBM swooped down and pinged one enough to auger shortly after takeoff. Had I arrived just a few seconds earlier, there would have been a rocket vulch of epic proportions.
-
just separate the score air kills vs ground kills then by statistics you can tell the skilled guy from the vulcher
IE:
Fighter:
325 Air Kills
678 Ground Kills
-
tell me why are people complaining about this? i dont think the germans wahhed when their pilots were shot down while taking off during WW2 same for the russians. you know what they did, they took off and tried again. dont complain when someone is doing exactly what all pilots do in war.
-
tell me why are people complaining about this? i dont think the germans wahhed when their pilots were shot down while taking off during WW2 same for the russians. you know what they did, they took off and tried again. dont complain when someone is doing exactly what all pilots do in war.
How did they manage that if they were dead? Zombies?
-
simple get a another pilot. i mean its not a big deal to get vulched for me im not gonna say ok you can take off and have a chance to shoot me down when i can just shoot you down when you try to take off.
-
simple get a another pilot. i mean its not a big deal to get vulched for me im not gonna say ok you can take off and have a chance to shoot me down when i can just shoot you down when you try to take off.
So why do you vulch at all? If it's no big deal on the recieving end, what's the enjoyment on the shooting end?
Your fear is that once up the pilot taking off is better then you? That's all I can figure from the last part of your comment.
-
i said i dont want to take a chance of being shot down i never said the other pilot would be better then me. and yes i do sometime get frustrated by it but i just go up again, the point of vulching in a base capture scenario is that we are trying to cap the base not be stopped.
-
Honestly?
I will do it just to sap the will to fight from the other guy during a base capture.
Sometimes it doesn't work out that way...
-
Im always up for giving incentive for more defense in this game so big +1 :aok
The only people this would upset are the head lemmings that send their henchmen as kamakazi warriors so they can follow behind, get 8 easy kills..land and recieve the ever fruitfull bounty of "WTG XXX..can I join yer skwad?".
So vulching is a reward..big deal. Jug's request seems fair as either has a choice in the situation. 1) you can still shoot him down ( if base supression is why your vulching) which wont affect anything in a negative way, but you wont get credit for it. 2) if you really want the credit..you are just going have to be "less" fat and lazy for it and give them just a little chance.
Only thing I would be upset about is not being able to do the fun rocket/bomb vulch that always gets a few laughs is really popular. Otherwise implimenting this is a step in the right direction
-
So...
When is the subject of the vulchee having wheels down on his front end vs. the vulcher seeing wheels up on his front end (or some other similar, lag-induced reason to whine)?
I foresee a whole, new species of whine threads begging Skuzzy to fix the intardnetz lag.
Refusing to use the simplest solution offered here (upping from a different base, if it is pissing you off) is no reason for HTC to cater to the whiners and lemmings.
I'd rather see my $14.95 go to more important things like more a/c, remodeling existing a/c that need it and, of course, bringing back the sheep.
-
So...
When is the subject of the vulchee having wheels down on his front end vs. the vulcher seeing wheels up on his front end (or some other similar, lag-induced reason to whine)?
I foresee a whole, new species of whine threads begging Skuzzy to fix the intardnetz lag.
Refusing to use the simplest solution offered here (upping from a different base, if it is pissing you off) is no reason for HTC to cater to the whiners and lemmings.
I'd rather see my $14.95 go to more important things like more a/c, remodeling existing a/c that need it and, of course, bringing back the sheep.
As it is now for example in GVs: You have a great spawn camp spot, the camper always has this slight adavantage of a few seconds that the guy spawning in needs that time to get his bearings, find the camper, turn his turret and so on. In planes you still need those seconds to fire up the engine etc..some vulchers wont even give you that. The OP's request is just saying that if you choose to shoot down a guy in this mode, you arent going to get credit for it. Would I choose to up off a capped feild if this were to be? Mabye, maybe not. ITs a fair request in my mind
-
I like upping off a capped field. It may take many tries (I usually give it 5-10), but the satisfaction of watching the vulchers auger while fighting for the kill is awesome.
Breaking a vulch the hard way can be quite rewarding. :neener:
-
So...
When is the subject of the vulchee having wheels down on his front end vs. the vulcher seeing wheels up on his front end (or some other similar, lag-induced reason to whine)?
I foresee a whole, new species of whine threads begging Skuzzy to fix the intardnetz lag.
Refusing to use the simplest solution offered here (upping from a different base, if it is pissing you off) is no reason for HTC to cater to the whiners and lemmings.
I'd rather see my $14.95 go to more important things like more a/c, remodeling existing a/c that need it and, of course, bringing back the sheep.
Well, this is calling a spade a non-issue, and I tend to agree. I'd rather see scarce resources devoted to my beloved 410 or even the Beau.
At the same time, I want to give a shout out for the "vulch is a reward" school of thought. Those are the guys I want with me when we enter an unarmed city, for I know they'll look the other way as a lay my foul and defiling hands on every wench I choose to vile-late (with muh violator), aaaaaah.
Maybe it's not the same scale. Still, I love this attitude that the reward for good work is being able to pummel the stupid (for upping from a capped field) and defenseless (because stupid). Hell, I do it too, sometimes. But then, when I was a child in grade school, I was a notorious playground bully and attempted to assault a "special needs" kid, too. So, just because I "get it" doesn't mean it's worthwhile. It just means we share a proclivity.
Flipside: what are you going to do when some acehole ups while you're trying to take a base? You need to vulch that ace, just to keep security. At that point, what difference does it make what's in your heart? You pound the ace either way. Then, if you're really an ace yourself, you call him out as an acehole on -channel, just to leave no doubt.
Let the rules stand. Let this thread die - despite the fact that I've enjoyed this critique more than I should have.
One last thing, appropos of nothing: Life is like an acehole, one good flick at it and you're covered in glory.
I sincerely hope I violated no rules here today.
-
I'm starting to think the score theory is correct.
Perks and Scoring are set up to promote "sissy" flying not challenging or competitive flying.
If a person got fewer points for a "sissy" kill and more points for a harder kill, then less folks would fly like sissies and game play would improve for all.
-
How about you get ranked #1 this camp to demonstrate how it's not challenging or competitive? :devil
-
so if I shoot a guy whos still wheels down, he doesnt get a kill recorded against him.
do I get my ammo back?
-
How about you get ranked #1 this camp to demonstrate how it's not challenging or competitive? :devil
That would surely do it. :D
-
I'm starting to think the score theory is correct.
Perks and Scoring are set up to promote "sissy" flying not challenging or competitive flying.
If a person got fewer points for a "sissy" kill and more points for a harder kill, then less folks would fly like sissies and game play would improve for all.
how are perks like this? if I take a val or an A6M2 up agianst 5 F4U's P51's or other "Uber" planes, and shoot them all down, you dont think that warrants 50 or 60 perks? :devil
-
I'm starting to think the score theory is correct.
Perks and Scoring are set up to promote "sissy" flying not challenging or competitive flying.
If a person got fewer points for a "sissy" kill and more points for a harder kill, then less folks would fly like sissies and game play would improve for all.
+1 on the scoring -1 on the perks comment. Perks are an ingenious method to reward you MORE for taking the harder route.
I agree 100% that you reward people for being sissys, then sissys is what you get.
For the statement that "vulching is your reward for all your hard work". :lol :lol :rofl . YOU DO KNOW that the reason these guys are vulching is by chance and if you get that chance is because some lemming died 300 times deacking the feild. Funny because the majority of time, by the time the guys actually "doing the work" get to come back to reap their rewards, usually means 50 other freindlies are hovering around like prisoners on a fat chick
-
so if I shoot a guy whos still wheels down, he doesnt get a kill recorded against him.
do I get my ammo back?
I don't think it would still be wheels down. I think it would be wheels down on concrete.
-
I don't think it would still be wheels down. I think it would be wheels down on concrete.
Again, on whose front end?
+1 on the scoring -1 on the perks comment. Perks are an ingenious method to reward you MORE for taking the harder route.
I agree 100% that you reward people for being sissys, then sissys is what you get.
For the statement that "vulching is your reward for all your hard work". :lol :lol :rofl . YOU DO KNOW that the reason these guys are vulching is by chance and if you get that chance is because some lemming died 300 times deacking the feild. Funny because the majority of time, by the time the guys actually "doing the work" get to come back to reap their rewards, usually means 50 other freindlies are hovering around like prisoners on a fat chick
If I have enough speed, I will vulch regardless of whether the ack is up or not, just to see if I can survive :rock
-
How about you get ranked #1 this camp to demonstrate how it's not challenging or competitive? :devil
In fighter mode?
I'll bet I could make top 5 next tour if I tried. It would require much gaminess and many peeps whith whom I have a rapore with would not appreciate being "GAMED" by me, just saying ;)
So the risk of damaging some friendships would require a wager! ''Any thoughts?
The challenge to GAMINESS is, Time to do it and constant management of the mode you are in and finding the "sweet" action ;)
JUGgler
-
+1 on the scoring -1 on the perks comment. Perks are an ingenious method to reward you MORE for taking the harder route.
I agree 100% that you reward people for being sissys, then sissys is what you get.
For the statement that "vulching is your reward for all your hard work". :lol :lol :rofl . YOU DO KNOW that the reason these guys are vulching is by chance and if you get that chance is because some lemming died 300 times deacking the feild. Funny because the majority of time, by the time the guys actually "doing the work" get to come back to reap their rewards, usually means 50 other freindlies are hovering around like prisoners on a fat chick
I agree completely on the perks.
Otherwise, I just wanted to say that I love the mental imagery of a gang of prisoners enjoying a fat chick.
My guess: The fat chick digs it too - but here the analogy breaks down, since it's not very fun to try to up from a capped field. Why do people do it?
Socrates said analogy is not truth. If it were, they'd be upping because they enjoy getting ganged like a fat chick in a prison yard.
