Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Greebo on November 27, 2013, 10:08:31 AM
-
I have made the following suggestion in other posts but subsequent discussion tended to derail the OP's original topic. So I have decided to give it its own post. The idea is for HTC to alter the game's scoring system in a way that encourages players who are interested in score/rank to fly in a more aggressive way to achieve a high score.
Currently the fighter rank is calculated by creating an average rank from the player's individual ranks in these five stats: K/D, K/S, K/T, Hit % and kill points (total damage done). The problem with this as I see it is it tends to make players fly in a fairly conservative manner, only engaging with a plane/energy/numbers advantage and running if things look at all risky. I think that this makes the game less interesting for many players, including me. Also it does not do what a score system should, reward what is difficult and penalise what is easy. The way I propose for this to be improved is for HTC to create one or two new stats to be added to the combined score total.
The first one would be friend/enemy ratio. The game would calculate the numbers of red and green icons in view each time a player makes a kill and add that to the player's F/E stat. So a player with a stat of 2.6 would be someone who tends to seek the safety of numbers, while someone with a stat of 0.6 would be the opposite. The player with the lowest number would be ranked first in that stat and this would be added to the other five stats to calculate the total rank. Anyone who is flying for score/rank would now have an incentive to seek out more even engagements, which should mean more fighting for everyone. A slightly more complex version of this would also tot up the average range of the red and green icons at the same time.
The second stat is ENY/kill. The game records the ENY of the plane you are flying every time you score a kill and creates an average stat for you. Optionally it could also record the ENY of each plane you kill and record the ratio of the two. Your rank in this stat is then also added to the combined score stat. This is an incentive to fly some more challenging higher ENY rides and should create a bigger variety of planes in the MA. If enemy ENY is calculated it is also an incentive to go after the toughest enemy and not the weakest.
-
Sounds good mate
+1
-
The red/green ratio idea could be somewhat circumvented by a 262. A good 262 pilot could fly into a horde of bombers and get a lot of kills in a short time.
The eny/kill is a very good idea.
Also, I would like to see an assist/death stat. A pilot that gets killed mostly by one other pilot at a time would be A: probably not be as good as advertised and B: would not be flying into harms way. Someone who has a lot of assists/death against them would be a pilot that is more difficult to bring down.
-
I'm in....+1
:aok
boo
PS We likely need a few ways to incentive some changes. This could be a great start.
-
I could dig it, but you're going to have to set a defined limit to the friend/enemy ratio thing. Just coming into view is a bit long. I can foresee all types of fussing because some green guy came into view right before a kill was recorded.
-
Absolutely!
This is one of the brightest wishes I've seen in a long time :aok
+1
:salute
-
I'm all against the first half,. becasue it's not really an improvement.
I don't need my ENY 5 262 or Tempest to be 'within' a lot of enemy cons without really taking that much risks, it also works fine with a 47M (10), Ta 152(10), 109K(15) or P-51B(20), especially as I'm actively hunting for bomber and Jabo missions. Swooping down on the enemy blob, score a kill or two 'against great odds' and zooming back to alt. Conservative, relatively low risk, and my F/E stat will show and impessively 'brave' pilot ;)
If I now think about it in detail, it would be actually a good boost for my own fighter rank... And I'm certainly not flying the way you had in mind :)
But I do fully agree with making ENY a part of the score. :aok
And while we are at it... I'd like to see the object damage score points fixed :pray
-
I definitely see Lushce's points...
What if the instant you score a kill, the game assesses your altitude and speed (E state) and provides a modifier based on your energy in relation to any enemy cons within X range (maybe icon range, perhaps less).
So, a high E boom and zoomer who is placing himself at little risk due to his energy advantage may score fewer points per kill, even though he should be able to score more kills than the guy who is down in the weeds with flaps hanging out who may score a kill but leave himself at much greater risk and consequently down fewer planes per death.
So, if properly balanced, the guys down turn fighting are not at such a score disadvantage to the guys who are much more careful in engaging only when having a great E advantage. Maybe it would encourage more guys to get in and mix it up instead of playing it safe all the time.
It also might encourage pilots to intentionally fight from a disadvantage. (I remember all of those instructional videos Agent360 did in the 109, illustrating how to entice a higher con to attack, then reversing him for the kill).
I'm sure there is a major flaw in the thought that somebody will come along to point out soon...
Just spitballing here...
-
What if the instant you score a kill, the game assesses your altitude and speed (E state) and provides a modifier based on your energy in relation to any enemy cons within X range (maybe icon range, perhaps less).
(...)
