Kill score system/net stats - suggestions

[hnbdgr]

Hi one and all!

I've read through an interesting thread a couple of days back dealing with the changes to the scoring system etc. The problem is I can't find it anymore...? I thought some great suggestions were put forward that would improve the gameplay and immersion.

Can we have a look at these things and perhaps put them forward as an official suggestion? If it has enough backing and it is technically possible to execute, it will have a chance of being accepted be it by ATAG or TF.

What we need to know:

1.) the precise changes we would like to have
2.) whether it is technically possible to enact them ( and whether it requires implementation in the TF mod or simply server side scripts)

I propose we post suggestions (let's call them changes to scoring system) here - number them #1 to #x and make a poll in 7 days or so.

I would humbly propose to discuss the following changes

Changes to scoring system #1

Basic proposition:

players get their kills from a sortie attributed only if they finished their sortie succesfully:
- they safely land in a friendly base
- they crash land on the friendly side of the map (and character lives)
- they bail out on the friendly side of the map - and touch ground safely

players don't get their kills from a sortie attributed if they finished their sortie unsuccesfully
- abandon (create new plane, leave server) before the above conditions have been met
- character gets killed
- they bail out on the enemy side of the map - and touch ground safely
- they crash land on the enemy side of the map (and character lives)

Changes to scores for hitting stationary planes or planes within 10 seconds of takeoff
- these would not count towards air kills anymore - instead they would be counted towards ground kills.
- to kill a character rather then plane on the ground would not count or only be counted as one ground kill.

Notes:
- this would motivate players to fly back home, instead of creating a new airplane when currently it's more convenient.
- the above system would require clearly dividing the map between blue and red without any neutral territory. On the offchance it can be done - neutral territory crash landings and bail outs can have a 50-50 outcome. But I'm in favor of decidedly splicing territory so that everyone knows where it is safe and where it isn't.
-this system would be applied to ground kills as well.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bonus proposition:
Introduction of victory points as a measure of effectivness of a player - don't dismiss this yet:)

- one victory point for every half of an air kill (1.56K = 3VP or 1.45K = 2VP)
- 0.5 victory point for every whole ground kill
- four victory points for a successful bombing of an objective area*
- two victory points for a destroyed ship

*note: successful in this sense means that at least one bomb has hit the specified area as means of confirmation that the bomber pilot was bombing the objective, they don't have to destroy stuff.

This specially should be an incentive for the bomber pilots who I don't think are getting enough credit for winning the map at the moment. For example - if a bombing run destroys 2 buildings and 3 trucks in a target area, the bomber pilot gets credited with 6.5 victory points (4+1+1.5).

Victory points are not subject to the same restrictions like the kill scoring system (to be attributed upon arriving home safely etc.) - as a solo bomber will not always get back home in one piece and I feel it is fair to acknowledge a players contribution even when he doesn't make it home. see the following points:

- VP are awarded at the end of a sortie based on the air/ground/ship kills - whether the sortie has had successful end or not.
Successful sortie - full VP: example - a player gets 1.56 of an air kill - he will be credited with 3VP the bomber, bombing run example 6.5VP
Unsuccessful sortie - half VP rounded up to nearest whole number: example - a player gets 1.56 of an air kill - he will be credited with 2VP (3/2=1.5=>2VP), bombing run example 6.5VP (6.5/2=3.25=>4VP)

Why I think the VP system is fair:

- A vulcher would get 1 VP for a successful vulch (under proposed changes 1 whole ground kill) which are worth less then the 2VP for whole air kills - more over as they often don't make it home after vulching - their ground kills wouldn't be even credited. This would hopefully stop people vulching as much. They would no longer feature on the top of the air kill table. and chasing one stationary airplane for 1 ground kill is not worth it if you can go strafe some cars or other soft targets and accumulate a lot more points.
- A bomber would get much more visible credit for his team efforts - likely leading the tables in VP
- A fighter would still get 1 VP for every 0.5 kill allowing ace pilots to lead the table in air kills and/or VP.
- Fighter players will vulch less and chase air kills as that is their primary source of pride - therefore they would still be motivated to land at the base to get their kills credited.
- Every player can compare their measure of effectivness and thus if a player doesn't have enough air kills, he can take solace in the fact that he was helpful to the team (strafing ground targets, bombing ships, VP for unattributed air kills)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


-what does the community think about the basic proposition and the bonus option - victory points?
-is it technically possible to do the proposed changes?
-anybody with an idea please post post post!

