Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: RELIC on July 07, 2009, 04:49:53 PM
-
Looking at the fighter rankings for the last camp, Late War Tour 113, is confusing. Shawk also posted on this but never included any data for review. Before I continue, let me stress this post is not intended to drag any squad through the mud. My issue is with what I perceive to be a bug in the Fighter rankings and nothing else. For this reason I will not name any of the squads involved and I apologize if I step on any toes – it is not my intent.
The stats for the #1 ranked Fighter squad:
Category Score Rank
K/D 1.32 133
K/S 0.91 113
K/H 5.51 100
Hit% 5.54 133
Points 220,582 29
#2 Squad disbanded, so looking at #3 in Fighter:
Category Score Rank
K/D 3.10 26
K/S 1.95 14
K/H 10.30 7
Hit% 8.91 26
Points 156,298 50
It seems to me that the squad ranked #3 should be ranked higher than the squad at #1. Is it because “Points” is given MUCH more significance in the scoring?
Looking at the squad ranked next at #4:
Category Score Rank
K/D 1.12 171
K/S 0.67 196
K/H 5.04 134
Hit% 4.82 186
Points 137,599 65
Now I’m really lost so I looked up a squad that I know has some extremely good sticks. They were ranked #41:
Category Score Rank
K/D 1.31 135
K/S 1.03 84
K/H 6.44 58
Hit% 6.06 106
Points 228,558 26
It seems to me the squad ranked #41 did better in every section than the squad ranked #4. In fact, if you add the rankings together and divide by the number of scoring sections (five), they should be ranked higher than the squad at #1. The other rankings, Bomber Attack etc. seem to be fine.
-
I have no clue but doesn't the amount of squad members factor into this ?
Edit
had a quick look tour 113 fighter squad rank
1) 30 members 4 not active that tour ......total hours 865
3) 20 members 10 not active ....total hours 174
41) 31 members 10 not active ...total hors 511
-
I would like this clarified by HTC. As CO of a squad of around 25 (Arn't I magnificant :D) I would like us to aim for the top 10 in these categories. If they are not transparent and fare what would be the point.
I hope this can be sorted out.
-
I sure hope this score thing can be resolved. This game would suck without it. :cry
-
If its going to be enabled it ought to:
1) Make sense
2) Reflect something besides how well an indivudual can solve puzzles
-
The scoring/rank system has always been questionable. It is absolutely meaningless. The game play would most certainly improve if it was removed.
-
The scoring/rank system has always been questionable. It is absolutely meaningless. The game play would most certainly improve if it was removed.
I would love to see what pacerr and shawk have to say about this. :O
-
The game play would most certainly improve if it (rank) was removed.
If so, how then to settle/determine the CV control privilidge? Seems to me that, in MW at least, rank is in many cases sought by those who simply wish to control the CV for strategic reasons.
-
Shawk already posted some time ago that the Fighter rankings seemed wrong.
Whether or not gameplay would be improved if the scoring system was removed is not the point of my post and I don't want to go down that road - that topic has been covered many times before in other posts. I'd simply like to know how the different sections in the Fighter score are combined to create the overall Fighter ranking. What I'm seeing here isn't making sense.
I'm hoping someone can explain the calculations involved OR we can get an acknowledgement of a bug in the Fighter rankings.
-
If its going to be enabled it ought to:
1) Make sense
2) Reflect something besides how well an indivudual can solve puzzles
:rofl
That's a good one, right there :lol
-
The scoring/rank system has always been questionable. It is absolutely meaningless. The game play would most certainly improve if it was removed.
I think the score HAS been removed in MW and EW arenas this tour.
Haven't they?
-
I think the score HAS been removed in MW and EW arenas this tour.
Haven't they?
Smells more like a bug to me ;)
Not even any stats to be found there. No way I will fly any arena if I can't even look up the stats...
-
Smells more like a bug to me ;)
Not even any stats to be found there. No way I will fly any arena if I can't even look up the stats...
Damn the stats!
I've been havin a blast defending bases from the Soar crowd etc. in EW.
Most fun I've had in a long time in this game.
(I think they all hate me!)
Why would the stats matter, as long as you were having a good time??
-
Damn the stats!
I've been havin a blast defending bases from the Soar crowd etc. in EW.
Most fun I've had in a long time in this game.
(I think they all hate me!)
Why would the stats matter, as long as you were having a good time??
Stats are part of having a good time for me.
I want too see what i killed. In which planes I scored, and which targets. I want to track my hit%, K/S, K/D. I want to see how different rides influence those values. I want to see how different models fare against each other. I like to see how other players do.
-
Stats are part of having a good time for me.
To each there own. :salute
Its a big game, plenty of room for everybody.
