The "shot" down principle

[Y-29.Silky]

Anyone realize that this is just one big circle jerk over stats and K/D?

 

Also, want to know why mostly German pilots in this game are terrible escorts? Because they'll engage the first Russian they see with 6 passes until he's in pieces and leaving the bomber to die. Like in my first comment.

 

Pretend Hans is escorting a bomber. Ivan in his Yak, comes in for an attack but Hans dives in and lands a couple shots forcing him to disengage and Hans stays with his bomber, he did his job.

 

Two minutes later, Hans gets credit for a kill as Ivan crash landed near his airfield, but Ivan is upset because even though he wasn't credited for a death, he thinks he was "barely" hit but in reality, his aircraft is beyond repair and has to be written off.

 

Do you see the immersion I'm getting at here?

 

It was actually a true story because Hans was me in the WoL server not too long ago.

 

------

 

Btw, if the servers took the kill messages off, people wouldn't be so butthurt because they wouldn't know who shot them down and would just care about their pilot surviving. Kind of like real life..

Edited September 18, 2015 by Y-29.Silky

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Anyone realize that this is just one big circle jerk over stats and K/D?

 

 

No....it isn't

[6./ZG26_Custard]

No....it isn't

I have to agree with you there old boy!

[Y-29.Silky]

No....it isn't

How is it not? The only reason people care is because they see a message showing that so and so shot them down after damaging their aircraft.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

How is it not? The only reason people care is because they see a message showing that so and so shot them down after damaging their aircraft.

 

Becasue I know the OP and I also know my own opinions.

 

Getting given a kill 15 minutes after I shot someone doesn't feel right...if you'd read the thread you would understand that.

 

I would like the stats to reflect actual aircraft shot down and not gift people 'probables' as kills.

 

I also (and more importantly) would like a forced landing or struggling back to base mean something...otherwise why don't we just bail out, take another aircraft and flying headlong in to the furball maelstrom rinse and repeat?

Edited September 18, 2015 by JG5_Emil

[SharpeXB]

if you crash and total the plane.. OK... but if you just land and bend your prop or break your gear.. or even loose a wing.. that should not count as a kill.

Im not sure what exact level of damage counts as "shot down". I think in RoF and maybe BoS, just busting a wing on the ground is not enough. In RoF I think you have to actually nose over to be considered shot down. I've banged up the plane pretty bad landing in BoS and not been shot down.

I also (and more importantly) would like a forced landing or struggling back to base mean something...otherwise why don't we just bail out, take another aircraft and flying headlong in to the furball maelstrom rinse and repeat?

Agree. You should get some credit in the game for pulling off a damaged landing. Conversely though that does mean being penalized for cracking it up. I think the criteria are actually a bit more strict though than just banging a wing on the ground. Edited September 18, 2015 by SharpeXB

[6./ZG26_Custard]

If the amount of airfield accidents were counted that occurred during WWII we would have "aces" with 1000's of aerial victories, forget over claiming!

 

I believe more 109's were damaged during take off and landings than by enemy fire? I'm not worried about in game stats at all.  

 

As I stated before, maybe a safe zone on the airfield could be programmed in that if you get the bird on the runway, prang it but don't get killed its not a "kill."

 

Before anyone gets their knickers in a twist, I'm not demanding or expecting this, its just a general discussion and something I hope can or will be implemented one day. 

[BraveSirRobin]

If the amount of airfield accidents were counted that occurred during WWII we would have "aces" with 1000's of aerial victories, forget over claiming!

 

 

Every accident isn't counted.  Only the accidents where the aircraft was damaged by enemy fire are counted.  Considering all the overclaiming that happened during the war, counting those as kills is probably pretty realistic.

[6./ZG26_Custard]

 

 

Only the accidents where the aircraft was damaged by enemy fire are counted.

Yep, I get what you are saying but if you take a hit from 1 round in a non vital area and mess up on landing in game that is classed as a credited "kill" which in MHO is a little absurd.

 

 

Every accident isn't counted.

Forgot to add that if an aircraft in WWII was hit by enemy fire, made it back to base but crash landed due to pilot error that would not have been tagged as an enemy "kill."

[BraveSirRobin]

Yep, I get what you are saying but if you take a hit from 1 round in a non vital area and mess up on landing in game that is classed as a credited "kill" which in MHO is a little absurd.

 

In RoF hits to "non vital" areas don't result in kills if you crash.  RoF tracks "hits" and "damage".  Not all hits cause damage.  If you crash with no "damage" it does not show up as a kill.  I suspect that BoS uses the same system.  

[6./ZG26_Custard]

 

 

Not all hits cause damage.

