What counts?

[Ack-Ack]

Since your post is full of basic cluelessness, you'll never find the answer you're looking for.  But I will address a point or two.

Alot of guys in the MA seem to put alot of stock into how well they DA, and will gladly offer to school anyone of us at the drop of a hat, though things like fair play, or clearly stating the rules of engagment are allowed to slip.....Do certain persons put to much stock in victory in the DA where SA is of no importance, and subterfuge is used in place of skill?

All fights require SA, whether the fight is a 1v1 DA match or a furball in the MA.  No SA = Dead Pilot.  Subterfuge and lack of fair play in a 1v1 DA match?  That's why you set rules prior to the duel.  If one doesn't abide by the set forth terms, they lose the match.  Your idea of what happens in duels just shows that you've never done it.  No surprise since you are a very timid and limited skilled player.

Fairplay seems to have gone the way of the Do Do in the DA, and several squads seem to function on the bases that it is ok to die in the MA as long as the victoriouse pilot can be suckerd into the DA where he cant ever seem to get a fair fight, be it the merge rule is broken, or one guy ho's another when it was clearly stated that ho's where to be avoided, or any other of a hundred ways that can be found to prey upon the guy who is honestly doing his best to give a fair fight.

Again, just goes to show that you've never dueled anyone before and like all threads you've over created, it's full of text from someone that really has no clue.

To answer your question, what counts is having fun.  Someday you will realize that yourself and maybe you won't be such a timid little git.


ack-ack

[Zazen13]

It's important to establish that there's a not so subtle difference between Situational Awareness and Tactical Awareness. Situational Awareness implies the assimilation of area wide information consisting of multiple bandits, friendlies, their relative E states, projected vectors and likely intentions on an ongoing basis. Then using that information to formulate a dynamic action plan for working the entire engagement.

Tactical Awareness is the diligent scrutiny of a single opponent's moves, behaviors and likely intentions in order to decide the proper counter-maneuvers to deal with him specifically, in hermetic isolation, as efficiently as possible. Tactical Awareness is always required in any engagement, situational awareness is not.

Never losing sight of a bandit after the merge, watching him in order to decide how to best counter his merge move is an example of tactical awareness.

Keeping a vigilant eye on the bandit above you who you suspect may be coming in for a gun pass on you just as you are about to go to guns on his buddy you've been working is an example of situational awareness.

[Ack-Ack]

It's important to establish that there's a not so subtle difference between Situational Awareness and Tactical Awareness. Situational Awareness implies the assimilation of area wide information consisting of multiple bandits, friendlies, their relative E states, projected vectors and likely intentions on an ongoing basis. Then using that information to formulate a dynamic action plan for working the entire engagement.

Tactical Awareness is the diligent scrutiny of a single opponent's moves, behaviors and likely intentions in order to decide the proper counter-maneuvers to deal with him specifically, in hermetic isolation, as efficiently as possible. Tactical Awareness is always required in any engagement, situational awareness is not.

Never losing sight of a bandit after the merge, watching him in order to decide how to best counter his merge move is an example of tactical awareness.

Keeping a vigilant eye on the bandit above you who you suspect may be coming in for a gun pass on you just as you are about to go to guns on his buddy you've been working is an example of situational awareness.

I really do hate to burst your bubble after you've spent so much time composing yet another essay.  'Tactical Awarness' is all part of Situational Awarness and is not a seperate thing, just like 'Situational Assessment' isn't seperate from SA but rather a part of Situational Awarness.

ack-ack

[2bighorn]

I really do hate to burst your bubble after you've spent so much time composing yet another essay.  'Tactical Awarness' is all part of Situational Awarness and is not a seperate thing, just like 'Situational Assessment' isn't seperate from SA but rather a part of Situational Awarness.

Aye, as defined today, all those are included in SA

[infowars]

It's important to establish that there's a not so subtle difference between Situational Awareness and Tactical Awareness. Situational Awareness implies the assimilation of area wide information consisting of multiple bandits, friendlies, their relative E states, projected vectors and likely intentions on an ongoing basis. Then using that information to formulate a dynamic action plan for working the entire engagement.