-
Oh I forgot.. sometimes stats are even an inducement to fly something different, as silly as that may sound.
I do occasionally look at my career stats and think "Oh, I haven't much kills in a XXX, let's make it a main ride this tour" or "Let's see if I can increase the 109G-2's K/D in LW MA by at least 0.2" ;)
(actually i look a lot at my stats...it's almost a fetish :lol)
-
Stats are part of having a good time for me.
I want too see what i killed.
I like the idea of being able to look up who I killed.... I dig that.
-
Stats are fine..... as for how they are used for rank and score are too funny. Instead of playing the game.. simply game the game. Like the squads mentioned before that train their folks on how to get score and rank instead of how to actually get better flying.
-
Oh I forgot.. sometimes stats are even an inducement to fly something different, as silly as that may sound.
I do occasionally look at my career stats and think "Oh, I haven't much kills in a XXX, let's make it a main ride this tour" or "Let's see if I can increase the 109G-2's K/D in LW MA by at least 0.2" ;)
(actually i look a lot at my stats...it's almost a fetish :lol)
Last tour, I tried to get a kill in as many different rides as I could. I managed to get kills in 61 of 96 possible. Even a chute counts - so proxies included unintentionally.
It got me into a lot of rides that are hangar queens, and made the obvious even more so that there is a preponderance of fast LW planes at high altitude - P51D, F4U, Typhy/Tempests - that love to pick away at low, slow birds.
Still, it was great fun and facilitated by the stats available.
On the scoring system for squads, I believe it is an objective and automated system. The logic is not obvious by the examples posted.
-
Agreed. Score, not so important, but stats certainly are. It's a part of getting better.
Stats are part of having a good time for me.
I want too see what i killed. In which planes I scored, and which targets. I want to track my hit%, K/S, K/D. I want to see how different rides influence those values. I want to see how different models fare against each other. I like to see how other players do.
-
Since AH is a game, and "winning" ain't what it used to be, understanding the scoring "rules" would be peachy.
-
(actually i look a lot at my stats...it's almost a fetish :lol)
I can see Lusche walking into a Reno Cathouse and saying, "I'll take the one with the big stats".
-
Nothings changed and the score thing makes perfect sense. Landing kills (even if its only one kill) will always pay off with more points AND rank than going out and killing more guys but getting shot down for your trouble. The question is not whether one category (score in this case) figures more heavily (it does not) but how pilots score on average by comparison.
-
Looking at the fighter rankings for the last camp, Late War Tour 113, is confusing. Shawk also posted on this but never included any data for review. Before I continue, let me stress this post is not intended to drag any squad through the mud. My issue is with what I perceive to be a bug in the Fighter rankings and nothing else. For this reason I will not name any of the squads involved and I apologize if I step on any toes – it is not my intent.
The stats for the #1 ranked Fighter squad:
Category Score Rank
K/D 1.32 133
K/S 0.91 113
K/H 5.51 100
Hit% 5.54 133
Points 220,582 29
#2 Squad disbanded, so looking at #3 in Fighter:
Category Score Rank
K/D 3.10 26
K/S 1.95 14
K/H 10.30 7
Hit% 8.91 26
Points 156,298 50
It seems to me that the squad ranked #3 should be ranked higher than the squad at #1. Is it because “Points” is given MUCH more significance in the scoring?
Looking at the squad ranked next at #4:
Category Score Rank
K/D 1.12 171
K/S 0.67 196
K/H 5.04 134
Hit% 4.82 186
Points 137,599 65
Now I’m really lost so I looked up a squad that I know has some extremely good sticks. They were ranked #41:
Category Score Rank
K/D 1.31 135
K/S 1.03 84
K/H 6.44 58
Hit% 6.06 106
Points 228,558 26
It seems to me the squad ranked #41 did better in every section than the squad ranked #4. In fact, if you add the rankings together and divide by the number of scoring sections (five), they should be ranked higher than the squad at #1. The other rankings, Bomber Attack etc. seem to be fine.
You can throw #41 out, we had a CO change part way through that tour.
Rashy
-
Nothings changed and the score thing makes perfect sense. Landing kills (even if its only one kill) will always pay off with more points AND rank than going out and killing more guys but getting shot down for your trouble. The question is not whether one category (score in this case) figures more heavily (it does not) but how pilots score on average by comparison.
So you're saying that the more kills a squad lands the more points and the higher the squad overal fighter rank? If that is the case, then why have the other four scoring sections? Also, using that theory, the math still doesn't add up as evidenced by the stats I used in the first post.
-
The 80th is waiting on the addition of auger stats, flying through hangers at enemy bases stats, and killshooting on squadmate stats. Till they are implemented we are staying neutral on this issue.
