Author Topic: Kill Per Time (Read 477 times)

Urchin · « **Reply #30 on:** April 17, 2002, 03:58:17 PM »

Your example is a little flawed, in my opinion.

In your example, the Spitfire would of course be ranked higher. But that is because he fought more often, leading to more kills and pretty much a higher everything (except possibly accuracy). But, for a Spitfire pilot to get 27 kills in 45 minutes, he would have to be extraordinarily skilled. That extraordinary skill is what would give him the high rank, not the fact that he flew the Spitfire as it should be flown.

I think for your example to be a bit more fair for the hapless F4U, you'd have to add some details. For instance, in order for the Spitfire to be able to get 3 kills in 5 minutes on every sortie, there would have to be some intense action going on (and very close to his field). It is very likely that he would have numerous sorties in which he accomplished nothing more than a quick death. And remember, the equation is actually K/D+1- so if a spitfire gets 2 kills and dies, his K/D is 1.

Even in your example, the F4U would have a higher K/D (at 3.00) than the Spitfire. The Spitfire would have a K/D of 2.7. If the Spitfire pilot had ANY sorties in which he failed to score a kill, his K/D would suffer even more- and it is very likely that he would die without scoring on at least some sorties.

Basically, every 'style' of flying has inherent advantages and disadvantages. This balance is included in our scoring system.

BNM · « **Reply #31 on:** April 17, 2002, 04:18:14 PM »

So in your opinion Urchin you don't think surviving should be worth more 'rank wise' than it is? Do you also think scoring as I outlined where consecutive landings would increase your multiplier would not be a good incentive for better gameplay? Just curious and before I getted jumped on by the HTC knows best crowd just let me say I think HTC is a great company and I have every respect for the way the game is done from every angle and I enjoy it a lot. This is just a 'discussion' board and I'm just throwing out some ideas. I think HTC is great, HT is my hero.

AKDejaVu · « **Reply #32 on:** April 17, 2002, 04:45:47 PM »

Quote

? Do you also think scoring as I outlined where consecutive landings would increase your multiplier would not be a good incentive for better gameplay?

Better gameplay for whom? The P-51 pilot or the guy chasing him?

AKDejaVu

Urchin · « **Reply #33 on:** April 17, 2002, 05:07:42 PM »

No, I think the scoring system is fine as it is. Increasing the 'weight' of surviving (by making it worth a lot more points than dying) would basically penalize people that fly slow planes.

One thing I *would* like to see as far as points go- I think early war planes should get more points for a kill than a late war plane. Right now getting a kill in a C202 is worth the same as getting a kill in a La7, even though it is much easier to get kills in the La7. Even this isn't critical, just something I'd like to see. And don't get me wrong either, the primary reason I'd like to see it is because I like to fly early war planes, I won't hesistate to admit that.

BNM · « **Reply #34 on:** April 17, 2002, 05:30:15 PM »

I agree on the La7 thing. I guess I never really looked that close on the 'points' for early vs late war planes but I just figured that was the way it was done.

I didn't mean to come off as anything here is critical. I'm just passing time at work.

I don't really agree that: "Increasing the 'weight' of surviving (by making it worth a lot more points than dying) would basically penalize people that fly slow planes."

It's your choice to fly a slow plane. When I choose a slow plane I expect to land my kills just like when I choose a fast plane. You may have to save some ammo to rtb and fly defensively to get home but that is all part of "flying a plane the way it should be flown".

BNM · « **Reply #35 on:** April 17, 2002, 05:45:25 PM »

DejaVu: "Better gameplay for whom? The P-51 pilot or the guy chasing him?"

The guy who lands his kills. Doesn't matter what plane or where. Just that you return home.

AKDejaVu · « **Reply #36 on:** April 17, 2002, 06:30:05 PM »

Quote

The guy who lands his kills. Doesn't matter what plane or where. Just that you return home.

No... it will matter that you can get a kill then run as fast as you can to get home. Not everyone will have that option in an environment where the person you just killed will definately be back looking for you.

The push should be toward engaging other aircraft... not running from them.

And landing your kills wasn't the all important mission. Actually having a mission that you had to do was. Surving it was the battle. Right now there is no requirement for someone to engage... no need... no mission. Anything to encourage engagements is a good thing. Making surviving the sortie the all important statistic is not encouraging much other than getting the hell out of dodge on a regular basis.

AKDejaVu

Dead Man Flying · « **Reply #37 on:** April 17, 2002, 07:17:55 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by BNM
I don't have a problem Levi. It was just an opinion.

[/B]

It's an opinion that's been voiced time and again in here, and HiTech himself has refuted it in other threads. If you either greatly increase the rewards for flying to live, or if you greatly penalize not flying to live, you create a game where everyone flies to live, and nobody fights. You're welcome to your opinion, of course, but the fact is that this does not improve gameplay. Not for most of the people playing AH anyway.

Quote

No need to be amazinhunk about it.

[/B]

I wasn't, but I can be if you'd like. When I see the common hyperbole describing furballers (e.g. four kills in five minutes), it raises a roadkill flag for me.

Quote

Personally, I don't care much about points I'm just all for better gameplay and extending the life of AH. I thought these boards were here for folks to voice their opinions, I bow to the AH Gods Leviathn and Hooligan.

You still haven't described effectively how the changes you suggest will either improve gameplay or extend the life of AH. At the most basic level, the point of flying fighters in AH is to fight and not just to live. To that end, the game does an awful lot to encourage fighting while neither rewarding nor punishing particular flying styles.

-- Todd/Leviathn

DmdNexus · « **Reply #38 on:** April 19, 2002, 01:59:40 PM »

Score??

Someone's keeping score??

gofaster · « **Reply #39 on:** April 19, 2002, 02:22:30 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by MANDOBLE
Well, none of you are understanding exactly what I mean.
Some EXCELENT and well known pilots and friends of mine are usually involved in long CAPs looking for buffs or hi cons (the real danger for any country). This is a more than respectable service for rookland but it is really risky bussiness. Fighting buffs usually ends in dissaster or engine damage, so, killing more than two hi buffs in a single sortie and surviving is almost a record. Using a lot of time in the CAPs and then RTB, rearrm and CAP again.
These pilots are awarded with K/Ts as low as 2 kills per hour and, of course, they are well above ranking 100.

While they are doing an excelent service they are getting less perks and much worse score (mainly cause K/T penalty) than any furballing spit.

The fact is that actual rules punish that kind of missions.

The kicker to this whole convesation is that, in another thread, the bomber pilots are campaigning to turn off the "base under attack" alerts and flashing icons so that they can run surprise attacks on undefended bases.

But if I read this thread correctly, the guys that actually patrol to intercept the bombers aren't getting the points that the dogfighters are getting, and want to know where's the reward for intercepting bombers?

Seems to me its a pretty fair balance as it is. Pilots that dogfight down low can't intercept high-flying bombers, and so the bombers can go in unmolested. Likewise, pilots that fly up high to get the bombers have fewer targets to shoot at. Its a trade-off.

And then there's Urchin's arithmetic. I like his example.

gofaster · « **Reply #40 on:** April 19, 2002, 02:26:33 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Urchin
One thing I *would* like to see as far as points go- I think early war planes should get more points for a kill than a late war plane. Right now getting a kill in a C202 is worth the same as getting a kill in a La7, even though it is much easier to get kills in the La7. Even this isn't critical, just something I'd like to see. And don't get me wrong either, the primary reason I'd like to see it is because I like to fly early war planes, I won't hesistate to admit that.

Hear! Hear! And bring in the P-40, too! The AVG flew'em, John Wayne featured'em, and I wanna fly'em!