I'm sure there is a major flaw in the thought that somebody will come along to point out soon...
The first 'major flaw' I see is that it's going to be terribly complicated, intransparent and most probably still not 'fair' at all, as it tries to objectively quantify a mostly subjective situation. :old:
-
I'm not too bothered about players taking advantage of the F/E ratio by using a fast aircraft to browse off massed bomber or jabo formations. If the raid didn't bring their own fast and high planes as cover, that's their fault. In that situation what you gain from the F/E stat, you lose from the ENY stat and in the case of buffs probably K/T as well. I can see that the change would be bad for people who habitually escort bombers however, maybe they could exclude friendly bombers from it.
The primary purpose of the F/E change is to encourage people to engage while outnumbered, not to determine how "brave" anyone is. If someone is up high in a fast plane harassing a massed jabo raid, that encourages his team mates to come in and engage the raid as well. Few want to be first in to attack a horde, but if there's one or two green there already they may be keener to do so. If the raid's high cover is busy looking over their shoulders at the fast guy and not down at the furball, it encourages combat to begin at lower alts. Currently some score-obsessed players see a bigger red darbar in one place on the map and a bigger green darbar at another place and up at the green. With the F/E mod in place they might think of the red as an opportunity rather than a risk, up a fast plane there and get the combat ball rolling.
The point about a red or green icon appearing just before the kill is not a big deal I think, these things would average out in the end. Adding the average range of green and red icons to the equation would make it fairer if a little more complex.
-
1+ look good Greebo :aok
-
I'm not too bothered about players taking advantage of the F/E ratio by using a fast aircraft to browse off massed bomber or jabo formations. If the raid didn't bring their own fast and high planes as cover, that's their fault. In that situation what you gain from the F/E stat, you lose from the ENY stat and in the case of buffs probably K/T as well. I can see that the change would be bad for people who habitually escort bombers however, maybe they could exclude friendly bombers from it.
I included some ENY stats with my example to show that I would not lose from it. You don't need to fly 262 to do the thing I described.
And I won't lose more in K/Time as I do now - because I'm already flying the way I described above, hovering at high altitude and looking for bomber and Jabo missions. The F/E stat would just boost my already quite exaggerated rank some more. No need for me to become a 'brave' fighter pilot fighting at unfavorable odds to get a great F/E stat.
That's why I think this won't improve anything. It just makes score more complicated. Even more so when you start to add special cases and exceptions (friendly bombers).
-
I don't really care who gets great stats from this, the idea is to give more players a reason to fight more often. The only stat that matters to me personally is fun (i.e fights) per hour.
-
I don't really care who gets great stats from this, the idea is to give more players a reason to fight more often.
But it doesn't really, and that's the whole point. :P
Who did not care about score before will not care after, and who did care about his score can very easily game your new stat as shown above. And if you add more rules to it, people will just ignore it at all... after all, a great number already doesn't get how the current system works at all (as can be seen in many post about 'protecting K/D for rank')
Making ENY a part of the score (points) would be a far more streamlined, comprehensible and most probably much effective way.
But the chances are slim to see any of it implemented anyway. When I did show the damage point bug, HT himself wrote "but it has always been like this" ;)
-
how would the score work when most of the fights are low on the floor and there's gv's nearby?
-two guys defending against 4 or 5 not actually hiding behind let's say 4 or 5 werbies?
-two guys "defending" against 4 or 5 while hiding under 7 werbies? attackers are
-two werbies defending against 10 guys in airplanes attempting to kill the town?
-a massive gv spawn fest camping like at 185?
since most of the fights are not really high alt fights but more low to the ground, using "green/red" counters to determine score will create more confusion and arguments than the collision model.
you can argue that the gv's can be excluded but at the same time you penalize AA gv's who's only purpose is to kill airplanes. also the scores for airplanes like il2's and some other tank killers would be weird.
while you can argue that it should only be while in "fighter" mode, everybody knows that if you are defending you never up in "fighter" mode as the kills count against you and thus lowers your score.
I dont think changing the "fighter" score, will encourage more people to defend against higher numbers. getting rid of the "fighter" score and have only attack score while having gv/air/structures categories would encourage more fighting as people wont be so worried about hurting their precious "fighter" score.
semp
-
I like both the additional score mechanisms.... I would have to say however that I would continue to seek combat with plane/energy advantage and would withdraw from combat if/when I should lose said advantage in order to regain it. It's basically common sense.......