-
Stats are part of having a good time for me.
I want too see what i killed. In which planes I scored, and which targets. I want to track my hit%, K/S, K/D. I want to see how different rides influence those values. I want to see how different models fare against each other. I like to see how other players do.
So... you're saying that you want to see how much the aircraft actually impacts the "rank" of the player? Ya mean the plane is far more important than previously though??? ;)
If aircraft meant little and the pilot meant it all... we'd see far more self proclaimeded stat jocks land kills consistantly in high ENY planes like the P40E, 109F-4, F4F, etc etc. Tell me I'm wrong. Ever notice what the "uber" jocks fly? They fly the best because they must.
-
The scoring/rank system has always been questionable. It is absolutely meaningless. The game play would most certainly improve if it was removed.
+1 !!!!! :aok
-
So... you're saying that you want to see how much the aircraft actually impacts the "rank" of the player? Ya mean the plane is far more important than previously though??? ;)
If aircraft meant little and the pilot meant it all... we'd see far more self proclaimeded stat jocks land kills consistantly in high ENY planes like the P40E, 109F-4, F4F, etc etc. Tell me I'm wrong. Ever notice what the "uber" jocks fly? They fly the best because they must.
Its not only what they fly but how they fly IMHO. I think there are players that fly like their lives depended on it ( in a more real life aspect ). Granted this is only a game but I notice that some of the higher scoring "uber jocks" will only engage when they have the advantage, they try to never really put themselves in harms way (like one would in real life). For example... one could take up a 51d, fly over to enemy field that is capped by your country men. Make sure the VH and Dar and ack are all down. BnZ and vulch to you hearts content....re-arm at a nearby friendly cv (friendly dar is always a great help....) When you get bored with that... simply land your 20 kills... and there is nothing really wrong with that although I dont see how it can really be that much fun. And then there are the uber jocks that fly the higher eny planes and head straight for the red dar bar. At least with those guys you get a chance to learn something and the fights are always fun. Those are the guys whos true skill level is hidden by the current score system. And generally those are the guys who could care less about score. Stats are another matter... I do check out the stats.
<S>
A8Grind
-
So you're saying that the more kills a squad lands the more points and the higher the squad overal fighter rank? If that is the case, then why have the other four scoring sections? Also, using that theory, the math still doesn't add up as evidenced by the stats I used in the first post.
You completely missed the point I made and worse yet dont seem to understand how points relate to the other categories.
-
You completely missed the point I made and worse yet dont seem to understand how points relate to the other categories.
Please enlighten me then.
-
Agreed. Score, not so important, but stats certainly are. It's a part of getting better.
I disagree about reflecting ones getting better. If you truly believe this, then don't log into the game for two or three days, (I know how hard this can be :)) and see what happens to your score. I'll be willing to bet that your score/rank changes for the worse and changes big time! This may be due to a lack of time logged into the game, where your score/rank is averaged over a shrinking amount of hours played, but if anyone truly thinks the current system accurately indicates ones improvement, then why does it need to be represented in the way it is now? Why not introduce a system whereby a pilot obtains levels of proficiency, such as Basic, Intermediate, Advanced and Master with criteria one must have in order to advance? Once reached, you would carry this "level" from tour to tour working on the next step.
IDK, but this whole score/rank thing could be done better I think.
-
Please enlighten me then.
You are fighting statistical dispersion as much as their score. The problem you are facing is defeating the difference between your performance and theirs versus the entire arena. The guys in #1 are shooting down more planes and so pushing their scores higher. The problem is that you are not landing enough kills or killing enough per sortie to drive the advantage above their point advantage. Because the average performance is less than both of you and they score enough above the norm to remain within the spread on the other categories it isnt hard to win on points. All the categories have equal weight so no the score category isnt any more valuable but it is more important if both teams are only a short percentage apart in distribution.
Dont fall into the trap of averaging the final ranks as if they mattered because they dont.
-
You are fighting statistical dispersion as much as their score. The problem you are facing is defeating the difference between your performance and theirs versus the entire arena. The guys in #1 are shooting down more planes and so pushing their scores higher. The problem is that you are not landing enough kills or killing enough per sortie to drive the advantage above their point advantage. Because the average performance is less than both of you and they score enough above the norm to remain within the spread on the other categories it isnt hard to win on points. All the categories have equal weight so no the score category isnt any more valuable but it is more important if both teams are only a short percentage apart in distribution.
Dont fall into the trap of averaging the final ranks as if they mattered because they dont.