One thing's certain in this analogy... the prisoners are demonstrating their skill and prowess, not mindlessly working over some needy and pathetic gloryhole.
-
I still dont understand what problem this change would solve ... :headscratch:
-
I still dont understand what problem this change would solve ... :headscratch:
some people vultch to be score hores,etc.
take away the ability of them scoring points&a kill when they shoot a plane on the runway and there is a chance they will atleast wait till the plane is in the air until they start shooting.
-
some people vultch to be score hores,etc.
take away the ability of them scoring points&a kill when they shoot a plane on the runway and there is a chance they will atleast wait till the plane is in the air until they start shooting.
It really is this simple!
Also this change would encourage more peeps to keep trying to up :aok and that is a good thing for all
Those 20 cons above the field have nothing to do, make it so I can get "wheels up" and I guarantee they'll have something to do :aok
JUGgler
-
Something being simple in your mind is not the same as it being simple in reality.
If you think you can vulch your way to a #1 ranking go for it. :devil
-
Also this change would encourage more peeps to keep trying to up :aok and that is a good thing for all
Those 20 cons above the field have nothing to do, make it so I can get "wheels up" and I guarantee they'll have something to do :aok
so you want more people upping, then getting shot down at 150mph 10ft off the ground? sounds like a system to try to provide more easy kills to the side capping the field, not less.
-
some people vultch to be score hores,etc.
take away the ability of them scoring points&a kill when they shoot a plane on the runway and there is a chance they will atleast wait till the plane is in the air until they start shooting.
I don't do it for score or perks, I do it for fun. So how do we address that? :headscratch:
-
I don't do it for score or perks, I do it for fun. So how do we address that? :headscratch:
We ban you under all aliases - for good sportsmanship and making too much sense.
-
so you want more people upping, then getting shot down at 150mph 10ft off the ground? sounds like a system to try to provide more easy kills to the side capping the field, not less.
:devil
-
so you want more people upping, then getting shot down at 150mph 10ft off the ground? sounds like a system to try to provide more easy kills to the side capping the field, not less.
Exactly. There is no realistic "solution". The proposed solution merely displaces the behavior slightly.
Of course, RW, you could never get vulched. I was going to follow this with, "Just ask Johannes Steinhof", but, of course, he wasn't vulched, just horribly burned from a take-off accident. Never mind the example, for vulching was common and accepted practice and a completely legit way to destroy an Air Force on the ground.
If you really wanted to change the behavior, the thing to do would be to put the fear of God into those stupid enough to take off into the teeth of a cap - some rule like:
GET VULCHED AND LOSE YOUR POIKIES, SUCKAH.
Then the prison yard wouldn't be so full of eager gangbangers since the fat chicks wouldn't be coming out for armloads of hard salami.
-
how are perks like this? if I take a val or an A6M2 up agianst 5 F4U's P51's or other "Uber" planes, and shoot them all down, you dont think that warrants 50 or 60 perks? :devil
Yes that's true. What I meant was that a pack of K4s attacking a single mustang will yield the same perk point to the winner as a single K4 taking on a pack of Mustangs. So Perk system could be improved by similar thinking also. Sorry for that confusion. :salute
-
We ban you under all aliases - for good sportsmanship and making too much sense.
Hey Pj,
Haven't seen you around here for a while. Hope all is well.
Making sense gets you shot around here... :uhoh
:salute
Way
-
I don't do it for score or perks, I do it for fun. So how do we address that? :headscratch:
i was gonna say "except for the people that dont care about there score, dont know what we can do about them" but decided not too :lol
-
Hey Pj,
Haven't seen you around here for a while. Hope all is well.
Making sense gets you shot around here... :uhoh
:salute
Way
I got sucked into the black hole of MTW for a couple of months. I was still making FSO even then. I'm back now.
-
Yeah, it's a great idea..... Let's protect the silly people who up from a capped field and than want to moan & groan about it.
Typical American attitude.... Protect the retarded people! :aok
Just wow. Yes that certainly is my outlook, protecting those who are unable to protect themselves. Not in the game however but your comment wasn't about the game either, it kinda maybe looked like a political comment, sorta.
-
:bhead
:rolleyes:
JUGgler
-
So why do you vulch at all? If it's no big deal on the recieving end, what's the enjoyment on the shooting end?
Your fear is that once up the pilot taking off is better then you? That's all I can figure from the last part of your comment.
Gotta stop that peelot from getting to town and killing that goon or one of those troops entering the map room..
-
I don't do it for score or perks, I do it for fun. So how do we address that? :headscratch:
Good answer.. :salute
-
The solution may be technically impractical. But I still like the sentiment. A cloud of red guys below, a plunging dive from altitude like a hawk down upon a flock of pigeons, a quick calculation of deflection and your target falls...that is a sport. Like shooting clays. Vulching though...that is like putting the clay pigeon on the ground, walking up, and blowing it away at point blank range.
-
Gotta stop that peelot from getting to town and killing that goon or one of those troops entering the map room..
Yes...and I can't tell you how many times I've wished I could shoot a goon with a green icon...or buffs for that matter. Dammit, don't cut off my steady stream of victims!
-
Just wow. Yes that certainly is my outlook, protecting those who are unable to protect themselves. Not in the game however but your comment wasn't about the game either, it kinda maybe looked like a political comment, sorta.
Gotta side with Llogann here... You can protect defenseless but there's little use in protecting stupid, which I guess you could call a subset. Now, you could protect certain categories of stupid. You'd probably do so when it stupid and blameless intersect. OTOH, I don't think you want to protect willfully stupid, as that just encourages more of the same.
It's not so much political as it is economic - see First Law, aka: Incentives Matter. Forget that and lose all.
-
so you want more people upping, then getting shot down at 150mph 10ft off the ground? sounds like a system to try to provide more easy kills to the side capping the field, not less.
Dont see how this would be eaiser than 2 guys circling above watching the poor guy start his engine and get blasted. You also have the option and if you had time to kill that you up on the runway and .ef as they start to shoot :lol Its like a drunken prom date that wont put out :P
-
how about....
if someone is vultched, it only counts as an assist for the vultcher? and they only get half (or a fraction) of the points for it.
and at a field, if there is a certain number of deaths on the runway recorded, it will shorten the downtime of the ack(if its down) and increase the damage a little of the ack if its still up?
maybe installing low-alt manned flak? or possably creating a "hidden" flak camp postioned somewheres close to the base,with manned flak guns that can be used to try to shoot down the hovering vultchers above the base when the ack is down?
and also giving us the choice of which fighter hanger we want to spawn out of.
just some thoughts.
-
Gotta side with Llogann here... You can protect defenseless but there's little use in protecting stupid, which I guess you could call a subset. Now, you could protect certain categories of stupid. You'd probably do so when it stupid and blameless intersect. OTOH, I don't think you want to protect willfully stupid, as that just encourages more of the same.
It's not so much political as it is economic - see First Law, aka: Incentives Matter. Forget that and lose all.
I think the wheels down is idea is the right spirit, but I agree that it doesn't go far enough. With the new "anti-Sissy" scoring system, a low slow plane who just put his wheels up, would still yield very few points for poaching. I would base the score on E-state, numbers, and ENY values for planes within icon range. Low points if you out number, out eny, and out E the bandit. High points for the opposite.
-
I think the wheels down is idea is the right spirit, but I agree that it doesn't go far enough. With the new "anti-Sissy" scoring system, a low slow plane who just put his wheels up, would still yield very few points for poaching. I would base the score on E-state, numbers, and ENY values for planes within icon range. Low points if you out number, out eny, and out E the bandit. High points for the opposite.
It's an interesting idea but it implies that youd have to track those state variables at all times. Perhaps one of the AH code community could address the feas osf such an idea.
I still like the idea of penalizing the foolish upper for getting killed. OTOH, your system would add the offestting reqrd that, should he succeed from such a dubious starting point, he'd be rewarded.
-
It's an interesting idea but it implies that youd have to track those state variables at all times. Perhaps one of the AH code community could address the feas osf such an idea.
I still like the idea of penalizing the foolish upper for getting killed. OTOH, your system would add the offestting reqrd that, should he succeed from such a dubious starting point, he'd be rewarded.
There was several people that came up with localized eny which meant that you get more perks if you approached more baddies than goodies. Honestly this should be considered in the score/rank system as this would be a true testament to ones ability to attain skill rather than just patience in playing the game. Not knocking at all what it takes to get a good score, but lets be honest..most that strive for a good score are not that fun to engage versus the ones that take the plunge and fight you even when outnumbered
-
It's an interesting idea but it implies that youd have to track those state variables at all times. Perhaps one of the AH code community could address the feas osf such an idea.
I still like the idea of penalizing the foolish upper for getting killed. OTOH, your system would add the offestting reqrd that, should he succeed from such a dubious starting point, he'd be rewarded.
I think it's possible, even easy. The film viewer has all the info required. All you would need is one line of code that calculated your running SA [situational advantage] every 10 or 100 miliseconds. Don't think that's a lot of over heads. The real issue is the logic of what constitutes a low or high score at given point in time. The time is critical.
Example. I see a high bandit and engage him, suck him into a fight, eventually getting him to blead of his speed until I turn the tables and kill him. A the time of the kill, our e-states may be equal, or even better for me, but I should get high points for that kind of kill. So the logic would need to look at SA over time with more points going to positive slopes [SA starting out bad and getting better over the time] and low scores going to flat SA over time [ I dove on AFK pilot and vulched him]. Negative slope [I started with more E but manuvered on to his 6 and blead E to equal and killed him, yeilds something in the middle. It's getting the algorithm around slope-to-kill and the time constant over which to calculate the slope that needs regression. I would use film of engagements to calculate the algorythm, and them compare to experts who subjectively evaluate the situations for "sissyness" and merit, then correlate to the subjective evaluations.