-
I like this changes. What about creating incentives to fly in set-up missions, which would lead to organized behavior?
boo
-
Someone gaming the new stat in any way would by definition be more likely to be flying in a few vs many situation, which is what I am trying to make happen. Without the stat he would be more likely to be contributing to a many vs few situation.
Anyone who doesn't care about score would not be bothered by this, but judging from the way I see many fly in the MA I suspect there are a significant fraction of people who do. Even if 10% of players go from joining hordes to picking off hordes it will help the gameplay in the MA IMO.
As for GV icons if you are in fighter mode they don't count, but if you kill a plane in attack mode they do. Even in the current scoring GV kills don't count in fighter mode so its no different to that in principle.
As for whether HTC will ever implement this, I'd say the odds are against it. But if you don't ask.....
-
:huh I'm so confused :confused:
-
I like the OP ideas :aok
Also, I welcome any 262 to challenge my bombers. I believe I'm 1/1 there, the other night I was almost 2/2 but he got skeerrd. The risk is considerably one sided in that scenario.
-
Not down for the first part of the OP's wish, however the second part involving ENY+Kill is fantastic. :salute
-
Good ideas and well presented. +1
-
I wonder if any scoring system will alter people's inlaid psyche.
-
I wonder if any scoring system will alter people's inlaid psyche.
:airplane: I agreed with Greebo's suggestion about doing something about the scoring system in the game, and like Randy says, not sure how it would change a players attitude towards combat. I think a players score should reflect the aircraft in which he is flying. Most aircraft in the game are single engine fighters, designed to intercept and destroy enemy aircraft, and that is the only thing it should be scored on. Aircraft used for ground attacks, either bombing GV's or hangars, should be scored on just that. Bombers should be scored on what they are designed to do, destroy objects on the ground. A bomber pilot should not have base captures, GV kills and where are not he has bailed or been killed as part of his score, because this is a unlimited life game, so his or her bails and getting killed shouldn't be counted against his ranking. The only thing that matters, the way this game is set up, is what he or she accomplishes while in flight. How many air to air kills in a fighter, how many objects destroyed by a bomber, how many objects destroyed by dive bombing.
Can't address GVer's, as I don't GV because with the eyes that I have, I can't get off the spawn before getting killed.
-
:airplane: I agreed with Greebo's suggestion about doing something about the scoring system in the game, and like Randy says, not sure how it would change a players attitude towards combat. I think a players score should reflect the aircraft in which he is flying. Most aircraft in the game are single engine fighters, designed to intercept and destroy enemy aircraft, and that is the only thing it should be scored on. Aircraft used for ground attacks, either bombing GV's or hangars, should be scored on just that. Bombers should be scored on what they are designed to do, destroy objects on the ground. A bomber pilot should not have base captures, GV kills and where are not he has bailed or been killed as part of his score, because this is a unlimited life game, so his or her bails and getting killed shouldn't be counted against his ranking. The only thing that matters, the way this game is set up, is what he or she accomplishes while in flight. How many air to air kills in a fighter, how many objects destroyed by a bomber, how many objects destroyed by dive bombing.
Can't address GVer's, as I don't GV because with the eyes that I have, I can't get off the spawn before getting killed.
If there wasn't a disincentive for bailing everyone in the arena would bomb and bail. I don't see that as a good thing. Quite gamey in fact. I know this isn't real life but is that what they did in the war?
I'm also cuious how you propose to not count kills for bombers. Why as a fighter would I go up against a bomber when it has no effect on him but puts me and only me at risk? What you're really asking for is bomber impunity right? Along with the ability to bomb and bail to get back as fast as possible to... raise your score.
As to GV's there are a lot of places to GV outside of the few spawns that are regularily camped. In fact the heavily camped spawns are relatively few.
-
If there wasn't a disincentive for bailing everyone in the arena would bomb and bail. I don't see that as a good thing. Quite gamey in fact. I know this isn't real life but is that what they did in the war?
I'm also cuious how you propose to not count kills for bombers. Why as a fighter would I go up against a bomber when it has no effect on him but puts me and only me at risk? What you're really asking for is bomber impunity right? Along with the ability to bomb and bail to get back as fast as possible to... raise your score.
As to GV's there are a lot of places to GV outside of the few spawns that are regularily camped. In fact the heavily camped spawns are relatively few.
:airplane: Didn't mean to sound like I wanted impunity for bombers, just trying to make the point that bombers should be scored on damage hits and not scored on base captures, GV'ing and or dive bombing!
-
:airplane: Didn't mean to sound like I wanted impunity for bombers, just trying to make the point that bombers should be scored on damage hits and not scored on base captures, GV'ing and or dive bombing!