I don't want this to turn into a pissing match between us, but did you look at the stats for the squad ranked #41 in Fighter (let's call em Squad41)? Squad 41 shot down 2614 planes for a total of 228558.18 fighter points. The squad ranked #1 in Fighter (call them squad1) shot down 1838 planes for a total of 220582.81 fighter points. In the "Points" scoring subsection Squad1 came in at #29 out of all the squads in the arena (which is your "statistical dispersion") and squad41 came in a bit better at #26, close... but squad41 did kill more planes AND score more points and was therefore ranked a bit better in that (Points) subsection. But that is just ONE subsection. In the other 4 subsections (K/D, K/S, K/per Hour, Hit%), squad41 bested squad1 (by sometimes significant margins - see my original post) in every section except for K/D which was basically a draw.
So if you could win because you score MUCH better in one section, then why didn't Squad41 get ranked higher than Squad1? They ranked better than Squad1 in four out of five subsections and the only one that they didn't (K/D) was basically neck and neck.
This is the problem and no matter how you spin it, its damn hard to justify why the squad that did better in all but one of the Fighter rankings "subsections" ended up ranked MUCH lower than the squad ranked at #1.
In every other score (Bomber, Attack, V/B) the final ranking is calculated by taking the ranks from each subsection and dividing them by the total number of subsections. The squad with the lowest number is ranked #1. The squad which the 2nd lowest number is ranked #2, and so on... It's ONLY the Fighter section where this formula does not apply and that is why we have squads that (IMO) should be ranked much better sitting at #41.
-
You completely missed the point I made and worse yet dont seem to understand how points relate to the other categories.
I must have missed the point also...
You are fighting statistical dispersion as much as their score. The problem you are facing is defeating the difference between your performance and theirs versus the entire arena. The guys in #1 are shooting down more planes and so pushing their scores higher. The problem is that you are not landing enough kills or killing enough per sortie to drive the advantage above their point advantage. Because the average performance is less than both of you and they score enough above the norm to remain within the spread on the other categories it isnt hard to win on points. All the categories have equal weight so no the score category isnt any more valuable but it is more important if both teams are only a short percentage apart in distribution.
¿Cómo? :huh
I am still trying to figure out for myself how those numbers make any sense, but this response is making me more confused. :confused:
edit: The only thing I can think of is that somehow Landed Kills plays a role. For example, as Relic posted:
Squad 41 shot down 2614 planes for a total of 228558.18 fighter points. The squad ranked #1 in Fighter shot down 1838 planes for a total of 220582.81 fighter points.
Squad 1 had significantly less kills but almost as many points as Squad 41. That means they were landing their kills a lot more frequently to rack up more Points. Maybe for "Squad Points", only Points accrued from landed missions count, even though the rank shows Points accrued from all sorties. Could this be a scoring bug? Idk. Again, this is the only thing I can think of that would explain these numbers.
-
I must have missed the point also...
¿Cómo? :huh
I am still trying to figure out for myself how those numbers make any sense, but this response is making me more confused. :confused:
edit: The only thing I can think of is that somehow Landed Kills plays a role. For example, as Relic posted, Squad 1 had significantly less kills but almost as many points as Squad 41. That means they were landing their kills a lot more frequently to rack up more Points. Maybe for "Squad Points", only Points accrued from landed missions count, even though the rank shows Points accrued from all sorties. Again, this is the only thing I can think of that would explain these numbers.
I suppose that could be the "invisible" factor skewing the equation. If that is the case then my question has been answered, but since there are no "landed kills" stats available on the score/stats pages, there is no way to test this. Keep in mind squad1 could be targeting bombers more than squad41 which would also generate more points per kill, regardless if they were landed or not.
-
This may help you...its from the bottom of the squad score list
squad 1
Sorties 2030
landed 585
died 995
squad 41
2539
474
1353
Couldn't be arsed to go threw individual squad members to count the bomber kills.
-
edit: The only thing I can think of is that somehow Landed Kills plays a role. For example, as Relic posted: Squad 1 had significantly less kills but almost as many points as Squad 41. That means they were landing their kills a lot more frequently to rack up more Points. Maybe for "Squad Points", only Points accrued from landed missions count, even though the rank shows Points accrued from all sorties. Could this be a scoring bug? Idk. Again, this is the only thing I can think of that would explain these numbers.
possible I suppose, although deaths are already factored into K/D and points. higher points/K could be down to squad1 hunting buffs more than squad41 - way more damage points from hammering away at a B17 than removing the tailplane of a spit.
You can throw #41 out, we had a CO change part way through that tour.
dont think this should make a difference - squad41's stats are still there to be ranked.
overall the ranking dosent look right.
-
This may help you...its from the bottom of the squad score list
squad 1
Sorties 2030
landed 585
died 995
squad 41
2539
474
1353
Couldn't be arsed to go threw individual squad members to count the bomber kills.
