Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Shane on November 22, 2011, 12:13:47 AM
-
does anyone out side of HTC know the variables and computations involved in scoring and aggregating/weighing the various sub-cateories of fighter rank?
given kd, ks, kt, %, points etc = ftr rank for example, does the formula allow us to plug in our own nbr for one or more of the variables to see the effect on ranking?
i.e., what would my rank be if my k/s was say, 1.72 instead of whatever it is now, while all other variables remain teh same?
anyone? class? lusche?
<and to think I used to like maths, and also realize there are some uber-geeks lurking about these forums>
-
does anyone out side of HTC know the variables and computations involved in scoring and aggregating/weighing the various sub-cateories of fighter rank?
given kd, ks, kt, %, points etc = ftr rank for example, does the formula allow us to plug in our own nbr for one or more of the variables to see the effect on ranking?
i.e., what would my rank be if my k/s was say, 1.72 instead of whatever it is now, while all other variables remain teh same?
anyone? class? lusche?
<and to think I used to like maths, and also realize there are some uber-geeks lurking about these forums>
It's very simple. All those subcategories have the same weight, there are no complex math involved, just comparing numbers and simple additions.
Fighter rank is calculated as follows: Each day the players are ranked in each sub category with the best on top and the worst at the bottom. After that, all those sub category rank numbers are added together for each player. The one with the smallest total will be fighter #1, the one with the biggest sum will be last.
It's the same for all other ranks; and total rank is working the same way: fighter, attack, bomber and vehicle rank number added together.
Example:
At this moment, Bruv119 is #5 in K/D, #4 in K/S, #20 in K/H, #62 in Hit% and #247 in Kill Points. Sum = 338, Fighter Rank 3
Esset: #61 (K/D), #57(K/S), #49(K/H), #37(Hit%), #117(Kill Points). Sum = 321, and that's why his fighter rank (#2) is better than Bruv's
Additional blah blah:
By how much your rank will "improve" by getting a sub category to a particular value is a bit difficult to tell, as it depends on you relative standing. If you have a relatively low score in that, even small changes can give you a big boost, but the higher your score already is, the more difficult it becomes.
To illustrate this: The actual fighter mode K/S distribution of tour 141:
(http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/6238/kslw141.jpg)
Getting your K/S from 0.5 to 1.0 would had resulted in a big jump in that category's rank number (from about #1400 to about #500), but from 2.5 to 3.0 the gain is much smaller.
As a rule of thumb, to get into the top 50 in fighter rank, your sum of sub category rank #'s has to be below 1000, to get into the top 10 it needs to be below 500. Number one in fighters can have a sub-rank sum as low as 80 at times.
-
does anyone out side of HTC know the variables and computations involved in scoring and aggregating/weighing the various sub-cateories of fighter rank?
given kd, ks, kt, %, points etc = ftr rank for example, does the formula allow us to plug in our own nbr for one or more of the variables to see the effect on ranking?
i.e., what would my rank be if my k/s was say, 1.72 instead of whatever it is now, while all other variables remain teh same?
anyone? class? lusche?
<and to think I used to like maths, and also realize there are some uber-geeks lurking about these forums>
The sub-categories of your rank aren't figured out by a calculation against your K/S, it's just a matter of where your k/s stands in comparison to everyone else.
If you improved your k/s from 1.8 to 1.7, and everyone else had the same level of improvement, your rank would stay the same. If your k/s worsened from 1.8 to 1.9 while everyone else worsened by .11, your rank would improve.
Your rank can improve/worsen even if you don't fly.
-
The sub-categories of your rank aren't figured out by a calculation against your K/S, it's just a matter of where your k/s stands in comparison to everyone else.
If you improved your k/s from 1.8 to 1.7, and everyone else had the same level of improvement, your rank would stay the same. If your k/s worsened from 1.8 to 1.9 while everyone else worsened by .11, your rank would improve.
Your rank can improve/worsen even if you don't fly.
I wish I had explained it in such a simple & elegant way :uhoh
-
Now I know :)
Bruv is the best :old:
-
Thanks for clarifying how the systems work. Never cared to understand it more fully (and on retrospect, I knew it was relative ranking.)
My gunnery stat has long supressed my greatness. :noid :banana: :bolt:
-
Bruv is the best :old:
:aok :cheers: :rock
:noid
-
I fly the 110 almost exclusively as of recently and shoot off the rear gun ammo almost empty on most flights.
Do the wasted rounds fired from the rear gun affect gunnery score?
-
I fly the 110 almost exclusively as of recently and shoot off the rear gun ammo almost empty on most flights.
Do the wasted rounds fired from the rear gun affect gunnery score?
Yes. After all, they would also add to score if you would shoot somebody down with them ;)
-
Ok, now you can check what difference a change of k/s or any other sub category will make for fighter rank
The AH Fighter Rank Oracle:
(http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/8849/clipboard01iq.jpg)
http://www.mediafire.com/?atjjw33aztz0c8z
A crude spreadsheet based on Tour 141 data. Enter values into the green area and the sheet will give you a rank estimation. Rank is given for the finished tour!
It may differ a bit from official AH ranks and will be very much off for players ranked near the bottom (those with "0" in one or more catgories), as multiple pilots with same rank # can't happen in my version. But it will give you a very good ballpark number for most players. A quick test with Shane's data for tour 141 gave me rank # 179, his actual rank was 180.
:banana:
-
what are 'kill points' exactly?
-
what are 'kill points' exactly?
The points you get down for killing and damaging enemy aircraft.
In fact, they are for the most part damage points inflicted on the enemy, the actual "kill" is worth only one additional point.
-
The points you get down for killing and damaging enemy aircraft.
In fact, they are for the most part damage points inflicted on the enemy, the actual "kill" is worth only one additional point.
#1 in kill points. :aok :banana: :D
:noid
-
And #2344 for landings.
-
And #2344 for landings.
and K/D = 0,8 :lol :lol :lol
-
New version... now a chart included :D
(http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/2681/clipboard01hi.jpg)
http://www.mediafire.com/?atjjw33aztz0c8z
I edited the link in the original message above, too.
-
sounds like Midway has the kind of great attitude to flying Aces High that so many people preach on these boards, but so few actually practice
dhyran the real joke here is you of all people mocking Midways k/d and play style :old:
consider your way Sir
-
and K/D = 0,8 :lol :lol :lol
:headscratch:
0.8 is way above average ;)
-
K/D
Rewards players that fly in a more realistic way. Rewards vulchers as well.
K/S
Rewards players that fite in a less friendly enviroment. Rewards vulchers as well.
K/T
Still dont know what it rewards to, but vulchers. Maybe base defenders.....dunno...
%Hit
It punishes the sprayers. Well, In fact. Sprayers with the actual damage model can hit a thing. So they are punished twice. 1 for spraying and second one for not to killing a thing
Points
Rewards the player who spents more hours flying. And reward vulchers.
First conclusion: Vulching action is rewarded in every category. So, you cant say this or that category helps vulchers at ranking.
But: Look at this:
Player A:
1 sortie, 3 kills, 1 landed in 1 hour, %hit= 5
k/d : 3 (100)
k/s : 3 (10)
k/t : 3 (200)
hit: 5% (400)
hypothetical ranking for every category: 100+10+200+400 = 710
Player B
1 sortie, 2 kills, 0 landed in 1 hour, hit= 20%:
k/d : 1 (300)
k/s : 2 (100)
k/t : 2 (300)
hit: 20% (17)
hypothetical ranking for every category: 300+100+300+17 = 717
The numbers are hypothetical, and must be unaccurate, but you can get the idea, both players are ranked nearly the same, althought k/d and k/s indicate a better global flying in the simulator for player A.
Of course, Pilot A could be a vulcher and pilot B could get those 2 kills in a 1 vs 2 fite. But, as I said before, rank will never reflect if you are vulching, or fiting outnumbered.
For me, each factor should be weighted.....
K/D x 4f + K/S x 3f + K/T x 2f + Points...for exemple.
Ranking, anyway, doesnt reflect much as a whole picture.........
-
sounds like Midway has the kind of great attitude to flying Aces High that so many people preach on these boards, but so few actually practice
dhyran the real joke here is you of all people mocking Midways k/d and play style :old:
consider your way Sir
The Real Joke is on you if thats what you believe.
-
feel free to enlighten me :angel: I'm always ready to learn
to my eyes Midway's style appears to be 'fly a large number of sorties, have as many fights as possible, and don't worry about how much you get shot down' (and also wind up the easily trolled idiots on 200 incessantly :rofl )
Isn't that a laudable attitude? the latter part is certainly something that is frequently mentioned on these boards as being a mark of the 'better' pilots. It's all about the fight, not the score. Isn't that what everyone keeps saying? :headscratch:
seems to me Midway is the living embodiment of that noble goal, and dhyran..... :lol well, we all know his style*
*not that I personally have a problem with more conservative play, it's just funny that he chooses to attack Midway. I think someone has hurt feelings :devil
-
feel free to enlighten me :angel: I'm always ready to learn
to my eyes Midway's style appears to be 'fly a large number of sorties, have as many fights as possible, and don't worry about how much you get shot down' (and also wind up the easily trolled idiots on 200 incessantly :rofl )
isn't that a laudable attitude? the latter part is certainly something that is frequently mentioned on these boards as being a mark of the 'better' pilots. It's all about the fight, not the score. isn't that what everyone keeps saying?
seems to me Midway is the living embodiment of that noble goal, and dhyran..... :lol well, we all know his style*
*not that I personally have a problem with more conservative play, it's just funny that he chooses to attack Midway. I think someone has hurt feelings :devil
You find it funny that Midway disrespects LD? and they are attacking him? Dont get me wrong I understand the rest but this doesnt make sense. It looks to me that Midway attacks LD more then most I wonder why :noid
-
Ah OK, that's an easy one that I can be confident of answering correctly :aok
As mentioned above, Midway seems to be all about the fights!
As is well known by most, LD are generally, with some notable exceptions unwilling to engage in anything resembling a fair fight. As I said before, I personally don't really have a problem with that kind of playstyle as I really do understand and appreciate their approach to squad tactics, trying to get home alive like in a real fighter sortie, and general squad ethos. It's right up my alley ;]
But that is complete anathema to Midway's kind of playstyle, which is why he probably winds them up (trolls ;) ) especially often.
This obviously upsets dhyran to the point that he forgets his normal mature and respectful persona and tries (as so many do) to take some cheap shots at Midway. But imho the cheap shot was not very well aimed :old:
-
Player A:
1 sortie, 3 kills, 1 landed in 1 hour, %hit= 5
k/d : 3 (100)
k/s : 3 (10)
k/t : 3 (200)
hit: 5% (400)
hypothetical ranking for every category: 100+10+200+400 = 710
Player B
1 sortie, 2 kills, 0 landed in 1 hour, hit= 20%:
k/d : 1 (300)
k/s : 2 (100)
k/t : 2 (300)
hit: 20% (17)
hypothetical ranking for every category: 300+100+300+17 = 717
The numbers are hypothetical, and must be unaccurate, but you can get the idea, both players are ranked nearly the same, althought k/d and k/s indicate a better global flying in the simulator for player A.
If we reduce the hypothetical component a bit: Had they both managed to keep these stats over a whole tour (141), player A would have had a rank # of about 100-200 lower than player B.
-
Ah OK, that's an easy one that I can be confident of answering correctly :aok
As mentioned above, Midway seems to be all about the fights!
As is well known by most, LD are generally, with some notable exceptions unwilling to engage in anything resembling a fair fight. As I said before, I personally don't really have a problem with that kind of playstyle as I really do understand and appreciate their approach to squad tactics, trying to get home alive like in a real fighter sortie, and general squad ethos. It's right up my alley ;]
But that is a complete anathema to Midway's kind of playstyle, which is why he probably winds them up (trolls ;) ) especially often.
This obviously upsets dhyran to the point that he forgets his normal mature and respectful persona and tries (as so many do) to take some cheap shots at Midway. But imho the cheap shot was not very well aimed :old:
:aok
-
Ah OK, that's an easy one that I can be confident of answering correctly :aok
As mentioned above, Midway seems to be all about the fights!
As is well known by most, LD are generally, with some notable exceptions unwilling to engage in anything resembling a fair fight. As I said before, I personally don't really have a problem with that kind of playstyle as I really do understand and appreciate their approach to squad tactics, trying to get home alive like in a real fighter sortie, and general squad ethos. It's right up my alley ;]
But that is complete anathema to Midway's kind of playstyle, which is why he probably winds them up (trolls ;) ) especially often.
This obviously upsets dhyran to the point that he forgets his normal mature and respectful persona and tries (as so many do) to take some cheap shots at Midway. But imho the cheap shot was not very well aimed :old:
I see you guys are done not being noticed on the BBS and back to flaming other squads. :aok Have fun with that sure Bruv will be along shortly to put you in place.
-
:salute Midway you are twice the fighter pilot I am and three times the trolling experten ;)
I'd like to forestall any accusations that I am humping Midway's ankle - the correct nomenclature that I would like to be applied in this instance is 'e-knight'
as in
"typical that the Few member is e-knighting for their #1 ankle humper Midway"
:aok
-
Thanks Lusche for putting more exact numbers :)
Now look how much it is descompensated, imho. Only 100 positions ranking only for being better at K/D K/S and K/T, 3 much mor important categories than %hit.
:salute
-
I see you guys are done not being noticed on the BBS and back to flaming other squads. :aok Have fun with that sure Bruv will be along shortly to put you in place.
You guys? Is there more than one of me now? Have I multiplied like an amoeba?
You can't flame on these boards, due to all of the prohibitive rules :D But you can certainly take the piss...
However I did my best to couch my comments about LD in as respectful a manner as possible, and my derision was reserved solely for dhyran's unworthy comment about Midway.
I don't think that counts as flaming squads, but if you want to e-knight for LD that's cool with me ;)
-
Ah OK, that's an easy one that I can be confident of answering correctly :aok
As mentioned above, Midway seems to be all about the fights!
As is well known by most, LD are generally, with some notable exceptions unwilling to engage in anything resembling a fair fight. As I said before, I personally don't really have a problem with that kind of playstyle as I really do understand and appreciate their approach to squad tactics, trying to get home alive like in a real fighter sortie, and general squad ethos. It's right up my alley ;]
But that is a complete anathema to Midway's kind of playstyle, which is why he probably winds them up (trolls ;) ) especially often.
