Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: MANDOBLE on January 28, 2002, 06:41:10 AM
-
Actually, your overal score for, for example, fighter category is the result of your K/D, K/S, K/T, HP and points ranks.
With this criteria, you may start a tour and fly a single fighter mission (F4U1C ;) ), go to a vulched base and achieve impressive results in K/D, K/S, K/T and HP. That is, you return to you home base with a 15/1 K/D and K/S, .0040 K/T, .2500 HP and some landed points. Since them, this pilot dedicates his time to attack, buff and vehicle missions the rest of the tour, being at first possition in K/D, K/S, K/T and HP, and having one of the worst scoring in points. What is the result? Almost sure he will be into the top 100 fighter pilots.
The conclusion is obvious, all except points are very easy to achieve in a single mission. What about calculating your score only after you have achieved a minimum of points, or a minimum of sorties, or both? IMO, a minimum of sorties would be the best solution for any category (fighter, attack, bomber or vehicle). what about 15 sorties?
In the other hand, there is no reward for killing "skilled" pilots. You may go near an enemy base, and keep killing that alone rookie over'n over. What about extra points based on the ranking of the victim relative to your own rank? That is, you are into the top 100 pilots and you kill a pilot listed at 1200 pos, you get the normal point quantity. But if that pilot kills you, then he receives bonus points up to twice the normal quantity.
Same with the countries with inferior numbers, more bonus points per kill.
-
Nah its pretty good the way its.
No affirmitive action in AH
eny values are the best way to deal with less used vrs more used.
Getting more points for who you kill shouldn't matter. Especially since theres no way to know or choose who you want to engage with the current icons.
Besides if you check the rankings Air points dont effect fighter rank as greatly as k/s and k/t.
It would still give you rank quicker to vulch 15 n00bs in 30 sec then go fight festerbria.
No free lunch
-
Wotan, ENY will give you only useless perk points.
And I agree, with actual icons there is no way to choose who you want to engange, and this is the good point. If you are a mediocre pilot, and, ignorant of who your opponent is, you engange him, and, not only survive, but also you get the kill, and surprise, your victim was the first ranked fighter pilot, then, IMO, this should be rewarded with extra points.
-
I say we earn a star next to our icon after five kills without a death. Starting as a Sgt, you gain rank with ur kill/death ratio until you become a General. At the same time there is a button you press and you totally lose ur cockpit, just a gunsight floating in space and there is a room u start off at alt and mindlessly dive down shooting at anyone and everything ........
oops sorry, just another FA flashback... happens whenever I'm on a diet :)
-
Only thing score is good for is commanding a cv if in trubble and a newbie have it :D
Fiter :
quick kills count most + higher hit ratio. Staying alive dont help much.
bomber:
dropping goons and bombs and coming back alone give most points.
GV:
troops, killing hangars and stuff count most.
attack:
lol having a high kill/death kill/sortie score lol ground stuff dont count.
I think this is about it, but then again i could be wrong.
airguard
-
I don't think it is that important but it is a loophole for the sky accountants to use.
I don't see any problem with a minimum of sorties be required. If the guy is not interested in flying much then he won't be interested in "rank" anyhow. Make it a minimum of say 20 or so sorties for rank. If a guiy can keep it up for 20 or so sorties then he probly is pretty good.
lazs
-
MANDOBLE,
There still wouldn't be anything to prevent folks from flying 15 or 20 vulch sorties in "Fighter" mode. I a player only flew in fighter mode when he saw a vulch potential, he could still end up with an outstanding fighter rank by the end of the tour. Minimal sorties are not the problem here. Personally, I don't have any problem being "out-ranked" by someone who has flown 1 or 2 really good vulch sorties.
I do like the idea of giving bonus points toward killing a high ranked player. Perhaps just multiply the enemy pilots K/D against the points earned for that kill.
(Your plane's ENY X Enemy plane's ENY) X K/D of Enemy Pilot.
So killing Fester when he is on a streak could earn you 50 times as many points as killing a pilot with a K/D f 1.
Kill JoeNewbie (with a K/D of 0.1) 10 times to earn as many points as you would have earned killing a pilot with a K/D of 1.
The big problem with Fighter and Attack rankings is that they can be manipulated, intentionally or not.