Surely any hit is damage?It is if it damages a vital system that is more important as opposed minor damage to a fuselage or wing etc? I got hit in the canopy and it took out the Revi sight and front wind screen. I didn't get hit in the engine or fuel tank but I messed up the landing by breaking the undercarriage. This was credited as a kill by another player.  

 

Yes you could probably say "you should be more careful" but the aircraft was completely flyable till I had an augment with the deck.

[BraveSirRobin]

Surely any hit is damage?It is if it damages a vital system that is more important as opposed minor damage to a fuselage or wing etc? I got hit in the canopy and it took out the Revi sight and front wind screen. I didn't get hit in the engine or fuel tank but I messed up the landing by breaking the undercarriage. This was credited as a kill by another player.  

 

Yes you could probably say "you should be more careful" but the aircraft was completely flyable till I had an augment with the deck.

 

 

You survived after someone shot up your cockpit and you're complaining that they got credit for a kill?  Really?  Actually, at this point I would just say "get over it".  

[6./ZG26_Emil]

There is a difference between complaining and using something for an example...surely you know that

[BraveSirRobin]

There is a difference between complaining and using something for an example...surely you know that

 

Starting a thread because you're butthurt about people getting kills when you don't think they deserve it is complaining.  I see it all the time online.  First there is a kill message.  Then someone posts a message in chat to make themselves feel better about getting shot down:

 

"I butchered the landing"

 

I don't care.

 

"S! to all 4 of you"

 

I don't care.

 

"You didn't get any hits on me"

 

Yes, I did.

 

"I don't know why that was a kill"

 

Because I shot the crap out of your aircraft.

 

"I was just gang raped"

 

You should try to avoid that in the future.

 

"Lucky hit"

 

Luck had nothing to do with it.

[6./ZG26_Custard]

 

 

You survived after someone shot up your cockpit and you're complaining that they got credit for a kill? Really? Actually, at this point I would just say "get over it".

You really can't have a discussion without coming across as all acerbic can you? The point I'm trying to make is if you crash a damaged but perfectly flyable aircraft on landing because it your fault should that be credited to another player?  

 

 

Starting a thread because you're butthurt about people getting kills when you don't think they deserve it is complaining.

I'm not complaining and I'm certainly not eh"butthurt." if you read the first post I said it was a personal rambling but you just come across as insulting tbh.

[SharpeXB]

I'm totally guessing but I figure the "shot down" criteria in the game is

A. Your plane receives damage. Not just a hit but damage.

B. Your fuselage hits the ground. I think just breaking a wing on the deck doesn't do it but breaking the gear and therefore having the fuselage hit the ground is what does it. That would explain RoF as well where you need to nose over to be shot down

Just a guess but that seems right.

Edited September 18, 2015 by SharpeXB

[BraveSirRobin]

The point I'm trying to make is if you crash a damaged but perfectly flyable aircraft on landing because it your fault should that be credited to another player?  

 

Every aircraft is "flyable" until it hits the ground too hard.  And I'm sure that plenty of pilots have jumped out of aircraft there were still "flyable".  In any case, if it was still "flyable" you should not have butchered the landing.

[6./ZG26_Custard]

 

 

you should not have butchered the landing.

Eh.... I've established that, but should it be credited as a kill? In your view it seems to be "you're Butthurt" so yes!  In my view no.

[SharpeXB]

Every aircraft is "flyable" until it hits the ground too hard.

Hehe. Right. Just don't auger in the landing and you're home free

I've become an expert at landing the RoF crates with missing wings and stuff. If it's still got stubs on it, it's flyable! :-D

[BraveSirRobin]

Eh.... I've established that, but should it be credited as a kill? In your view it seems to be "you're Butthurt" so yes!  In my view no.

 

Yes, it should be a kill.  You were damaged.  You crashed.  Give credit to the guy that caused the crash.  If you don't think he deserves credit, land the aircraft.

[6./ZG26_Custard]

 

 

Give credit to the guy that caused the crash. If you don't think he deserves credit, land the aircraft

Your logic isn't sound because I caused the crash?

[BraveSirRobin]

There is no reason that a programmer in Russia should be deciding if the aircraft is flyable.  If you think it's flyable, prove it by landing it.

Your logic isn't sound because I caused the crash?

 

No, the guy who shot up your aircraft caused the crash.  

[6./ZG26_Custard]

 

 

No, the guy who shot up your aircraft caused the crash.

Eh no he didn't I messed up the landing and just to let you know in advance I'm not "butthurt."

[BraveSirRobin]

Eh no he didn't I messed up the landing and just to let you know in advance I'm not "butthurt."

 

You messed up the landing because your aircraft was damaged.

 

On the other hand, if you're messing up landings of undamaged aircraft, you probably should not be a pilot in JG5.

[6./ZG26_Custard]

 

 

You messed up the landing because your aircraft was damaged.