[9./JG52 Jamz Dackel]

Hi one and all!

I've read through an interesting thread a couple of days back dealing with the changes to the scoring system etc. The problem is I can't find it anymore...? I thought some great suggestions were put forward that would improve the gameplay and immersion.

Can we have a look at these things and perhaps put them forward as an official suggestion? If it has enough backing and it is technically possible to execute, it will have a chance of being accepted be it by ATAG or TF.

What we need to know:

1.) the precise changes we would like to have
2.) whether it is technically possible to enact them ( and whether it requires implementation in the TF mod or simply server side scripts)

I propose we post suggestions (let's call them changes to scoring system) here - number them #1 to #x and make a poll in 7 days or so.

I would humbly propose to discuss the following changes

Changes to scoring system #1

Basic proposition:

players get their kills from a sortie attributed only if they finished their sortie succesfully:
- they safely land in a friendly base
- they crash land on the friendly side of the map (and character lives)
- they bail out on the friendly side of the map - and touch ground safely

players don't get their kills from a sortie attributed if they finished their sortie unsuccesfully
- abandon (create new plane, leave server) before the above conditions have been met
- character gets killed
- they bail out on the enemy side of the map - and touch ground safely
- they crash land on the enemy side of the map (and character lives)

Changes to scores for hitting stationary planes or planes within 10 seconds of takeoff
- these would not count towards air kills anymore - instead they would be counted towards ground kills.
- to kill a character rather then plane on the ground would not count or only be counted as one ground kill.

Notes:
- this would motivate players to fly back home, instead of creating a new airplane when currently it's more convenient.
- the above system would require clearly dividing the map between blue and red without any neutral territory. On the offchance it can be done - neutral territory crash landings and bail outs can have a 50-50 outcome. But I'm in favor of decidedly splicing territory so that everyone knows where it is safe and where it isn't.
-this system would be applied to ground kills as well.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bonus proposition:
Introduction of victory points as a measure of effectivness of a player - don't dismiss this yet:)

- one victory point for every half of an air kill (1.56K = 3VP or 1.45K = 2VP)
- 0.5 victory point for every whole ground kill
- four victory points for a successful bombing of an objective area*
- two victory points for a destroyed ship

*note: successful in this sense means that at least one bomb has hit the specified area as means of confirmation that the bomber pilot was bombing the objective, they don't have to destroy stuff.

This specially should be an incentive for the bomber pilots who I don't think are getting enough credit for winning the map at the moment. For example - if a bombing run destroys 2 buildings and 3 trucks in a target area, the bomber pilot gets credited with 6.5 victory points (4+1+1.5).

Victory points are not subject to the same restrictions like the kill scoring system (to be attributed upon arriving home safely etc.) - as a solo bomber will not always get back home in one piece and I feel it is fair to acknowledge a players contribution even when he doesn't make it home. see the following points:

- VP are awarded at the end of a sortie based on the air/ground/ship kills - whether the sortie has had successful end or not.
Successful sortie - full VP: example - a player gets 1.56 of an air kill - he will be credited with 3VP the bomber, bombing run example 6.5VP
Unsuccessful sortie - half VP rounded up to nearest whole number: example - a player gets 1.56 of an air kill - he will be credited with 2VP (3/2=1.5=>2VP), bombing run example 6.5VP (6.5/2=3.25=>4VP)

Why I think the VP system is fair:

- A vulcher would get 1 VP for a successful vulch (under proposed changes 1 whole ground kill) which are worth less then the 2VP for whole air kills - more over as they often don't make it home after vulching - their ground kills wouldn't be even credited. This would hopefully stop people vulching as much. They would no longer feature on the top of the air kill table. and chasing one stationary airplane for 1 ground kill is not worth it if you can go strafe some cars or other soft targets and accumulate a lot more points.
- A bomber would get much more visible credit for his team efforts - likely leading the tables in VP
- A fighter would still get 1 VP for every 0.5 kill allowing ace pilots to lead the table in air kills and/or VP.
- Fighter players will vulch less and chase air kills as that is their primary source of pride - therefore they would still be motivated to land at the base to get their kills credited.
- Every player can compare their measure of effectivness and thus if a player doesn't have enough air kills, he can take solace in the fact that he was helpful to the team (strafing ground targets, bombing ships, VP for unattributed air kills)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


-what does the community think about the basic proposition and the bonus option - victory points?
-is it technically possible to do the proposed changes?
-anybody with an idea please post post post!