So you are saying there is another "hidden" scoring section in Fighter - shall we call it "Deaths per Sortie"? Looking at just a couple of the other squads stats I think you might be on to something here. If this is the case, could a squad skew the stats in their favor by spawning and immediately towering out in Fighter mode a couple hundred times? That would damage the Kills per Sortie section, but would the improvement in "Deaths per Sortie" bump the final Fighter rank for the squad? Gawd I hope that isn't the case.
-
Looking at the fighter rankings for the last camp, Late War Tour 113, is confusing. Shawk also posted on this but never included any data for review. Before I continue, let me stress this post is not intended to drag any squad through the mud. My issue is with what I perceive to be a bug in the Fighter rankings and nothing else. For this reason I will not name any of the squads involved and I apologize if I step on any toes – it is not my intent.
The stats for the #1 ranked Fighter squad:
Category Score Rank
K/D 1.32 133
K/S 0.91 113
K/H 5.51 100
Hit% 5.54 133
Points 220,582 29
#2 Squad disbanded, so looking at #3 in Fighter:
Category Score Rank
K/D 3.10 26
K/S 1.95 14
K/H 10.30 7
Hit% 8.91 26
Points 156,298 50
It seems to me that the squad ranked #3 should be ranked higher than the squad at #1. Is it because “Points” is given MUCH more significance in the scoring?
Looking at the squad ranked next at #4:
Category Score Rank
K/D 1.12 171
K/S 0.67 196
K/H 5.04 134
Hit% 4.82 186
Points 137,599 65
Now I’m really lost so I looked up a squad that I know has some extremely good sticks. They were ranked #41:
Category Score Rank
K/D 1.31 135
K/S 1.03 84
K/H 6.44 58
Hit% 6.06 106
Points 228,558 26
It seems to me the squad ranked #41 did better in every section than the squad ranked #4. In fact, if you add the rankings together and divide by the number of scoring sections (five), they should be ranked higher than the squad at #1. The other rankings, Bomber Attack etc. seem to be fine.
Looks like a bug to me.
-
possible I suppose, although deaths are already factored into K/D and points. higher points/K could be down to squad1 hunting buffs more than squad41 - way more damage points from hammering away at a B17 than removing the tailplane of a spit.
I'm not sure really how many more points you get per kill for shooting down buffs but my hunch tells me the landing bonus is more favorable than killing buffs. I also think that the number of buffs killed by each squad should be relatively normalized to the typical buff traffic in the MA.
Imagine though a squad that flies 1000 missions, kills 5 guys per sorties but never lands. Say they accumulate 150,000 points. They have 5 K/s, 5 K/d, and a high Hit percentage.
Then you have a squad that flies 400 missions, kills 4 guys per flight, but lands everytime. Say they accumulate 149,000 points. They have 4 k/s, 4 k/d, and slightly less hit % than ^^.
My venture is that the second mentioned in example would have a higher squad fighter rank even though the first in example has better stats in every category. Just not sure how this landed thing is incorporated into the squad fighter ranks and if it is actually a bug or not.
-
What is this score and rank of which you speak? And what is this landing business!?!
Geeze the learning curve in this game is steep!
As Shuff mentioned, we in the 80th are still waiting for augering statistics. We know we're #1 at that! :)
-
What is this score and rank of which you speak? And what is this landing business!?!
Geeze the learning curve in this game is steep!
As Shuff mentioned, we in the 80th are still waiting for augering statistics. We know we're #1 at that! :)
Yeah I could care less either, I'm more interested in the puzzle/mystery aspect of this. :)
-
:rofl
As Shuff mentioned, we in the 80th are still waiting for augering statistics. We know we're #1 at that! :)
Don't know about the 80th stats but I found yours for last tour..
CorkyJr LW Tour 113 Auger Stats:
Kills per Hangar Auger+1 1.45 Rank 1
Missing P38 Parts per Sortie 9.13 Rank 1
Destroyed P38s by Ground Shrubbery per Hours of Flight 6.5 Rank 1
Hangar Auger Hit Percentage 100 Rank 1
Style Points 1,000,000,000 Rank 1
Kudos to CorkyJr for being the Top Auger Pilot of Tour 113. Tour 114 auger campaign has now begun...
-
Thanks Grizz for digging that up....er....does that sound right when we're talking about augering 38s? Yeah digging that up.
I feel so proud now! :)
-
This may help you...its from the bottom of the squad score list
squad 1
Sorties 2030
landed 585
died 995
squad 41
2539
474
1353
Couldn't be arsed to go threw individual squad members to count the bomber kills.
#41 landed 18% but died 53 % of the time
#1 23% landed but died 49%
If you spawn and tower you'll ruin this and other factors.