:lol last time i killed you i came from below, so much about the unwilling style you described. And yes we love to RTB, we love to fight together. When we engage into a fight, we allways have engaged and free fighters. roles changes during the battle each couple of seconds. yesterday we engaged a group of 6 with 4 sticks, we lost one but killed all, now what happend next? the last one who get shot was yelling about 3 vs1 at the end. Way too funny! When we played the SDL, these days you wasn't a member of the Few, each squad had the same chance, we were mostly unknown, we won all matches, sadly the SDL died in seasion 2! Each fight, same chances, fair enough with same planes , opend up at 10K
LD vs The Few
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krkLzbf-iyY
filmed with fraps directly during the fights, cutted afterwards
and more:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MN_LasaURtg&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GjeCnIbWWlU&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUEJbDAphAs
No come back if you got enough knowledge what you are talking about!
..... no more questions.
Well i did a coment because of all these 'look at me' postings. Its nothing more. have it all your way, but i never would coment anyones playstyle or whatever, its just the complete flooding of ch 200 each day and each hour......... if there would only some smart or funny stuff, but both missed period
-
:lol last time i killed you i came from below, so much about the unwilling style you described.
aww that's sweet, it's nice that you have such a good memory of something that must have happened at least 2 or 3 months ago! (I don't know how to look up scores and stats etc otherwise I'd be more specific ;) )
Regardless it's obvious that the comments (mine and Midway's, and others in the past) strike a little too close to home, as they always seem to bring this same angry, overly-defensive response from you...but as I said this wasn't meant to be about flaming squads, so I'll leave it at that and not add more fuel :salute Congratulations on your many well earned victories I'm sure
sorry for the thread de-rail :uhoh
-
.but as I said this wasn't meant to be about flaming squads, so I'll leave it at that and not add more fuel ..............
than just tell me what it was? a nice posting??? sure?????
better PM me for not hijaking this thread anymore
-
than just tell me what it was? a nice posting??? sure?????
Well, you obviously don't have a good enough grasp of English to have comprehended my previous posts, so I'll be blunt and spell it out:
I was taking the piss out of you for insulting Midway's k/d, the product of someone who doesn't care about dying, only fighting (the most admirable possible attitude, according to most BBS Warriors ® ) when your own precious k/d is protected by picking and running (the least admirable playstyle in the eyes of most)
-
coombz stop bating and go read the interview of a great and successful pilot.
http://www.hall-of-aces.org/
-> behind the scenes
:angel:
-
WTG on derailing such a nice thread about numbers :(
-
WTG on derailing such a nice thread about numbers :(
well lusche, we missed a pie chart, thats why the thread went offtopic..... ;)
-
I love you all in a manly way :old:
I like savoury pies as you all know, do they have savoury pies in Germany?
-
I love you all in a manly way :old:
I like savoury pies as you all know, do they have savoury pies in Germany?
<3 :D
:old: Pies are good
-
Well, you obviously don't have a good enough grasp of English to have comprehended my previous posts, so I'll be blunt and spell it out:
I was taking the piss out of you for insulting Midway's k/d, the product of someone who doesn't care about dying, only fighting (the most admirable possible attitude, according to most BBS Warriors ® ) when your own precious k/d is protected by picking and running (the least admirable playstyle in the eyes of most)
I have another point of view there Coombz.
For me it's more important and even realistic flying and trying not to die.
Fighting without caring if you die or not is a lot more gamie. It's more like plying Sonic's fite at the PS2 with my son.
Nevertheless, I respect your point of view.
-
I have another point of view there Coombz.
For me it's more important and even realistic flying and trying not to die.
Fighting without caring if you die or not is a lot more gamie. It's more like plying Sonic's fite at the PS2 with my son.
Nevertheless, I respect your point of view.
Kovel, as mentioned in my posts above, personally I also subscribe to this same view (that it's better to get home alive, than have a glorious brave fight and die)!!
I really don't have a problem with LDs way of playing, it's pretty close to my own style, except that sometimes I have to wing up with Yarbles instead of having someone good like Tallboy or schu covering my back ;)
I was just pointing out to DrBone why Midway trolls LD, and to dhyran why I found his insult to Midway unworthy
:salute
:old:
-
Nice Lusche! I bet that would actually be pretty accurate until you get into top 10ish.
-
My fun in AH is keeping myself untouchable, and killing the most, the best. It doesn't has to do with score. Maybe mine could be Dhyran's goal too....who knows.....I wouldnt admit that people that cares about not dying are less admirable that people who loves 1 vs many fites.
I'll tell you something:
I like Midway because he takes off from very outnumbered bases, and he tries to fight there against the odds. I would never do it though, however he does it and it's great.
But, I also love Dhyran styles, he can go to a crowdy enemy base, get 4-5 kills and get home!!!! And I try to do it as well.
But I cant' buy that you are a better pilot if you act like Midway or Dhyran, for exemple.
I guess you could say that DHYRAN is a better pilot THAN ME if we fly with the same attitude and circumstances and he gets a better performance.
:salute
-
they're both better pilots than me ;) but I think that Midway has a much better attitude (an opinion probably not shared by many :rofl )
and now it's time for me to go home and actually play AH instead of just talking about it :airplane:
-
Cya in the skys :salute
-
Nice Lusche! I bet that would actually be pretty accurate until you get into top 10ish.
Oh, it's only off by 1 for Bruv in that tour (5 instead of 4).. actually it's 1 too high for everybody. It really only fails for those in the 2500+ region (mostly 2 weekers).
Of course I could had adjusted that, but then it was only meant as a tool to check the general influence of bigger changes in stats. Like: What if I fly more boldly and my K/D drops from 5 to 3 while my K/H goes from 4 to 8?
-
I have another point of view there Coombz.
For me it's more important and even realistic flying and trying not to die.
Fighting without caring if you die or not is a lot more gamie. It's more like plying Sonic's fite at the PS2 with my son.
Nevertheless, I respect your point of view.
I fight very much with caring that I live to land. I do not want to die. I want to shoot down 8+ and get my name in lights landing the victories that a typical Top Gun :cool: pilot might land. ( and get the wtg's that come with it! :D )
But, for now...I only land what a typical Loose Duecer will land (2 or 3), on occasion more, but they probably have 8 assists :furious each :devil where I have maybe 1. :angel:
:old: Graduating from 2 or 3 landed to that of Top Gun level of 8+ takes awesome skill development by trying and dieing.
:)
-
WTG :)
-
I fight very much with caring that I live to land. I do not want to die. I want to shoot down 8+ and get my name in lights landing the victories that a typical Top Gun :cool: pilot might land. ( and get the wtg's that come with it! :D )
But, for now...I only land what a typical Loose Duecer will land (2 or 3), on occasion more, but they probably have 8 assists :furious each :devil where I have maybe 1. :angel:
:old: Graduating from 2 or 3 landed to that of Top Gun level of 8+ takes awesome skill development by trying and dieing.
:)
yeah, i know what you talking about, its like in the game, you talk about it on ch200 all night long, i just do it...... ;)
(http://www.loose-deuce.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/ahss29.jpg)
-
yeah, i know what you talking about, its like in the game, you talk about it on ch200 all night long, i just do it......
(http://www.loose-deuce.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/ahss29.jpg)
Nice...wtg, I do to (even landed 8 before on my own), on occasion... but Top Gun :cool: does it very often, multiple times per day even. :eek:
Don't worry though, even LDs :uhoh can, like me :angel:, work hard to get up to Top Gun level :aok --- one day. I have faith hard work will get us there.
:salute
btw: Fighting for assists won't do it. :)
:salute
-
Don't worry though, even LDs :uhoh can, like me
:salute
Well you have to accept the truth..... Even when it might hurt
-
sorry for the thread de-rail :uhoh
I have no beef with his flying style. He's usually a fun fight. I take issue with his "lookit me!" antics. This thread is a great example of exactly how disrespectful he can be. He contributed nothing to the conversation at hand other than to troll. Shame on thoe that take the bait and shame on those that encourage it.
-
I have no beef with his flying style. He's usually a fun fight. I take issue with his "lookit me!" antics. This thread is a great example of exactly how disrespectful he can be. He contributed nothing to the conversation at hand other than to troll. Shame on thoe that take the bait and shame on those that encourage it.
:old: An LD disparaged my good name's k/D and I should be allowed to defend said good name.
:huh He even laughed, triple laughed, at my k/D near the beginning of this thread! :uhoh
:angel:
-
not before your narcissism showed. Take it to PM.
I'd rather read Lusche's numbers than see you and your detractors compare dick sizes.
-
not before your narcissism showed. Take it to PM.
I'd rather read Lusche's numbers than see you and your detractors compare dick sizes.
:O
:uhoh
:noid
-
Thx lusche, awesome little table. This is only base don tour 141 data, though, right, since it's still a relative ranking? It does allow you to play with the "what if..." like you said. My "what if..." is my hit %
-
Ok, lets marry the original thread, and the hijacked thread together.
Q: which flying style most hurts a good fighter score followed up by which flying style most helps a good fighter style?
There is a set of tracks folks, stay on em or feel the wrath! :devil
-
My "what if..." is my hit %
It's funny you mention that Shane, because I honestly think that element is more of a "key" than the other elements when it comes to fighter rank.
IMO, improving your Hit% will likely result in an almost automatic improvement in the other subsections, particularly for someone who fights the way that I remember you fighting. I took a look at your current Hit%, and it was right around 5%, which is right at the top edge of (but still in) the "masses". Improving it slightly would put you into the realm of accuracy that is shared by only a small percentage of AH players.
Doing that wouldn't matter much from a rank standpoint (back to the previously-mentioned (Lusche?) "rule" of diminishing returns for improvement beyond a certain level). But... Improving it to the 10% level would. The reason I say that is because it would cut your firing time down to about 1/2 of what it is now to inflict the same damage. That means if it currently takes you 4 crossing "snapshots" to kill your opponent, you could cut it down to two. Or take several missed kill opportunities and turn them into quick kills. On those saddle-up kills you'll score a bunch more (twice as many) hits in the same amount of time (more damage points). Even bombers become one-pass kills (or at least give more damage points if they're already one pass kills).
The effect of that is a lesser loss of SA.
Better shooting equates to quicker finishes to your fights, which improves survivability. Those 2 on ones or 3 on ones are much more survivable if you can kill the guys in front of you rather than miss them or just "sting" them.
In that way, an improved Hit% could easily bring up your K/D, which almost automatically brings up your K/S (especially because killing quickly helps keep you from taking hits yourself; even the more or less inconsequential hits add up...). Killing quickly has the effect of making your gas mileage seem greater, allowing you to kill a few more times more in that same xx minute fuel window.
An improved Hit% makes it easier to rack up more damage points, in less time, in fewer sorties, with less ammo. It leads to far fewer assists (more kills).
It's also an element that you can "work on" to greater effect than K/D, K/T, K/S or points. And while improving your Hit% can help lift the other elements, picking one of those other elements to work on generally had the opposite effect for me (i.e. working to raise my K/D made me try to fly "safer" which led to a worse K/T).
I've never been one to enjoy vulching, ganging, or augering, and I consider it a personal requirement to RTB to consider my sorties "successful". Those attitudes generally hurt fighter rank, but with a better than average Hit% I still often found myself ranked in the top 25 more or less accidentally.
And beyond that, Hit% is the one thing the AH community never really seems to improve on as a whole so it's fairly easy to jump to the lead and have a leg up on the others when it comes to rank. Get your Hit% up to 7% or so, and you'll be in a tiny minority of players.
And there's even a psychological advantage to it. Landing those little hits here and there on those crossing shots that nobody ever makes is disheartening to an opponent. It boost your confidence, while degrading his. Fun stuff!
-
My hit% was in the 10-12% range when I was flying a lot. Now it's in the 6-7% range and I think I've only broken the top 100 a couple of times. K/T always has been my weak spot and now kill points adds to that since I don't play as much. Taking off a base away from the action, flying in less populated areas of the map, getting there when the fight's already over, saving fuel using max cruise, getting antsy to fight and diving into a horde only to die, etc., etc, etc.
Hit% can help but you have to pay attention to the whole picture.
-
It's funny you mention that Shane, because I honestly think that element is more of a "key" than the other elements when it comes to fighter rank.
IMO, improving your Hit% will likely result in an almost automatic improvement in the other subsections, particularly for someone who fights the way that I remember you fighting. I took a look at your current Hit%, and it was right around 5%, which is right at the top edge of (but still in) the "masses". Improving it slightly would put you into the realm of accuracy that is shared by only a small percentage of AH players.
Doing that wouldn't matter much from a rank standpoint (back to the previously-mentioned (Lusche?) "rule" of diminishing returns for improvement beyond a certain level). But... Improving it to the 10% level would. The reason I say that is because it would cut your firing time down to about 1/2 of what it is now to inflict the same damage. That means if it currently takes you 4 crossing "snapshots" to kill your opponent, you could cut it down to two. Or take several missed kill opportunities and turn them into quick kills. On those saddle-up kills you'll score a bunch more (twice as many) hits in the same amount of time (more damage points). Even bombers become one-pass kills (or at least give more damage points if they're already one pass kills).
The effect of that is a lesser loss of SA.
Better shooting equates to quicker finishes to your fights, which improves survivability. Those 2 on ones or 3 on ones are much more survivable if you can kill the guys in front of you rather than miss them or just "sting" them.
In that way, an improved Hit% could easily bring up your K/D, which almost automatically brings up your K/S (especially because killing quickly helps keep you from taking hits yourself; even the more or less inconsequential hits add up...). Killing quickly has the effect of making your gas mileage seem greater, allowing you to kill a few more times more in that same xx minute fuel window.
An improved Hit% makes it easier to rack up more damage points, in less time, in fewer sorties, with less ammo. It leads to far fewer assists (more kills).
It's also an element that you can "work on" to greater effect than K/D, K/T, K/S or points. And while improving your Hit% can help lift the other elements, picking one of those other elements to work on generally had the opposite effect for me (i.e. working to raise my K/D made me try to fly "safer" which led to a worse K/T).
