How to get a high rank

[Shane]

Originally posted by Steve
Ya, I think he flies the 109.  

he doesn't "fly" it.  he hangs on for the ride.

[captg]

Score matters little...enjoy what you're doing...

I prefer the competition between individuals instead of "Everyone in the MA" anyway...

[Steve]

Dernit, thanks for the offer Wld... I'm at the office though.

I honestly don't know how he flies the 109. I've flown  w/ him a time or two only so really can't even tell ya what his skill level is(imho)

I can say that he was a very communicative wingman and willing to help those in trouble.. good things.  I enjoyed flying w/ him.

[beet1e]

Originally posted by WldThing
This is for you beetle..

As a P-51 dweeb myself for these 3 and a half years,  i can claim the P-51 as a very easy plane to get kills in "IF" flown smart.

Of course it's easy! That's why even I was able to do it! Best in AH was in the old scoring system - Victory 12, although I rearmed once. Best in WB was a 12 kill sortie, but 5 of those were what we in AH would know as prox kills. Divine, the game's producer, (Pyro's counterpart) kept spawning on a runway whose spawn point had been bombed. That was the WB flight denial game trick that was in vogue - the current AH equivalent is fuel porkage. Anyway, he spawned 5 times and his plane blew up every time (runway damage counts in WB) and I was the nearest, so I got the points.

Steve said "Right, but since it's one night, one can reasonably assert that it does not establish him as an authority on the subject.". Steve, you're still not listening! I never claimed to be an expert on anything in these games. I've described some of the things that happened in my total P51 experience, and added that I had found it easy.  Much easier than getting kills in a 109, in which I sucked. That is not the same as claiming to be an expert!

I'm attaching a .ZIP file for Steve. It contains 2 Word .DOC files. One is from Dec.2000 - me ranting about P51 dweebery, and the other is a thread I started called "Describe your worst plane". Mine was the 109. Through AH, I have been able to change things. But other things remain unchanged - see if you can tell which is which!

Click here, Steve - and all you other nosey bastages

[Murdr]

The thread opend with a 9 point list of gamey techniques for attaining a higher rank.  Several post followed of which the theme was 'see rank is meaningless'

This instigated a debate.  After 4 pages of debate by the principals, including HiTech, both sides appearently concluded that the rank system is a general indicator of skill level among those who chose to compete for rank in a tour.  The unresolved point was that some believe that gaming the game can out rank skill while others believe that skill will out rank game gaming.


Then on page 5 beet1e offered this observation.  (I will quote since so that further posting will not result from paraphrasing)

Originally posted by beet1e
I had been trying to interpret the MA scores yet another way. And that is to locate a player whose fighter rank was better than mine and who did not fly the Easymode/Big Three subset of P51/LA7/Spit ix, because I never do. And what did I find? I couldn't find a single pilot who ranked higher than me who didn't fly one, two, or all three of those planes.

When asked what the point was the following answer was given.

Originally posted by beet1e
The point is that no-one gets into the top 100 fighter ranks, without resorting to the EasyMode™ plane subset, ie P51/LA7/Spit ix.

The point was shown to be incorrect, because players do place in the top 100 fighters.  The general trend of limited player use of the three planes in question in the top 100 fighers however, was recognized and agreed upon.  Further points were made to show that use of these planes were not prerequsite to placing in the top 100.  Which could be interpreted as being the same place the discussion was on page 4, with the gaming the game issue focused specifically on the use of the Big late war planes.  

In closing there are some very good arguments and anologies offered scattered throughout the thread.  However, at several points they have to be saught for among off topic, and side discussions that do not relate to the thread title.

[beet1e]

Murdr – you’re forgetting the part about the umbrellas, and you still haven’t told us why the man in your avatar pic doesn’t have one.

In his post immediately above, Murdr quoted me twice. In the first quote, notice that I didn’t say that there were no pilots in the top 100 who never flew the Big3. I said I couldn’t find any. And that’s because to do the type of analysis required involves an invidual check of every score in that top 100. That was made clear at the time of the original posting.