Tactical Awareness is the diligent scrutiny of a single opponent's moves, behaviors and likely intentions in order to decide the proper counter-maneuvers to deal with him specifically, in hermetic isolation, as efficiently as possible. Tactical Awareness is always required in any engagement, situational awareness is not.

Never losing sight of a bandit after the merge, watching him in order to decide how to best counter his merge move is an example of tactical awareness.

Keeping a vigilant eye on the bandit above you who you suspect may be coming in for a gun pass on you just as you are about to go to guns on his buddy you've been working is an example of situational awareness.

  That is why I play.  I play because it is hard to get good.  A constant challange.   

[Xargos]

The only reason I play nowadays is because of the community/friends.

[Zazen13]

I really do hate to burst your bubble after you've spent so much time composing yet another essay.  'Tactical Awarness' is all part of Situational Awarness and is not a seperate thing, just like 'Situational Assessment' isn't seperate from SA but rather a part of Situational Awarness.

ack-ack

I never said tactical awareness couldn't be construed as a subset of the broad definition of situational awareness, it's obvious by my definition it very well could be in a general sense. But, situational awareness is so much more than just tactical awareness. To say tactical awareness is situational awareness is to say a water droplet is the ocean, it can be a component part of it, but it's not the ocean...Think of it as the logical sets and subsets of mathematics. All you need to fight one con in guaranteed isolation is the subset of tactical awareness. When fighting in a complex engagement you need the full breadth of situational awareness, also including the tactical aspect of course.

[Chalenge]

I try to control the situation and deny the enemy control. Sometimes that means I fly in situations that are hopeless and sometimes I have to fly home without kills after shooting like ten to fifteen planes because no one or only one guy from my country is helping in the area I am flying in and everyone is now on my six 'helping' each other. The most fun I have is flying with my squad kills or no kills. My squad is the sole judge of the measure of my 'effectiveness' and what anyone else in the game thinks about that I dont care. There are three things I love to kill: bombers me262s and P51s. I will drop everything I am doing to attack these and not in any particular order. I love to do slow rolls 1k above flaks and WWs after killing the troops at their vehicle field. Resupplying a field after someone has flown for an hour to pork it can be fun too. Decide what you like best about the game and have fun doing what you like. The worst mistake you can make is watching your score and letting that tell you what you need to do to have fun. At least that would not be fun for me.

[Ack-Ack]

I never said tactical awareness couldn't be construed as a subset of the broad definition of situational awareness, it's obvious by my definition it very well could be in a general sense. But, situational awareness is so much more than just tactical awareness. To say tactical awareness is situational awareness is to say a water droplet is the ocean, it can be a component part of it, but it's not the ocean...Think of it as the logical sets and subsets of mathematics. All you need to fight one con in guaranteed isolation is the subset of tactical awareness. When fighting in a complex engagement you need the full breadth of situational awareness, also including the tactical aspect of course.

No matter how you try to spin it or redefine what it is, you're still wrong.  You cannot have tactical awarness without situational awarness, they are not two seperate things.  They are inter-related, one goes with the other and a player needs to be proficient in both if they want to be successful in any sort of engagement, whether it be a 1v1 affair in the DA or a multi-threat environment in the MA.  To say different really shows a lack of knowledge what SA really is.

It's like the thread about stall fighting, you kept changing the definition of what it is to fit your argument, exactly what you are doing here.  In the stall fighting thread, you were incorrect just like you are in this thread.


ack-ack

[Zazen13]

No matter how you try to spin it or redefine what it is, you're still wrong.  You cannot have tactical awarness without situational awarness, they are not two seperate things.  They are inter-related, one goes with the other and a player needs to be proficient in both if they want to be successful in any sort of engagement, whether it be a 1v1 affair in the DA or a multi-threat environment in the MA.  To say different really shows a lack of knowledge what SA really is.