Is there a way to dump the plane/speed/alt info from the film viewer to a .csv file?
-
No, please! Don't stop! The popcorn is all warmed up. This is hilarious!
-
No, please! Don't stop! The popcorn is all warmed up. This is hilarious!
hillarious in what way Krusty?
-
There was several people that came up with localized eny which meant that you get more perks if you approached more baddies than goodies. Honestly this should be considered in the score/rank system as this would be a true testament to ones ability to attain skill rather than just patience in playing the game. Not knocking at all what it takes to get a good score, but lets be honest..most that strive for a good score are not that fun to engage versus the ones that take the plunge and fight you even when outnumbered
<--- Plunger, yes!
Stupid, NO <-- not directed toward you tralfz
The offhanded, indirect insults of "stupid" are not required. The 2nd loser "name calls", the 1st loser does it indirectly ;)
My style is obviously different than yours. My thoughts are sound, possibly impractical but sound :salute
There are some who share my view, obviously most do not!
:salute
JUGgler
-
In the ridiculousness of your suggestions (if that's even a word -- if not you have all just coined it as a new word).
-
In the ridiculousness of your suggestions (if that's even a word -- if not you have all just coined it as a new word).
Ridiculous in what way? That a situational advantage metric could not be developed, or that one should matter?
-
Ridiculous in what way? That a situational advantage metric could not be developed, or that one should matter?
Nevermind krusty vink, he is awesome ;)
JUGgler
-
:headscratch: would having a flak camp be so bad? i mean some airfields in ww2 had them, so it wouldnt be very inaccurate.
could have an ackfield hidden somewheres around the base (but not on it). camoflaged, that cannot be used when ack is up. but when ack goes down the camoflage is pulled off and the camps location is exposed, along with the flak guns being operational. they could then be manned and open fire on the vultchers flying above the base, then the bases pilots would have enough time to take off while all enemy planes are trying to dodge the flak above the field.
maybe 3-5 flak guns per camp?
-
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,305198.msg3927062.html#msg3927062
Repsonses from this thread show the formula for the idea of localized eny. Keep in mind this would only figure in numbers and NOT tactical adavantage. Ive been wishing something like this be implimented in the game in hopes of swaying people to play less of an AIRQUAKE style of play.
Honestly, I accept the fact that the MA's mantra is all for the hordes. Its always going to be that way. 99% of the guys that fly in there fly for either the real estate game or by getting you in the tower the fastest way possible. Few and far between players like the dance and giving incentive to guys that fight at disadvantages in turn getting more talent in the arenas
-
<--- Plunger, yes!
Stupid, NO <-- not directed toward you tralfz
The offhanded, indirect insults of "stupid" are not required. The 2nd loser "name calls", the 1st loser does it indirectly ;)
My style is obviously different than yours. My thoughts are sound, possibly impractical but sound :salute
There are some who share my view, obviously most do not!
:salute
JUGgler
I completly agree with you on this one Jug. Not sure what to get out of your response and hope you dont think Im not with ya. Frankly Im surprised at some responses at some here and wonder why they are so agianst it
-
Nevermind krusty vink, he is awesome ;)
JUGgler
I'm wondering if there is critical thinking I missed, and that Krusty can enlighten me on. ;)
-
Absurdly ridiculous that you would recode the ENTIRE game just because you got vulched and it was your own fault.
Beyond ridiculous that you're totally taking a currently objective rule (you get shot somebody kills you) and changing it to benefit you alone. All of a sudden any plane on the ground cannot be killed. What about gear down in flight? Oh yeah, the guy still low and slow, right, so he's can't count now, right?
What next? "I was already engaged! You can't shoot me down!" or "I wasn't looking! No fair!" or "OMG! You snuck up on me when I had rockets selected instead of guns!"
The only final result can be the suggestion that the ONLY kills that count will be the ones where both pilots have aim on each other. In other words, the only kills that are valid are HOs.
THAT is why this is so patently absurd it's hilarious.
-
I'm wondering if there is critical thinking I missed, and that Krusty can enlighten me on. ;)
I honestly believe he likes to debate for the sole sake of debating!
Whether he agrees or not he will disagree just to debate :huh :headscratch:
JUGgler
-
Don't ankle hump. It's unbecoming. Just because somebody disagrees with you doesn't make them contrary or wrong. You alone are not the only one to say whether vulching should be in the rules of this game or not. It affects the entire dynamic of gameplay.
-
I completly agree with you on this one Jug. Not sure what to get out of your response and hope you dont think Im not with ya. Frankly Im surprised at some responses at some here and wonder why they are so agianst it
I too am quite perplexed and should just bow out gracefully! :salute
JUGgler
-
Don't ankle hump. It's unbecoming. Just because somebody disagrees with you doesn't make them contrary or wrong. You alone are not the only one to say whether vulching should be in the rules of this game or not. It affects the entire dynamic of gameplay.
I dont think your reading this the right way and what the OP is suggesting. Im on board with it, but seeing as some people are heated about it,guess just drop it
-
Absurdly ridiculous that you would recode the ENTIRE game just because you got vulched and it was your own fault.
Beyond ridiculous that you're totally taking a currently objective rule (you get shot somebody kills you) and changing it to benefit you alone. All of a sudden any plane on the ground cannot be killed. What about gear down in flight? Oh yeah, the guy still low and slow, right, so he's can't count now, right?
What next? "I was already engaged! You can't shoot me down!" or "I wasn't looking! No fair!" or "OMG! You snuck up on me when I had rockets selected instead of guns!"
The only final result can be the suggestion that the ONLY kills that count will be the ones where both pilots have aim on each other. In other words, the only kills that are valid are HOs.
THAT is why this is so patently absurd it's hilarious.
Well I suspected you'd miss the whole point but now it's official. Score, fun, and Strategy are different elements and motivations in the game. Of course you could still kill a plane on the ground and vulch. If that's a good strategy for taking a field you will benefit strategically. Just not for Score. I thought score didn't matter to you? Then why would you stop vulching if the game made it worth less points? The point of the thread is that if there are those who's behavior and play are motivated by for score, then the scoring system, which is artificial and arbitrary in it's current formulation, could be modified to encourage more fun game play.
It's FUN to think of how that could be accomplished.
With so much game knowlege Krusty, why not engage in the discussion of how to do it? :salute
The proposal I threw out is a kernal or draft idea. I think is the basis for something that could work. It is far from fully developed.
P.S. I also don't think the ENTIRE game would need to be re-written. In fact I think an add on line or two of code would do just fine.
-
why not engage in the discussion of how to do it?
well personally I still dont understand what "it" is, and why we would want to achieve "it". :headscratch:
-
My style is obviously different than yours. My thoughts are sound, possibly impractical but sound :salute
There are some who share my view, obviously most do not!
:salute
JUGgler
Most people derive their view from "authority" and what the status quo is. This is a sad societal affliction in issues far more important than our silly game! :D
-
In the spirit of my hero "ack-ack".....
You have the DA for this Politicaly Correct Nonsense or, up from another feild if you don't want to be vulched.
-
In the spirit of my hero "ack-ack".....
You have the DA for this Politicaly Correct Nonsense or, up from another feild if you don't want to be vulched.
I don't worry about ME being vulched. I worry about going to a field, only to find that the victim supply has dried up because my fellow green guys cut down the giving tree by either completely suppressing any hope uppers have of even getting airborne or outright toolshedding the place.
-
Means the life span of that particular fight has run its course exactly like every dynamic system in this universe does.
Beginning --- Middle --- End
Pick a new fight, which by the way takes time. You have to paitiently wait for the part in the drama you wanted perpetuated to unfold again for it's breif moment on stage for you to enjoy.
The PC mentality attempts to control others actions to perpetuate ones own feelings of how the universe "should" work. As this particular flavor of human being beleives it's in control of it's environment, so is qualifyed under the guise of "good intentions" to assist others to control thier conduct in favor of it's feelings.
Go start another fight or take your right minded freinds to the DA and Uber fest it "your way, Franky boy". To the moon baby, "the right way"......
Hello Nancy, how's the seats on United first class these days?
-
Well I suspected you'd miss the whole point but now it's official. Score, fun, and Strategy are different elements and motivations in the game. Of course you could still kill a plane on the ground and vulch. If that's a good strategy for taking a field you will benefit strategically. Just not for Score. I thought score didn't matter to you? Then why would you stop vulching if the game made it worth less points? The point of the thread is that if there are those who's behavior and play are motivated by for score, then the scoring system, which is artificial and arbitrary in it's current formulation, could be modified to encourage more fun game play.
It's FUN to think of how that could be accomplished.
With so much game knowlege Krusty, why not engage in the discussion of how to do it? :salute
The proposal I threw out is a kernal or draft idea. I think is the basis for something that could work. It is far from fully developed.
P.S. I also don't think the ENTIRE game would need to be re-written. In fact I think an add on line or two of code would do just fine.
The scoring system is artificial and arbitrary because it just tracks how many planes you shot down, how accurately you shot, and how quickly you killed them? (I suppose that's a reflection of Hitech and Pyro's relative lack of experience with online flight sims and knowledge of historical air combat.) The Vinkometer you propose would instead show the true awesomeness of certain pilots who are currently overshadowed by sissy pilots with better rankings? And human nature and gameplay would improve as a result?
I can't wait. :x
While we wait for the 2 lines of code to be written maybe we could just have a dueling ladder or something. :D
-
if you really want the credit..you are just going have to be "less" fat and lazy for it and give them just a little chance.
warfare is never gonna be fair, not even in a video game like AH2. you give your opponent 1 chance, 1 chance at all then it will most likely 9 times out of 10 backfire on you. never give your opponents any chance what so ever. its bad enough radar give people the chance to warn the enemy. im not gonna say take it out becuase i do love a bit of a challange but complaining about vulching isnt what you should be complaining about at all.