I've never been one to enjoy vulching, ganging, or augering, and I consider it a personal requirement to RTB to consider my sorties "successful". Those attitudes generally hurt fighter rank, but with a better than average Hit% I still often found myself ranked in the top 25 more or less accidentally.
And beyond that, Hit% is the one thing the AH community never really seems to improve on as a whole so it's fairly easy to jump to the lead and have a leg up on the others when it comes to rank. Get your Hit% up to 7% or so, and you'll be in a tiny minority of players.
And there's even a psychological advantage to it. Landing those little hits here and there on those crossing shots that nobody ever makes is disheartening to an opponent. It boost your confidence, while degrading his. Fun stuff!
Nail on da head.
-
mtnman, your post for me is excellent and I agree 100%. Nevertheless, I think that %hit is a "cause indicator" and no an "effect indicator". I think its a mistake mixing up cause and effect indicators altogether.
Following the same rule, you could rank "% fuel when you get a kill". It means that the more fuel you have when you get a kill, the more control you have over your plane, so you can survive more, land more kills, etc. In this exemple, we are facing again one "cause indicator" with "effects indicators", and you could choose even more "cause indicators"......
For me, scoring "cause indicators" makes no sense.
I wouldn't rank % hit, althought it is very important for the reasons you mentioned.
:salute
-
Unfortunately high hit% equals a 4*20mm or 2*20mm 2*30mm + 2*13mm190a8 will have a h*ll getting the same hit % as you will get in a 109.
As for knife-fighting, so much loved by many pilots, equals in a certain death in a prolonged battle in an A8.
I do not know how many times i have heard Spit16 drivers yells ,
"come back and turnfight, coward" , at the same time they took off with 25% fuel, getting altitude over their own ack cover.
-
mtnman nails it pretty good belonging the hit ratio%
A good Hit ratio means also less assits and more trust by you wingman, you finish cons quickly
But there is one score indicator which i still miss at AH, the kill streak.
-
Unfortunately high hit% equals a 4*20mm or 2*20mm 2*30mm + 2*13mm190a8 will have a h*ll getting the same hit % as you will get in a 109.
As for knife-fighting, so much loved by many pilots, equals in a certain death in a prolonged battle in an A8.
I do not know how many times i have heard Spit16 drivers yells ,
"come back and turnfight, coward" , at the same time they took off with 25% fuel, getting altitude over their own ack cover.
+1 :aok
-
mtnman, your post for me is excellent and I agree 100%. Nevertheless, I think that %hit is a "cause indicator" and no an "effect indicator". I think its a mistake mixing up cause and effect indicators altogether.
Following the same rule, you could rank "% fuel when you get a kill". It means that the more fuel you have when you get a kill, the more control you have over your plane, so you can survive more, land more kills, etc. In this exemple, we are facing again one "cause indicator" with "effects indicators", and you could choose even more "cause indicators"......
For me, scoring "cause indicators" makes no sense.
I wouldn't rank % hit, althought it is very important for the reasons you mentioned.
:salute
Define your examples of cause indicators vs. effect indicators. If I understand your view, I disagree with it. I'm just not sure I understand it.
I don't understand how you're considering it anything at all like fuel level either.
I don't think it would be wise to rank anything that's effected by shooting skill, without considering how often you hit the targets targets you're shooting at.
-
Hya mtnman,
As you said:
Cause: You improve %hit
Effect: You improve K/D, K/S and K/T
I agree with that statement but,
Concerning to the ranking, it should only recflect the final results (K/d, K/s.....) and not the tools you use to get the results (% hit)
Concerning the fuel amount I admit it is an exemple taken to an extreme in order to express my thoughts.
The best your %hit is, the best your K/d and K/s could be.
The havier the plane you you are able to control in a fight (full of fuel) , the best k/d and k/s could be.
(I'm trying my best with my english level Sir :))
:salute
-
I think K/S is nearly worthless as a stat. I mostly fly off hours when there are fewer players on and will often up a few sorties in a row and not run into an enemy or have them run away.
-
I think paying attention to score over all is just silly. I don't, and I still know if I'm having fun or not :)
-
Ok, now you can check what difference a change of k/s or any other sub category will make for fighter rank
The AH Fighter Rank Oracle:
(http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/8849/clipboard01iq.jpg)
http://www.mediafire.com/?atjjw33aztz0c8z
A crude spreadsheet based on Tour 141 data. Enter values into the green area and the sheet will give you a rank estimation. Rank is given for the finished tour!
It may differ a bit from official AH ranks and will be very much off for players ranked near the bottom (those with "0" in one or more catgories), as multiple pilots with same rank # can't happen in my version. But it will give you a very good ballpark number for most players. A quick test with Shane's data for tour 141 gave me rank # 179, his actual rank was 180.
:banana:
I did the exact same calcualtion months ago, and made a spead sheet with formulas from the regression equations so I could predict Rank from score, etc... Because me squaddie asked me how it was figured. He could never understand why his rank was going up and down.
(http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6116/6389453699_b0978c89ef_b.jpg)
Funny. :salute
-
K/D
Rewards players that fly in a more realistic way. Rewards vulchers as well.
K/S
Rewards players that fite in a less friendly enviroment. Rewards vulchers as well.
K/T
Still dont know what it rewards to, but vulchers. Maybe base defenders.....dunno...
%Hit
It punishes the sprayers. Well, In fact. Sprayers with the actual damage model can hit a thing. So they are punished twice. 1 for spraying and second one for not to killing a thing
Points
Rewards the player who spents more hours flying. And reward vulchers.
First conclusion: Vulching action is rewarded in every category. So, you cant say this or that category helps vulchers at ranking.
But: Look at this:
Player A:
1 sortie, 3 kills, 1 landed in 1 hour, %hit= 5
k/d : 3 (100)
k/s : 3 (10)
k/t : 3 (200)
hit: 5% (400)
hypothetical ranking for every category: 100+10+200+400 = 710
Player B
1 sortie, 2 kills, 0 landed in 1 hour, hit= 20%:
k/d : 1 (300)
k/s : 2 (100)
k/t : 2 (300)
hit: 20% (17)
hypothetical ranking for every category: 300+100+300+17 = 717
The numbers are hypothetical, and must be unaccurate, but you can get the idea, both players are ranked nearly the same, althought k/d and k/s indicate a better global flying in the simulator for player A.
Of course, Pilot A could be a vulcher and pilot B could get those 2 kills in a 1 vs 2 fite. But, as I said before, rank will never reflect if you are vulching, or fiting outnumbered.
For me, each factor should be weighted.....
K/D x 4f + K/S x 3f + K/T x 2f + Points...for exemple.
Ranking, anyway, doesnt reflect much as a whole picture.........
The K/T penalizes players that fly too safe. If you run from everyone and only engage when you have an advantage Then the number of folks you can kill/hour goes way down.
-
I did the exact same calcualtion months ago, and made a spead sheet with formulas from the regression equations so I could predict Rank from score, etc...
Ah, the elegant way. Being mathematically challenged, I had to stick to looking up numbers in tables :lol
-
The K/T penalizes players that fly too safe. If you run from everyone and only engage when you have an advantage Then the number of folks you can kill/hour goes way down.
you have to take the time to travel to the fight into account. Being aggressive to anyone will lead to more deaths for you. Each death costs at least 15mins without a kill.
-
Ah, the elegant way. Being mathematically challenged, I had to stick to looking up numbers in tables :lol
A lazy man [like Vinkman] will always find the easier way to do something. ;)
In that way I didn't have to download all the data, just enough points to get a good curve fit. ;)
-
you have to take the time to travel to the fight into account. Being aggressive to anyone will lead to more deaths for you. Each death costs at least 15mins without a kill.
VinkMan
I have to agree. ON THE OTHER WAY, it helps people that get into a big furball near the base and they picks one or two planes which are not paying attention to him, dying, upping again and getting into the furbal again. This is the opposite behavior to the one you described. And for me K/T supports this behaviour. And this behaviour is not better than the one you described, but it is rewarded.
Noir
I can't agree. K/T increases if you kill 3-4 and you die, as you don't have to spend time getting home.
:salute
-
getting home usually takes no more than 5mins. I prefer getting 2 kills, getting some alt back, getting another couple kills, rinse and repeat until I'm dead or out of fuel/ammo then rtb.
In any case this it a personal thing, I'm usually doing ok in the K/H department.
-
Noir, nothing to say about your preferences or style, of course.
I don't understand why you told that every death cost you 15 minutes, and now you say that getting back cost you 5 minutes.
:salute
-
VinkMan
I have to agree. ON THE OTHER WAY, it helps people that get into a big furball near the base and they picks one or two planes which are not paying attention to him, dying, upping again and getting into the furbal again. This is the opposite behavior to the one you described. And for me K/T supports this behaviour. And this behaviour is not better than the one you described, but it is rewarded.
Noir
I can't agree. K/T increases if you kill 3-4 and you die, as you don't have to spend time getting home.
:salute
I don't dissagree with anything you said. IT rewards being agressive, and punishes, not being agressive. I think the behavior you discribe..Upping at a furball near a base and jumping in the action...is something HTC wants to encourage. Running away and taking 1 hour to get a kill, is something they want to discourage. I think that's why it's in there. Dying right away will up your K/T, but will hurt your killpoints, and hurt your K/D. So someone cannot up their rank by dying to save the time it takes to fly back and land.
Also Hit% rewards pilots for being good shots. You could say that is implied or a factor in Kills per/sortie, but since you can re-arm, how many kills you are getting on an ammo load is lost, because you can have infinite ammo loads per sortie. So hit% puts how good a shot you are, back in the rank.
-
going to the fight will take 15mins (10mins is more realistic), coming back from it <5mins.
the less travel time you spend, the better kills/hours you get. If I focused exclusively on K/H I would bail as soon as I'm out of fuel or ammo, at the expense of K/D tho...
-
I don't dissagree with anything you said. IT rewards being agressive, and punishes, not being agressive. I think the behavior you discribe..Upping at a furball near a base and jumping in the action...is something HTC wants to encourage. Running away and taking 1 hour to get a kill, is something they want to discourage. I think that's why it's in there. Dying right away will up your K/T, but will hurt your killpoints, and hurt your K/D. So someone cannot up their rank by dying to save the time it takes to fly back and land.
Also Hit% rewards pilots for being good shots. You could say that is implied or a factor in Kills per/sortie, but since you can re-arm, how many kills you are getting on an ammo load is lost, because you can have infinite ammo loads per sortie. So hit% puts how good a shot you are, back in the rank.
Interesting point of view.... I haven't thought %hit from this point of view :)
Anyway, I think that % hit should not have the same weight in final score than K/D. But now you are making me doubt a bit :aok
-
going to the fight will take 15mins (10mins is more realistic), coming back from it <5mins.
the less travel time you spend, the better kills/hours you get. If I focused exclusively on K/H I would bail as soon as I'm out of fuel or ammo, at the expense of K/D tho...
Now I see what you mean........Going into the battle you need to climb and it takes longer. RTBing usually you go diving and faster....thanks Sir.
:salute
-
Dying right away will up your K/T, but will hurt your killpoints, and hurt your K/D. So someone cannot up their rank by dying to save the time it takes to fly back and land.
Yes, you can - if you are a top stick and your K/D is high enough already. A pilot who routinely manages to get 5 kills in a furball (and we have a few of them) will suffer just a bit from that additional death, but if that boosts his K/H by 20% or so it can make quite a difference.
However, this is very much theory, as at the end of the day only very few players pay that much attention to score (if at all).
------
And on the question ""Which fighting style is good (or bad) for fighter score?": If you look at the top 50 over some time, you will find many players with very distinct styles (and reputations!) up there, from bold furballers to cautious and methodical buff hunters and vulcher/runners. The only thing that really "hurts" is a lack of aggressiveness. In the end, it's all about killing as many as possible in as little time as possible with as little ammo as possible. Find the style you are happy with. Hardly anyone but you looks at your score anyway, and even when they do, it's quickly forgotten again.
-
Yes, you can - if you are a top stick and your K/D is high enough already. A pilot who routinely manages to get 5 kills in a furball (and we have a few of them) will suffer just a bit from that additional death, but if that boosts his K/H by 20% or so it can make quite a difference.
However, this is very much theory, as at the end of the day only very few players pay that much attention to score (if at all).
------
And on the question ""Which fighting style is good (or bad) for fighter score?": If you look at the top 50 over some time, you will find many players with very distinct styles (and reputations!) up there, from bold furballers to cautious and methodical buff hunters and vulcher/runners. The only thing that really "hurts" is a lack of aggressiveness. In the end, it's all about killing as many as possible in as little time as possible with as little ammo as possible. Find the style you are happy with. Hardly anyone but you looks at your score anyway, and even when they do, it's quickly forgotten again.
Hands down for this post :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok :aok
-
Some of you guys Top Ranks in the geekiness score. :neener: :banana:
Flying how I do, (by the seat of my pants) means there is no particular fighting style going towards score. I do a little bit of everything. All I know is, my kill points rank is generally pretty high. I'm not sure what that says but I guess it helps.
As for hit%, I still empty my magazine of bullets if my engine goes out to save weight. Gliding home is a little easier no carrying that extra weight. Often helped a captured become a ditch.
Kills per hour I'm not sure how to take, sometimes the arena has a low population and you have to spend a bit of time circling an enemy field just to get a single upper...
-
Yes, you can - if you are a top stick and your K/D is high enough already. A pilot who routinely manages to get 5 kills in a furball (and we have a few of them) will suffer just a bit from that additional death, but if that boosts his K/H by 20% or so it can make quite a difference.
However, this is very much theory, as at the end of the day only very few players pay that much attention to score (if at all).
I would have to pull some examples and change their "landed" results, modify their points (reduce by half), then up their kills/T by 20%. I'm betting it would be very hard to find someone who's rnak would go up. hmmmm.......
And on the question ""Which fighting style is good (or bad) for fighter score?": If you look at the top 50 over some time, you will find many players with very distinct styles (and reputations!) up there, from bold furballers to cautious and methodical buff hunters and vulcher/runners. The only thing that really "hurts" is a lack of aggressiveness. In the end, it's all about killing as many as possible in as little time as possible with as little ammo as possible. Find the style you are happy with. Hardly anyone but you looks at your score anyway, and even when they do, it's quickly forgotten again.
