Author Topic: New Scoring for Kills in Air (Read 1041 times)

Sikboy · « **Reply #15 on:** February 07, 2005, 01:30:55 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Murdr
My thought is, if I can deny someone a kill by making it back to friendly territory I will.

THATS it! that's why I do it. Thanks Murdr, I couldn't put my finger on it while not playing lol.

-Sik

Murdr · « **Reply #16 on:** February 07, 2005, 01:37:12 PM »

Besides, the current "soft" ditch model can be very fun sometimes

rabbidrabbit · « **Reply #17 on:** February 07, 2005, 01:42:30 PM »

I do the same but am wondering how a fair kill can be awarded. With the extremely generous ditch model now there are many occasions where people get robbed of a proper kill. They were awarded probables if they could not confirm that the plane went down. In this case we have the magic of computers for this.

I would not be opposed to another option but am wondering what would be the most fair method. The not awarding kill points after critical damage is a good idea as well.

I just hate blowing a wing off someone between 2 bases in a low turn fight only to have them land it How about a landing within a mile of a friendly base count as a ditch, the others as a kill/ditch? This gets rid of the wide unmarked net that folks can unfairly deprive a fair kill?

Murdr · « **Reply #18 on:** February 07, 2005, 02:26:32 PM »

imo, this stems from many patches ago when the ditch model was tweeked to where it was nearly impossible to land gear-up. The fix for that gave us this ditch model that imo is softer than versions prior to the problem.

However, the older versions did seem to kill the pilot a little to easily in a crash landing. So without adding new modeling, which is more offensive? Your pilot arbitrarly being killed in what appears to be a survivable crash landing? Or being denied a kill once in awhile when you shoot the guy 50ft off the deck in his territory?

Id rather not return to the days when accidently clipping a few inches of wing on an object means an instant death for the pilot, instead of damage to the wing.

Im not saying Im aginst some sort of solution, but Im pointing out there is a balancing of factors, and the occational lost kill bothers me less than an unrealistic instant death.

MANDO · « **Reply #19 on:** February 07, 2005, 02:29:23 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by hitech
We used to have it in one catagory. But hit % gets realy messed up, I.E. you could pad your fighter hit % by just shooting buildings.

Now substitute buildings by buffs or vulches to pad the %.

Without considering "big targets" and vulches, hit% depends too much on weapon type, weapons placement, damage per hit, sync or unsync and even frame rate. If everyone fly the same plane all the time, with the same weapon set and with the same frame rate, then hit % may have some meaning, meanwhile what counts should be only the kill, not the rounds used to get it.

Murdr · « **Reply #20 on:** February 07, 2005, 03:10:49 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by MANDO
Now substitute buildings by buffs or vulches to pad the %.

Buildings dont shoot back, or call their ground object buddies to up the anti-vulch squad. Just sayn.

Kaz · « **Reply #21 on:** February 07, 2005, 03:39:56 PM »

Quote

What would be possible is that no more lethality points are tracked once certian componets fail. The plane could still be shot and more damage done, but no kill award tracking would be done, you still must stay living until the hit plane exits flight.

Been thinking about implementing this for a while, it just hasn't moved to the top of the list yet.

HiTech

This will be great.

rabbidrabbit · « **Reply #22 on:** February 07, 2005, 03:53:06 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Murdr
imo, this stems from many patches ago when the ditch model was tweeked to where it was nearly impossible to land gear-up. The fix for that gave us this ditch model that imo is softer than versions prior to the problem.

However, the older versions did seem to kill the pilot a little to easily in a crash landing. So without adding new modeling, which is more offensive? Your pilot arbitrarly being killed in what appears to be a survivable crash landing? Or being denied a kill once in awhile when you shoot the guy 50ft off the deck in his territory?

Id rather not return to the days when accidently clipping a few inches of wing on an object means an instant death for the pilot, instead of damage to the wing.

Im not saying Im aginst some sort of solution, but Im pointing out there is a balancing of factors, and the occational lost kill bothers me less than an unrealistic instant death.

Why is it either or? I don't see how you can't have it both ways instead of compromising one way or the other. I'm suggesting the damage model stay the same unrealistically lenient way but award a kill and a ditch unless its within 1 mile of a friendly field which then grants the ditchee the benefit of the doubt.

SunKing · « **Reply #23 on:** February 07, 2005, 04:13:43 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by hitech

Been thinking about implementing this for a while, it just hasn't moved to the top of the list yet.

HiTech

Please add it to the list.

MANDO · « **Reply #24 on:** February 07, 2005, 04:18:50 PM »

Just curious, how different airforces did distribute kills when several pilots hit the same target? shared kill? kill plus several assists?

Murdr · « **Reply #25 on:** February 07, 2005, 04:47:12 PM »

Say Im on Mindano. The whole A42 peninsula is enemy territory. I fight at 42, take a few pings, no damage. I head back across the bay to A31. I foolishly stayed too long and run out of fuel while rtb and ditch in the bay off A31. Why does someone 40 miles away deserve a kill when Im in friendly territory and they had nothing to do with me ditching?

Im sure you can come up with an solution for that. No doubt I can think of more complications for your proposed model too. However, I didnt chime in to give you a hard time, but to point out a breif new rule probably wouldnt cover everything. And that HT's "ditch by luck" comment kind of implies he likes that aspect in the game.

Karnak · « **Reply #26 on:** February 07, 2005, 04:54:28 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by MANDO
Just curious, how different airforces did distribute kills when several pilots hit the same target? shared kill? kill plus several assists?

Chuck Yeager punched a pilot who shot at a German fighter that Yeager'd already shot down. The guy did it to get a "kill" by having the evidence on his gun camera.

Captain Virgil Hilts · « **Reply #27 on:** February 07, 2005, 05:17:41 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by hitech

What would be possible is that no more lethality points are tracked once certian componets fail. The plane could still be shot and more damage done, but no kill award tracking would be done, you still must stay living until the hit plane exits flight.

Been thinking about implementing this for a while, it just hasn't moved to the top of the list yet.

HiTech

OUTSTANDING!!! Please do that, and please move it as high on the list as is humanly possible.

TalonX · « **Reply #28 on:** February 07, 2005, 05:45:52 PM »

I can buy the "ditch" in some instances... I hate that you get a "you have ditched" by running 3 feet off the runway.... Any "ditch" within the limits of the base (or within 500 yards for that matter) should be scored a LANDING.

A "ditch" where the plane is in pieces, should be scored a KILL. That plane is dead (destroyed or severely damaged). Ditching to me is running out of fuel, or minor structural damage and being forced down to land in the fields.

MANDO · « **Reply #29 on:** February 07, 2005, 06:02:08 PM »

A bit more about the % of hit.

I find no reason to punish those players that waste all their small cal MG ammo with the sole purpose of making their planes lighter. 190A5, 109G2, 109F and spits are good examples.

For example, I used 190A5 quite a lot and cant remember the last time I fired the MG17s.

BTW, some planes alow you to select the number of MGs and different ammo quantities, some others dont.