-
warfare is never gonna be fair, not even in a video game like AH2. you give your opponent 1 chance, 1 chance at all then it will most likely 9 times out of 10 backfire on you. never give your opponents any chance what so ever. its bad enough radar give people the chance to warn the enemy. im not gonna say take it out becuase i do love a bit of a challange but complaining about vulching isnt what you should be complaining about at all.
For the record I am not complaining about vulching. Its part of the game and yes..I agree, you dont want to get vulched, up from the other 1000 feilds on the map.
From what I got from the OP, it wasnt his intent to stop vulching, but to give more ppl incentive to up off a capped feild.
Regarding your view on complete conquest, if thats what your playing for..then more power to you. Lemme remind you though that we are not in war, the red icons are not the enemies, Its prob some fat kid behind a joystick :P Dont take this game so seriously
-
it wasnt his intent to stop vulching, but to give more ppl incentive to up off a capped feild.
thats how I read it: a wish* for more easy kills on the occasions that a field is deacked and capped ...
edit: * not saying that was the intent, but its certainly a consequence.
-
Wasn't it some political philosopher that said, "Vulching is the opiate for the masses" and didn't some English playright penned in one of his famous plays:
"To vulch, or not to vulch: that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The bullets and bombs of outrageous vulches,
Or to take arms against and whine a sea of troubles"
Or as one game developer stated, "Vulching is the reward".
ack-ack
-
I vote Ack-Ack moderator in chief.
Mikey doesn't like anyone.......
-
all im saying is you should post topics on the forums about vulching. it happends deal with it, and al that i said was a way aof putting things.and yes i do play for conquest, there nothing else going for this game to be honest. i mean i use to play it for fun but with kids playing this game, well then theres no fun in it anymore so i just play to win now. anyways my point is there nothing you can do about vulching even if you dont get a kill for it people are still going to do it so why bother posting it on the forums in HTC really knows that changing this wont stop the vulching. just deal with it. i dont come on her whine about vulching, becuase thats what you guys are doing. posting topics like these and agreeing with them even though that probrably some of you if not all have pick off people when they try to take off. its not something bad its just what you do to keep them from attacking you or your buddies. so no this wish of juglers shouldnt be added or asked for, becuase HTC most likely wont do anything or it will probrably make alot of people leave.
-
I think it's possible, even easy. The film viewer has all the info required. All you would need is one line of code that calculated your running SA [situational advantage] every 10 or 100 miliseconds. Don't think that's a lot of over heads. The real issue is the logic of what constitutes a low or high score at given point in time. The time is critical.
Example. I see a high bandit and engage him, suck him into a fight, eventually getting him to blead of his speed until I turn the tables and kill him. A the time of the kill, our e-states may be equal, or even better for me, but I should get high points for that kind of kill. So the logic would need to look at SA over time with more points going to positive slopes [SA starting out bad and getting better over the time] and low scores going to flat SA over time [ I dove on AFK pilot and vulched him]. Negative slope [I started with more E but manuvered on to his 6 and blead E to equal and killed him, yeilds something in the middle. It's getting the algorithm around slope-to-kill and the time constant over which to calculate the slope that needs regression. I would use film of engagements to calculate the algorythm, and them compare to experts who subjectively evaluate the situations for "sissyness" and merit, then correlate to the subjective evaluations.
Is there a way to dump the plane/speed/alt info from the film viewer to a .csv file?
Well, you've just raised the ugly specter of ac interactions. In your postulated 1v1 case, the historical state tracking is simple. Now consider 3rd party hotdog "ColonCowboy" (just throwing a handle out there) who comes in and cherry picks the benefit of your e-state clawback. What is the code to do with his historical e-state? If he was low and slow before raping your good work, does he get scored as well as you would've? How does it eval him as having been engaged or not engaged?
We've got a shared employer. My anecdotal experience with software tools says that they start simple but inevitably get very complicated, once they have to account for a global range of eventualities. I'm just throwing one out there. Now consider the explosion in interactivity you'd see in any common furball.
-
The scoring system is artificial and arbitrary because it just tracks how many planes you shot down, how accurately you shot, and how quickly you killed them? (I suppose that's a reflection of Hitech and Pyro's relative lack of experience with online flight sims and knowledge of historical air combat.) The Vinkometer you propose would instead show the true awesomeness of certain pilots who are currently overshadowed by sissy pilots with better rankings? And human nature and gameplay would improve as a result?
I can't wait. :x
While we wait for the 2 lines of code to be written maybe we could just have a dueling ladder or something. :D
Exactly! Your sarcasm on the current scoring system makes for good copy, I laughed, but bad analysis. The only objective historically was to kill bad guys. How fancy you did it, or how much fun you had doing it, was irrelivent. In AH, a GAME, the score it to provide a measure that a player tries to excel in, for the sake of creating more competition and braggin rights among players, in the hopes that achievement of such a goal will drive more fun game play.
It is all about incentives. You get what you measure. If you want a more fun game, introduce metrics that reward fun game play. Want a boring game? Do the opposite. Sissy flying is boring. THe current metrics reward and promote sissy flying.
Not sure I understand the case for sissy flying, but if there's good critical thinking out there that I've missed, please lay it on me. HAven't heard it yet.
:salute
-
I'm glad you took that as it was intended. On a more serious note, if the rationale for your idea requires you to insult other players because their game play choices don't match yours, then you probably don't have a good idea. It's more likely that you're just airing your prejudices. I used to have a narrower view of what was right and proper in a combat flight sim but I've come to appreciate the clash of competing agendas. I believe it keeps the game more interesting as the years go by. :old:
-
Vinkman, your problem is that you're trying to present an objective argument as if you're only considering the facts, but the words and the ideas behind them are totally subjective.
-
Not sure I understand the case for sissy flying, but if there's good critical thinking out there that I've missed, please lay it on me. HAven't heard it yet.
:salute
I'll bite on this one. What is one man's "sissy flying" is just another man's sound tactical planning. For example, when hispd boom and zooms from fast and high in his perked Tempest, is his skill less or more than the guy who fails to plan such that he has an advantageous e-state when he arrives on-scene?
I have to work with this one constantly since I'm using the g-14 constantly lately (and with gondos). I never want to get caught low and slow and thus have to plan. Your proposed metric rewards a good dogfighter but a bad tactician. Consider Hartmann's "rules", for they are "sissy flying" writ large. Further, the proposed metric distorts the "real world" aspect of the game by failing to reward that which was doubtless of salient import to the RW pilot ; killing with minimal risk. To me, losing that aspect of the game would make it less fun.
OTOH, you could vary the rules by Arena. The Vinkometer looks tuned to more like a DA.
-
Vinkman, your problem is that you're trying to present an objective argument as if you're only considering the facts, but the words and the ideas behind them are totally subjective.
This seems true enough if I'm trying to come up with metric to determine the better pilot. But all we really want is to have metrics that reward people for fun play. I think fun is the objective.
and to PJ_Godzilla's point.
Come on, Hartmann? He only one life to give, and put it on the line everytime he went up. that's never sissy flying.
But in AH sissy flying wastes time, and is boring. Ask this question: If everyone got "smart" and flew in a self preservating way, would the game be any fun? 400 guys in P-51Ds all at max alt looking for someone flying with their eyes closed. That doesn't sound like fun for anyone. I put forth the idea that those sissy flyers can only do what they do, because others choose to dog fight each other. Without dogfighting there wouldn't be any targets for sissy flyers, so the game wouldn't be any fun for anyone...the game would colapse.
People will always choose their strategies, and this scroring idea doesn't try to adress all the reasons people fly the way they do. It only adresses those who fly for score. I think it's counter productive to have a scoring system that encourages people to fly like sissy's and call it smart. It's only "smart" flying because their objective is to get a high score. So I'm proposing change the scoring system so that smart flying is where one succeeds in more challenging situations.
It is my opinion that will make the game more fun for everyone, and hence worth trying to attempt.
And always fun to discuss. :salute
-
While fun is "the objective" (noun), it is by no means in any way "objective" (adj.).
P.S. Your comment "wastes time" makes no sense either. The entire game is a waste of time. Wasting time is fun in and of itself. I take great joy in 45-minute sorties where I engage and disengage half a dozen times but keep looking for the next contact. If I'm damaged I don't bail. I take my wounded ride all the way back to a field and try my darndest to land her. Guess what? If I can't land on the first pass, I don't just auger. I make another pass. Even if I have no kills. I don't just alt-F4 and log back in because it's faster. We don't have instant-spawn quake arenas. This game is NOT about fastest time-to-action. Otherwise we'd spawn directly behind the nearest enemy, bail out as soon as we got the kill, and respawn directly behind the next enemy.
Your ideas do not lend to good gameplay.
-
I'd just like to echo PJ's comments. You're forcing your OWN ideas of what is a "good pilot" and insulting all others that don't fit your criteria. You're openly insulting them. You're slapping the majority of the community in the face. Especially with comments like "the ONLY reason you fly like that is because you only think of score" and so forth.
-
This seems true enough if I'm trying to come up with metric to determine the better pilot. But all we really want is to have metrics that reward people for fun play. I think fun is the objective.
and to PJ_Godzilla's point.
Come on, Hartmann? He only one life to give, and put it on the line everytime he went up. that's never sissy flying.
For some of us, playing as if this were real is half the appeal. that's why I fly FSO. Clearly, there is no real risk, but the key to enjoying theater is to willingly suspend disbelief. More on this point - If it were just about dogfighting and not tactics and historical realities, I probably wouldn't bother with AH. A big part of the reason I do is for realism and immersion in a world I could never otherwise experience. That's a big part of what separates this from fantasy/arcade.
To your other point, certainly your metrics will encourage a type of flying - but why this one is any more valid still escapes me.
See my other post on interactivity also. I wanted to get your response to the multi/multi confounding issue such a system would face.