The only thing I think is missing from the score as it stands is the effect of the plane. Not to pick on Hoagi, but he spends 80% of his time in a Tempest, and wins the tour a plenty over guys that run up the same stats in a P-38 or a variety of lower ENY planes. Clearly it's easier to score and land kills in a Tempest than it is in a 109F.
Since I don't think Rank defines pilot quality, correcting for plane quality is not necessary. EXCEPT, if score effects gameplay. Then the scoring system would want to reflect desired gameplay decisions. If it did, then multiplying your points by the planes ENY would drive more folks into less super planes. Right now there is no penealty or byass to your score and rank if you spend all your time ponies, Spitsteen, and Tempests.
Should a player be ranked higher for putting up the same stats in a P-40 that another player puts up in Tempest?
My thoughts are that plane ENY could be factored in, if the rank system is trying to determine who is a better pilot, or if it would force better pilots into lesser planes because such a thing would be better for gameplay. This last point is very common already as many a very stick try to handicap themselves by flying lesser rides. It wouldn't bother me to see it reflected in the rank.
Thoughts? :salute
-
Hya mtnman,
As you said
Cause: You improve %hit
Effect: You improve K/D, K/S and K/T
I agree with that statement but,
Concerning to the ranking, it should only recflect the final results (K/d, K/s.....) and not the tools you use to get the results (% hit)
Concerning the fuel amount I admit it is an exemple taken to an extreme in order to express my thoughts.
The best your %hit is, the best your K/d and K/s could be.
The havier the plane you you are able to control in a fight (full of fuel) , the best k/d and k/s could be.
(I'm trying my best with my english level Sir :))
:salute
I see what you mean, but I don't really agree. Here's why.
Fighter rank is really about shooting down the bad guys, and is an attempt to rank based on that. "Shooting" is a vital (and measurable) part of "shooting down the bad guys".
All of the criteria being measured is related to shooting down the bad guys, and success in any of those will have a tendency to drag at least one of the other subsections up.
Improving K/D will bring up K/T (unless you're being exceedingly cautious) because you'll spend more time "alive" (and likely in the "danger zone"), which means less time flying back to the fight after you die. It'll also bring up your K/S, because if you kill someone you'll probably try to get another one (unless you always RTB after you score a single kill).
If you work to improve your K/S, that is again dependent on successfully killing more opponents without dying yourself, so will bring up your K/D. And of course hitting anybody at all will add to your points. It'll also bring up your K/T for the same reason I listed above (staying alive, while getting kills, means less "wasted" time flying back to the fight.
Shooting anyone down will always have a positive effect on all of the sub-sections EXCEPT Hit% (you could easily shoot someone down but have a negative effect on your Hit%). Shooting a plane down will never have a negative effect on any of the other subsections though.
I'm just of the opinion that improving Hit% will help bring up the others (a lot, potentially), while bringing up the others won't bring up Hit%.
I certainly think "cause" is the wrong word to describe that effect though. "Byproduct" is more accurate I think.
Also, Hit% is one of the only subsections you can actually practice at (and study), so is really the only subsection (IMO) that measures "skill". You can't "practice" getting more points or improving your K/D, K/S, or K/T. That doesn't mean I don't think those other sections are worth tracking though, because in the end they're measurable components of being a good fighter pilot.
Hit% is also the most "individual" of the measures. Flying with a wingman or horde won't help your hit% much, if at all. It will help your K/D, though, which will have an effect on points, K/S, and K/T. And again, I don't see that as a "problem" with fighter rank, because teamwork is also a valid tool for the fighter pilot.
It just means I don't see K/D, K/T, K/S or points as good measures of an individuals skill.
Personally, I use Hit% as the key measure of individual skill within the ranking system (although it can also be misleading). I honestly consider any kill made by someone with a 3-4% (or less) hit% to be primarily based on luck. After all, they miss 96-97% of the time. That's certainly not a display of skillful mastery of the tools they're using (in my eyes). If a few of those lucky hits happen to be lucky enough to damage something, or lucky enough to kill someone, well, I still see it as mostly luck.
Hit% gives me a good idea of how good my opponent is at setting up shots (i.e. maneuvering), and judging of his opponent's flight angle, speed, etc... A person who hasn't mastered flying will never master aerial gunnery, but mastering flying doesn't mean someone has mastered aerial gunnery. The best fighter pilots master both, and it's reflected in Hit%. Maneuvering skill on it's own isn't measured effectively with the current fighter rank system.
Of course, Hit% can be skewed. I can easily bring mine up above 40% by limiting myself to killing bombers. Doing so also brings my K/D up into the 80/1 range, and gives me gobs and gobs of points. If I did it with a wingman I could be more effective than that. Killing bombers doesn't help my K/T though, and they use up too much ammo to help my K/S much (unless I re-arm).
Would doing this make me "less" of a fighter pilot than the guy that kills lots of fighters in 1v1 fights? Not by WWII standards, since killing bombers was a vital role of a fighter pilot...
And BTW, flying with more fuel will also help your fighter rank (as long as you can continue to kill your opponents without getting killed yourself).
-
mtman
I can't disagree what you are saying, and it is actually very interesting.
Neverthelees, I resist to think that %Hit is not over-weighted as a final factor.
Look at those two real pilots with their real ranks:
Factor Pilot A Pilot B
K/d 2.86 4.42
k/s 1.62 1.75
k/t 7.45 6.05
%hit 7.66 5.26
kill p. 27k 33k
#Rank 50 114
mntman. Honestly, I don't know if Pilot A or B vulched, used a perfect ACM, picked, fighted outnumbered....But, given you have the same attitude for both of them, I consider that Pilot B is playing better as a FIGHTER PILOT.
Why? Because he has survived a lot more times, he has killed more enemies per sorties and he has gotten nearly twice the kill points than PILOT A.
.
Pilot B, however has been a little more agresiive, but has a big advantatge in %hit.
Pilot A ranks 50 and pilot B ranks 114. Do you think it is a balanced score?
The difference in %Hit is punishing pilot B more than tha advantage he has due to K/D, K/S and Kill ponits, K/D and K.P doubling Player B's.
For me, it is unbalanced and it is unfair.
(And I also think that lag affects a lot % hit. And I think that lag issues are there every day. It is unfair as well that score is affected so much by lag)
-
Factor Pilot A Pilot B
K/d 2.86 4.42
k/s 1.62 1.75
k/t 7.45 6.05
%hit 7.66 5.26
kill p. 27k 33k
#Rank 50 114
Why? Because he has survived a lot more times, he has killed more enemies per sorties and he has gotten nearly twice the kill points than PILOT A.
33k nearly twice as much as 27k? :headscratch: ;)
(And I also think that lag affects a lot % hit. And I think that lag issues are there every day. It is unfair as well that score is affected so much by lag)
No, lag doesn't effect your hit %. All shooting is done your front end, if you have hit your enemy on your screen you have hit him, no matter what he may have seen on his screen.
-
if you have packet loss your bullets will disappear in thin air, but packet loss != lag
-
Ok, I made two mistakes in my last stament:
1. 33k is not nearly twice as much as 27k. I was rounding numbers biased to the way my brain wanted to see them lol sorry.
2. I meant packet-losses instead of net-lag.
Sorry for both mistakes and thank you guys for correcting me and make y last post more accurate :salute
-
mtman
I can't disagree what you are saying, and it is actually very interesting.
Neverthelees, I resist to think that %Hit is not over-weighted as a final factor.
Look at those two real pilots with their real ranks:
Factor Pilot A Pilot B
K/d 2.86 4.42
k/s 1.62 1.75
k/t 7.45 6.05
%hit 7.66 5.26
kill p. 27k 33k
#Rank 50 114
Pilot A ranks 50 and pilot B ranks 114. Do you think it is a balanced score?
I do think it's a balanced score. I think so because these are all weighted evenly, and in relation to the AH populace player A has better stats in the two areas that are more difficult to break ahead of the masses in.
Another way to look at it is like this. They're both fairly average when it comes to K/D, K/S, and K/T. Nothing terrible, but nothing to get too excited about either. Better than the majority of players, but nowhere near "elite" yet. There are probably several hundred players who outrank them in those categories though. The same could be said for their points (which are awarded for hits, not necessarily kills).
The reason they're ranked as well as they are though is coming down to Hit% in a large part. If player B's Hit% where a percent or two lower, he/she would probably lose several hundred ranking positions. Player A could lose 2% there, and still keep his high rank though (lose far fewer positions, anyway).
The reason for that is that while player B is doing pretty good overall, Player A is really breaking into that "elite" status when it comes to Hit%. They're both pretty good, slightly above average in everything, but A is going to have a significantly better rank when it comes to Hit%.
Being 50% better in K/D isn't going to count much, compared to the masses. Being 30% better in Hit% will though (compared to the masses) at least at this level.
-
I do think it's a balanced score. I think so because these are all weighted evenly, and in relation to the AH populace player A has better stats in the two areas that are more difficult to break ahead of the masses in.
Another way to look at it is like this. They're both fairly average when it comes to K/D, K/S, and K/T. Nothing terrible, but nothing to get too excited about either. Better than the majority of players, but nowhere near "elite" yet. There are probably several hundred players who outrank them in those categories though. The same could be said for their points (which are awarded for hits, not necessarily kills).
The reason they're ranked as well as they are though is coming down to Hit% in a large part. If player B's Hit% where a percent or two lower, he/she would probably lose several hundred ranking positions. Player A could lose 2% there, and still keep his high rank though (lose far fewer positions, anyway).
The reason for that is that while player B is doing pretty good overall, Player A is really breaking into that "elite" status when it comes to Hit%. They're both pretty good, slightly above average in everything, but A is going to have a significantly better rank when it comes to Hit%.
Being 50% better in K/D isn't going to count much, compared to the masses. Being 30% better in Hit% will though (compared to the masses) at least at this level.
Let's see the ranks in every area:
Factor Pilot A Pilot B
K/d 2.86 (211) 4.42 (124)
k/s 1.62 (147) 1.75 (130)
k/t 7.45 (148) 6.05 (313)
%hit 7.66 (368) 5.26 (850)
kill p. 27k (47) 33k (41)
#Rank 50 114
As you can see, Pilot B is much more punished because of % Hit than rewarded for better k/d and k/s.
So, %hit overweights k/d + k/s + kill p. altogether.
Ok, I agree that %Hit values are the most concentrated for the population of players, and if you improve a little bit, you rank in that area increases surpringsly. But this is exactly the, for me, the unfair reason of why %hit overweights even 3 very important areas altogether.
And, as I said, % hit is highly punished by packet-losses. I think it is the only area that is hurted by network issues. This and discos. Although discos can't be representative if you fly enough hours and packet losses can be always there, every minute you fly.
And, from another point of view. Pilot B with a worse %Hit has better K/D, K/S and K.P. So, a better %hit doesn't mean, in the end, a better performance
:salute
-
Another way to look at it is like this. They're both fairly average when it comes to K/D, K/S, and K/T. Nothing terrible, but nothing to get too excited about either. Better than the majority of players, but nowhere near "elite" yet. There are probably several hundred players who outrank them in those categories though. The same could be said for their points (which are awarded for hits, not necessarily kills).
A bit of a hijack:
"Nothing terrible, but nothing to get excited". Sometimes I think we (including myself) are judging players from a very high point of view. I wonder were "elite" truly begins. Both player A and player B have a K/S better than 95%(!) of all players, same goes for player A's K/H. Even his K/D of "only" 2.86 is getting close to that 95%, player B's 4.42 is putting him in the top 3%. Maybe not elite, but maybe still something to get excited about. (I know I was when first breaking 3.0 K/D, I couldn't believe I was now "up there", as I rarely encountered players in that "weight class")
When I think back to my university days, the top 5%of students were considered to be quite "elite" ;)
Addendum
A quick check of tour 141. To get into the top 10% or top 5% in each fighter score category, you approximately needed:
(http://img853.imageshack.us/img853/7319/clipboard01jt.jpg)
And getting into the top 5% of everything would get you into the top 50 ranks.
-
And, as I said, % hit is highly punished by packet-losses.
So are European or Aussie players by flying at offpeak times with much less combat opportunities (K/H, K/S) or players with a life who can't put many hours into the game (kill points). ;)
And if you have so many packet loss that it significantly lowers your hit%, you have really big issues apart from score anyway. I can't imagine anybody with such a bad connection with constantly loosing packets who wouldn't warp or disco a lot. After all, it should be very remarkable if only gunnery data would be affected by lost packets...
-
Kovel, I think your looking at it backwards. Pilot B isn't being penalized for his hit%, but Pilot A is being rewarded for his.
Pilot A flies the K4 and so must need "snipe" his shots and shoot better to succeed. So he is being rewarded for that extra skill. Where as pilot B flies spits, Chogs, and La7's and get the kills while "spraying" a bit more.
-
Hya Fugitive,
Look at this way: Pilot A is rewarded a lot more for %hit than Pilot B for getting better 3 important areas (lets say 2, K/D and K/S).
In the end, K/D and K/S is the last performance goal. The other areas are important, but I think they only add to the whole picture.
¿Why? Because I am suppossing that every1 in fighter pilot mode likes killing the most while dying the less.
-
Now look at this:
Column 1: For each area we divide Pilot B value by Pilot A
Column 2: For each are, we divide specific area rank Pilot B by specific area rank Pilot A
ex:
Pilot A Pilot B
k/d(rank) 2.26 (#211) 4.42 (#124)
Column 1 for k/d: 4.42 / 2.26 = 1.54
Column 2 for k/d: 211 / 124 = 1.7
So, a difference factor of 1.54 for that area makes a difference factor of 1.7 in the rank for that specific area.
Doing it for every specific area:
Area Value Dif. Factor #Rank Dif. Factor
K/d 1.54 1.7
k/s 1.08 1.13
k/t 1.23 2.11
%hit 1.45 2.3
kill p. 1.22 1.14
You could even plot a graph with both variables and you would see that a little differences in %hit creates big diferences in the global rank. And % hit is not as a leading indicator as K/D or K/S or K/T
:salute
-
Kovel, I think you may be confused on how the scores are calculated. It's not a mathematical calculation between player A and player B stats that decides their rank. It's a simple comparison. One is doing better overall than the other, that's all.