Personally, I fly most of my sorties in "Attack" mode. I do this because on most of my sorties I end up attacking something on the ground or water. I fly in "Fighter" mode only when I am pretty sure that I will be engaging air-threats only. Even in fighter mode, I end up attacking GVs, straffing ack or whatever more often than not.
A real solution to the problem should involve eliminating players from sellecting between "Fighter" and "Attack" modes. The 2 scores should be derrived automatically every time a player flies a fighter. I have an idea on this that I have been meaning to post.
eskimo
-
Aw screw the scores.....have fun! :cool:
-
I like the idea of tracking stats. They can be quite fun to look at and manipulate.
What seems to come up short each and every time its attempted is trying to use statistics to levy some kind of score or rank.
Stats will always fail to provide an accurate summary of a person's capabilities or even their accomplishments.
Fly to have fun... see what your stats look like afterwards. Once the formula is released the inevitable happens... people start to play the formula. Complaints begin to be levied based on what hurts your score vs what is fun/not fun. It really is a pandora's box containing virtually every member of this community.
AKDejaVu
-
Originally posted by eskimo2
MANDOBLE,
I do like the idea of giving bonus points toward killing a high ranked player. Perhaps just multiply the enemy pilots K/D against the points earned for that kill.
(Your plane's ENY X Enemy plane's ENY) X K/D of Enemy Pilot.
So killing Fester when he is on a streak could earn you 50 times as many points as killing a pilot with a K/D f 1.
Kill JoeNewbie (with a K/D of 0.1) 10 times to earn as many points as you would have earned killing a pilot with a K/D of 1.
eskimo
Makes a lot of sense to me. I agree with Wotan :o that the scoring and perks system isn't bad as it is. But it probably isn't perfect and there's no harm in putting forward alternatives. Such is the route of progress.
-
I'm not one that pays much attention to scores. If they stroke your goose though, by all means, chase em!
However I am kinda curious what that "Fighter" and "Attack" buttons are all about. I gather the latter has to do with flying jabo sorties or something to that effect. Why not just combine the two though? I'm a bit unclear on why the split is needed.
Its not really that big a deal, just curious is all.
Vortex
-
I want bounties. In Tanarus (futuristic tank sim) each player had a bounty that was proportional to how many points he had scored on his current streak, and how long the streak had lasted. You could get a high bounty either by scoring a lot of points, or staying alive a long time, or both. Bounties were displayed in real time on the roster. If you killed a player, you got points equal to his current bounty.
It was a great system because you were rewarded for killing the best players. Also it gave big bounties to gives who avoided fights and stayed alive a long time, and made them targets whether they liked it or not. It caused some really cool "bounty hunts" where one side would hunt a particular player, while his team would try to protect him. It was a lot of fun to stealthily hunt a guy with a high bounty, and it was a lot of fun to kill suicidal bounty hunters who were looking to pick up my bounty. :)
-
Can we use perk points to be able to use someone else's handle?
Funkedup
-
Scores, smores...
They mean as much or as little as you let them.
-
Easy score by vulching is why we see the top ranked pilots flying in the overpopulated countries.
If scoresystem would be revised so that the players whose country has least players (meaning the toughest job having kills, often 4:1 odds) would get the highest points for kills, maybe the scorewh.. oops I mean the highest ranking players would do what they're supposed - balance the sides.. Because that would be the best way to make score.
The endless imbalance in the arena only ruins some people's day while making a couple individuals happy vulching and the rest flying around with no targets. Of course presently the strat folks have their heaven when they can take over empty fields - nobody left to defend.
I have to ask from all those: WHY DONT YOU PLAY OFFLINE IF YOU LIVE ON TAKING EMPTY FIELDS?
Much smarter option would be to switch side so that sides are balanced. Even fight leaves more opportunities for both sides and only then the true skill will result in a victory.
-
Originally posted by mrsid2
Easy score by vulching is why we see the top ranked pilots flying in the overpopulated countries.
If scoresystem would be revised so that the players whose country has least players (meaning the toughest job having kills, often 4:1 odds) would get the highest points for kills, maybe the scorewh.. oops I mean the highest ranking players would do what they're supposed - balance the sides.. Because that would be the best way to make score.
The endless imbalance in the arena only ruins some people's day while making a couple individuals happy vulching and the rest flying around with no targets. Of course presently the strat folks have their heaven when they can take over empty fields - nobody left to defend.