If its making players play their game a certain way it wont be looked at...Plentys of threads including mine have been dismissed..

Not a Dig at ATAG or TF its just the way it is... numerous threads on stats and scoring haven't developed into anything or are given any mention from TF

[hnbdgr]

If its making players play their game a certain way it wont be looked at...Plentys of threads including mine have been dismissed..

Not a Dig at ATAG or TF its just the way it is... numerous threads on stats and scoring haven't developed into anything or are given any mention from TF

Ok I don't think the proposed system places any boundaries on behavior. just provides incentives to encourage a certain type of attitude. We could have a credited kills and uncredited kills in the table, in order not to leave anyone out....

[9./JG52 Jamz Dackel]

Ok I don't think the proposed system places any boundaries on behavior. just provides incentives to encourage a certain type of attitude. We could have a credited kills and uncredited kills in the table, in order not to leave anyone out....

Agreed...Plenty of options

[Mysticpuma]

Makes me wonder if it's possible to run to stats. Scripts on the server. One for players who just want to furball and bomb and who don't really give two hoots about stats and one where all your recommendations in the first post in this thread could be run as a separate stats page for those who like to fly 'proper' stats?

Just asking as I think it would be great for different styles of player? Cheers, MP

[hnbdgr]

Makes me wonder if it's possible to run to stats. Scripts on the server. One for players who just want to furball and bomb and who don't really give two hoots about stats and one where all your recommendations in the first post in this thread could be run as a separate stats page for those who like to fly 'proper' stats?

Just asking as I think it would be great for different styles of player? Cheers, MP

That's a good idea. I think it would work well. Net Stats + Old Style Net Stats to give people the option. As for whether it is possible, I think you would be the kind of person I'd ask that:)) Perhaps we need to hear from ATAG server admins...

[92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)]

That's a good idea. I think it would work well. Net Stats + Old Style Net Stats to give people the option. As for whether it is possible, I think you would be the kind of person I'd ask that:)) Perhaps we need to hear from ATAG server admins...


ATAG already has a stats system that runs in addition to the in-game nets stats.
Storm Of War also already have a very complex and detailed stats system in place, that sites on-top-of the game stats (i.e. you access it from their website).

AFAIK, the in-game scoring system ("net-stats") is low down on the TF priority list. I don't even know if that part of the code has been understood yet. Just getting through the FMs and Graphics occupies ALL of TF resources.

[SoW Reddog]

Makes me wonder if it's possible to run to stats. Scripts on the server. One for players who just want to furball and bomb and who don't really give two hoots about stats and one where all your recommendations in the first post in this thread could be run as a separate stats page for those who like to fly 'proper' stats?

Just asking as I think it would be great for different styles of player? Cheers, MP

Why not just have S1 as a realistic stat's system, and S2 as a dogfight/current system server or visa versa? It seems to me that there is an increased interest by ATAG flyers (if not ATAG as an....organisation?) in more realism and constraints on player behaviour. Of course, it could just be a small percentage of the overall population who are members here and post.

[9./JG52 Jamz Dackel]

ATAG already has a stats system that runs in addition to the in-game nets stats.

Storm Of War also already have a very complex and detailed stats system in place, that sites on-top-of the game stats (i.e. you access it from their website).



AFAIK, the in-game scoring system ("net-stats") is low down on the TF priority list. I don't even know if that part of the code has been understood yet. Just getting through the FMs and Graphics occupies ALL of TF resources.

1. In game System does not have no where near enough info, and the ATAG stats is what we are asking can/could/will it be changed at all to include some suggestions from the community

2. But this is about ATAG Servers

~S~

[Kling]

Makes me wonder if it's possible to run to stats. Scripts on the server. One for players who just want to furball and bomb and who don't really give two hoots about stats and one where all your recommendations in the first post in this thread could be run as a separate stats page for those who like to fly 'proper' stats?