It's just a comparison ranking. Back to this- %hit 7.66 (368) 5.26 (850) Player A is ranked 368 because 367 players are shooting more accurately than him. Player B is 850 because 849 players are shooting better than him.
Player A is being rewarded because he's doing so well compared to his peers (not mathematically). Player B isn't rewarded nearly as much, because he's not doing nearly as well compared to his peers.
It's only a 2.4% increase in accuracy between player A and B, but that small amount allowed a lot of other players to slip in between them. Player A has a better rank because he's beaten out almost 500 players by increasing his Hit% slightly.
-
Addendum
A quick check of tour 141. To get into the top 10% or top 5% in each fighter score category, you approximately needed:
And getting into the top 5% of everything would get you into the top 50 ranks.
What I did below was change only my hit % for tour 141 to 7.6% and 9.4% - if I had (heh) hit either of these targets my fighter rank would have been impacted somewhat significantly.
(http://i499.photobucket.com/albums/rr355/swatpeace/rankwhatif.jpg)
-
You have to remember that the scoring system is relative to ALL players, not individual.
The higher you place in a category the harder it is to move up. While both players are in the top 5% in hit% both are still compared to the rest of the players. Player A is in the upper echelon with only a few others, where as player B is still in a much larger group (relative to player A) of good shots. If they made a list of the top 500 pilots by hit% player B would be a nobody like most of the rest of us. On the other hand if the list was a top 200 neither would be on it.
The whole system is a "rating" comparing you to all the other players. The problem is the scoring system is easily manipulated so that "comparison" is warped and what you see as the system "favoring" one category or another is really the inability of the system to track each player accurately.
Another thing you may be in error about is this, "I am suppossing that every1 in fighter pilot mode likes killing the most while dying the less". I know many players that couldn't care less about dying less as nobody really dies, it's a game. A majority of players play the game to accomplish a task such as capturing territory and they will do ANYTHING to do that. This is why you see so many dive bombers aurger, and guys running back and forth through the ack to make 4 runs on the radar tower to take it down dieing in the process, or bailing once they drop there bombs on a town.
While I think aim/hit% is the most important (hit harder means you kill quicker, kill quicker means you kill more, killing more means you survive better) I don't think it should weight heavyer in the figuring, but if it did, it would apply to all players the same and we would have the same out come in score.
-
What I did below was change only my hit % for tour 141 to 7.6% and 9.4% - if I had (heh) hit either of these targets my fighter rank would have been impacted somewhat significantly.
A pure buff hunting sortie every once in a while in an .50 cal equipped ride should the trick.
But of course, you may find that terribly boring... ;)
(note to all newbies: Yes, hit% and score is really that little meaningful and that easy to skew! Remember this next time you are trying to play the score card on CH200 or country ;))
-
Let's see the ranks in every area:
Factor Pilot A Pilot B
K/d 2.86 (211) 4.42 (124)
k/s 1.62 (147) 1.75 (130)
k/t 7.45 (148) 6.05 (313)
%hit 7.66 (368) 5.26 (850)
kill p. 27k (47) 33k (41)
#Rank 50 114
And, from another point of view. Pilot B with a worse %Hit has better K/D, K/S and K.P. So, a better %hit doesn't mean, in the end, a better performance
:salute
Exactly. Now you're getting it. Hit% isn't enough to drive your rank up on it's own.
And that's also a reason I look at Hit% primarily, and ignore the rest. It's too easy to drive K/D, K/S, K/T and points up "artificially" by vulching, ganging, etc, so they don't give me a good read on someone (that doesn't mean those aren't valid scoring tactics, or that they shouldn't effect overall rank). As such, I don't see those as accurate measures of individual skill.
If I want to look at someone's "individual skill" I feel Hit% is the only one that gives any form of accuracy, because flying with the best wingman, or squad, etc, won't lift your Hit% appreciably. K/T is second, IMO. K/S would be third, and K/D would be the last thing I'd really consider as "telling".
-
If I want to look at someone's "individual skill" I feel Hit% is the only one that gives any form of accuracy, because flying with the best wingman, or squad, etc, won't lift your Hit% appreciably. K/T is second, IMO. K/S would be third, and K/D would be the last thing I'd really consider as "telling".
I would look only at all stats (including relation fighter/attack sorties as well as plane kill statistics)) as a whole, because hit% can be "gamed" almost the same as any other stat. Someone could exclusively and very timid hunt bombers and get a great hit%.... but is other stats will show.
A very high hit% is an indicator, but it really just a reason to look at all other stats too to get the picture. And even then I would not go as far as calling the result "skill level", but more a "game personality profile". A player's score's & stats are like a business card to me :)
-
If I want to look at someone's "individual skill" I feel Hit% is the only one that gives any form of accuracy,
so you're saying i suck? :neener:
-
I would look only at all stats (including relation fighter/attack sorties as well as plane kill statistics)) as a whole, because hit% can be "gamed" almost the same as any other stat. Someone could exclusively and very timid hunt bombers and get a great hit%.... but is other stats will show.
A very high hit% is an indicator, but it really just a reason to look at all other stats too to get the picture. And even then I would not go as far as calling the result "skill level", but more a "game personality profile". A player's score's & stats are like a business card to me :)
^^^^^^^^ QFT
<the safest place to have me is on your dead six when I can't hit anything... nose bounce at fine control level... :bhead I'll take a crossing shot any day (and ironically enough I was tracking how many crossing shots it was taking me - it was 4, :noid and I know it should have been 2, lol)>
I posted a similar perspective about how I perceive stats:
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,318164.msg4139151/topicseen.html#msg4139151
-
A bit of a hijack:
"Nothing terrible, but nothing to get excited". Sometimes I think we (including myself) are judging players from a very high point of view. I wonder were "elite" truly begins. Both player A and player B have a K/S better than 95%(!) of all players, same goes for player A's K/H. Even his K/D of "only" 2.86 is getting close to that 95%, player B's 4.42 is putting him in the top 3%. Maybe not elite, but maybe still something to get excited about. (I know I was when first breaking 3.0 K/D, I couldn't believe I was now "up there", as I rarely encountered players in that "weight class")
When I think back to my university days, the top 5%of students were considered to be quite "elite" ;)
Wow, you're right Lusche! I had no idea the overall AH K/D, K/T, and K/S averages were that low (but to be fair, I've never been interested enough in those categories to look into it). That definitely puts these two guys up in the elite class overall (which is actually reflected in their fighter rank, no?)
When it comes to Hit%, what I consider "elite" comes from your charts (one of which I'm borrowing for this post)-
(http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m309/Mtnman_03/clipboard01hq1.jpg)
By my standards, looking at this chart I'd consider the guys with 8% or better to be "elite", best of the pack. 10% or better would put them a step up from there, maybe "best of the best".
Beginning at 6%, I'm considering them "well above average, pretty dang good". 5% and down is just "mixed in with all the rest/ average/ of the masses". At some point (3% or so?) I consider it more luck than anything when a bullet actually connects with anything, let alone scores a kill. After all, we're talking about a 97% chance of no damage at all from any given round.
Maybe that's too harsh, but that's how I would break them down. And I wouldn't base that opinion on one tour either, but rather I'd want to look at someone's averages across several tours, trends, etc. I also want to see it based on many, many kills, rather than just a few in a tour.
And yes, while Hit% can be skewed, it's still hit %. How well can someone aim a plane and hit their opponent (which speaks of their coordination as well as all the mental "judgement" required before and during the shot)? Nobody else is going to do it for them... As such, it's just a "part of the whole" when it comes to fighter rank, but in my eyes it's still the most telling part.
For the record, my Hit% is skewed.
I only fly in fighter mode, and I only shoot planes. That skews it. I also don't shoot many GV's or buildings, etc. That skews it. I generally won't shoot someone else's "cripple", so it's skewed there too (as-is my K/D since I rarely get assists). And it's safe to say I have less than 20 vulch kills over the last 5 years (which skews my whole fighter rank). I do a heck of a lot of "scare" shooting (with no real intent to hit) and I do a lot of "speculation" shooting, so it's skewed from that too. I do my best to set up crossing shots, rather than saddle-up shots, so it's skewed from that. I shoot fighters as often as possible, and I shoot bombers as often as possible, so I'm sure that messes my Hit% up too. I like to shoot at friendlies on the runway as I land and see how close I can get without hitting them. I like to shoot over friendlies shoulders on climb-out (no enemies around) and see if I can startle them.
Of course all that adds up to my "average" Hit%, since my it's based on the rounds I fire vs. those that actually hit my opponents.
Of course
-
so you're saying i suck? :neener:
Lol, no.
But I'd say you make up for some not-so-spectacular shooting with far-above-average use of 3D space.
I'm saying if you could shoot better you'd be absolutely devastating (because I've seen you fly enough times).
Fancy flying isn't taken into account with the current fight rank system though. The current ranking system gives credit for someone's ability to shoot the bad guys down in the MA (not in a 1v1 in the DA).
You'd be more effective than you already are if you could improve your aim.
-
(http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m309/Mtnman_03/clipboard01hq1.jpg)
Holy Sh..., that's ancient! :O
That's actually the thing that started it all, my first AH stats analysis ever. LOL, only 356 samples! I remember it well, it took me days to compile, because I had taken all the names from screenshots of the ingame roster and then I looked them up one by one :bhead.
By now, that 356 individual scores have evolved into more than 600k :banana:
-
I only fly in fighter mode, and I only shoot planes. That skews it.
mate you are at 23% right now lol.
And I don't agree with that statement, I fire at planes only and always get above 10%, which is alright in your book :) If I only fly the P51D, and get closer to 15%...But maybe I'm an alien or something.
-
I would look only at all stats (including relation fighter/attack sorties as well as plane kill statistics)) as a whole, because hit% can be "gamed" almost the same as any other stat. Someone could exclusively and very timid hunt bombers and get a great hit%.... but is other stats will show.
On a personal level, this is why I only fly in fighter mode. It's much harder to "game" that way, sortie after sortie, month after month, year after year.
And since I'm measuring my own effectiveness against my own effectiveness, there really isn't any "gaming" involved. A 12% is too low in my eyes, regardless of what anyone else's Hit% is. A 12% is a 12%, it's not a rank.
I'm not striving for a higher Hit% because I want to be better than someone else. I'm striving for a higher Hit% because mine has always been far (far, far, far) too low. And since I predominately fight fighters, that's what I'm really interested in when it comes to comparing my past/present/future performance, not bombers.
-
Holy Sh..., that's ancient! :O
That's actually the thing that started it all, my first AH stats analysis ever. LOL, only 356 samples! I remember it well, it took me days to compile, because I had taken all the names from screenshots of the ingame roster and then I looked them up one by one :bhead.
By now, that 356 individual scores have evolved into more than 600k :banana:
LOl, it's the only one I've saved!
I'd truly love to see one with 600k samples! I wonder if it would be much different? 30 samples is about all you need to begin seeing trends.
-
mate you are at 23% right now lol.
Lol, trust me, it's skewed. 23% is not a real average for me.
Those are some of the only sorties I've flown in the last six+ months. I can't hit the broad side of a barn anymore (even from the inside).
I must have killed a few bombers, and only a few fighters. Not enough samples, and not a realistic distribution of target types.
Shooting only planes while in fighter mode does skew things, if I were to try to compare myself to someone who's shooting a lot of ground targets while in fighter mode (hitting buildings in fighter mode counts as a miss, so lowers your hit%).
-
Well mtnman:
I undesrtand 100% your point of view. The problem (not really) is that if %hit CONCEPT is so important then your statements make sense 100%. But, If %Hit is not that important CONCEPT, then current rank system don't support the arguments.
Anyhow, I've just been shocked on your previous post when I've read that for you (and I know you here more than 8 years) %hit is the most important area.
It leaves me thinking sir..........
How can a respectul and experienced player as mtnman say that % hit is much more important than k/d? :headscratch:
And I know you know what you are talking about, beacuse I know all the studies you have shared about gunnery here.
And now here it comes the second question: Do I have a bad gunnery because I don't consider it important? or I do not consider gunnery important because I have a bad gunnery? :headscratch: :headscratch: :headscratch:
Btw, whats your nick in MA mtnman? I remember you flying as mtnman 8 years ago. But now I can't see you in the MA...
:salute :salute :salute
-
You'd be more effective than you already are if you could improve your aim.
That's what I was getting at with this thread, actually. And for me the one stat I frowny face at is my hit %
Some of this *is* system/hardware related. My nose bobbles at the micro-control level, I've never been able to completely reduce this.
This is why I like crossing shots which are generally with smoother input - I notice I'm taking more shots because I'm off by just a fraction in timing/aim or I don't get the damage I was expecting. People may not realize the critical factors of:
a) if you're shooting, hit the guy because if you miss
b) the committment to taking a shot and missing, gives the other guy an edge.
A lot of my fancy flying comes from making them miss, now I need to work on not missing. :joystick:
-
Well mtnman:
I undesrtand 100% your point of view. The problem (not really) is that if %hit CONCEPT is so important then your statements make sense 100%. But, If %Hit is not that important CONCEPT, then current rank system don't support the arguments.
Anyhow, I've just been shocked on your previous post when I've read that for you (and I know you here more than 8 years) %hit is the most important area.
It leaves me thinking sir..........
How can a respectul and experienced player as mtnman say that % hit is much more important than k/d? :headscratch:
And I know you know what you are talking about, beacuse I know all the studies you have shared about gunnery here.
And now here it comes the second question: Do I have a bad gunnery because I don't consider it important? or I do not consider gunnery important because I have a bad gunnery? :headscratch: :headscratch: :headscratch:
Btw, whats your nick in MA mtnman? I remember you flying as mtnman 8 years ago. But now I can't see you in the MA...
:salute :salute :salute
I'm MtnMan in the MA. I just don't get in there much anymore. That will probably change now that it's getting dark so early.
I used to care about K/D...
Gunnery is only important if you want to hit what you shoot at.
If you don't care whether you hit what you shoot at gunnery is not important at all.
If you want to make sure you miss what you shoot at, gunnery becomes at least somewhat important again.
-
the hit% is a lot joystick related. I went from 7% to 11+% by switching to a more adapted joystick.
-
I'd truly love to see one with 600k samples! I wonder if it would be much different? 30 samples is about all you need to begin seeing trends.