I have to ask from all those: WHY DONT YOU PLAY OFFLINE IF YOU LIVE ON TAKING EMPTY FIELDS?
Much smarter option would be to switch side so that sides are balanced. Even fight leaves more opportunities for both sides and only then the true skill will result in a victory.
Great idea on giving the less populated countries more points for kills. That'll work 100% certain it'll work. In fact not only give them more points but more perks, that way the perkhoarders will help balance as well. Of course all of this would have to be base on how badly a country is outnumbered. It wouldn't make sense to give more perks to rooks when there are 76 rooks vs 78 knights vs 77 bishops. Or would it? I dunno, but I think a kind of constantly updating "underdog bonus" of perks and points would be the perfect solution to the lopsided problem.
-
Originally posted by mrsid2
Easy score by vulching is why we see the top ranked pilots flying in the overpopulated countries.
Your factual assertion is wrong. I did a quick check of the Top 10 fighter pilots and found that three belong to Bishops (Fester, Ypsilon, AKNimitz), three belong to Knights (Wilbuz, yancya13, Hanzo), and three belong to Rooks (MANDOBLE, Rammjagr, tukiyo). One is miscellaneous (me).
Surely they can't all be flying for overpopulated countries, especially since I've seen at least seven or eight of them up at the same time.
You've suggested an unnecessary remedy based upon flawed statements of fact.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
DMF that has nothing to do with arena imbalance and the fix that is needed for that though.
Whenever I bring out this issue I get retarded 'everyone gets their turn in the bucket' comments. The point is no country should go there! What's the use for a US player to know that his country RULEZZZ on euro timezone? None. The same applies vice versa.
Whats the use of a player changing to the smallest side now? It makes all the difference. The change in the scoresystem could make some players consider the change in hope of benefiting from it. Just like now all the dweebs switch to the winning country before reset in hope of free perks :)
The countryhopping in hope of easy score is what presently makes things worse when it could be used to make things more balanced.
-
Originally posted by mrsid2
DMF that has nothing to do with arena imbalance and the fix that is needed for that though.
[/B]
By your own statement it does. You suggested that by offering scoring incentives, the "scorepotatos" would switch sides to balance things. However, the top "scorepotatos" are balanced evenly between all sides. Your assertion that they only join the side with the largest numbers in order to vulch freely obviously isn't true.
Whenever I bring out this issue I get retarded 'everyone gets their turn in the bucket' comments. The point is no country should go there! What's the use for a US player to know that his country RULEZZZ on euro timezone? None. The same applies vice versa.
[/B]
I don't recall making a statement like that. I simply refuted your incorrect factual assertion that the top players achieve their scores by joining sides with massive numbers advantages and then vulching ad infinitum. This statement was also the basis for your arena imbalance proposition which was similarly flawed as a result. Think of it this way. If you argue that the world is flat, and a remedy to falling off the edge is to not sail so far in any direction... you'd be wrong. The factual assumption of a flat world would be incorrect, and the notion of limited sailing wouldn't be a remedy to anything at all.
The countryhopping in hope of easy score is what presently makes things worse when it could be used to make things more balanced.
It's a novel idea, but this isn't true for the Top 10 fighter pilots. Of the Top 10, only two that I recall had kills in more than one country. Rammjagr was Knights before going Rooks, so he has some kills in both countries. And I hop around to different countries every other day or so, so I have a pretty even balance of kills from side to side. The others never changed sides in hopes of an "easy score." How exactly would changing the current system affect them?
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
I stand corrected on the part of the 10 top scoring pilots.
As what goes to the rest of the issue, how do you think balancing the countries would somehow limit your play?
It would limit some of your score, but only if you're flying for the country who has significantly bigger number of players online than the one being attacked. If you're really worried about that then you already proved my point..
The arena IS imbalanced. As I wrote this I took a snapshot of the situation on the arena. The situation is actually quite good now compared to the time when fields get narrowed down to 3-4 and the countryhopping really starts. Those times the imbalance is often 4:3:2
(http://users.kymp.net/cable130/ahss1.jpg)
-
My GOD! That snapshot CLEARLY PROVES EVERYTHING!!!!
Its not like someone else will get a snapshot from later tonight where knits have numbers and bish are in the hole. Nah.. that can't possibly happen because you have provided a snapshot that proves things conclusively.
What they hell were you thinking?
AKDejaVu
-
I say the following.......