Always thought the C47 was ( in the absence of a transport classification) more of an attack ac than a bomber.
-
:airplane: Didn't mean to sound like I wanted impunity for bombers, just trying to make the point that bombers should be scored on damage hits and not scored on base captures, GV'ing and or dive bombing!
Bombers already are not scored for killing anything. Go to the pilot stats page and you'll see there's no kill categories tracked for bombers except deaths. The only thing they are scored on is destroying objects and base captures. If kill stats were allowed for bombers you'd probably see them flying into furballs trying to raise their kill stats so I can see why HT didn't score them.
Since base captures are currently split between bombers (C-47) and GV's (M-3/Skd) where do you propose C-47 base captues are scored? If not bombers then your choices are fighter, attack or GV.
-
Bombers already are not scored for killing anything. Go to the pilot stats page and you'll see there's no kill categories tracked for bombers except deaths. The only thing they are scored on is destroying objects and base captures. If kill stats were allowed for bombers you'd probably see them flying into furballs trying to raise their kill stats so I can see why HT didn't score them.
Since base captures are currently split between bombers (C-47) and GV's (M-3/Skd) where do you propose C-47 base captues are scored? If not bombers then your choices are fighter, attack or GV.
:airplane: What would be wrong with a transport category, listing cargo or troops as a measuring unit. I agree with you that placing the C-47 in anything other than transporting troops or cargo is incorrect way of scoring that aircraft. To my knowledge, first C-47 which was armed were the "puff the majic dragon" aircraft used in Vietnam.
-
I agree with you that placing the C-47 in anything other than transporting troops or cargo is incorrect way of scoring that aircraft.
I was under the impression you didn't care about score..
-
:airplane: What would be wrong with a transport category, listing cargo or troops as a measuring unit.
Sure, but why score it at all? It's silly that base captures improve your score and resupply runs hurt your score. If someone takes the time to do the tedious but very useful chore of resupping strats, why punish him or her in score? Likewise, why punish someone for bringing GV supplies to friendly players? And why factor in base takes at all? Carrying the troops is more than adequately rewarded by perk points, and it is the LEAST skill-intensive task of taking a base. Just have a troops/cargo flight category that, like ship and field guns, shows up in stats but doesn't effect your score.
I absolutely agree with Lusche about fixing the damage score. The thing I hate the most about the current system is how low the values for ships are - they should be worth MUCH more than town buildings or hangars, because they're much harder to hit, more likely to be defended, and above all must be bombed from fairly low alt which makes it much, much easier for enemy fighters to get to you. Town buildings should be worth the least for the same reasons - they're pathetically easy to hit, less likely to be defended than anything else, and can easily be bombed from 30k where, away from the strats, no one (aside from the odd gastropod) will be loitering around in a fighter waiting for you.
As for ENY, doesn't that already factor into kill points? It seems to me the easiest way to weight it more heavily would be to change kills/sortie or kills/time to kill points/sortie or kill points/time instead. Or eliminate some of the useless score categories like hit % (your gunnery is already quite well represented in the other categories - you can't kill what you can't hit) or above all kills/sortie (I don't see how rearming vs. replaning makes anyone a better pilot). Or do both: make fighter rank the sum of k/d, kill points, and kill points/time. if you want to factor in enemy/friendly ratio, that could also be made to affect kill points.
-
Sure, but why score it at all? It's silly that base captures improve your score and resupply runs hurt your score. If someone takes the time to do the tedious but very useful chore of resupping strats, why punish him or her in score? Likewise, why punish someone for bringing GV supplies to friendly players? And why factor in base takes at all? Carrying the troops is more than adequately rewarded by perk points, and it is the LEAST skill-intensive task of taking a base. Just have a troops/cargo flight category that, like ship and field guns, shows up in stats but doesn't effect your score.
I absolutely agree with Lusche about fixing the damage score. The thing I hate the most about the current system is how low the values for ships are - they should be worth MUCH more than town buildings or hangars, because they're much harder to hit, more likely to be defended, and above all must be bombed from fairly low alt which makes it much, much easier for enemy fighters to get to you. Town buildings should be worth the least for the same reasons - they're pathetically easy to hit, less likely to be defended than anything else, and can easily be bombed from 30k where, away from the strats, no one (aside from the odd gastropod) will be loitering around in a fighter waiting for you.