You will, but that's not a single graph showing a static moment in time (obviously, as we never had 600K pilots in a single tour ;), but developments over a span of 11 years.
-
I'll take a crossing shot any day (and ironically enough I was tracking how many crossing shots it was taking me - it was 4, :noid and I know it should have been 2, lol)>
I know you see this, but how much more effective could you be by making those shots count and killing your opponent in two passes? Cutting it in half would be a good start.
Less time spent, E lost, SA lost, etc. More time for more kills on the same sortie. Less chance of taking damage yourself.
What if it was a 2v1? Can you afford to take 4 passes to kill one of them? Under "duress" will you still be able to do it in 4?
3v1? Swarmed by 4 or more?
What if you could take your Hit% up to double what it is now (10% say), with the same type of fighting and shot set-ups? 3v1's and even 4v1's get a lot easier at that level...
What if you could get it down so you only needed 1 (very brief, or snap) shot opportunity on average?
-
You will, but that's not a single graph showing a static moment in time (obviously, as we never had 600K pilots in a single tour ;), but developments over a span of 11 years.
you sir are nuts :rolleyes:
-
I know you see this, but how much more effective could you be by making those shots count and killing your opponent in two passes? Cutting it in half would be a good start.
Less time spent, E lost, SA lost, etc. More time for more kills on the same sortie. Less chance of taking damage yourself.
What if it was a 2v1? Can you afford to take 4 passes to kill one of them? Under "duress" will you still be able to do it in 4?
3v1? Swarmed by 4 or more?
What if you could take your Hit% up to double what it is now (10% say), with the same type of fighting and shot set-ups? 3v1's and even 4v1's get a lot easier at that level...
What if you could get it down so you only needed 1 (very brief, or snap) shot opportunity on average?
I agree everyword you say here. Regardless the discussion we are having above.
-
you sir are nuts :rolleyes:
And you are just a small cluster of numbers in my database MUAHAHAHAHA
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_v0Ji2AgSgN0/TDcHUqEAtGI/AAAAAAAAAzo/4z7B3j5HBPg/s200/accountant-image.jpg)
-
I have found that FOR ME, it affects to % hit or gunnery:
1. Joystick set-up: Scaling, deadbands etc
2. Rubber bullets
3. Sucking
I read a long time ago mtnman's posts about gunnery but I couldnt improve much.
I'd better read them again :aok
-
spending a couple hours offline with ammo multiplier sent to 10 is a good gunnery training.
-
also the planes with mixed ammo types are more prone to destroy your hit%...the spitfire mkIX is a good example. A 7mm hit counts as much as a 20mm hit in the %, but the 7mm's are much more numerous :airplane:
-
also the planes with mixed ammo types are more prone to destroy your hit%...the spitfire mkIX is a good example. A 7mm hit counts as much as a 20mm hit in the %, but the 7mm's are much more numerous :airplane:
How so?
I'm not necessarily disagreeing, I'd just like to hear the argument.
-
How so?
I'm not necessarily disagreeing, I'd just like to hear the argument.
Bullets of different calibers have different trajectories, meaning a shot that works for the 7mm's doesn't work for the 20mm's, resulting in quite a few bullets missing. The way around is possible too, 20mm's hitting but 7mm overshooting. 7mm tracers give false indications for leading, and seeing a lot of hit sprites you could think that you hit a lot but the enemy is undamaged.
Also having all that 7mm gives ideas of shooting 800+ out when the enemy is extending, which is very bad of course, because I don't think that even 1% of these bullets will ever hit anything (or you are a god).
Score wise in a spit I'd say not the fire the MG's, or put convergence on 200 on all guns and stick to close range shots.
-
In another game , made by Hitech , kill streak was a factor many pilots fought for.
Is this hard to put in to the equation , or is it undesirable to fly without getting killed / captured ?
-
Bullets of different calibers have different trajectories, meaning a shot that works for the 7mm's doesn't work for the 20mm's, resulting in quite a few bullets missing. The way around is possible too, 20mm's hitting but 7mm overshooting. 7mm tracers give false indications for leading, and seeing a lot of hit sprites you could think that you hit a lot but the enemy is undamaged.
Also having all that 7mm gives ideas of shooting 800+ out when the enemy is extending, which is very bad of course, because I don't think that even 1% of these bullets will ever hit anything (or you are a god).
Score wise in a spit I'd say not the fire the MG's, or put convergence on 200 on all guns and stick to close range shots.
That's partially true, but the trajectory differences take too much blame IMO (which leads to the constant, ineffectual, tweaking in an effort to "fix" the problem).
When firing at convergence distances (with the various guns set to the same convergence) trajectory makes no difference at all. At convergence, it doesn't matter if the various guns exhibit identical trajectories, or vastly different trajectories; they'll all shoot to the same place (but won't get there at the same time).
The problems come into play as soon as there is any apparent target motion to deal with. The reason once again has less to do with trajectory, and more to do with time. A cannon round and a MG round, fired at the same time and going to the same place, won't get there at the same time.
The result is that a different amount of lead is required for each gun. The cannon rounds (being slower) require more lead. Essentially, it means that if your getting hits with more MG's on a crossing target, your lead is wrong to get hits with your cannons, and vice versa. On a target that appears stationary (saddled up on an unsuspecting target, for example) that time difference doesn't matter, but on a crossing target it could mean missing in front of a target with your MG's (too much lead) while also missing behind your target with your cannons (not enough lead) on the same pull of the trigger.
Beyond that, if the pilot is pulling anything above 1G (i.e if he's turning) while he's firing he's going to exaggerate this effect. This comes into play if he's trying to minimize apparent target motion by following his target through a turn.
At anything beyond convergence (as in your example) trajectory (which is a factor of time) comes into play. But at that point it's really just taking a bad situation and making it worse.
From a Hit% viewpoint, firing at crossing targets is always bad. It's worse if you have mixed guns. In both cases though, firing at a crossing target is ok if you fire in short bursts with the correct lead (and proper aim). If you fire a 1 second burst there's always going to be "waste" on a crossing shot. There's really only a small window within that 1 second burst where hits are going to be possible (with either gun). If it's a .25 second window, that means that .75 seconds of your 1 second burst are guaranteed misses (even with absolutely perfect aim). This takes your potential Hit% down to 25% already.
But being bad from a Hit% viewpoint doesn't mean they're bad shots to take, it just means you want to limit them to very short bursts (my bursts are tiny on these shots; I view them almost as if I was firing a single-shot weapon rather than MG's. When I flew CHogs a lot I was generally only firing 10-12 rounds in a burst). Even that was a lot of waste, since I could generally only expect 1-3 rounds to hit my opponent in any one burst (less than 10% hits). I actually find these are some of the best shots for me to take though (as long as I can hit with them) because even those little bursts will pick an opponent apart and demoralize him.
When it comes to a "mixed gun handicap" on these types of shots though, I'm not sure there really is one. For starters, less cannon rounds are being fired, so have less effect on your hit% (even if they all miss) than the multitude of MG rounds. Also, the cannon rounds will have more effect then the MG's if they do hit.
-
mntnman,
If you shoot @ 400 yards , shooting in a Fw90a5 vs a maneuvering target at least 2/3 of the bullets are waste , shooting with "all guns" pressed, shooting with the cannons on a 4*20mm Fw190a5 penalize you with 2*20 has really low trajectory , and the other 2*20 has better trajectory.
You can improve this by never shoot with the 7.7mm's or shoot with only them, it that give few kills but you get higher fighter rating than if you shot the enemy down which is incredibly stupid imo.
The way is to only take 2*20mm if you live with the fighter score , which renders a good plane with different guns partly useless unless you want buffs
-
You can improve this by never shoot with the 7.7mm's or shoot with only them, it that give few kills but you get higher fighter rating than if you shot the enemy down which is incredibly stupid imo.
I think this is very much just academical.
In the end, these things have a rather minor impact on total fighter rating and ranking (that is, unless one is spending all his ammo on buildings all the time). One's fighter rank will not change much (if at all) just by choosing to use only secondary or all guns in a 190A5. in the big picture, other things have a much bigger influence.
And if one opts to "waste" a bit more ammo on difficult shots and thus lowers his hit%, it often can be easily offset by the increase in K/D, K/S and K/H at the same time. For example I used to take a lot of long range shots on crossing targets in the Tempest. Pulling the trigger early and sending out a good burst resulted in a lower hit% but resulted in additional kills. To exaggerate: My "effiency" as a fighter did rise while my hit % fell.
Generally, I do what is necessary to get the job done, and while I of course strive to improve my aim I don't make decisions with my hit% as a primary concern.
But I think this discussion has already become a very theoretical one, very much removed from the reality of MA combat and lost most readers long time ago :D
-
The problem , Lusche is that you fighter score will take a big hit with much different guns on your plane , I do not have the time to do the math , but the K/D should have much more impact than the hit%.
-
The problem , Lusche is that you fighter score will take a big hit with much different guns on your plane , I do not have the time to do the math , but the K/D should have much more impact than the hit%.
Hit% is just one factor, and the resulting change in hit% rank # imho isn't that big in the overall context of fighter rank. Getting kills directly affects all other four: K/D, K/S, K/H, and score points. Taking such rather "extreme" measures to protect the hit % is akin to those players taking utmost measures to protect their k/d at the expense of everything else. And the "point of diminishing returns" does apply here, too. Finally, if your hit% changes notably just because you are using the BB guns or not, you are already a way above average shooter and thus the resulting % change will have little actual consequences on your hit% rank number - which is a relative one.
When flying the A-5 (and I had tours with a lot of A-5 usage), I too usually shoot with the MGs 151/20 only. But that's more a matter of philosophy and general firing discipline, but has little actual consequences on my hit% and none on on fighter rank that I have ever noticed.
-
but the K/D should have much more impact than the hit%.
are yo sure?
Guess an AH full of 20k 190s, tempons, ponies, running from the first sight of danger 2 times worse than nowadays (already pretty bad tho)
Now think about it, how much fun it would be?
IMO the current system is pretty decent. It still favorizes picking much enough...
:salute
-
Ok, I did a practical check with my Fighter Rank Oracle.
I entered my Tour 138 fighter scores (because they had not been that extremely high as my more recent one). I had to lower my hit% from the actual value 15.7% down to 10% - a reduction by about 1/3rd! - to have any impact on my fighter rank at all, and it was still very minor.
This is what I meant by diminishing returns - if you are such a good shot that fire primary/secondary/all guns will make a notable difference on your absolute hit% value, it will have a lesser impact on your relative hit% ranking, and much lesser impact on your overall fighter ranking.
There is one thing that has the biggest impact on your scores: Getting kills.
-
Ok, I did a practical check with my Fighter Rank Oracle.
I entered my Tour 138 fighter scores (because they had not been that extremely high as my more recent one). I had to lower my hit% from the actual value 15.7% down to 10% - a reduction by about 1/3rd! - to have any impact on my fighter rank at all, and it was still very minor.
This is what I meant by diminishing returns - if you are such a good shot that fire primary/secondary/all guns will make a notable difference on your absolute hit% value, it will have a lesser impact on your relative hit% ranking, and much lesser impact on your overall fighter ranking.
There is one thing that has the biggest impact on your scores: Getting kills.
Yeah but anything over 10% is a very high hit% rank to begin with. Go to an average player and change theirs from 4% to 6% (same type of % change) and tell me what happens.
As to mixed guns I find flying Spits with 4x.303's improves my hit% over flying Spits with 2x.50's even though the Hispanos/.50's have closer trajectories than the Hispanos/.303's. The vast majority of my kills are crossing shots and typically I rake the target from nose to tail mostly straight down the fuselage and typically get a pilot kill and an explosion. I also find that type of full plane form shot improves my hit% rather than hurts it. My hit% drops markedy on straight six shots on a level but smaller target.
-
Yeah but anything over 10% is a very high hit% rank to begin with.
The difference is that in my opinion it's only this kind of shooters where such in depth fiddling and minor tweaks actually have an impact. Just as with setting convergences - you need to be at a certain level before meticiously adjusted settings make any sense at all.
Telling a (low) average player to hold his fire until at close range, or to teach him a few ways how to saddle up better would imho have a much more radical impact on his hit%.
But of course that's an opinion I can't prove ;)
-
Kovel, I think you may be confused on how the scores are calculated. It's not a mathematical calculation between player A and player B stats that decides their rank. It's a simple comparison. One is doing better overall than the other, that's all.
It's just a comparison ranking. Back to this- %hit 7.66 (368) 5.26 (850) Player A is ranked 368 because 367 players are shooting more accurately than him. Player B is 850 because 849 players are shooting better than him.
Player A is being rewarded because he's doing so well compared to his peers (not mathematically). Player B isn't rewarded nearly as much, because he's not doing nearly as well compared to his peers.
It's only a 2.4% increase in accuracy between player A and B, but that small amount allowed a lot of other players to slip in between them. Player A has a better rank because he's beaten out almost 500 players by increasing his Hit% slightly.
I think all the Kovel is saying (and I've thought the same thing myself) is that hitting with 5% of your bullets, isn't statistically different than hitting with 7% of you bullets. IT's difficult to make an argument that if player B had landed an extra 2 out of 100 bullets, his other stats would improve.
So one could argue that a statistically irrelevant change in hit percentage, can make the difference between being 114th and 50th. While it is a side effect of flying K4 (or other 30mm planes) that your hit percentage goes up (because those pilots learn to fire from very close range) it can't be said that every 2% difference in hit% was created by employing better ACM to get in close.
I think he makes an effective point that hit% could be over rated as a "who's the best pilot" indicator. But even acknowleging that, I'd leave it the way it is. :salute
-
I think all the Kovel is saying (and I've thought the same thing myself) is that hitting with 5% of your bullets, isn't statistically different than hitting with 7% of you bullets. IT's difficult to make an argument that if player B had landed an extra 2 out of 100 bullets, his other stats would improve.
So one could argue that a statistically irrelevant change in hit percentage, can make the difference between being 114th and 50th. While it is a side effect of flying K4 (or other 30mm planes) that your hit percentage goes up (because those pilots learn to fire from very close range) it can't be said that every 2% difference in hit% was created by employing better ACM to get in close.