Dale....evenly divide up all accounts between the 3 countries...feel free to break up squads...we need parity man!!!
Are you people nutts? It's a game!!! Enjoy it!!! If you feel outnumbered, get pissed and do something about it, like....kill folks...lotsa folks!!!
I kill everyone I engage, unless they kill me first...there's nothing to it!!! Really!!!
:rolleyes:
(http://www.13thtas.com/rudesig.jpg)
-
AKDejavu did I mention a specific country ANYWHERE in my post?
Use your brain man! The same change would help also the bishops when its their turn 'in the hole.'
It would be beneficial for the players to switch to the outnumbered side - no matter which country it is.
There is no downside to this!
-
Hm. Uneven numbers you say? Well, let's look at the arena as of ten minutes ago.
Seems that Rooks and Knights are even with Bishops enjoying about a 20% numbers advantage.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
But wait! What's this?
Oh, it seems that the outnumbered sides are ganging the poor, hapless Bishops. It sure would be nice if more people would join Knights or Rooks to save them from the Bishop hordes.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
AKDejavu did I mention a specific country ANYWHERE in my post?
No you didn't. Instead, you used a fricking snapshot to summarize how things are in the arena.
What is it you want exactly? Even numbers? How about even numbers evenly distributed amongst all fields on both fronts? How about even dispersement of even numbers of all types of aircraft?
Basically, you just show up and the game tells you where what and when you can fly.
You know what I want? For you to stop and think about exactly what it is you are proposing.. or asking for.. or expecting from this game. Then come back with some ideas that actually make sense.
AKDejaVu
-
Thats not even a real screen shot, Leviathn, if thats your real name. I can tell photoshop hacking, you loser.
Drex
-
lol Drex. :)
oh wait.. scores?!?!? we have scores?!?!?!???
-
Looks like we found a hardcore gangbanger here ..
You can say what you want AKDeja, you can't silence me though.
Neither one of you have yet showed anything that would speak against my suggestion. This system would hurt nobody and potentially benefit many..
Only the true gangbangers would then lose some points because they're too gutless to fight with even odds.
Leviathan: What you said about two countries hitting one is absolutely true. It's a sad state of affairs especially when the two bigger countries hit the small one. That factor is what pushed me on this crusade originally, it happened too often and too easy.
There is a clear logic to why things were like they were in your picture - the two smaller countries counter superior numbers of the leading country by concentrating power against it. If the numbers were not lopsided there's a good chance that the battle would have continued evenly between the countries.
However when the numbers are lopsided, as they usually are, the battle will never be even. Some country will always be hit beyond their ability to respond which leads to massive defeats by overpower, despair of the defender and a bad taste in general.
At some point it seems futile to take off a field only to know that the fight will end up to a 4-1 situation and a certain death.
-
This system would hurt nobody and potentially benefit many
LOL! I love statements like this. They are totally worthless.
You do realize that those you are chosing to "benefit" are the ones currently establishing the numbers "imbalance" in the arena?
Come now.. YOU'D like to see more even numbers because somehow YOU think that would make YOUR gaming experience more enjoyable as if somehow the actions of everyone else in the arena dictated that.
AKDejaVu
-
Everytime i log on i see this,,, wondering if NOBODY likes me?
(http://www.graphixone.net/images/new-1.jpg)
NUTTZ
-
Originally posted by mrsid2
Leviathan: What you said about two countries hitting one is absolutely true. It's a sad state of affairs especially when the two bigger countries hit the small one. That factor is what pushed me on this crusade originally, it happened too often and too easy.
[/B]
Why is it a sad state of affairs? What I showed was two smaller countries hitting a larger one. The larger country fielded 20% to 25% more players than either of the two other sides alone. However, the Rooks and Knights combined outnumbered the Bishops by almost 30%. By your logic, we should reward Rooks and Knights in this situation for having individually lower numbers despite the fact that the above scene shows that the fights are either even or favor the "outnumbered" side on both fronts.
You've solved nothing and created new problems.
There is a clear logic to why things were like they were in your picture - the two smaller countries counter superior numbers of the leading country by concentrating power against it. If the numbers were not lopsided there's a good chance that the battle would have continued evenly between the countries.
[/B]
There's absolutely no guarantee of this, and even numbers have not led to even fights in the past. If each side has an even number of players, and two sides concentrate their forces against one, you're looking at a 2 to 1 advantage on both fronts despite even numbers. Your idea doesn't speak to this, nor does it speak to the situation posted in the picture earlier.