Later when asked what the point was, I gave the answer as quoted by Murdr. The use of the word “resorting” may have given rise to the suggestion that pilots got into the top 100 only by flying the Big3. I never said that, and my choice of the word “resorting” is merely a reflection of my thinly veiled disdain for those would fly EasyMode™ planes like the P51. I have harboured said disdain for many years, and if you would care to review the file I posted for Steve, you will see that an incident involving myself and a P51 is described in a newsgroup posting under my WB handle of SCRMBL – way back in 2000. So to my mind, resorting to an EasyMode™ plane to get into the top 100 does not begin when the pilot begins to rack up scores in that plane; it begins when he spawns on the runway.

When I said that “no-one gets into the top 100 without resorting to the Big3”, Murdr said I was flat out wrong. Turns out that I was only 9% wrong, and therefore 91% correct. Besides, I could have been speaking figuratively, just as the statement “Water is NOT free” is a figurative statement, because of course there’s nothing to stop anyone of us collecting rainwater in a bucket, and this bucket of water would be free. But, point taken, and I amended my statement to “no-one, with very few exceptions…” – and I still maintain that 9 guys out of 100, in a game that has thousands of subscribers, is a very small number.

While many players may well have ranked in the top 100 without recourse to the Big3, by the same token many,many players relied heavily on those Big3 planes, some almost to the exclusion of any other types. Having spent Sunday afternoon hacking through those scores, I was amazed to see many guys who I thought were good pilots, shamelessly flying the easiest of planes.

[Shane]

Originally posted by beet1e
When I said that “no-one gets into the top 100 without resorting to the Big3”, Murdr said I was flat out wrong.

and murdr is right. you were flat out wrong.  "no-one" is an absolute as has been mentioned. there's no % play allowed.

spin, spin, spin Nutty Professor!

[Ack-Ack]

Originally posted by WldThing
Well ...  Since he usually flies LW planes(Right?),  do they not too require "smart" flying,  similar to flying a P-51?

Like many in the MA, beet1e's idea of 'smart flying' is being timid.



ack-ack

[eskimo2]

How many “spins” can a man’s brain spew before it turns to mush?

eskimo

[Murdr]

The author of post number 413 titled "Cliff notes for How to get high rank" would like to disavow any relationship either private, commercial, or by subsiderary, to the post number 414 titled "Cliff Notes version - Part 2 of 2 "

The author,a participant of the thread, as a public service offered a third person summery of the core content relating to the thread topic.  (With one first person reference as an aside)

This should not be confused with the latter mentioned post of similar title.  That post contains no less than 16 first person references by its author, and for all appearances does not cover anything relating to the thread topic.  It does however, appear to cover its authors main intrest (himself).  Unfortunatly its header does not relate this in its content.

Thank you for your understanding in this matter.

[beet1e]

...because some people have closed minds which were already made up before I began the analysis of the top 100. I could do the challenge, but whatever the results, Shane and others would dismiss the attempt, regardless of its outcome, and that's why I'm not going to waste my time doing it.

• "no-one" is an absolute as has been mentioned.
• That post contains no less than 16 first person references by its author
• beet1e's idea of 'smart flying' is being timid.

As can be seen from the above, the rebuttals against my findings have degenerated into arguments over semantics. Is "no-one" an absolute, or could it be figurative? Is an account valid only if written in the third person, but not in the first person? I see that the first person references have actually been counted in an attempt to add validity to the rebuttal!

...and there would be guys like akak, jumping on the bandwagon before the last wheel falls off, trying to balance the weight and keep the thing rolling - somehow. I could post a film of me fighting alone against about 4 spits and a yak and getting 6 kills in less than 12 minutes (no gondolas 109). But whatever material I would present, akak's closed mind tells him that "beet1e flies timid". I could fly that P51 and get kills, and someone might dismiss it as "timid flying" or "flying carefully" or "those were not "fights". The word "fight" would be tossed around, as certain guys (and they know who they are) searched for new definitions to apply to the word, at the same time discarding others.