-
I'm glad you took that as it was intended. On a more serious note, if the rationale for your idea requires you to insult other players because their game play choices don't match yours, then you probably don't have a good idea. It's more likely that you're just airing your prejudices. I used to have a narrower view of what was right and proper in a combat flight sim but I've come to appreciate the clash of competing agendas. I believe it keeps the game more interesting as the years go by. :old:
FLS, :salute
If you are refering to my use of the term "sissy flying" as an insult, then you are focused on the wrong thing. I'm not mad at people because they make it hard for me to kill them. I'm really OK with people fighting the way they want. I guess I'm asking you to ask yourself, whether they are fighting the way they want, or if what they want is a high score? If they want a high score, than changing the scoring system won't upset them, they will just figure out how to fly to get a high score in the new system. If they are flying to emulate the kill ratio of a Hartmann or to simulate the exploits of a different historical figure then, again, changing the score/rank system won't bother them either.
But it would take away the rant that folks who fly like that are "score potatos" since they wouldn't achieve top scores and rankings for flying that way.
I really think everybody wins.
-
I'd just like to echo PJ's comments. You're forcing your OWN ideas of what is a "good pilot" and insulting all others that don't fit your criteria. You're openly insulting them. You're slapping the majority of the community in the face. Especially with comments like "the ONLY reason you fly like that is because you only think of score" and so forth.
Come on Krusty, read the posts. I'm not saying that.
-
For some of us, playing as if this were real is half the appeal. that's why I fly FSO. Clearly, there is no real risk, but the key to enjoying theater is to willingly suspend disbelief. More on this point - If it were just about dogfighting and not tactics and historical realities, I probably wouldn't bother with AH. A big part of the reason I do is for realism and immersion in a world I could never otherwise experience. That's a big part of what separates this from fantasy/arcade.
To your other point, certainly your metrics will encourage a type of flying - but why this one is any more valid still escapes me.
Now we're getting close. I don't think one is more valid, I think one creates more quality interaction between participants. Quality defines as "Both parties had a lot of fun"
See my other post on interactivity also. I wanted to get your response to the multi/multi confounding issue such a system would face.
Well, I have been formulating and haven't posted the whole formulae. But sometimes seeming complex things break down to very simple common denominators. Will it be perfect in its ability to rank challening from easy? Nope. Will it be better the current plane eny only system? I think it will be a ton better.
-
If you don't mean "sissy" as an insult why use it? You know it's pejorative. If everybody in the main arenas flew historically or "smart" it wouldn't result in no action. It would cause an evolution as people adapted to the different behavior. Just look at the scenarios. There is smart historical flying with a lot of action.
-
Well, I have been formulating and haven't posted the whole formulae. But sometimes seeming complex things break down to very simple common denominators. Will it be perfect in its ability to rank challening from easy? Nope. Will it be better the current plane eny only system? I think it will be a ton better.
Here I was referring to the issue of the 1v1 as compared to the furball. The historical state scoring looks very complicated to me once you get into a multi-interactive scenario. Consider the example where a fellow upper picks off the kill you e-bled to parity. Doe she get the same score you would've since his e-state and yours are historically virtually identical? What about a 10v10 furball where you're engaging multiple foes intermittently.? I see that as a major hurdle to any type of dynamic scoring system. 1 on 1, the tracking is easy. In the furball, you've got pickers dropping and uppers fighting up. Their historical states are probably less significant than their snapshot gunnery under such a scenario. Hell, I recall a furball where I cross-pinged an F6F pilot out of his seat with about 4 rounds of D-9 cowl gun. It was unbelievably lucky.
I guess I'd like to see such a system applied to perks more than rank. Why? Because perk scores are already weighted. The objective kill score and ratios, though, are something that will have to be retained regardless. Why? Because k/d is a gold standard people won't be abandoning soon. Any "other" metrics would still need to be "and" instead of "or".
-
If Hitech had never introduced a scoring system then this whizz fest would be about your loss of perk points.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This same arugument comes around every year about the time a new crop of 18-36 month "serious players" decide the game wll be a better place for everyone because now they is experienced in the "Way of Aces High Mysteries" and is a proslitisin. One of you always has this last straw moment in the MA about those unanointed casual gamers who just don't get the true essence of Aces High.
ACK-ACK and Krusty have been telling them the same thing for about 10 years now. It's the MA. You don't like it go play in the DA with your six freinds. So,,, you PC minded real players can have the MA operating the way you think the universe in AH should run, you want HTC to kill its golden goose by coproliteing on the larger block of players who pay it's bills? And the same answers get thrown back by you guys: Well,,in that case this game has become a dog and I'll be dancing on HTC's grave. Just you wait and see......
So how are you going to convice Hitech the majority of his customers having fun is bad for business when he tallys his profit margin against that? You do realise this post pretty much is a veiled global insult, something like labeling them "ruinists" to the general active MA player base? This is the problem with being Politicaly Correct. First you have to convince the majority to beleive they are some how wrong or evil or something with an (ist) on the end of it to successfully control their conduct through shame.
So why not be up front with your label and convice 98% of us we can't have fun the way we see fit for our $14.95 within HTC's rules?
-
If Hitech had never introduced a scoring system then this whizz fest would be about your loss of perk points.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This same arugument comes around every year about the time a new crop of 18-36 month "serious players" decide the game wll be a better place for everyone because now they is experienced in the "Way of Aces High Mysteries" and is a proslitisin. One of you always has this last straw moment in the MA about those unanointed casual gamers who just don't get the true essence of Aces High.
ACK-ACK and Krusty have been telling them the same thing for about 10 years now. It's the MA. You don't like it go play in the DA with your six freinds. So,,, you PC minded real players can have the MA operating the way you think the universe in AH should run, you want HTC to kill its golden goose by coproliteing on the larger block of players who pay it's bills? And the same answers get thrown back by you guys: Well,,in that case this game has become a dog and I'll be dancing on HTC's grave. Just you wait and see......
So how are you going to convice Hitech the majority of his customers having fun is bad for business when he tallys his profit margin against that? You do realise this post pretty much is a veiled global insult, something like labeling them "ruinists" to the general active MA player base? This is the problem with being Politicaly Correct. First you have to convince the majority to beleive they are some how wrong or evil or something with an (ist) on the end of it to successfully control their conduct through shame.
So why not be up front with your label and convice 98% of us we can't have fun the way we see fit for our $14.95 within HTC's rules?
good point, i dont pay good hard earned money just to play a dull boing game. people do need to stop whining about this though, its not really a big deal. i mean wow i shot your plane up before you took off whoopdeedoo. your just gonna take off again.
-
If Hitech had never introduced a scoring system then this whizz fest would be about your loss of perk points.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This same arugument comes around every year about the time a new crop of 18-36 month "serious players" decide the game wll be a better place for everyone because now they is experienced in the "Way of Aces High Mysteries" and is a proslitisin. One of you always has this last straw moment in the MA about those unanointed casual gamers who just don't get the true essence of Aces High.
ACK-ACK and Krusty have been telling them the same thing for about 10 years now. It's the MA. You don't like it go play in the DA with your six freinds. So,,, you PC minded real players can have the MA operating the way you think the universe in AH should run, you want HTC to kill its golden goose by coproliteing on the larger block of players who pay it's bills? And the same answers get thrown back by you guys: Well,,in that case this game has become a dog and I'll be dancing on HTC's grave. Just you wait and see......
So how are you going to convice Hitech the majority of his customers having fun is bad for business when he tallys his profit margin against that? You do realise this post pretty much is a veiled global insult, something like labeling them "ruinists" to the general active MA player base? This is the problem with being Politicaly Correct. First you have to convince the majority to beleive they are some how wrong or evil or something with an (ist) on the end of it to successfully control their conduct through shame.
So why not be up front with your label and convice 98% of us we can't have fun the way we see fit for our $14.95 within HTC's rules?
Hmm. I don't know where to start. So I'll just say that game has changed dramatically over ten years in an effort to tune it and make it better for all players. This would seem to render your whole premise that it was pefected years ago, and needs no tweaking, as an argument against change, not much of an argument at all.
-
Here I was referring to the issue of the 1v1 as compared to the furball. The historical state scoring looks very complicated to me once you get into a multi-interactive scenario. Consider the example where a fellow upper picks off the kill you e-bled to parity. Doe she get the same score you would've since his e-state and yours are historically virtually identical? What about a 10v10 furball where you're engaging multiple foes intermittently.? I see that as a major hurdle to any type of dynamic scoring system. 1 on 1, the tracking is easy. In the furball, you've got pickers dropping and uppers fighting up. Their historical states are probably less significant than their snapshot gunnery under such a scenario. Hell, I recall a furball where I cross-pinged an F6F pilot out of his seat with about 4 rounds of D-9 cowl gun. It was unbelievably lucky.
I guess I'd like to see such a system applied to perks more than rank. Why? Because perk scores are already weighted. The objective kill score and ratios, though, are something that will have to be retained regardless. Why? Because k/d is a gold standard people won't be abandoning soon. Any "other" metrics would still need to be "and" instead of "or".
I think order can come from the kaos, but I'm an optimist. I agree with you that adding, rather replacing is the way to start. If it adds value it will gain in credibility. Whether it becomes a factor in Rank or Perks or both can be determined later. I will try to see what I can extract from a Film file in the way of data. I will use that as a basis for some formulations. It may end up being too hard to make sense of it, but where's the fun in NOT trying? :salute
-
I never infered it was perfected. Experience over time has shown HTC makes money from the largest number of players being happy. When they decide a change needs to happen it's dramtic and extream. Good or bad. But it's when they decide.
You gents are offering an arugument based solely on your small caudre is in some way elevated over the general ranks. Subsiquently you beleive as a consensus you collectivly have the ability to observe they are the rank and file ( something-ists) playing the game with a wrong headed approach impacting your self elevated sense of how the MA universe should function.