However when the numbers are lopsided, as they usually are, the battle will never be even. Some country will always be hit beyond their ability to respond which leads to massive defeats by overpower, despair of the defender and a bad taste in general.
[/B]
Your suggestion changes nothing. Even if it did, it'd be boring as hell. Aces High isn't about affirmative action, it's about things like teamwork, overwhelming power, advantages, disadvantages, outnumbering, being outnumbered, and more. I'd sure as toejam rather enjoy the luxury of ganging as well as the sting of being ganged than just playing the exact same scenario over and over again every day.
At some point it seems futile to take off a field only to know that the fight will end up to a 4-1 situation and a certain death.
Relax and enjoy yourself. I was the only plane to up from a field that was being torn apart by F4U-1Cs, Seafires, and more last night. I was easily outnumbered 4 to 1... probably 8 to 1 at the end of it. I also managed to kill three of them before buying it. That was fun despite certain death. Learn to make lemonade out of lemons, dude.
EDIT: lemons out of lemonade? I am a tard sometimes.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Leviathn my gripe is because during my timezone rooks are almost 100% certainly being banged every time I log on..
If I stay awake untill 2-3 am then things even up pretty much.
I'm just tired to the present situation up to the point that I've stoped playing. Maybe I have AH burnout..
One thing is sure anyway; I'm not getting the same kind of fun out of this like I used to.
Purchasing 6 months in advance was a bad call - it feels like I need a break.
-
scores just dont mean squat.
If you look at the scores of (IMO) the best fighter flyers they are often way outside the top 50 because they dont care about scores or they dont mind augering to grab goons.HP is also often misleading as some pilots shoot off excess loadouts for the weight saving, as in 190a5's.
do yourself a favour and dont worry too much about your rank.
:)
-
I like to work on my K/D and K/L, screw the point system. :p
-
Originally posted by NUTTZ
Everytime i log on i see this,,, wondering if NOBODY likes me?
(http://www.graphixone.net/images/new-1.jpg)
NUTTZ
Nuttz...
Two words for yah..."think deodorant" :D
-
Originally posted by Dead Man Flying
Oh, it seems that the outnumbered sides are ganging the poor, hapless Bishops. It sure would be nice if more people would join Knights or Rooks to save them from the Bishop hordes.
-- Todd/Leviathn
And that's precisely why no system giving the smallest country an advantage will succeed. Often, the smallest two countries will turn on the largest -- nothing formal, just a natural desire to devote more resources to the more-threatened front. How to compensate for that is unclear, at best.
-RY-
-
The only situation where it would help marginally is when the two BIGGER countries turn on the smaller..
That makes 4:1 battles and thats total dweebery on the part of the attackers. Milkruns, gangbangs..
In that situation even 2:1 looks pretty ok.
I can't count how many fields I've seen lost to milkrunners.
The system should work so that it calculates the amount of people on a country's borders attacking it, not only how many players a country has.. That way the country who is being banged would benefit from being the underdog.
Darbars on the country-owned sectors should reveal the situation easily even to the naked eye, not to mention what HT could do in order to calculate the real pressure.
I'm talking about situations like this (http://users.kymp.net/cable130/vitunspitit.zip) where the milkrunners actually start a mission to take over a field that has no defenders knowing that the mission will have more players attacking than the defending country has defenders.
That one mission alone, let alone there's another whole country to push back.
-
er sending less attackers than there are defenders results in....guess what mrsid?
failure and non capture.
overwhelming force is what war is all about.sheesh.
-
Hazed I was talking about the situations when the enemy has enough people to attack an undefended field with more ppl than the whole defending country has total fighting..
That's called milkrunning and it's dweebish. You might aswell play offline then. The end result is the same - field capture and nobody there defending.
Sure it's a great tactic for the attacker.. They have superior numbers and can take fields at will. Does it require skill? No.
Is it fun? Can't say.. I'd guess taking over an empty field with only the ack opposing should be very boring.
So in the situation the defending country has no choice but to watch how the milkrunners take over field after another while the borders between the two biggest countries are empty - both ganging on the smallest one. That's FUN man.. real fun. Definately the kind of gameplay I came here for.
If you haven't tried protecting your land with 80:30 or worse odds, try it. It might be refreshing.