-
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the number of pilots in a squad factor into the equation? What about total squad members -vs- total ACTIVE squad members? LOL, the more I think about it, the more I like my idea of obtaining "levels" within the game! Doesn't make ones brain hurt! :D
-
Why don't you just ask Skuzzy?
-
Let me put it another way (and no its not a pissing match).
You fly and kill five fighters but you die so you get 100 pts (if your lucky).
You fly and kill five fighters and land you get 1000 pts.
You fly and kill five bombers and land you get 2500 pts.
You fly and kill five GOONS and land you get 5000 pts.
(These are round about figures and your actual damage done to your target will cause changes in the actual numbers)
Now the deaths per sortie comment was a little off wouldnt you say? BUT points per kill or per sortie would lead to more of an advantage to the squad that is holding #1 by the numbers you offered.
Before anyone decides 'hey it only pays to live' just remember that the kill/time category will be the undoing of anyone that plays it too safe. If you can manage to average 2.2 kills/death and every fifth plane is a bomber you will rank well enough but if you spend an hour on each sortie your rank will suck at only 2.2 kills/death.
-
Let me put it another way (and no its not a pissing match).
You fly and kill five fighters but you die so you get 100 pts (if your lucky).
You fly and kill five fighters and land you get 1000 pts.
You fly and kill five bombers and land you get 2500 pts.
You fly and kill five GOONS and land you get 5000 pts.
(These are round about figures and your actual damage done to your target will cause changes in the actual numbers)
Now the deaths per sortie comment was a little off wouldnt you say? BUT points per kill or per sortie would lead to more of an advantage to the squad that is holding #1 by the numbers you offered.
Before anyone decides 'hey it only pays to live' just remember that the kill/time category will be the undoing of anyone that plays it too safe. If you can manage to average 2.2 kills/death and every fifth plane is a bomber you will rank well enough but if you spend an hour on each sortie your rank will suck at only 2.2 kills/death.
CRAP!!! I just got a new hotas setup and I'M flying like Stevie Wonder behind the wheel of a Ferrari and with all that I gotta worry bought stats like that, I'M almost 50 and i did some damage along the way so i cant think that deep.
Personally... I'M just happy I have a computer that runs good and the game is still fun.
froger
-
Back in the day I was told but forget who by that you need to kill as many as possible in the shortest time possible and land as much as you can.
How on earth this can be done as a squad like this thread pertains to is wholly speculative. That's why I think members per squad is somewhere part of the equation.
-
Let me put it another way (and no its not a pissing match).
You fly and kill five fighters but you die so you get 100 pts (if your lucky).
You fly and kill five fighters and land you get 1000 pts.
You fly and kill five bombers and land you get 2500 pts.
You fly and kill five GOONS and land you get 5000 pts.
(These are round about figures and your actual damage done to your target will cause changes in the actual numbers)
And that is what's wrong with scoring system. You get the most points for the easiest targets. Same thing with attack mode. More points are awarded for destroying a building than a M8 rolling down a hill. Score hasn't much to do with skill.
-
Another thing about fighter score. We get the same amount of points shooting down a guy that has played the game for the first time, as we would for the vet score players. In most cases, it would take a bit of skill to kill the savvy player then the "can i be ur gunner" noob.
-
And that is what's wrong with scoring system. You get the most points for the easiest targets. Same thing with attack mode. More points are awarded for destroying a building than a M8 rolling down a hill. Score hasn't much to do with skill.
That's not entirely correct.
The building doesn't give you more or better points. It gives you completely different points. You don't benefit from shooting buildings only and refusing to kill anything else, for instance M8s.
Destroying a building gives you Damage Points. Killing a M8 gives you Killing Points. If you are interested in getting a good *cough* rank, you will need both.
-
I don't see that any of us understand.
-
Its simple Hap... the squad that lands more kills in the shortest time wins the rank race. In close races the one with the more valuable targets and less time flown wins.
-
I hate to burst anyone's bubble but here's my squad's fighter rank so far this camp. There's only 2 of us so there goes the number of members or hours of flight theorys.
Late War Tour 114 Fighter Scores for
The Wingmen
Kills per Death + 1 3.29 23
Kills per Sortie 1.57 25
Kills per Hour of Flight 4.97 124
Kills Hit Percentage 12.46 13
Kill Points 18638.32 156
Kills 69
Assists 9
Sorties 44
Landed 23
Bailed 4
Ditched 1
Captured 4
Deaths 12
Discos 0
Time hh:mm:ss 13:56:08
Rank 31
-
I understand points and how they are accrued, but that doesn't explain the ranking examples from my first post. Points is only one of the five subsections. In order for the squad ranked #1 to be at the top, points would have to be given MORE importance than the other four sections - and if that is the case then the math STILL doesn't add up when you look at the squad ranked 41 who had MORE points (and I think both squads have the same number of members) and scored better in all but one other subsection.