Just asking as I think it would be great for different styles of player? Cheers, MP

I never understood that. If certain player dont care about stats at all why would they care if stats are changed in the first place.

For them nothing would change. For those of us who like stats, me included, better stats would surely make the experince alot more realistic!


Im dreaming and hope that the code for stats can be completely rewritten! No more "AI shot down" message when the player has bailed out or "successful landing" at base even if you landed at an enemy base etc etc.

One day maybe one could be assigned his own aircraft with wear and tear included so people would care about treating their engines as good a possible. Also refuel and rearm and repair option would nice if it could be implented as a part of the game instead of the server.

Would be cool if people would be use this function instead of hitting refly and get a new aircraft.
Maybe stats where you get less points if you click refly instead of using the refuel and rearm function?!

[9./JG52 Jamz Dackel]

I never understood that. If certain player dont care about stats at all why would they care if stats are changed in the first place.

For them nothing would change. For those of us who like stats, me included, better stats would surely make the experince alot more realistic!


Im dreaming and hope that the code for stats can be completely rewritten! No more "AI shot down" message when the player has bailed out or "successful landing" at base even if you landed at an enemy base etc etc.

One day maybe one could be assigned his own aircraft with wear and tear included so people would care about treating their engines as good a possible. Also refuel and rearm and repair option would nice if it could be implented as a part of the game instead of the server.

Would be cool if people would be use this function instead of hitting refly and get a new aircraft.
Maybe stats where you get less points if you click refly instead of using the refuel and rearm function?!

For me its more they don't work as they should... twice tonight within the last hour on ATAG I hit a 110 smoke streaming engines out and ditches in the water, no kill ... a 109 over Deal black smoke 109 ditches on land, no kill..

Why? Do I need to go back and completely hammer them to get a kill even though as far as I'm concerned there dead and I purposely let them land/ditch..

If we are going to have them then it would be nice if they were accurate

~S~

[Roblex]

I never understood that. If certain player dont care about stats at all why would they care if stats are changed in the first place.

For them nothing would change. For those of us who like stats, me included, better stats would surely make the experince alot more realistic!



I am with you brother. You see it all the time 'Who cares about stats? I don't even look at my stats!' then they say 'Don't change the stats just because that is how you choose to play' :-) As you say, if you don't believe anyone cares about stats then why are you complaining that the stats will force people to fly a particular way?

We can't demand that anyone writes us a new script for updated stats but if someone is willing to do it then I can't see a problem with having a separate table for people who want to fly as if dying is a bad thing as long as the current table of pure kills is also available for the people who prefer to just furball and see how many kills they can get.

I would like to see a points based table where you get full score for landed kills, 75% for crash landings in friendly territory, 50% for bailing over friendly territory and 25% for ditching or bailing over enemy territory. My logic is that a crash landing might allow the plane to be fixed while a bail loses the plane and either crash landing or bail over France loses both pilot and plane. This does of course rely on maps that are balanced in terms of mission objectives in England & France. Where the map is specifically about Blue bombers coming to England then the scoring system should just give full scores.

I also like the idea of showing 'Best Streak' i.e. the highest number of kills before being killed or captured.

[hnbdgr]

So the general consesus is we can keep the old stats and have some new more complex ones ( in the forums or on game) -

My guess is changing this in-game would require involvement from TF
changing them on the forum (processing existing numbers) would require somebody knowledgeable from ATAG to do it....

I guess what we need to know now is if we come up with a new stats system, is somebody willing to implement it? Can somebody higher up have a look at this and let us know?

[2./JG54 Chumleigh]

I also like the idea of showing 'Best Streak' i.e. the highest number of kills before being killed or captured.

That's a meaningful number and one that should never reset. It is the greatest indicator of pilot skill. The man at the top of that list is definitely the man to beat! In fact you could pretty well chuck the rest of the stats in favor of that one.