I think he makes an effective point that hit% could be over rated as a "who's the best pilot" indicator. But even acknowleging that, I'd leave it the way it is. :salute
VINKMAN thax for explaining that much better than me :aok
:salute
-
I think all the Kovel is saying (and I've thought the same thing myself) is that hitting with 5% of your bullets, isn't statistically different than hitting with 7% of you bullets. IT's difficult to make an argument that if player B had landed an extra 2 out of 100 bullets, his other stats would improve.
So one could argue that a statistically irrelevant change in hit percentage, can make the difference between being 114th and 50th. While it is a side effect of flying K4 (or other 30mm planes) that your hit percentage goes up (because those pilots learn to fire from very close range) it can't be said that every 2% difference in hit% was created by employing better ACM to get in close.
I think he makes an effective point that hit% could be over rated as a "who's the best pilot" indicator. But even acknowleging that, I'd leave it the way it is. :salute
And your looking it as that 2 percent is an over all marker. It isn't, it is "as compared to". If you have 20 people tied for the same spot ANY change "as compared to" the other 20 is going to cause a jump.
You have to remember that a 2 percent increase doesn't mean YOU are that much better, but you might be a lot better than the other players and that is where the change is.
-
And your looking it as that 2 percent is an over all marker. It isn't, it is "as compared to". If you have 20 people tied for the same spot ANY change "as compared to" the other 20 is going to cause a jump.
You have to remember that a 2 percent increase doesn't mean YOU are that much better, but you might be a lot better than the other players and that is where the change is.
I get that Fugitive. The numbers are the numbers. Kovel is making the point that if a stat becomes a disproportionate discriminator in rank, compared to its required difference in skill or how well you played, then perhaps it should be 'weighted' to bring those in proportion.
To further that point when you look at all the stats, hit percentage is the easiest to get a big movement in rank on. It's hard to kill more Bandits, or to not get killed. But most pilots only think of how they are using their ammo in terms of running out. To ensure a kill, you may choose to shoot early and often (skip the discussion about allerting enemies to your presence, not talking about that trade off here.), or hold down the trigger a little extra just to be sure. You'll shoot at guys just to turn them for someone else, etc. You'll spray some troops, or shoot at a gv for the hell of it. If your in Fighter mode, these are hit% killers.
But if you are a little more careful about tossing bullets around, you can move your number a couple of percentage points. As Lusche has shown, a couple of points can move your number up a lot [until you reach the knee of the curve]. And that number can move your rank quite a bit. You won't find an easier way to improve your rank than getting carefull with a few percentage of your bullets. Try it. :salute
-
The problem , Lusche is that you fighter score will take a big hit with much different guns on your plane , I do not have the time to do the math , but the K/D should have much more impact than the hit%.
You can always map which guns to have on your trigger. When I fly a tater plane I shoot only taters, when taters are gone it's time to go.
Tater tossers will always have better hit%, take the k4 it has 65 rounds of taters IF you land with 6 kill and say you hit each kill with just 1 tater (which is probably not the case) and you expended all your taters in this sortie then you'll have 10% hit% This skews hit% cause it's not that difficult to become good at tossing taters. I too think hit% weighs to heavily with score.
Get rid of hit% as one of the "score measurements" and add ENY as one :aok :aok
JUGgler
-
I think all the Kovel is saying (and I've thought the same thing myself) is that hitting with 5% of your bullets, isn't statistically different than hitting with 7% of you bullets. IT's difficult to make an argument that if player B had landed an extra 2 out of 100 bullets, his other stats would improve.
So one could argue that a statistically irrelevant change in hit percentage, can make the difference between being 114th and 50th. While it is a side effect of flying K4 (or other 30mm planes) that your hit percentage goes up (because those pilots learn to fire from very close range) it can't be said that every 2% difference in hit% was created by employing better ACM to get in close.
I think he makes an effective point that hit% could be over rated as a "who's the best pilot" indicator. But even acknowleging that, I'd leave it the way it is. :salute
Actually, that 2% increase is significant, because it means player B is showing a 40% improvement in accuracy over player A...
Even a 20% Hit% is just plain gawdawful, terrible statistically, lol! Then again, it's 4x better than the guy with only 5%.
In the end though, any of the components that go into any of the ranks could be seen as over-rated when it comes to weighting. I've essentially said the same thing when it comes to K/D, K/S, and K/T. IMO, it's far too easy to raise those with help from other players, so they certainly aren't necessarily an accurate measure of INDIVIDUAL skill when it comes to INDIVIDUAL rank.
Sorry, my router died, so I've been without internet the last few days.
-
I personally feel the most important aspect of being a good fighter pilot in AH is The ability to hit.
absolutely more important then anything else :aok
now If I could just learn to hit :bhead
-
So basically what it boils down to is Rank doesn't matter?
-
So basically what it boils down to is Rank doesn't matter?
I don't think that was ever in question :D
-
I personally feel the most important aspect of being a good fighter pilot in AH is The ability to hit.
Without that, it's just flying around, right?
-
Actually, that 2% increase is significant, because it means player B is showing a 40% improvement in accuracy over player A...
Only a guy selling something looks to the rate of change of blips in the noise floor and discribes them as 'significant changes'. ;) :salute
I will only buy that if he's killing 40% more planes with the 40% greater hit percentage. If he's not killing anymore planes, than it's proof that the 2% difference in actual percent, and hence the 40% relative comparison, are irrelevant.
-
Without that, it's just flying around, right?
or like i allways say, good flying doesen't kill the con! You have to hit him. For squadrons like us LDs based on Wing tactics, a good hit ratio is the base of the trust to each other!
So beside going RTB represented by a good K/D the hit% is the most important score too me
<S>
-
is the commercial break over? :)
-
So to test the theories, and see if hit percent can be gamed I'm going to try an experiment.
I've done a rough calculation of my bullet count based on ammo loads fromthe various planes I've flown this tour and a swag at the number of sorties in each plane.
I figure I've fired ~97,000 rounds and landed ~5700 of them. Assuming ground targets count has hits in Fighter Mode, I'm going to take up a P-51 0r P-47 and fly to a remote base with a shore battery. I will pump all my ammo into the shore battery. Assuming I can land 50% of the rounds, a single sortie should raise my hit percentage from 5.94 to 7.66%
Susequent runs will generate the following changes.
second sortie 7.66% to 8.49%
third sortie 8.49% to 9.31%
Fourth sortie 9.31% to 10.11%
etc....
Then we'll see how much my hit% rank changes, and fighter rank changes.
My current scores:
Score Rank
Kills per Death + 1 1.37 660
Kills per Sortie 0.93 555
Kills per Hour of Flight 5.40 441
Kills Hit Percentage 5.94 688
Kill Points 21937.67 136
Ok let's see what happens.
-
Ground targets supply count as misses while in fighter mode. That why some people won't straf buildings
-
easiest way to game hit% is attack bombers
Without that, it's just flying around, right?
:rofl
exactly
-
easiest way to game hit% is attack bombers
:rofl
exactly
Or get really close... :noid
-
Or get really close... :noid
in that case its usually my plane that does the hitting and not my rounds :rofl
-
Ground targets supply count as misses while in fighter mode. That why some people won't straf buildings
So what counts as a hit in fighter mode? planes, vehicles, ships, anything else? Can anyone confirm?
-
easiest way to game hit% is attack bombers
My hit % can attest to that! :rock
-
in that case its usually my plane that does the hitting and not my rounds :rofl
Not dat close. :bhead :D
-
So what counts as a hit in fighter mode? planes, vehicles, ships, anything else? Can anyone confirm?
Just use Lusche's oracle (based on tour 141 data) and plug in yourr original tour nbrs, then play around with the various sub-categories to see what the effect *would* have been in Tour 141.
I did this, specifically for my gunnery % a few pages earlier in this thread:
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,324028.msg4234917.html#msg4234917
(http://i499.photobucket.com/albums/rr355/swatpeace/rankwhatif.jpg)
-
Just use Lusche's oracle (based on tour 141 data) and plug in yourr original tour nbrs, then play around with the various sub-categories to see what the effect *would* have been in Tour 141.
I did this, specifically for my gunnery % a few pages earlier in this thread:
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,324028.msg4234917.html#msg4234917
(http://i499.photobucket.com/albums/rr355/swatpeace/rankwhatif.jpg)
Yes I thought I suggested using the tool, but I must have forgot to add that to the post. But I guess I can't hit a shore battery and have it count as hits in fighter mode. has some one confirmed what counts in fighter mode?
-
Yes I thought I suggested using the tool, but I must have forgot to add that to the post. But I guess I can't hit a shore battery and have it count as hits in fighter mode.
If that were the case, 20% hit percentage would be barely average ;)
No, objects do not count. You need to hit planes. (Wheels up no requirement :noid)
-
If that were the case, 20% hit percentage would be barely average ;)
No, objects do not count. You need to hit planes. (Wheels up no requirement :noid)
ok so it's much harder to "game it" which is good. :aok
-
Not dat close. :bhead :D
:rofl
the other day I dropped on an AFK badguy totally missed all shots and slammed into his plane, I fell away broken he kept flying straight...don't even think he knew what happened because he never moved and kept flying straight..... :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
ok so it's much harder to "game it" which is good. :aok
Like any other facet of any other rank, Hit% can be "gamed". Of course! It may be more difficult that some of the other components, but it certainly can be done...
And, like others mentioned, bombers are a good way to do that. You need to shoot planes to have bullets counted as hits while scoring as a fighter, and since bombers are big, mostly helpless, and don't dodge much they make easy targets... Beyond that, shooting them should also allow you to "game" your K/D, since once you learn the basics you should be able to shoot them down with little risk to yourself. It's been 5+ years since I checked, but my personal K/D against bombers was in the 80/1 range (and that was because I counted C47's as bombers, since they had the most "kills" on me; it should have been higher than that). Coupled with the 40%+ Hit% I was enjoying on them at that point (I wasn't as accurate on bombers as I am now) I could have had a nice K/D and a nice Hit% to go along with it.
Of course, that would have also lowered my K/T substantially, and probably my K/S unless I re-armed a lot (my F4U carries enough .50 rounds for 12+ fighter kills per hop, but I have trouble getting more than 4-5 bomber kills without running out of ammo). Another option would be to NOT kill the bombers quickly, but instead "prolong the agony" by distributing your hits all over his plane (allowing for more hits on each bomber before it dies).
For the most part, it's difficult to "game" any one aspect of your rank without hurting another, but if someone really wants to do it...
Other options less-often mentioned to "game" the various components of fighter rank are vulching (especially if you have a friend on another team or a second account), and bailing to avoid RTBing (fighting to the death accomplishes the same thing, but is seen as more "legitimate"). Or, you could carefully "select" which hops you wanted scored as fighter vs. attack. Or fly with a wingman, squad, or horde (which will allow you to use the skill of others to "pad" your K/D, K/S, and K/T (they help keep you alive, and you spend less time flying back to the fight). Of course, that'll help your points as well... And the perks you earn will allow... Ah, won't go there. Regardless, someone is always willing to argue that all of those options are perfectly legitimate (and they probably are).
Keep in mind, I don't give a rats bahooty what my rank is, or your rank is, or how we compare. So my Hit% is just that; my Hit%. It tells me how many hits I get on my opponents... As such, it's true value (to me) is a measure of my skill or improvement over time. I have enough respect for myself that I won't try to "game" myself.
-
Only a guy selling something looks to the rate of change of blips in the noise floor and discribes them as 'significant changes'. ;) :salute
I will only buy that if he's killing 40% more planes with the 40% greater hit percentage. If he's not killing anymore planes, than it's proof that the 2% difference in actual percent, and hence the 40% relative comparison, are irrelevant.
I wasn't going to respond to this originally, because I was pretty sure you were just trolling. I honestly have trouble thinking that folks would argue that the "shooting" part of "shooting someone down" was over-rated.
It is significant, because it's a simple, basic comparison between the two numbers. In the same manner, 10 is twice as many as 5. It's even more significant because the overall Hit% of ANYONE in the MA is so pitifully low. When it comes to low percentages like that, whole numbers often aren't really sufficient for measuring. For example, we measure waste percentages in the hundredths of a percent, because we're measuring something that's only around 10% of the whole. Small changes can have a large impact at that level.
As far as relevance, it would come down to several things before we could make a solid judgement on that. Your method wouldn't necessarily work, because it doesn't take time into account. Or targets (is one shooting bombers, while the other shoots fighters?). Is one a lone-wolf, doing it all on his own, while the other has friends to protect him while he saddles up for an easy shot?
I also wouldn't take a one month performance as "gospel". Are these two players still showing the same Hit% now, a few days later? Were their 5% and 7%'s "flukes", or are they continuing to display this level of competence?
Lots of other factors to consider as well. But for a simple, basic, comparison, one is definitely a 40% improvement over the other. Ask your math teacher or someone who plays with statistics. Be sure to include the information that these are just two data points of several thousand, and that the data points are primarily concentrated between 0 and 6% with limited outliers as high at 15-18%. That 2% difference is quite significant in a situation like that, especially if it's used in a simple sequential ranking system.
Of course, if I wanted to "sell" a different idea I could argue that it was only a measly 2% higher than the other guy and has no real significance (and hope nobody saw that it was a 40% improvement over the other guy?).
-
I don;t find killing buff easy. They're tough and have lots of guns. I find killing a fighter 1v1 easier than killing a buff formation. If the buff doesn't kill me, It usually damages me enough that I'm not fighting anything else after I encounter them.
The K/D of B-17s is .40, and B-24s is .35, B-29 is .99, and Lancs is the lowest at .22. But I think its artificially low due to the number of ditches and landed bandits because they fight right over the bandits base. I bet if you counted a damaged fighter that had to break off a buff attack as a kill, buffs would have K/D > 1.0
I find it a challenge. My new high speed approach to attacks has lead to a sharp decrease in getting shot up, but has also lead to a unsatisfactory increase in collisions! :eek:
-
The K/D of B-17s is .40, and B-24s is .35, B-29 is .99, and Lancs is the lowest at .22. But I think its artificially low due to the number of ditches and landed bandits because they fight right over the bandits base. I bet if you counted a damaged fighter that had to break off a buff attack as a kill, buffs would have K/D > 1.0
Apart from the B-29, this doesn't match my observations in the MA at all. Even with lots of fighters getting shot up due to their stupidity on the bombers 6 o'clock, the buffs still take much more than they dish out. And most of the time I see fighters going boom instead of a controlled descent & ditch anyway.