There seems to be something else going on in that final calculation and I don't know what it is, or if it is intentional or a bug. That is the only answer I am currently looking for - as Grizz stated earlier "I'm more interested in the puzzle/mystery aspect of this". I am inclined to wonder if the Squad Fighter rankings may not reflect the actual skills of any given squad, but until I fully understand how this is calculated it's improper to form any final opinion.
I realize for many the rankings are considered a joke. I've always felt the sections where you can "game" the score could be open to some eye rolling, but IMO the Fighter section was the hardest to substitute "trickery" for skill. I've played AH for nearly 10 years and I've occasionally tangled with some of the guys who are at the top of the Fighter ranks and all of them have been very good. As stated above, to be at the top in Fighters you have to:
1. Don't die
2. Get a lot of kills each time you up
3. Get kills quickly
4. Hit what you are shooting at
5. Get a LOT of kills/points (fly a lot)
This seems like a pretty good way to rank - certainly better than Air Warrior where only the total number of kills was used to determine ranks. This basic formula makes sense to me and it seems to be in play to determine the Individual Fighter ranks. Its only the Squad Fighter ranking that doesn't add up for me.
As for the number of members in a squad, it appears (as it should) that having a squad of 10 "terrible" pilots is going to get you ranked worse than a squad of 2 "good" pilots - even if the squad of 10 gets more total kills/points. They may rack up more total points but a few poorly performing players will offset that by bringing down the rank in other sections like K/D, Hit %, etc.
-
You know... I never did go look at the squads you were talking about which is too bad because now things have changed (of course). It is possible that one of the members you were talking about had just been online the first time the day that score was calculated and sometimes a zero score will through a wrench in the works. I went and looked at #1 and #3 today and I dont see the same issue. If you can show anothe example I would like to see if I can see the 'bug' if it exists (outside of the 0 score bug).
-
You know... I never did go look at the squads you were talking about which is too bad because now things have changed (of course). It is possible that one of the members you were talking about had just been online the first time the day that score was calculated and sometimes a zero score will through a wrench in the works. I went and looked at #1 and #3 today and I dont see the same issue. If you can show anothe example I would like to see if I can see the 'bug' if it exists (outside of the 0 score bug).
You mean you didn't even read the data in the OP before posting?
-
No grizz but obviously you didnt read what I read about THAT data. The ranks and such dont mean much its the individual scores and their relative position that matter but no one got that from what I posted and no one went and did the work to find out exactly what the issue is. Im pretty sure things had already changed before I came into the picture.
-
Individual rank is calculated by ranking each player in each statistical category (i.e. K/D, K/S, etc.), then adding those ranks together with the person with the lowest total ranking at 1, the next lowest at 2, etc.
Overall rank simply adds together the fighter, bomber, attack and vehicle ranks and then goes through the same process.
According to the OP this process was working for all other categories except fighter rank. I would have a hard time believing that HT thought that fighter rank was sooo special that he would develop an entire new code and process to determine what it was, therefore I think this was nothing more than a bug.
-
Individual rank is calculated by ranking each player in each statistical category (i.e. K/D, K/S, etc.), then adding those ranks together with the person with the lowest total ranking at 1, the next lowest at 2, etc.
squad#1 total: 508
squad#3 total: 123
squad#4 total: 752
squad#41 total: 409
squad ranking plainly doesnt work this way :confused:
-
No that is obviously NOT how it works for squad score but it still works that way for individuals.
-
No grizz but obviously you didnt read what I read about THAT data.
No, I read it twice, and it didn't make any sense. 59!
-
squad#1 total: 508
squad#3 total: 123
squad#4 total: 752
squad#41 total: 409
squad ranking plainly doesnt work this way :confused:
AND that's my point. It isn't working this way (for squad Fighter rank only) and why not? Baldeagl gets my point.
-
scores and rank are for people with no social life, just saying
-
scores and rank are for people with no social life, just saying
Thanks for your insightful and off topic input.
-
I think the mistake you are making is adding the RANKs of each individual while I think HTC takes the raw data and recalculates the overall scores before calculating the RANK of the squad. So in effect the average score would be in error by some percentage depending upon how many members a squad has over and beyond the squad being compared to but whether thats the case or not adding the RANKs together would be a huge error by comparison.
-
I think the mistake you are making is adding the RANKs of each individual while I think HTC takes the raw data and recalculates the overall scores before calculating the RANK of the squad.
And thats the result:
(http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/4701/rankstoday.jpg)
I took three squads as a sample. You can see the squads (not individual players) rankings per category, as computed by HTC.