Last two times a single player convinced HTC to change the game one was Lusch's presentation of his long term collected data which helped HTC decide on the off hours arena. I suspect it worked for HTC's bottom line. The other was Baumer using Angular Mil math to present a need to standardise the FOV for all fighter gunsights. These things benifited everyone equaly. Not Lusch or Baumer indivigualy over the player base.
What you are doing is trying to convice HTC to modify the majority of MA players conduct so the game will be played in a manner more to your specific liking. Solely based on the concept that your small cuadre knows better than the majority rank and file how the MA game should be played. No data, no collected interviews with a broad cross section of the actual player base. Just your offended sense and feelings about Aces High game play. That's called PC hubris and only benifits yourself and handfull of like minded individuals.
Why don't you and your six freinds wait for HTC to release the new player based hosted arenas where you can be the Captain of your own mini AH reality
-
LOL speaking of a lot of high and mighty folks coming down on old Vinkman!
It's your dime, but he's no more wrong in talking about how he feels about rewarding vulching then any number of the guys in this thread who have complained about this that and the other thing cause it doesn't fit their perception of the game. Think flight models for one. I won't name names, but you know who you are :)
And for you this is war guys. Remember that ground kills were not counted in WW2 outside of the 8th AF who for a time counted them as equal kills because they needed an incentive to get their fighter pilots to go down and strafe as the Luftwaffe wasn't coming up to play. Those guys didn't dream of setting up a vulch pattern over a deacked field. They dreamed of dogfighting. Considering the number of American aces who went down to ack strafing, you can understand why the brass looked for a way to reward the risk.
Since there is no risk in AH, unless your goal is to capture the field, the point in vulching is purely to get your name in lights. Since outside of that one instance, no air forces in WW2 counted ground kills as air to air, then getting rid of credit for them isn't such a dumb argument. If your goal is map conquest, who cares if you get your name in lights, you are doing it for teamwork and strategy. The attaboys for taking your latest cartoon base ought to be reward enough right?
And yes to some of us it is a waste of time. Not all of us have time to spend on long flights to a fight. And no I don't want to hear go to the DA on this. The folks I enjoy BS'ing with are in the MA. Last night was a perfect example. One dar bar on the entire map when I was able to log on. This was at the center isle where naturally one side had taken all the bases but one where they had the vulch pattern on. I saw a vet player land 9 kills twice, to attaboys. He is a far better stick then that, but the goal seemed to be kills in the quickest and easiest fashion, which meant getting guys trying to up to the one fight there was. I ended up calling it a night as there seemed little point in upping as there was no fight.
-
So why do you vulch at all? If it's no big deal on the recieving end, what's the enjoyment on the shooting end?
hit sprites
-
Experience over time has shown HTC makes money from the largest number of players being happy.
That's my goal too.
You gents are offering an arugument based solely on your small caudre is in some way elevated over the general ranks. Subsiquently you beleive as a consensus you collectivly have the ability to observe they are the rank and file ( something-ists) playing the game with a wrong headed approach impacting your self elevated sense of how the MA universe should function.
Not true. My thesis is that players are trading fun flying for Score satisfaction. I'm simply suggesting that if those two atribute were more aligned, it wouldn't have to be atrade off. Then everyone would benefit. This is not about what I think is an "elite" style of fighting vs an inferior style of flying.
Last two times a single player convinced HTC to change the game one was Lusch's presentation of his long term collected data which helped HTC decide on the off hours arena. I suspect it worked for HTC's bottom line. The other was Baumer using Angular Mil math to present a need to standardise the FOV for all fighter gunsights. These things benifited everyone equaly. Not Lusch or Baumer indivigualy over the player base.
So Hitech does listen to player input to help keep his customers happy after evaluating the merit of their idea. That's what I figured, because that makes great business sense.
What you are doing is trying to convice HTC to modify the majority of MA players conduct so the game will be played in a manner more to your specific liking. Solely based on the concept that your small cuadre knows better than the majority rank and file how the MA game should be played. No data, no collected interviews with a broad cross section of the actual player base. Just your offended sense and feelings about Aces High game play. That's called PC hubris and only benifits yourself and handfull of like minded individuals.
No that's not what I'm doing. see above. Discussing ways to improve gameplay is not a condemnation of the game or its programmers. That is quite a leap you make. I'm sure you were on the BBS for AW and WARBIRDS and you called everyone who had an idea about changing the game a whiner. Thank God Dale [HiTech] didn't listen to you. This game exists because of his desire for constant improvement to keep it the best game on the market.
Why don't you and your six freinds wait for HTC to release the new player based hosted arenas where you can be the Captain of your own mini AH reality
In the end my idea may be a bad one. So far only Godzilla has offered aanalysis and critique of the formulation of metric itself. Much appreciated. Too may offer the "You're an arragant Bleep for thinking the game is broken and you know how to fix it." argument. I don't understand why folks come to the discussion board with "Stop the discussion!" Can we focus the discussion on the merits or non-merits of the idea, and not on whether we should be discussing it?
Again your input on how to formulate such a metric would be a lot more valueable than your condemnation of the discussion. Give it a shot. :salute
-
In the end my idea may be a bad one. So far only Godzilla has offered aanalysis and critique of the formulation of metric itself. Much appreciated.
Sure. I always play the ball, not the man. It's a rule that allows those of disparate opinion to work together - and often the tension of differing perspectives can produce something useful. This is especially true when tradeoffs are present, like they are here.
-
Others beside PJ have pointed out the problems with your idea and your presentation. You choose to ignore them.
-
Complaining about being vultched makes me think of someone pissing on an electric fence, getting shocked, doing it again, getting shocked and then being angry at the fence for being energized. :headscratch:
Wouldn't avoid pissing on the fence be the simplest solution? If you have an uncontrollable compulsion to piss on the fence at all costs, perhaps going to the source of the power to shut it down before attempting to piss on the fence may be a solution.
If just pissing in the general direction of the fence is what is important to you, perhaps pissing at the fence from further away would work as the stream will not be close enough to the fence?
Vultching is ONLY possible, if there are targets that insist on presenting themselves to be shot at...
-
Complaining about being vultched makes me think of someone pissing on an electric fence, getting shocked, doing it again, getting shocked and then being angry at the fence for being energized. :headscratch:
Wouldn't avoid pissing on the fence be the simplest solution? If you have an uncontrollable compulsion to piss on the fence at all costs, perhaps going to the source of the power to shut it down before attempting to piss on the fence may be a solution.
If just pissing in the general direction of the fence is what is important to you, perhaps pissing at the fence from further away would work as the stream will not be close enough to the fence?
Vultching is ONLY possible, if there are targets that insist on presenting themselves to be shot at...
The op was not complaining about being vulched, I know this cause the OP is ME. I was merely presenting an idea to encourage more peeps to defend a situation, more peeps= more targets= more fight= more fun IMO.
Don't worry I was not looking to eliminate the vulch all together, just looking to limit it "VOLUNTARILY" from the pavement :salute
You are more than welcome to still vulch me anytime :rock
JUGgler
-
Others beside PJ have pointed out the problems with your idea and your presentation. You choose to ignore them.
Comments on the idea I find constructive would be:
1) How a metric could determine an easy kill from a difficult one.
2) Whether a scoring system that is weighted to provide more points for difficult kills and less for easy ones would effect game play, and how?
Can you quote them? I can't find them.
-
If you don't mean "sissy" as an insult why use it? You know it's pejorative. If everybody in the main arenas flew historically or "smart" it wouldn't result in no action. It would cause an evolution as people adapted to the different behavior. Just look at the scenarios. There is smart historical flying with a lot of action.
OK true. I use the term Sissy because it's a pejorative, and because I want to discredit the idea that avoiding combat is "smart". I never avoid combat, and I don't think I'm stupid. But I see where the use of the term will create an "elitist" idea of who to fly so will stop using it. :salute
-
OK true. I use the term Sissy because it's a pejorative, and because I want to discredit the idea that avoiding combat is "smart". I never avoid combat, and I don't think I'm stupid. But I see where the use of the term will create an "elitist" idea of who to fly so will stop using it. :salute
I understand the wordage you are using Vink, not necessarily the ones that I would use, but I understand. If I was to categorize myself it would lean towards the minimize risk/maximize advantage flying style. Please understand that this does not mean run away. Take for instance last night against the Bishop in Orange. They had a full red dar over a knight V-base in the north. So me and two other Pigs up to get some. I managed to knock two down, squaddies got a few others, but they got taken out eventually as well. So here I am over a friendly V-base, low fuel, no other friendly planes in sight and multiple enemy cons 5+ over my head. Now is it sissy to bait them down and let the Ack soften them up or is it smart? By the way thanks to Juggler for hollering on range to get out there and fight (which I stupidly listened to), 30 seconds later I got pounded into the ground by two high Spits.
anyway I am rambling. What I am getting at is I refuse to give the enemy cons an easy meal, whether I am already in the air or contemplating upping at a capped or near capped field.
:salute
Way
-
Guppy you make the same mistake that Vinkman does. You define other players motivations to support your point. Players vulch for a number of reasons, not just to see their name in lights. The primary reason, I'm guessing, is fun. If the vulchee is the only thing to shoot at you can watch somebody else do it or do it yourself or go somewhere else. Are all valid choices.
Bustr makes a good point. The top sticks don't complain so much. They have adapted to the current system. The players who can spank newbies and would like to be top sticks tend to think of all the reasons why they're not getting all the kills they deserve to get. This isn't directed at anyone in particular, I'm speaking generally. It's human nature for people who perceive themselves as being near the top to bully their perceived inferiors in order to improve their own positions. In Aces High we see this all the time with the complaints about other people's choices in aircraft, tactics, and game play goals. So we have the HOing spitdweeb hoarding runstang etc epithets from everybody who believes that their true greatness will be apparent as soon as HTC fixes Aces High or the players all start playing the right and proper way.