It's like the thread about stall fighting, you kept changing the definition of what it is to fit your argument, exactly what you are doing here.  In the stall fighting thread, you were incorrect just like you are in this thread.


ack-ack

Your true motivation for arguing with me in every thread notwithstanding, I changed my definition of nothing. Use whatever terms you care to use to describe them the fact remains the same. The level of awareness required to fight a single enemy with zero chance of any other mitigating factor entering your sphere is a lot different quantitatively if not substantively than the level of awareness required when involved in a complex multi-plane engagement containing a vast array of mitigating factors and elements demanding your active attentiveness. To say otherwise indicates you are either completely ignorant, which I know is not the case, or you are being intentionally thick and argumentative for personal reasons, which I strongly suspect is the case...

[Yenny]

1 v. 1 enviroment is completely different then furball. There are times in a furball when I'm sitting 400 yards from a kill and have to break to survive. In a furball I almost never been able to stay on someone's tail for more then 30 seconds without not having to take evasive manuever.

[2bighorn]

Your true motivation for arguing with me in every thread notwithstanding, I changed my definition of nothing. Use whatever terms you care to use to describe them the fact remains the same. The level of awareness required to fight a single enemy with zero chance of any other mitigating factor entering your sphere is a lot different quantitatively if not substantively than the level of awareness required when involved in a complex multi-plane engagement containing a vast array of mitigating factors and elements demanding your active attentiveness. To say otherwise indicates you are either completely ignorant, which I know is not the case, or you are being intentionally thick and argumentative for personal reasons, which I strongly suspect is the case...

Zazen, he wasn't arguing the difference between 1-vs-1 or 1-vs-many. He just doesn't agree with your claim that in 1-vs-1 you don't need SA, and your definition of the same.

The flow is always the same: SA -> Decision -> Act.
Tactic comes into play after you made decision based on SA and is nothing more but one or more tasks you have to perform in order to achieve an objective.

Whether in one to one or many to many, you need sufficient SA in order to utilize your skills and tools. Of course, in 1 vs 1 you don't need to extend SA to the same volume of space as in multi plane engagement, but it's still needed.


PS
No need to call people ignorant just because they disagree with you.

[Zazen13]

PS
No need to call people ignorant just because they disagree with you.

To say otherwise indicates you are either completely ignorant, which I know is not the case

[2bighorn]

No need to split the hair. You know what I meant.

Your true motivation for arguing with me in every thread notwithstanding...
you are either completely ignorant, which I know is not the case, or you are being intentionally thick and argumentative for personal reasons, which I strongly suspect is the case...

"An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. The process of proving or disproving the claim is thereby subverted, and the argumentum ad hominem works to change the subject."

[Zazen13]

The flow is always the same: SA -> Decision -> Act.
Tactic comes into play after you made decision based on SA and is nothing more but one or more tasks you have to perform in order to achieve an objective.

Gross generalization in that way is a very convenient method of trying to fit something under a very restricted contextual umbrella. But, it does not change the fact that awareness of a single enemy in complete isolation is far less complex than awareness of an entire area containing multiple threats and friends. It's not just a simple matter of plurality, it's a matter of different things being much more important and to very different degrees. Furthermore, some things absolutely required in expansive SA have absolutely no relevance in restricted TA.

For example, there is absolutely no use for judging the relative E states and intentions of friendly and enemy cons you are not directly involved with in close proximity when dueling a single foe in isolation. Instantaneously judging the E states and intentions of multiple cons and maintaining that level of cognizance is an incredibly fundamental part of SA and very hard to maintain while actively engaged with another bandit. Truly gifted furballers have mastered this art, it's what makes them great at it. This art is not applicable to a 1 vs 1 isolated duel at all, but it is the single most important part of SA in complex multi-plane engagements. Having only to focus on a single bandit at close range where single-minded observation is simple, with no worry of outside factors, is so trivial by comparison it is laughable.