As it stands now there's absolutely no way to assess piloting skills from the stats and that is ludicrous. Kill ratio doesn't mean much if the pilot lands his aircraft 5% of the time. #kills minus #aircraft sacrificed divided by #sorties is a far better indicator. In other words kills ought to at least be offset by the number of aircraft lost in the process.

I'd also like to see bomber kills distinguished from fighter kills. In addition there is definitely no reason to call a sortie a sortie until you've at least got your wheels up. Whether or not you're vulched should never affect the data. Every sortie must end in either a landing, a crash, or a parachute and those three numbers need to add up to the number of sorties. If you died, you crashed. It's academic. There's no reason to distinguish between the two.

If you're unable to draw any kind of conclusion from statistical data then either you're collecting the wrong data or your analysis or statistical representation of that data is flawed. I'm cannot draw any meaningful conclusion from the data as it is presented now and I'd be interested to know if there happens to be anyone who can.

[9./JG52 Jamz Dackel]

That's a meaningful number and one that should never reset. It is the greatest indicator of pilot skill. The man at the top of that list is definitely the man to beat! In fact you could pretty well chuck the rest of the stats in favor of that one.

As it stands now there's absolutely no way to assess piloting skills from the stats and that is ludicrous. Kill ratio doesn't mean much if the pilot lands his aircraft 5% of the time. #kills minus #aircraft sacrificed divided by #sorties is a far better indicator. In other words kills ought to at least be offset by the number of aircraft lost in the process.

I'd also like to see bomber kills distinguished from fighter kills. In addition there is definitely no reason to call a sortie a sortie until you've at least got your wheels up. Whether or not you're vulched should never affect the data. Every sortie must end in either a landing, a crash, or a parachute and those three numbers need to add up to the number of sorties. If you died, you crashed. It's academic. There's no reason to distinguish between the two.

If you're unable to draw any kind of conclusion from statistical data then either you're collecting the wrong data or your analysis or statistical representation of that data is flawed. I'm cannot draw any meaningful conclusion from the data as it is presented now and I'd be interested to know if there happens to be anyone who can.

You could get up to alt and shoot down 5 bombers that puts you on a kill streak of 5.0 straight away, skill?

Just because people haven't flown for another 10 mins to get back to an airfield doesn't necessarily mean they bailed or exited the aircraft because they were 'shot up'.

Still lots of flaws in even adding a 'kill streak' to what we have now.. it wouldn't mean much tbh

[Kling]

You could get up to alt and shoot down 5 bombers that puts you on a kill streak of 5.0 straight away, skill?

Just because people haven't flown for another 10 mins to get back to an airfield doesn't necessarily mean they bailed or exited the aircraft because they were 'shot up'.

Still lots of flaws in even adding a 'kill streak' to what we have now.. it wouldn't mean much tbh

Uhm not sure im following you..
Yes to shoot down 5 bombers and rtb is considered skill both in real life and in the game.
To shoot down 5 planes and die doesnt require nearly the same skill.

The requirement to land your kills i think is crucial to any serious game play. Even arcade game like Aces high II uses the system with "landed" kills. Old il21946 promoted landed kills as you would only 10% of your points if you did not RTB.(50% if you bailed out or ditched inside friendly lines)
Currently no mission on the ATAG server promotes RTB. At the moment its encouraged to hit Esc and press refly/create when you run low on ammo or have taken damage.
Honestly why should anyone do anything else with the current system?!
Regards
Kling

[III./ZG76_Saipan]

perhaps he meant ai bombers, not a real challenge. mr snarglepuss in a blenny that's a diff story.

[2./JG54 Chumleigh]

You could get up to alt and shoot down 5 bombers that puts you on a kill streak of 5.0 straight away, skill?

Just because people haven't flown for another 10 mins to get back to an airfield doesn't necessarily mean they bailed or exited the aircraft because they were 'shot up'.

Still lots of flaws in even adding a 'kill streak' to what we have now.. it wouldn't mean much tbh

The point is if you don't RTB then that's the end of your streak. On the other hand if you RTB, fly again and score a few more kills, your streak continues. Your longest 'living' streak ought to be retained in the stats. that's your number to beat - and a realistically and far more accurate means of assessing whether or not you're making any progress.