Let's stick with the FACTS - 91%! That is the number to remember - of the top 100 is made up of Big3 drivers... but go ahead - cling on to that other 9% - because it's all you've got. Oh but wait, I'm talking about FACTS here, not theory or opinion or conjecture. You wouldn't understand... because your minds are already made up.

What a cracking thread! I have so enjoyed taking part. Going through those stats was a slog, but worth it in the end. Worth it to me, and for anyone else who was interested in the FACTS.

But now it's time to unsubscribe -

Toodle-Pip

[Shane]

i don't believe anyone ever questioned your contention (http://www.dictionary.com) that the majority of top 100 ranked fighters make use of the "big-3 subset."

not at all.  nope siree bob.

i believe the argument on the table was that it was impossible for anyone to get there without resorting to using them.

now as for the challenge. i think any of the ones you think have as hard-coded precepts as to your particular style as you think would be more than likely to at least recognize an effort made. at the same time your own precepts of these planes might be amended somewhat. you have nothing to lose, much to gain.

[Red Tail 444]

Originally posted by NoBaddy
Poopster...

I hate to be the one pissin' in your teapot....but, from the getgo, HT intended for AH to be more that an air combat sim. Ask him about submarines or the "1st person shooter" field captures he would like to implement some day.

As for what the thread is about (sri, I was coat-tailing the hijacking )....playing for score is silly. Anyone that hasn't figured that out yet has my sympathy. At the "end of the day", if you are playing for score...you're just jerkin' off .

I play for safe landings, to be honest...if I escort a goon in and land w/ no kills, thats just as good as landinf kills. K/D is what I'm after, for a cose second.

If greater attention were paid to safe landings, and not kills, or rank, the game would be much more fun. folks would have to learn to fly smarter (and no, I don't mean just faster).

Gainsie

[WilldCrd]

I used to be a score ho and now im reformed i would get sooooooo friggin mad it made the game really suck now i i try and "learn" from the aces by watching films and engaging them and "hopefully" giving them somewhat of a fight i was really proud of myself the day i lasted  a whole 3 maneuvers against wildthing LOL and i prefer playing this way ang going against laviathin, wildthing, ack-ack,yucca ,shane steve even lazer in his dang 38 guys i can ussually tell who im fighting now cause the moves i've been watching and trying to learn are used against me to a far superior extent and then revewing the film to correct my mistakes. in the past i got pissed at some and for that i apologize it was the score ho demon talking   guys hope to be more of a challange in the future

[moot]

hi beet-

pretty sure the majority of players in that top 100 could've made it with sub-par planes.  
pretty sure the MA could be a great 24/7 epic battle with no running and timid and unimaginative wusses and all, whatever, but it's not, and for the same reason, as other strange phenomena one might pick up on and make long boring threads that prove nothing about.

The common point is this is all a game, and only a small part of the population in it is tied together by the common interest of continually challenging themselves to the most, and even in this small lot there isn't a majority as to what the 'best' way to challenge oneself is.  As this is just a game, it's all quite.. moot, and while you have some guys taking it to the absolute end, some just stop caring, for one reason or another, and at some point it eventually returns to being dismissable as the game it is, i.e. the path of least resistance, i.e. mass M3 goon drops from spawn, absurd ganging of one low and slow con, Lancaster suicide jabos etc, whatever the result, epic CV furball or not, losing a duel without caring because your motivation for a good fight isn't in it anymore to feed your concentration, even tho you might've found a jewel somewhere in that mess of a stick your opponent is.

Most of the top 100 could probably make it with watermelon planes while the rest of the arena stuck to the best ones, but they probably don't care for the effort of(or) tactical changes required.