-
I understand the wordage you are using Vink, not necessarily the ones that I would use, but I understand. If I was to categorize myself it would lean towards the minimize risk/maximize advantage flying style. Please understand that this does not mean run away. Take for instance last night against the Bishop in Orange. They had a full red dar over a knight V-base in the north. So me and two other Pigs up to get some. I managed to knock two down, squaddies got a few others, but they got taken out eventually as well. So here I am over a friendly V-base, low fuel, no other friendly planes in sight and multiple enemy cons 5+ over my head. Now is it sissy to bait them down and let the Ack soften them up or is it smart? By the way thanks to Juggler for hollering on range to get out there and fight (which I stupidly listened to), 30 seconds later I got pounded into the ground by two high Spits.
anyway I am rambling. What I am getting at is I refuse to give the enemy cons an easy meal, whether I am already in the air or contemplating upping at a capped or near capped field.
:salute
Way
OOPS :D :rock
JUGgler
-
OK true. I use the term Sissy because it's a pejorative, and because I want to discredit the idea that avoiding combat is "smart". I never avoid combat, and I don't think I'm stupid. But I see where the use of the term will create an "elitist" idea of who to fly so will stop using it. :salute
Discussion of new ideas is more productive when it's civil. :D
-
OOPS :D :rock
JUGgler
Truly an catch 22 moment. I did not think they would let me land safely, and fuel dictated that I land or fly and die, so I said F it and moved out of the Ack. It's what they were waiting for. I dodged a Pony, 1 Spit, then a Hurricane and it was the other two Spits that nailed me.... Ouch
:salute
Way
-
I see alot of people arguing that the gameplay dynamic is what it is because that is exactly how the majority of players like it, as opposed to being like it is because of certain aspects of how the game is structured. I believe that is an unproven contention.
-
Guppy you make the same mistake that Vinkman does. You define other players motivations to support your point. Players vulch for a number of reasons, not just to see their name in lights. The primary reason, I'm guessing, is fun. If the vulchee is the only thing to shoot at you can watch somebody else do it or do it yourself or go somewhere else. Are all valid choices.
Bustr makes a good point. The top sticks don't complain so much. They have adapted to the current system. The players who can spank newbies and would like to be top sticks tend to think of all the reasons why they're not getting all the kills they deserve to get. This isn't directed at anyone in particular, I'm speaking generally. It's human nature for people who perceive themselves as being near the top to bully their perceived inferiors in order to improve their own positions. In Aces High we see this all the time with the complaints about other people's choices in aircraft, tactics, and game play goals. So we have the HOing spitdweeb hoarding runstang etc epithets from everybody who believes that their true greatness will be apparent as soon as HTC fixes Aces High or the players all start playing the right and proper way.
Some of that is true. But it ignores that there is more than one truth, and another truth is that people do adjust their tactics to achieve high scores. If the tactics employed to achieve high scores are detrimental to the overall fun of arena players as a whole, and that could be corrected by enhancing the scoring system, wouldn't you be for it?
Yes flying around at high alt in a perk plane and diving down on dogfighting bandits and picking them, ends the fun for the bandit, and for his competition. 1 guy had fun, two guys didn't. So the picker is not really letting them play their way is he? He is having fun at the expense of other's fun. If that's his personallity fine, it's his $14.95, and I'm ok with that. But what if he picks because that's the "smartest" way to achieve a high score? Then the scoring system is ill designed for promoting fun experiences for all players. An improvement may be possible.
I don't accept the premise the winning is fun and losing is no-fun, so 50% of the arena population is condemed to not having fun. Losing is fun too if quality combat preceeded it. Getting picked, getting vulched, getting ganged, is not quality combat. That is why the losers whine, not because they lost. While those situations cannot be avoided, perhaps the game would profit from scoring system that didn't promote those behaviors. I think it's worth investigating :salute
-
I don't believe people adjust their tactics to get high scores so much as they adjust their tactics to avoid someone getting a high score at the expense of their score being put in the toilet.
Like a vulch...lets say the player actually cares about his fighter score to any extent at all. He can just up in attack mode. But many still don't. Why? I believe it has more to do with not wanting to give some other guy a big name in lights at their expense as a reward for that player doing practically nothing.
Some of that is true. But it ignores that there is more than one truth, and another truth is that people do adjust their tactics to achieve high scores. If the tactics employed to achieve high scores are detrimental to the overall fun of arena players as a whole, and that could be corrected by enhancing the scoring system, wouldn't you be for it?
Yes flying around at high alt in a perk plane and diving down on dogfighting bandits and picking them, ends the fun for the bandit, and for his competition. 1 guy had fun, two guys didn't. So the picker is not really letting them play their way is he? He is having fun at the expense of other's fun. If that's his personallity fine, it's his $14.95, and I'm ok with that. But what if he picks because that's the "smartest" way to achieve a high score? Then the scoring system is ill designed for promoting fun experiences for all players. An improvement may be possible.
I don't accept the premise the winning is fun and losing is no-fun, so 50% of the arena population is condemed to not having fun. Losing is fun too if quality combat preceeded it. Getting picked, getting vulched, getting ganged, is not quality combat. That is why the losers whine, not because they lost. While those situations cannot be avoided, perhaps the game would profit from scoring system that didn't promote those behaviors. I think it's worth investigating :salute
-
So... Now pickers are ruining the game for everybody else?
Vink, you seem more and more to have a very big agenda with this thread, and that agenda is to make others fly the way you want. No picking. No vulching... You seem more and more to have blinders on and only want to see a fight be 1v1 at 5k in similar planes with no E-state difference (or fill in your ideal fight) at the expense of everybody else but you.
It just doesn't happen. Time to move on. There are countless ways to engage in combat in here, and they don't all fit such a narrow definition.
Again, you're trying to present totally subjective opinions as objective facts. It doesn't work.
-
Some of that is true. But it ignores that there is more than one truth, and another truth is that people do adjust their tactics to achieve high scores. If the tactics employed to achieve high scores are detrimental to the overall fun of arena players as a whole, and that could be corrected by enhancing the scoring system, wouldn't you be for it?
Yes flying around at high alt in a perk plane and diving down on dogfighting bandits and picking them, ends the fun for the bandit, and for his competition. 1 guy had fun, two guys didn't. So the picker is not really letting them play their way is he? He is having fun at the expense of other's fun. If that's his personallity fine, it's his $14.95, and I'm ok with that. But what if he picks because that's the "smartest" way to achieve a high score? Then the scoring system is ill designed for promoting fun experiences for all players. An improvement may be possible.
I don't accept the premise the winning is fun and losing is no-fun, so 50% of the arena population is condemed to not having fun. Losing is fun too if quality combat preceeded it. Getting picked, getting vulched, getting ganged, is not quality combat. That is why the losers whine, not because they lost. While those situations cannot be avoided, perhaps the game would profit from scoring system that didn't promote those behaviors. I think it's worth investigating :salute
You are using premises and conditional statements as conclusions. Also your facts and percentages are just made up although I think the 14.95 is reasonably accurate. :D The idea that all players will enjoy losing if the fight changes isn't supported. The notion that all players can avoid frustration by changing the score system isn't supported. It may be true for every player who's outlook is close enough to yours but it ignores the variety of players in AH and the fact the player's goals evolve according to their experience and ability.
-
So... Now pickers are ruining the game for everybody else?
Vink, you seem more and more to have a very big agenda with this thread, and that agenda is to make others fly the way you want. No picking. No vulching... You seem more and more to have blinders on and only want to see a fight be 1v1 at 5k in similar planes with no E-state difference (or fill in your ideal fight) at the expense of everybody else but you.
It just doesn't happen. Time to move on. There are countless ways to engage in combat in here, and they don't all fit such a narrow definition.
Again, you're trying to present totally subjective opinions as objective facts. It doesn't work.
<sigh> Sorry Krusty you just don't seem to be able to think past this "I'm trying make peole fight my way" bias of yours.
-
IMO 2 absolutes stand the test of time in AH
#1- EVERYONE hates being vulched, picked, camped and HOd
#2- EVERYONE looks the otherway when they themselves vulch, pick, camp and HO :)
It is a long standing tradition
I believe not 1 person can deny #1 yet most will not even entertain #2 lol
The elephant in the room is virtualy invisible ;)
My thoughts were only to alter 1 very very small part of 1 of these behaviors!
Aces HIpocracy <--- LOL
JUGgler
-
IMO 2 absolutes stand the test of time in AH
#1- EVERYONE hates being vulched, picked, camped and HOd
#2- EVERYONE looks the otherway when they themselves vulch, pick, camp and HO :)
JUGgler
I'll readily cop to 2. I love vulching. The problem is getting to the head of the train. Usually, it's just a formula for assists. Picking, otoh, demands some gunnery skill and is something I'm working hard on (hehe, I said hardon).
Camping... never really did it. It sounds a bit too sedentary for me. Ho'ing I'll only do selectively.
-
OK true. I use the term Sissy because it's a pejorative, and because I want to discredit the idea that avoiding combat is "smart". I never avoid combat, and I don't think I'm stupid. But I see where the use of the term will create an "elitist" idea of who to fly so will stop using it. :salute
If a crew is taking a base and holding cap on a field, why would they want to allow someone to up and possibly kill troops or the goon? I have seen many base takes fail because one fast spit managed to up and get to one troop running into the map room..
Vulching is part of the game.. Always will be...
-
Vulching is part of the game..
A fun part of the game too.
ack-ack
-
IMO 2 absolutes stand the test of time in AH
#1- EVERYONE hates being vulched, picked, camped and HOd
#2- EVERYONE looks the otherway when they themselves vulch, pick, camp and HO :)
:rolleyes: :mad:
#1 I mostly take those things in stride. The things that really hack me off if anything are being denied a kill because some bandit whose dead six I've gotten on does a good imitations of a landed trout, because they dive 15K to ack out of a perfectly fair fight, or because manage to ditch and tower their wreckage.