I did mention that it makes sense to distinguish between bomber and fighter kills. - I'd chuck ground kills for a bomber kill column in a heartbeat. Personally, I don't have much interest in knowing how many fighters I can destroy on the ground as a fighter pilot and I prefer not to aggravate others by spending my time vulching. It's more fun to make a low pass and let a guy get airborne so we can really duke it out - not realistic I agree - just my preference.

[9./JG52 Jamz Dackel]

The point is if you don't RTB then that's the end of your streak. On the other hand if you RTB, fly again and score a few more kills, your streak continues. Your longest 'living' streak ought to be retained in the stats. that's your number to beat - and a realistically and far more accurate means of assessing whether or not you're making any progress.

I did mention that it makes sense to distinguish between bomber and fighter kills. - I'd chuck ground kills for a bomber kill column in a heartbeat. Personally, I don't have much interest in knowing how many fighters I can destroy on the ground as a fighter pilot and I prefer not to aggravate others by spending my time vulching. It's more fun to make a low pass and let a guy get airborne so we can really duke it out - not realistic I agree - just my preference.

Ah yes..sorry mate. Need to learn to read 'all' the post.. :thumbsup:

[Gix]

Excellent suggestion hnbdgr.
Not only to makes stats more relevant but also because "playing the mission" would be rewarded, especially for bombers.
Its sometimes frustrating trying to kill the mission targets (even getting the last one and win the mission) without any info about it.

[2./JG54 Chumleigh]

Here are the statistics I'd like to see, most of which we know are do-able because we're collecting the data already. The purpose is to allow any player to assess his performance and relative skill level at a glance based on whatever criteria hw considers important.

1. total sorties and if possible without the inclusion of any in which the pilot never has a chance to raise his undercarriage. It is absolutely pointless to record the loss of one's aircraft prior to take-off due to either being vulched, blown up in a bogus hangar, bombed, or a desire to fly a different aircraft instead after spawning in.

2. total landings in friendly territory

3. total air kills and if possible separating bomber kills from fighter kills

4. total ground kills for those who care. I wouldn't think this would count for much where fighter pilots are concerned but if some kind of system can be worked out for the bomber pilots it would sure make a difference to them.

5. ((air kills)-(sorties-landings))/sorties This ratio really means something in the way the air kill ratio does not. Sorties minus landings equals the number of aircraft you lost. Subtracting that from the number of kills tells me, at least, something I want to know and it is a vastly superior measure of fighter pilot performance (the primary reason we have the stats in the first place, I have to assume). I'd be interested in hearing any argument to the contrary, by the way.

example:
1. 60 kills in 40 missions with 10 landings is a 0.75
2. 30 kills in 30 missions with 30 landings is a 1.0
3. 40 kills in 25 missions with 1 landing is a 0.64

I don't know about you but I think the highest score corresponds to the best pilot - pilot 2. The kill ratio we now have would have yielded a 1.50 for pilot 1, a 1.00 for pilot 2, and a 1.60 for pilot 3. Do you honestly believe pilot 3 with the 1.60 is the best overall? I don't. Yet pilot 3 has the highest score and pilot 2 comes in last based on kill ratio.

One thing is for sure. There wouldn't have been any aircraft fuselage left to paint pilot 3's kills on.

6. greatest number of kills achieved in a single 'pilot life' i.e. if you fail to make it back to friendly territory either by landing or parachuting you start over again from scratch. This is both the most realistic and valid measure of skill and again I'd welcome any arguments to the contrary. The highest score a player achieves ought to remain in the stats indefinitely. It is the number each pilot can work on to gauge his own performance and the number that best indicates how he measures up to everyone else.

I believe keeping score is important to many for the sake of having fun, the competitiveness, and as a means for assessing one's own level of improvement. Most games count scores against a player as being equivalent to scores in favor. Therefore what is the point of having a kill ratio that consists of the number of aircraft destroyed while failing to account for the number lost in the process.

I see no reason to list the number of deaths. What difference does it make? You either made it back or you didn't. The number of sorties has to equal the number of landings plus the number of aircraft lost. I the stats can't distinguish between bailing out over friendly territory or otherwise then we have no use for anything other than sorties, landings, and kills as raw data. If bailing out over friendly territory can be determined then those are the only air abandons we care about. If a pilot doesn't return do we really care whether or not he went down with his plane or ended up in a POW camp - to the extent that we confuse everything by doing a poor job of keeping track of it all. As it stands now, I really have no idea what ends up in that column.

