Scoring System

[VapoR]

These are some ideas I've thought of for the scoring system that I think would encourage teamplay and add to the fun of online playing:

 

*A total score for both coalitions (all points scored or lost on that coalition would add here).

 

*AI controlled units (both air and ground) would add their kill points to the total for that coalition. For instance: a blue SAM shoots down a red player, blue side gets those points added to the total. Ground vehicles killing each other would affect this as well.

 

*Plane losses from crashing would deduct from the coalition total .

 

*Ordinance that is fired (or jettisoned) that doesn't hit any targets should take some points from that player (this would help prevent spamming missiles). Different weapons could have different point costs depending on the value of the weapon.

 

*Buildings!! Buildings that are assigned as mission targets in the editor should have a score. So if you are tasked with attacking a bridge or one of the placeable ammo depots you will get points for it. Any buildings that ARE NOT assigned as targets should be considered civilian and given a penalty if destroyed.

 

Anyone like these ideas or have anything to add to it?

[Guest EVIL-SCOTSMAN]

T a blue SAM shoots down a blue player, blue side gets those points added to the total.

 

 

points for tkin, mmm i like that idea :D

[gustav]

Great ideas. They all make sense i think.

[Pilotasso]

*Ordinance that is fired (or jettisoned) that doesn't hit any targets should take some points from that player (this would help prevent spamming missiles). Different weapons could have different point costs depending on the value of the weapon.

 

I disagree with this, since it would interfere with the realistic doctrine that shooting missiles of more than 1 type maximizes PK.

Unfortunatly for your idea this is how russian pilots are taught and in practice everybody shoots more than 1 missile. Waiting for the first missile to hit might prompt you to not kill him at all if he moves outside missile evelope during your waiting time.

[suntrace1]

I don't understand why people whine about spamming missile - it's their choice to do so. If you get killed by a spammer, it's your fault that it happened. And if he missed, you get you chance to get him. It's that simple.

 

Just don't whine around, you are only making fool out of yourself, 'cause you were killed by a noob. Be a man and soak it up!

[Gazehound]

Good ideas there VapoR, they definately should let you score for destroying buildings which are placed in the editor. Dont know about existing buildings because you would get that silly diamond around the target (not in the vanilla frog I know ;) ).

[VapoR]

points for tkin, mmm i like that idea :D

 

Ooops!!! I meant blue on red!!!

[VapoR]

I don't understand why people whine about spamming missile - it's their choice to do so. If you get killed by a spammer, it's your fault that it happened. And if he missed, you get you chance to get him. It's that simple.

 

Just don't whine around, you are only making fool out of yourself, 'cause you were killed by a noob. Be a man and soak it up!

 

Whoa there, cowboy!! Who's whining about spamming?

 

The example I posted was the first thing I thought of. Having a point value would affect many other things as well, think about it--if it costs you more points for wasting a high value weapon, you might even carry something "cheaper". Like not using FAB-500's when a FAB-250 will do the job well enough. Or using Sparrows instead of just all AMRAAMs.

[VapoR]

Good ideas there VapoR, they definately should let you score for destroying buildings which are placed in the editor. Dont know about existing buildings because you would get that silly diamond around the target (not in the vanilla frog I know ;) ).

 

The diamond on an unmoving target is not bad, think of it this way: the coordinates of the object would be entered into the flight computer and thus the diamond at that spot.

[suntrace1]

It wasn't directed at you, personally.

 

So if i understand correctly, you would like to give each team certain amount of money which they can spend - similar to Counter Strike?

 

It would make campains more interesting if there were limited sources of weapons. Carry on....

[GGTharos]

Puh-lease. What are you doing getting anywhere near a fighter, anyway? Yes, you can shoot one or two down if you get lucky and the opposition isn't particularely challenging, but if the spam hits you, so would a single missile - they all fly the same trajectory.

 

If you're in a Hog/Frog and you get 'raped' by a spammer you have NOTHING to complain about, except your own inability to realize that you shouldn't be flying where you're a target without some air cover.