I messed up the landing because I made a mistake, hey we all do don't we?

 

you probably should not be a pilot in JG5.

Hey maybe your right?

[BraveSirRobin]

I messed up the landing because I made a mistake, hey we all do don't we?

 

 

If you make that mistake more than a few times you will probably be grounded.  Do you think some programmer in Russia should ground you if you butcher too many landings?  You know, because of realism.

Edited September 18, 2015 by BraveSirRobin

[6./ZG26_Custard]

 

 

If you make that mistake more than a few times you will probably be grounded. Do you think some programmer in Russia should ground you have if you butcher too many landings? You know, because of realism.

Well it seems that you are right about so many thing BSR so I suppose you must be right about this too?

[BraveSirRobin]

Well it seems that you are right about so many thing BSR so I suppose you must be right about this too?

 

Right, so you're all for "realism" when it costs someone else a kill, but "realism" isn't so fun when we start following it all the way down the rabbit hole.

 

Here's the thing.  Land the damned plane and this isn't an issue.

[6./ZG26_Custard]

 

 

Right, so you're all for "realism" when it costs someone else a kill, but "realism" isn't so fun when we start following it all the way down the rabbit hole.

You have turned this discussion into a thread where you are telling me you are right and I am wrong and you have been insulting into the bargain. Well done   I'm still not butthurt btw.

 

 

 

Here's the thing. Land the damned plane and this isn't an issue.

  Here's the thing agree with BSR and this isn't an issue!

[BraveSirRobin]

You have turned this discussion into a thread where you are telling me you are right and I am wrong 

 

 

It's pretty rare that I spend a lot of time arguing about an issue when I think that I'm wrong.

[SharpeXB]

In the real Luftwaffe wrecking your plane, no matter the reason, could be grounds for a court martial. Combat obvious excluded. But a screwed up landing could end your career.

[6./ZG26_Custard]

 

 

It's pretty rare that I spend a lot of time arguing about an issue when I think that I'm wrong.

Well you are always right aren't you?

[BraveSirRobin]

Well you are always right aren't you?

 

No.  I'm fine with conceding an issue if someone has a good argument.  The "don't give him a kill when I butcher landings (realism!!!!) but don't ground me for butchering landings (realism????)" argument is pathetically weak.

[6./ZG26_Custard]

No. I'm fine with conceding an issue if someone has a good argument. The "don't give him a kill when I butcher landings (realism!!!!) but don't ground me for butchering landings (realism????)" argument is pathetically weak.

Read the first post again please. I'm not asking for anything, I'm just having a discussion but I'm afraid that your forthright "view" seems to have got us into "a who has the biggest balls thread!"

Edited September 18, 2015 by Original_Custard

[Bearcat]

Sure, they track the level of damage.  Which random damage level is the different between a crash and a kill?  That is the part that is impossible to know.  And someone is going to be whining no matter what the devs decide to do.

 

And why should that matter to the person who managed to survive getting shot up?  I used to be bothered by people who got kills that I didn't think they deserved.  Now I don't care.  As long as I survive, who gives a crap if someone else gets a kill.  I still try to avoid giving away kills, but I think it reflects more on me when I butcher a landing and give someone a kill.  I should have done better.

 

Well if you are the person who is shot up and have managed to land your crippled aircraft .. why should someone get credit for killing you?

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Well if you are the person who is shot up and have managed to land your crippled aircraft .. why should someone get credit for killing you?

Because, IRL, it probably would have been credited anyway. You and your wingman saw the smoking heap disappear below the clouds, claimed and were awarded the kill. Pilot squeaks it home and is not actually killed. Happened every day during the war. It's possibly unrealistic to program it, doesn't count against your K/D, only keeps you from landing your points and it is correct in historical context.

Edited September 18, 2015 by [LBS]HerrMurf

[BraveSirRobin]

Well if you are the person who is shot up and have managed to land your crippled aircraft .. why should someone get credit for killing you?

 

They don't get credit for a kill in that situation in BoS.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

They don't get credit for a kill in that situation in BoS.

I'm pretty sure they do. You just don't get a tic in the killed box on your side.

[SharpeXB]

Well if you are the person who is shot up and have managed to land your crippled aircraft .. why should someone get credit for killing you?

Actually they don't if you land it correctly. And I think you have to wreck it pretty bad for your opponent to get the credit. I know just breaking a wing on the deck in a ground loop isn't enough. I think your fuselage needs to hit the ground.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Actually they don't if you land it correctly. And I think you have to wreck it pretty bad for your opponent to get the credit. I know just breaking a wing on the deck in a ground loop isn't enough. I think your fuselage needs to hit the ground.

Fair enough. I guess I just haven't paid attention to all of the intricacies of the forced landings.