Let's keep it simpler and to the point and not lose sight of the reasons we keep score in the first place. If one wants to know his air kill/sortie ratio let him do the math but I'd love to be able to sort by the numbers I've proposed in numbers 5 and 6 above.

[ATAG_Bliss]

This is something that has been brought up numerous times. I'm all for a stats overhaul as I'm sure many are, but the issue remains, someone actually has to not only create the system, but make it work and be reliable. The best system ever created was FBDj by WildWillie for the old IL2. The stats were very detailed. The web interface broke down your flights into individual sorties. Top bomber and top fighter pilots along with rank were proudly displayed in the stats system etc. And, of course, the beauty of it all is the fact that the points system worked in such a way that it shooting down 1 fighter and landing back at base equaled the same amount of points as shooting down 10 fighters and losing your plane in the process.

People wanted to be on that top list, and liked seeing their scores increase. A successful bomb run could lend you over 4000 points, but that 4000 turns into 400 if you couldn't make it home etc..

My perfect solution, suggestion, idea, etc., is to use what WildWillie already started for Clod (very similar to FBDj) and make it all work. Those from IL2 are used to that system of scoring in the 1st place. The programmer wouldn't have to recreate the web templates, the custom tables, or start from scratch. They would just need to make it all work, and work reliably (no easy task).

So, I've always wanted this type of stats system, but who's gonna make it? Who has the knowledge and know how to do it? There's a very select few I know that could and they are all busy on much bigger work. So therein lies the problem. Who can make it? :D

[9./JG52 Jamz Dackel]

This is something that has been brought up numerous times. I'm all for a stats overhaul as I'm sure many are, but the issue remains, someone actually has to not only create the system, but make it work and be reliable. The best system ever created was FBDj by WildWillie for the old IL2. The stats were very detailed. The web interface broke down your flights into individual sorties. Top bomber and top fighter pilots along with rank were proudly displayed in the stats system etc. And, of course, the beauty of it all is the fact that the points system worked in such a way that it shooting down 1 fighter and landing back at base equaled the same amount of points as shooting down 10 fighters and losing your plane in the process.

People wanted to be on that top list, and liked seeing their scores increase. A successful bomb run could lend you over 4000 points, but that 4000 turns into 400 if you couldn't make it home etc..

My perfect solution, suggestion, idea, etc., is to use what WildWillie already started for Clod (very similar to FBDj) and make it all work. Those from IL2 are used to that system of scoring in the 1st place. The programmer wouldn't have to recreate the web templates, the custom tables, or start from scratch. They would just need to make it all work, and work reliably (no easy task).

So, I've always wanted this type of stats system, but who's gonna make it? Who has the knowledge and know how to do it? There's a very select few I know that could and they are all busy on much bigger work. So therein lies the problem. Who can make it? :D

I hear yer m8..

And that's the trouble I guess, finding someone with the know how... I know I haven't a clue so its all well and good me suggesting ideas but that's where it stops I'm afraid

[ATAG_EvangelusE]

Interesting ideas and a lot of good ones. The only downside I see that could cause resentment for a mandatory 'RTB = Kills count' is losing those kills because of a launcher, Steam or server problem which boots the player out and of course, missions ending with no time to RTB (which could be overcome no doubt).

I don't see the 'Air Abandons' as a usefull stat (for the reasons above) and being PK'd is often counted as both a 'character death' and an 'Air Abandon'. May be that column could be used for something else that is fairly straightforward to calculate -e.g, Sortie to death ratio, Kill to Death ratio, etc, but we can work that out for ourselves anyway....:)

[AKA_Recon]

Let's clarify a few items, as I'm probably one who has contributed to several threads where I'd like to see more as well, here is my findings:

1. Server stats are dependent on ownership of a server.

2. If someone wants to host a server, developers would help you get the stats you want. It's not anything TF is preventing from occurring, any developer can write stat code. It's not a 'TF' issue - it's a 'server' one. Anyone can run a server, anyone can modify and come up with a system to store the stats. Someone can setup some MySQL and store and create a web server to display the stats, etc...