[VapoR]

So if i understand correctly, you would like to give each team certain amount of money which they can spend - similar to Counter Strike?

 

It would make campains more interesting if there were limited sources of weapons. Carry on....

 

Not exactly . . .

 

Each time you fire a weapon and that weapon misses, an assigned number of points would be deducted from your online score. I think the points given for kills would need to increased to balance this, else everyone will be running around with a negative score . . . :D

[suntrace1]

When i fight, i don't want to give my enemy ''50/50 chance'' , i want him killed. Period. Even if that means crashing into them, shooting them down when they are trying to land, etc. I am only against shooting pilots when they eject. Your claim that giving you a chance of fighting back is ''proper military tactics'' is MODESTLY said, funny.

 

You can only blaime your squadmates for not giving you a proper air-cover! THEY are the one that are not employing proper air-tactics! If they are not up to the job, stop flying that A-10, get in F-15 and do their job. But it seems to me that you are more eager to get that ''fun'' Vikhr air-kill to brag about.

 

War is not a sport of gentlemen, it's about winning and killing enemy with any means - just as you killled your opponents with A2G missile, you noob (being sarcastic)- usually overwhelming them, so that there is minimal damage to your force. May i mention recent war that is goin' on? How about kamikazi pilots?

 

THAT is a fact!

 

If you're not up to it, it's best that you leave that server too, and find one, that is more friendy (not likely) or join an acrobatic group.

 

 

 

Dying is not fun, but blaming the adversary for your death - that's just lack of character in my book.

[S77th-Paralyzer]

I personally have seen 2 people quit playing on-line in hyperlobby because of GG's usual brash style of comments.

 

:(

[Hitman IF]

When i fight, i don't want to give my enemy ''50/50 chance'' , i want him killed. Period. Even if that means crashing into them, shooting them down when they are trying to land, etc. I am only against shooting pilots when they eject. Your claim that giving you a chance of fighting back is ''proper military tactics'' is MODESTLY said, funny.

 

War is not a sport of gentlemen, it's about winning and killing enemy with any means - just as you killled your opponents with A2G missile, you noob (being sarcastic)- usually overwhelming them, so that there is minimal damage to your force. May i mention recent war that is goin' on? How about kamikazi pilots?

 

Totally agree with this. When you fight, you fight to win. So long as it doesn't prevent you from accomplishing your mission of course.

[Guest EVIL-SCOTSMAN]

Ooops!!! I meant blue on red!!!

 

 

no prob dude, that what i thought you meant, but now youve taken the fun right out of it, me sad that i not get a score for tkin :(

 

:D ;)

[Jester_159th]

Puh-lease. What are you doing getting anywhere near a fighter, anyway? Yes, you can shoot one or two down if you get lucky and the opposition isn't particularely challenging, but if the spam hits you, so would a single missile - they all fly the same trajectory.

 

With a due respect GG: RUBBISH!

 

If some spammer lets loose with 6 to 8 120's You may be able to dodge the first three (since they will be on roughly the same tragectory). But the numbers 6-8 will have more than enough time to adjust (and in a slower plane like the 25T numbers 4 & 5 probably will as well).

 

And as far as spamming being a "Proper military tactic" (as Suntrace hinted it must be with his comments) Well I'll believe that when someone shows me it in a USAF manual.

 

All the spammer does is turn a server into airquake. Even if he does get nailed good and solid after using all his missiles on a single target, folks like that still make it impossible to run anything approaching a realistic server and kill it for the other players, especially those who don't belong to a squad.

 

TBH, that's why I prefer to fly in a private server with my squad than on HL.

[BearF_CO_159th]

There is the difference, of course, between spamming (8 AIM-120's in 3 seconds) and the 'ripple fire' tactic. Please note the word tactic.