-
Sniping with taters produces the best hit%, other than maybe vulching with a chog :aok
JUGgler
-
Apart from the B-29, this doesn't match my observations in the MA at all. Even with lots of fighters getting shot up due to their stupidity on the bombers 6 o'clock, the buffs still take much more than they dish out. And most of the time I see fighters going boom instead of a controlled descent & ditch anyway.
I can agree with that in situations where multiple fighters are attacking the formation. But single fighters vs the formatins...my experience is that teh buffs usually can handle themselves pretty well. I'm not counting B-25s, A-20s or other ground attack planes. :salute
-
I don;t find killing buff easy. They're tough and have lots of guns. I find killing a fighter 1v1 easier than killing a buff formation. If the buff doesn't kill me, It usually damages me enough that I'm not fighting anything else after I encounter them.
The K/D of B-17s is .40, and B-24s is .35, B-29 is .99, and Lancs is the lowest at .22. But I think its artificially low due to the number of ditches and landed bandits because they fight right over the bandits base. I bet if you counted a damaged fighter that had to break off a buff attack as a kill, buffs would have K/D > 1.0
You're not seriously relating your effectiveness against them to their overall K/D are you?
It has nothing to do with what their K/D's are in the MA. It's how you set up your attack, and how well you shoot once you have them in range that matters.
-
I can agree with that in situations where multiple fighters are attacking the formation. But single fighters vs the formatins...my experience is that teh buffs usually can handle themselves pretty well. I'm not counting B-25s, A-20s or other ground attack planes. :salute
I don't attack formations with "help" from anyone else if I can help it at all. Actually, if there are friendlies that are interested in the same bombers I'm after I'm more likely to take damage because I'll be in a hurry to kill them all before they get too worried about the other friendly.
Bombers are essentially helpless if you attack them properly. I can think of only a few bomber pilots that stand much of a chance, and even then...
-
You're not seriously relating your effectiveness against them to their overall K/D are you?
It has nothing to do with what their K/D's are in the MA. It's how you set up your attack, and how well you shoot once you have them in range that matters.
I'm stating that buffs are not easy pickings, and making a case for the data confirming that. A single fighter attacking a bomber flown by a good gunner, is more than likely going to die before he gets to pad his hit percentage much.
So what is your full proof approach to padding your hit percentage against a formation of 18K B-17s?
-
Bombers are essentially helpless if you attack them properly.
+1
of course, the trouble for me is doing each pass properly :) but I agree with that, actually they are easy pickings if you've got the requisite alt and ammo
-
Bombers are essentially helpless if you attack them properly. I can think of only a few bomber pilots that stand much of a chance, and even then...
Not necessarily true against Mk108 aircraft. No matter what angle you take, you still have to get very close to record enough tater hits to take a bomber down and when you get that close, a good gunner will be able to damage you, regardless of your angle. I always try to take good angles and i'd say 80% of the time I do not take damage from bombers, but about 20% of the time he'll make a good shot as I am getting close.
-
Not necessarily true against Mk108 aircraft. No matter what angle you take, you still have to get very close to record enough tater hits to take a bomber down and when you get that close, a good gunner will be able to damage you, regardless of your angle. I always try to take good angles and i'd say 80% of the time I do not take damage from bombers, but about 20% of the time he'll make a good shot as I am getting close.
I do manange to dive in from good angles at high enough speed to make some close range passes without getting shot, but I miss my shots. I eventually make about 6 or 7 passes at the formation with a results percent breakdown that looks like this:
30% run out of ammo with no recorded kill
30% Get one kill or more
30% collide with the bomber and crash.
10% of the time get shot down by the bomber.
And that's once you've climbed sufficiently over the top of the formation, which is hard to do if you are below them when you spot them.
-
I don;t find killing buff easy. They're tough and have lots of guns. I find killing a fighter 1v1 easier than killing a buff formation. If the buff doesn't kill me, It usually damages me enough that I'm not fighting anything else after I encounter them.
True.....when I happen upon formations of b17s with escorts, I feel like I won a rare high altitude dogfight as a prize.
-
I'm stating that buffs are not easy pickings, and making a case for the data confirming that. A single fighter attacking a bomber flown by a good gunner, is more than likely going to die before he gets to pad his hit percentage much.
And there we have the problem. You are assuming a "good gunner". A gunner that good he will be able to shoot you up even when you do a by the book attack is exceptionally rare. At standard MA altitudes, the average bomber is posing a much less threat to a fighter than the average enemy fighter
The notion bombers (except B-29) are generally more dangerous and much less efficient for "padding hit%" borders on being absurd. :old:
-
And there we have the problem. You are assuming a "good gunner". A gunner that good he will be able to shoot you up even when you do a by the book attack is exceptionally rare. At standard MA altitudes, the average bomber is posing a much less threat to a fighter than the average enemy fighter
The notion bombers (except B-29) are generally more dangerous and much less efficient for "padding hit%" borders on being absurd. :old:
More dangerous and much less efficient than what?
What I said was, I don't think Buffs are an easy way to pad hit%. There's nothing absurd about that statement.
I did not say that hit percentage against bombers was going to be lower than fighters. That would be absurd.
-
More dangerous and much less efficient than what?
For Hit% (in Fighter rank) you need to shoot fighters or bombers (C47's count as bombers). Those are your choices.
Bombers are much easier to hit than fighters. They're much larger, much less agile, slower, and fly much more predictable flight-paths.
Compared to fighters, bombers are fairly simple to hit. Hitting them with a higher percentage of your shots fired is what allows you to drive up your hit%.
On a "dangerous" level, bombers pose much less of a threat than fighters. For one, they're almost entirely "passive". They cannot attack with any efficiency, and seldom even try. They cannot catch you. And, if you launch a well-planned attack from above, they have little chance of doing any damage to you. A tiny fraction of bomber gunners are good enough to be able to defend against that sort of attack. There used to be a guy named 999000 that was wicked-good with the B17 guns, and even he was beatable with a well-executed attack (is he still playing?).
What I said was, I don't think Buffs are an easy way to pad hit%. There's nothing absurd about that statement.
They're easy to hit. Admittedly, hit% is the one factor I consider "most difficult" to pad, but it's still somewhat easy to pad by shooting lots of bombers.
-
Not necessarily true against Mk108 aircraft. No matter what angle you take, you still have to get very close to record enough tater hits to take a bomber down and when you get that close, a good gunner will be able to damage you, regardless of your angle. I always try to take good angles and i'd say 80% of the time I do not take damage from bombers, but about 20% of the time he'll make a good shot as I am getting close.
I can see that some guns would be more difficult than the .50's I use.
I've run into some very good buff gunners, that could sometimes land damage even on a good pass, but I'm not sure I'm sold on the "regardless of angle" idea. I certainly don't get hit on the majority of my passes, even against some of the best gunners I've bumped into.
-
I do manange to dive in from good angles at high enough speed to make some close range passes without getting shot, but I miss my shots. I eventually make about 6 or 7 passes...
Which is why I stress the importance of YOUR OWN hit%. You haven't really perfected bomber attacking (and shooting) if you need more than three (occasionally 4) quick passes to kill a formation. Those extra passes are getting you killed...
Minimize the time you're vulnerable by maximizing your hits, and by hitting the right parts of the bomber.
-
I'm stating that buffs are not easy pickings, and making a case for the data confirming that. A single fighter attacking a bomber flown by a good gunner, is more than likely going to die before he gets to pad his hit percentage much.
So what is your full proof approach to padding your hit percentage against a formation of 18K B-17s?
I don't see the date confirming that they're not easy pickings? The data you've provided shows that they have a low K/D, but not that they're difficult targets.
It's more likely that they aren't often attacked by someone using good tactics, or with someone that can aim, so their K/D could be argued to be artificially high...
I don't want to turn this into a "how to kill bombers thread", but I'll show you a basic tactic that works the majority of the time. In this case, I was actually pretty sloppy with my attack, and was too far behind the bombers while shooting. That could have gotten me killed... I normally try to stay slightly more forward.
This attack takes more time to set up if the bombers are higher, but is still effective on 18-20K buffs. More time-consuming, but no less effective.
I'd have to dig for other film if you want it, but I'd recommend doing a search. The topic has come up before.
B24's_0001.ahf (http://www.4shared.com/file/wKWoxP0r/B24s_0001.html)
I don't think the film shows it (not on my end anyway) but these bombers were each set afire with one pass. While I'm setting up in position for the next pass each time, I'm also waiting for the burning bomber to die so there are fewer guns to worry about...
-
I can see that some guns would be more difficult than the .50's I use.
I've run into some very good buff gunners, that could sometimes land damage even on a good pass, but I'm not sure I'm sold on the "regardless of angle" idea. I certainly don't get hit on the majority of my passes, even against some of the best gunners I've bumped into.
What distance do you normally cross/break off at? I am usually around 100-150yds. If the gunner can get himself in the correct gun slot before my slash my plane is pretty large regardless of my angle. Lots of oil and radiator leaks.
-
What distance do you normally cross/break off at? I am usually around 100-150yds. If the gunner can get himself in the correct gun slot before my slash my plane is pretty large regardless of my angle. Lots of oil and radiator leaks.
I don't normally break off? I slash right through the formation, and I'm often extremely close to colliding (although I cannot recall ever actually hitting?).
I fire as I hit 400 yards or so, and continue until I'd start missing if I continued to hold the trigger, aiming for the rear of the cockpit. Once I see hits there I generally switch to the right wing root to set it afire. If my hands and feet are discombobulated I might shoot for the left wing root instead though. I'd bet 70% or better of the bombers I hit start burning on the right wing root though.
In my mind, my perfect attack starts above and slightly in front. I dive at a point slightly in the lead of the right drone, and begin leveling my dive at about 600yds out. I fire as I pass through or very slightly behind the formation, and generally will be level at a point about 600 in front of the lead bomber, and around 1000ft (but not more) underneath him, flying to the same rough heading he is. I'll maintain that level attitude until I'm 600-800yds from him (slightly out of guns range, for the most part), at which time I'll begin my zoom, gaining alt and getting out in front again. At the top of my zoom, I will either roll or loop back down on him, whichever method sets me up for a near-vertical dive at his cockpit again.
I never settle for a six attack, but will stay level at the top if I need to to get back out in front again.
What I'm hoping for is to only really offer my target a shot as I approach with his top turret (I'm too far forward for his tail gun, and too centered to present much of a shot from the waist guns). I'm only going to be within firing range of that turret for a second or so, before I pass beneath him. Beneath him, I'm only in view of his bottom turret, but by the time he gets to it I'm too far forward and/or beginning to go up. He'll have to switch to his nose turret for that, but I'm out of range now...
In my mind, I'm making him switch between guns to track me, but giving him little time to acquire me in those positions before I move out of range. I don't know if they really do that though :D I do know they fire at me as I dive, and spray at me as I zoom back up in front, but that they seldom hit me :D
This is another film that shows basically the same thing. Two groups of buffs, Saber takes the easy ones I take the hard ones :D I edited the voice out, but the jist of it was "you take those ones, and leave mine alone!".
6 buffs with Saber!.ahf (http://www.4shared.com/file/0h_xSRI2/6_buffs_with_Saber.html)
It really is a "cookie-cutter" technique, with some slight alterations depending upon how much height and speed I have, etc. I have the patience of a rock though, so I don't mind climbing into position if I need to. After all, I'd like them to get the idea that going high won't keep them safe :D Once you have this down bombers are just bonus kills for the most part.
I'm sure you don't really need any guidance though Grizz! You do just fine already!
-
he may not but I found that informative thanx :salute
been doing it a bit different then that, more trying for a face shot downward angle.
-
So 400yds ish? That sounds reasonable for 50 cals. A good angle and 400 yds will keep you out of good gun solutions. Good angle and 150 yds will keep you out of most gun solutions, not all though.
-
This is the first I've looked at this thread. I now have proof that there's 13 pages of guys more concerned about teh score than I.
(http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk121/TheAmish/smiley-level1_don021.gif)
-
This is the first I've looked at this thread. I now have proof that there's 13 pages of guys more concerned about teh score than I.
(http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk121/TheAmish/smiley-level1_don021.gif)
I think you should reread it :D I haven't given a hoot for any of my scores for almost a decade...
That doesn't mean we can't have a discussion on what components make it up.
How many pages??? This thread is only on page four for me!
-
So 400yds ish? That sounds reasonable for 50 cals. A good angle and 400 yds will keep you out of good gun solutions. Good angle and 150 yds will keep you out of most gun solutions, not all though.
I start firing at 400, but continue to get closer until I go through or right behind the formation. I actually want the majority of my hits to occur at a closer distance due to my convergence settings.
-
he may not but I found that informative thanx :salute
been doing it a bit different then that, more trying for a face shot downward angle.
The thing I don't like about that angle is that it puts me too far behind the formation for my second pass (if I'm visualizing your attack right?).
The way I set it up my first pass sets me up in position for my second, etc...
Still on page four, btw :noid
-
I do dead six attacks if I have a big rate of closure.
In a 110G, you can rake across all three in one pass and take them all out.
If you're chasing B17s that fly at 316mph at 34,800 feet in your 110g, you don't really have a choice on attack angle.
-
I do dead six attacks if I have a big rate of closure.
In a 110G, you can rake across all three in one pass and take them all out.
If you're chasing B17s that fly at 316mph at 34,800 feet in your 110g, you don't really have a choice on attack angle.
If you have so much more E why not just fly by them in front get above and come straight down?
-
Because a b17 doing 316mph at 32,800 feet will only get you one pass since turning the 110g causes it to slow greatly.
If I'm getting only one pass, I prefer to hit all 3 planes.
Since 1994, I've done all the different types of bomber attack scenarios but only do slashing attacks when the altitude and speed allow it.
If done right, you can catch most any plane with a high 110g.........as long as you have enough fuel.
-
Because a b17 doing 316mph at 32,800 feet will only get you one pass since turning the 110g causes it to slow greatly.
If you're chasing B17s that fly at 316mph at 34,800 feet in your 110g, you don't really have a choice on attack angle.
Not that I don't hang on every word you have ever typed out. But I thought I'd highlight an anomaly
-
2,000 feet changes nothing.