Basically, as said above, this is an ATAG server, not a TF one - and I think their view, not speaking for them, is that they will host missions and aren't really into stats. But again, I think if anyone wants more, it will probably be on their dime at this point.

Again, this is just my findings on this topic.

Personally, I think the life of any sim, be it BoS, DCS, or CloD depends on the quality of the experience of playing the game, not just the quality of the modelling, FM, DM, etc... so.. great ideas on stat keeping !

I spent 10+ years writing code to run a war for IL2:1946, it's time consuming and takes a community with much passion to really pull it off. One of the issue I can tell you right now, and save you the pain I had is this: no matter what you create, others will tear it down, want something else, and will tend not to really respect the work it takes to do it... which is probably why it hasn't been done yet :)

[AKA_Recon]

I hear yer m8..

And that's the trouble I guess, finding someone with the know how... I know I haven't a clue so its all well and good me suggesting ideas but that's where it stops I'm afraid

It's probably more about the resources not just the 'know how'.

[SepiaX]

Hallelujah

I second that


players get their kills from a sortie attributed only if they finished their sortie succesfully:
- they safely land in a friendly base
- they crash land on the friendly side of the map (and character lives)
- they bail out on the friendly side of the map - and touch ground safely

players don't get their kills from a sortie attributed if they finished their sortie unsuccesfully
- abandon (create new plane, leave server) before the above conditions have been met
- character gets killed
- they bail out on the enemy side of the map - and touch ground safely
- they crash land on the enemy side of the map (and character lives)

End of fraud and pilots who will not come back!

[Roblex]

Actually the most productive change to make to the stats system is probably to record ground targets properly. Most of the maps rely on bombers to actually win them but there is no incentive. You will have to fly for at least 40 minutes and almost certainly die and destroy any kill streak or k/d ratio you have worked hard to achieve but if you succeed nobody will know and nothing will be recorded (with the exception of ship kills) We need people to fly bombers.

[2./JG54 Chumleigh]

And why the heck are the stats so diligent in recording every sortie whether it's a sortie or not [like when you spawn in and the mission ends before you take off] ...and logging air abandons on occasions where you don't actually get off the ground ...and deaths when you're vulched...

...meanwhile 5 out of my last 6 kills didn't get recorded along with a couple of landings as well?

The data that's supposed to be collected isn't and the data that shouldn't be collected is. The stats never fail to add bogus/false sorties or air abandons.

[2./JG54 Chumleigh]

Is there any possibility one column could be added to the stats?
Call it the +/- ratio
the formula is: [kills - (sorties -landings)]/sorties or (kills+landings-sorties)/sorties

This factors in how many aircraft you lose with how many you destroy. How many you destroy in and of itself doesn't provide a valid measure of a pilot's performance unless he happens to be a kamikazee pilot which is what the kill ratio encourages us to be. After all, 1.0 is a pretty good ratio, right? All you have to do to achieve that is find a formation of bombers per sortie and collide with one of them. Shoot one of them down first, and then collide with another and your kill ratio makes you look like a star.

Is there a lot programming involved to make the addition of one column using the data we already post in the stats?

I copied the first page of the stats sorted by kill ratio and resorted it by +/- ratio. Here's what it looks like:

6239

[hnbdgr]

Salute All

Sorry to necro this.... I haven't flown online for a good 3 months and had a finally tried out jumping back in the water 2 days ago. To my surprise there is a new points system!!! Fantastic news.. I couldn't find it mentioned anywhere on the forums, please can somebody direct me to the right thread where this was announced...?

many thanks!

badger

[SoW Reddog]

Um, no there isn't.

If you were flying the Homeplate mission you might have seen Salmo's custom scores, but it only applies to that mission and resets each iteration.

[hnbdgr]

Oh:) well then: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ziX31ysNWw

Yes it was that map... I thought that was quite good, oh well.

[SoW Reddog]

Don't get me wrong bdgr, I think it's a real move in the right direction too and like it a lot.

[hnbdgr]

Great, can anyone shed any light on whether the system will be implemented on other missions? Looks like people like it. If there is a relevant discussion about this somewhere else please let me know.