 

Spamming, in the eyes of the majority of players that I have seen, read & talked to, is annoying to say the least. It cheapens the victory of your opponent. I doubt anyone has ever congratulated them with a 'GK' message afterwards and surely that is the best compliment one can receive? An acknowledgement from your foe that, yes, you flew and fought well and deserved your victory. To be hit by a spammer, (and spare me the 'what are you doing in range anyway blah blah blah'. To avoid getting in range why dont we just sit in our cockpits on the deck eating cake all day? I like Battenburg BTW), just ruins the game for players. I'm not saying that people are unhappy about being splashed and if you think I am saying that please re-read this paragraph.

 

The 'ripple fire' is, as stated, a recognised tactic and one used by myself and the 159th Guards when flying co-ops or online HL. I have seen a lot of RusFor players use it also.

 

So, spam if you will though I doubt you will earn respect from your opponents and, unfortunately, you may find your list of pilots who will fly against you getting thin on the ground. Or in the air if you see what I mean.

[S77th-konkussion]

Agreed. however off topic this has become- I don't even call multiple shots a "spammer" in some cases. I DO think that anyone firing away at an RWR spike without ever locking them up on their own radar is a cheap tactic. Hell-I'll even grant someone a "self defense" free launch. But if that's all you do- fire ARH's in the direction of a spike- shame on you.

 

The hogs & frogs simply cannot go into airspace with hostile CAP. While I definitely feel that pain- ya can't complain about that. It's the way it is. So if you jump in an A10 with a pile of mig's & sue's already in the air- you will die a lot. Get cover, change planes, or pick another room- sorry.

 

Anyway back to topic (i think) If there must be a scoreboard at all- y'know how you get higher percentage for landing? How about a bonus for carrier landing. :)

[Hitman IF]

I think part of the problem here is that fighter pilots don't think enough of their mission while flying escort. Missile conservation can get scant consideration when you're tangling with a fulcrum or something.

[suntrace1]

And as far as spamming being a "Proper military tactic" (as Suntrace hinted it must be with his comments) Well I'll believe that when someone shows me it in a USAF manual.

 

.

 

Don't twist my words Jester, there is nothing i hate more.

 

So does it say that is not allowed? I highly doubt it. Does it say that you can not employ a2g weapons against air targets? I bet that it doesn't. But it happens in RL.

 

Is it cheating? No

Is it cheap tactic? Yes

Noobish? Absolutely

Fair win? Yes, not GK, but a kill, nevertheless. And that is all that counts.

 

Really, a lot of crybabys here.

[Jester_159th]

Don't twist my words Jester, there is nothing i hate more.

 

So does it say that is not allowed? I highly doubt it. Does it say that you can not employ a2g weapons against air targets? I bet that it doesn't. But it happens in RL.

 

Is it cheating? No

Is it cheap tactic? Yes

Noobish? Absolutely

Fair win? Yes, not GK, but a kill, nevertheless. And that is all that counts.

 

Really, a lot of crybabys here.

 

Twist your words? No. Merely read between the lines. Funny it was ok for you to treat Wolverine's post in the same manner eh?

 

And as to your definition of what's fair or not that depends on what you're wanting to do. If you're happy playing airquake then fine. But not if you're interested in simulating something close to actual military operations. It's hard enough to do with a PC simulator due to obvious linitations, spamming just makes it worse. Different horses for different courses.

 

It also seems to me your definition of a crybaby is someone that doesn't agree with you. You might want to check that one in a dictionary.

[VapoR]

It's funny how this thread turned out!!

 

But really, the scoring ideas that I mentioned would in some way solve these problems--you want to fire 6 missiles at a single target, then fine. But you (and your coalition) will lose some points. And if you carry an "expensive" a2g missile and miss your target it with it, you will also lose points. I'm not talking a massive loss of points here either, maybe about 5 points or so for a cheap weapon and 15-20 for an expensive one. Of course I think the points awarded to all objects should be doubled from where they are at for this to balance out well.

[S77th-konkussion]

...... and the rest of the red fighter boys seem more interested in air quake than providing CAP.

 

Oh I agree with that- very frustrating!

[S77th-GOYA]

How about a bonus for carrier landing. :)

 

A great idea. As soon as the F/A-18 is flyable.