I absolutely can't figure out why Rolling Thunders have a better fighter rank than Lentolaivue 34...
I guess we still have to ask Skuzzy ;)
-
I think the mistake you are making is adding the RANKs of each individual while I think HTC takes the raw data and recalculates the overall scores before calculating the RANK of the squad. So in effect the average score would be in error by some percentage depending upon how many members a squad has over and beyond the squad being compared to but whether thats the case or not adding the RANKs together would be a huge error by comparison.
That wasn't what I was saying. I just used individuals to illustrate how it usually works. See Luche's example above.
-
Yes in Lusches example Mykul777 flew a fighter sortie but had not landed or anything else at the time the scores were rastered and so the error occurs. I have noticed (and this may be the case here) that the server or host sometimes assigns a score to a category where the pilot in question has not actually done anything and that sort of problem also causes score issues. At the end of the month all of these things clear up as the scores are finallized.
-
Yes in Lusches example Mykul777 flew a fighter sortie but had not landed or anything else at the time the scores were rastered and so the error occurs. I have noticed (and this may be the case here) that the server or host sometimes assigns a score to a category where the pilot in question has not actually done anything and that sort of problem also causes score issues. At the end of the month all of these things clear up as the scores are finallized.
I think this is not only speculative but wrong too.
Let's look at Tour 113. after the scores have been finalized it looks like this:
(http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/8216/113ranks.jpg)
See how AArach AAngles have a worse ranking than LL34, WM's and WoT in every sub-category, yet they are ranked higher.
-
I still think the zero scores are whats causing the error but now that you pointed that out I would say there does appear to be a problem with the EOM results. I have seen for a long time how people can take #1 2 or 3 spots in different categories without ever having flown for that category but at the EOM things have always cleared up (previously).
-
I still think the zero scores are whats causing the error but now that you pointed that out I would say there does appear to be a problem with the EOM results. I have seen for a long time how people can take #1 2 or 3 spots in different categories without ever having flown for that category but at the EOM things have always cleared up (previously).
Hmm..
While indeed one player of 367th had (2) fighter sorties without any score (which causes the rank problem and could explain this issue here too), none of the AA's had such a record.
-
...I guess we still have to ask Skuzzy ;)
He scares me. You ask him.
-
Perhaps I should shamelessly advertise my suggestion to a new scoring and MA mission system:
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,256300.0.html
Since we are talking rank and scores.
-
I think they are saying the scores are rank (as in smell). :lol
-
Stats are part of having a good time for me.
I want too see what i killed. In which planes I scored, and which targets. I want to track my hit%, K/S, K/D. I want to see how different rides influence those values. I want to see how different models fare against each other. I like to see how other players do.
Yup ,to me the stats are kind of like reading the backs of baseball cards. While definitely not necessarily a complete measure of a players' talent, they do quantify some salient attributes that are relatively easy to relate to and compare. Statistics in AH are especially valuable in gauging your own relative performance as mentioned above. You can make sure to do what is required to keep them meaningfull for yourself to use. Unlike other peoples' stats that they may have gone out of their way to manipulate artificially, which anyone who has played more than a month could do if they chose to with a little skill and motive.
-
I absolutely can't figure out why Rolling Thunders have a better fighter rank than Lentolaivue 34...
:noid
-
Perhaps I should shamelessly advertise my suggestion to a new scoring and MA mission system:
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,256300.0.html
Since we are talking rank and scores.
I think this would promote more interesting play with more meaningfull scores.
HOWEVER:
The current system has its merits and score does have some meaning. No unskilled fighter pilot can get a low score of say under around 500 halfway into the tour.
To get a realy top score you have to accumulate allot of points in either fighter, bomber, gv or atack which favors those who have plenty of time to play but that alone will not get them through the likes of Kill to death ratio, kill per hour, kill per sportie etc.
-
Ok Guys, I've posted about this before, and the same BS was produced.
Here's the FACTS
#1 The Fighter Scores for Squads are FUBAR'd and HTC won't admit it.
#2 I won't be convinced otherwise until the "FORMULA" for said scores is posted by HTC.
#3 Challenge is Clueless, so ignore any of his input.
Nuff Said :aok
-
#1 The Fighter Scores for Squads are FUBAR'd and HTC won't admit it.
#2 I won't be convinced otherwise until the "FORMULA" for said scores is posted by HTC.
:aok
-
Stats are part of having a good time for me.
I want too see what i killed. In which planes I scored, and which targets. I want to track my hit%, K/S, K/D. I want to see how different rides influence those values. I want to see how different models fare against each other. I like to see how other players do.
exactly! :aok
-
#3 Challenge is Clueless, so ignore any of his input.
:aok