As for ENY, doesn't that already factor into kill points? It seems to me the easiest way to weight it more heavily would be to change kills/sortie or kills/time to kill points/sortie or kill points/time instead. Or eliminate some of the useless score categories like hit % (your gunnery is already quite well represented in the other categories - you can't kill what you can't hit) or above all kills/sortie (I don't see how rearming vs. replaning makes anyone a better pilot). Or do both: make fighter rank the sum of k/d, kill points, and kill points/time. if you want to factor in enemy/friendly ratio, that could also be made to affect kill points.
:airplane: I was not aware of hurting your score on re-supply runs. I receive perkies for each re-supply run to the strats and to bases. You sure you have that right?
-
:airplane: I was not aware of hurting your score on re-supply runs. I receive perkies for each re-supply run to the strats and to bases. You sure you have that right?
He does. Perks and score are not connected to each other in any way. Each supply run in a C-47 is a bomber sortie, but you don't get any score points for it. Thus, your damage/sortie score & subrank will drop a little for each supply run you are doing. For the most buff pilots in game, this drop will be quite small, unless they are really doing a lot of supply runs, and/or are going for a frontpage bomber rank.
-
I agree with Grebe's idea but I think there is also a need for alteration in the scoring system in bombing etc.
I think getting huge score going around bombing town should be in someways offset. Perk farming which I am sure most of us have done at times is not a true testament to bombing skill. Fighting your way all the way to the Strat, bombing whilst under fighter attack and the getting the your formation home for example is more a test of bombing skill.
I would like to see a ranking system that give the true measure of all disciplines.
I think what maybe also a good idea is a area in the hanger where you actually pick your mission objective from a list. Which will go towards your score. IE Strat protection, Strat attack, Sinking carrier fleet, bomber escort, fighter sweep and so on and so forth
-
:airplane: I was not aware of hurting your score on re-supply runs. I receive perkies for each re-supply run to the strats and to bases. You sure you have that right?
In addition to what Lusche said in a GV it will hurt all of your kill and damage stats in exchange for a very small number of perks.
I run resup a good amount and it has a huge negative effect on my scores.
-
I've been here since 2002 and would fancy I've paid attention. I cannot get my head about this discussion. Is there a Cliff Notes version for dummies?
-
Shooting down a set of buffs with a ENYx plane with 4r heavy canons should lower perk points compared with a similar ENYx with only 2 machine-guns ..
I mean killing a set of Lancaster in an A8 is very close to murder compared with flying a p51B, which I considerer to be challenging.
-
Make landings count toward much more score than ditches or deaths/bails than they currently do.
-
Make landings count toward much more score than ditches or deaths/bails than they currently do.
Landing wheels down score more than wheels up. :D
-
What if the number of sorties in each mode affected the overall score? As it is right now, people fly less than a dozen fighter sorties, pick planes off from altitude in a furball, and get 13+ K/D ratios from rearming after every 2-3 kills. Then they never fly fighter mode again. Then they fly less than a dozen bomber sorties and just bomb town centers from 30K. Once their bomber rank is below 5 they never fly a bomber again. The same goes for gvs as well. What if having an Overall rank of 10 or so meant you were "overall" a really good player? Flying roughly the same number of sorties in Fighter, Attack, bomber, and vehicle. If you fly just 5 fighter sorties and 120 Attack sorties then even with a 23K/D ratio, 12 K/S, and 13% hit, you are ranked 500+ in fighter because you don't fly fighter mode often enough, but you're ranked in the top 100 in attack mode because you fly it a lot.
Just a thought I had today.
-
What if the number of sorties in each mode affected the overall score?
It already does by kill points and damage points.
As it is right now, people fly less than a dozen fighter sorties, pick planes off from altitude in a furball, and get 13+ K/D ratios from rearming after every 2-3 kills. Then they never fly fighter mode again.
I had analysed this kind of behaviour at various times and found it to have much less frequency and 'success' than commonly attributed.
Of course, this only holds true for the LW arena. It's different for MW and particularly EW arena due to the low numbers of players.
-
+1 to Greebo's idea. :aok
-
I like the OP ideas :aok
Also, I welcome any 262 to challenge my bombers. I believe I'm 1/1 there, the other night I was almost 2/2 but he got skeerrd. The risk is considerably one sided in that scenario.
You would lose that challenge sir.
-
I don't really care who gets great stats from this, the idea is to give more players a reason to fight more often. The only stat that matters to me personally is fun (i.e fights) per hour.
Yep. Excellent ideas mate. I agree with your OP and feel HTC should at least investigate further, to see if some of those could be implemented.
-
You would lose that challenge sir.
LOL maybe we'll run into each other someday. You're much braver with your perks than I, sir.
-
I think we both fly Knights, so it may not happen. BTW I think we both live in Phoenix do we not?