Huh...funny...seems like whether I am killed or not isn't really an issue for me but not getting a kill is what annoys me...wonder what that says about my personality.
#2 I'll admit I've done all of those things whenever I feel like, just as I'll proudly tell you've I've done WHATEVER I feel like whenever I had the capacity to do so my whole freakin' life. What I'll get slightly hacked off at you about is calling imprecations down on my manhood or the like because I'm cherrying a base when base cherrying is the only kind of fight you can find in the freakin' arenas anymore! :devil
-
A fun part of the game too.
ack-ack
I don't see how...shooting a bird on the wing is much more fun. Vulching is just a boring strafing chore, basically.
-
A fun part of the game too.
ack-ack
Can't agree with ya on that one AKAK. Bores me to tears. At that point I land at their field and drive into a hanger.
-
Guppy you make the same mistake that Vinkman does. You define other players motivations to support your point. Players vulch for a number of reasons, not just to see their name in lights. The primary reason, I'm guessing, is fun. If the vulchee is the only thing to shoot at you can watch somebody else do it or do it yourself or go somewhere else. Are all valid choices.
Bustr makes a good point. The top sticks don't complain so much. They have adapted to the current system. The players who can spank newbies and would like to be top sticks tend to think of all the reasons why they're not getting all the kills they deserve to get. This isn't directed at anyone in particular, I'm speaking generally. It's human nature for people who perceive themselves as being near the top to bully their perceived inferiors in order to improve their own positions. In Aces High we see this all the time with the complaints about other people's choices in aircraft, tactics, and game play goals. So we have the HOing spitdweeb hoarding runstang etc epithets from everybody who believes that their true greatness will be apparent as soon as HTC fixes Aces High or the players all start playing the right and proper way.
Could be. With that in mind, what harm would come from making vulch kills not count towards attaboys?
If it's for the fun of it, for the capture or whatever, the actual 'vulch' in iteself would be the reward correct? If I'm wrong, and it's not about attaboys, nothing will change and people can vulch to their hearts content anyway :)
You've flown with and around me long enough FLS to know there is little hope of me attaining my 'greatness' nor do I care. I just like a good fight :)
-
Can't agree with ya on that one AKAK. Bores me to tears. At that point I land at their field and drive into a hanger.
I would bet that many guys secretly get pleasure from destroying some poor sap who thinks he will take off from that capped field.. Complete and total ownage!!
-
I would bet that many guys secretly get pleasure from destroying some poor sap who thinks he will take off from that capped field.. Complete and total ownage!!
If that's complete and total ownage, our definitions are different :)
-
If that's complete and total ownage, our definitions are different :)
Nowhere near ownage in any shape or form. Eventually yes it will become boring. At first it's like that first firework you light at the July 4th party. "Boom" heh heh that was cool. By the 30th or 40th firework, you are wondering if there is something else to do at the party... :headscratch:
-
Could be. With that in mind, what harm would come from making vulch kills not count towards attaboys?
If it's for the fun of it, for the capture or whatever, the actual 'vulch' in iteself would be the reward correct? If I'm wrong, and it's not about attaboys, nothing will change and people can vulch to their hearts content anyway :)
You've flown with and around me long enough FLS to know there is little hope of me attaining my 'greatness' nor do I care. I just like a good fight :)
I don't believe I predicted any harmful effects. My point was that vulching is fun. Changing the points system would not change that.
If you think there was anything in the second paragraph that applied to you please let me know. :D
-
Nowhere near ownage in any shape or form. Eventually yes it will become boring. At first it's like that first firework you light at the July 4th party. "Boom" heh heh that was cool. By the 30th or 40th firework, you are wondering if there is something else to do at the party... :headscratch:
I used that word only to describe ownage of a field. This in the context of taking a base.. How long does the vulch fest last? In most cases long enough for the goon to fly in and drop troops. By this time , most wise players will stop upping and getting vulched..
-
I don't believe I predicted any harmful effects. My point was that vulching is fun. Changing the points system would not change that.
If you think there was anything in the second paragraph that applied to you please let me know. :D
I think he's pointing out that you would remove those vulches that are score-motivated. And what's the loss in that?
Counter (not direct, but counter) argument could be that vulching is an unalienable reward for strategic success. You reap what you sow.
-
IMO 2 absolutes stand the test of time in AH
#1- EVERYONE hates being vulched, picked, camped and HOd
#2- EVERYONE looks the otherway when they themselves vulch, pick, camp and HO :)
It is a long standing tradition
I believe not 1 person can deny #1 yet most will not even entertain #2 lol
The elephant in the room is virtualy invisible ;)
My thoughts were only to alter 1 very very small part of 1 of these behaviors!
Aces HIpocracy <--- LOL
JUGgler
Honestly I try very hard not to do any #1s, admittedly to my detriment many times over, once in a while I will get caught up in the "struggle" but it is quite rare, and I'd rather bail then be in the horde at the edge of an enemy base. With that said, I don't have issues with #2 ;)
JUGgler
-
I think he's pointing out that you would remove those vulches that are score-motivated. And what's the loss in that?
Counter (not direct, but counter) argument could be that vulching is an unalienable reward for strategic success. You reap what you sow.
You don't know that those vulches would be removed. The score minded would want to hit them as they went wheels up and if they waited too long someone else would shoot first. Shooting them would still be fun for the score minded even if they didn't get points. Does anyone fly for score and not enjoy shooting people down? Do they just force themselves to the unpleasant task for the sake of their score? All you would remove is the score for the vulch. Reducing vulching by that change is just a hope.
-
I don't but that's what Guppy's saying as I understand it.
The score minded would want to hit them as they went wheels up and if they waited too long someone else would shoot first. Shooting them would still be fun for the score minded even if they didn't get points.
Score motivated
Does anyone fly for score and not enjoy shooting people down? Do they just force themselves to the unpleasant task for the sake of their score?
Knew someone like that and I can play that way too. It's about max victories and max "genuine" score top dog bragging rights, not loophole exploiting. There's no such victory without peril. I don't think that's more than a niche inside AH though.
All you would remove is the score for the vulch. Reducing vulching by that change is just a hope.
I think that's a distinction that Guppy would be fine with. As pointed out, removing score-induced gaminess that detracts from quality dogfighting is the motivation.
-
I don't see how...shooting a bird on the wing is much more fun. Vulching is just a boring strafing chore, basically.
That's you, I, on the other hand think it's great fun especially when you toss in a little bit of artistic flair and creativity. Murdr and I used to love finding new creative ways to vulch. Personally, I love to wait until they've got their wheels tucked up before vulching them, gives them the false hope that they may actually get up without being vulched only to have their dreams and hopes dashed.
Heck, I learned from the early masters like HiTech.
ack-ack
-
double post
-
My fav's gotta be tea baggin em while they still can't do anything without the buzzer ringing hard.
-
Moot I've known Guppy since we were +Nomads. You don't have to explain him to me. We're used to disagreeing. :D
Ack-Ack we just had another Muskie from the early days on Genie join us on Aces High. He's still pissed at Hitech for vulching him back then. :rofl
-
If a crew is taking a base and holding cap on a field, why would they want to allow someone to up and possibly kill troops or the goon? I have seen many base takes fail because one fast spit managed to up and get to one troop running into the map room..
Vulching is part of the game.. Always will be...
Yeh we know. THat's a different discussion.
-
Could be. With that in mind, what harm would come from making vulch kills not count towards attaboys?
If it's for the fun of it, for the capture or whatever, the actual 'vulch' in iteself would be the reward correct? If I'm wrong, and it's not about attaboys, nothing will change and people can vulch to their hearts content anyway :)
You've flown with and around me long enough FLS to know there is little hope of me attaining my 'greatness' nor do I care. I just like a good fight :)
Guppy gets it. :aok
-
I don't but that's what Guppy's saying as I understand it.Score motivated
Knew someone like that and I can play that way too. It's about max victories and max "genuine" score top dog bragging rights, not loophole exploiting. There's no such victory without peril. I don't think that's more than a niche inside AH though.I think that's a distinction that Guppy would be fine with. As pointed out, removing score-induced gaminess that detracts from quality dogfighting is the motivation.
Moot gets it :aok
-
We all get it. We just don't all agree with you.
-
You don't know that those vulches would be removed. The score minded would want to hit them as they went wheels up and if they waited too long someone else would shoot first. Shooting them would still be fun for the score minded even if they didn't get points. Does anyone fly for score and not enjoy shooting people down? Do they just force themselves to the unpleasant task for the sake of their score? All you would remove is the score for the vulch. Reducing vulching by that change is just a hope.
Who's speculating now? :D :salute
Maybe the number is low. But I dont think I'm alone in thinking the number is higher than you suggest. But again I don't have to be right about the number. As as Guppy says, what the harm? Also, I don't mean to hijack JUGglers 'wheels up' idea, but to clarify I'm refereing to a sliding point scale for easy kills vs difficult kills, in which case most 'vulches' would yield few points. If they're fun, or required for a base capture, by all means do it. Not trying to ban picking, vulching, and ganging, just trying to de-incentivise it.
-
Guppy gets it. :aok
Quite a bit of us get it, it's just that there are some of us that have a different view than you and Dan. Just because we don't fall in line with your thinking doesn't mean we don't get it, we just don't agree with your position.
ack-ack
-
Quite a bit of us get it, it's just that there are some of us that have a different view than you and Dan. Just because we don't fall in line with your thinking doesn't mean we don't get it, we just don't agree with your position.
ack-ack
But AKAK, You know that everyone claims you always are at 30K so how could you vulch? :)
-
I agree, the vulches should not be added to the kill list, nor the "name in lights" At least that way we wouldn't be seeing Del land all those kills any more :neener:
-
Let's do more to decrease SA!!!!
+1
:bolt: