The Austrian School of MP scoring

[JimmyGiro]

Having watched the excellent video by 'Apeoftheyear', I'd like to suggest a scoring regime for online server battles.

 

In considering the fact that 'historical accuracy', and 'game fairness', are two separate dimensions, a solution would be to implement a sliding scale for 'kill' scores; depending on what plane type kills what other plane type. A simple, but dubious approach, would be to set a bounty for each plane type; such as: shooting down a Frederic is worth '3' points, and a Lagg is worth '2' points, for example; rather like the old IL-2 did with number of engines on the target plane.

 

A better way would be to allow a dynamic scale to be calculated according to the population on a particular server, as a free market model. For example, a standard base score of '100 pts' is set for any kill; this is then modified according to the ratio of friendly to foe types of planes on each server. And as scores for each type of plane roll in, the value of the kill for any type of plane will get recalculated according to the success or failure of that type of plane during the life of the server session. For example:

 

Kill score for Lagg player = 100 x [TP / LP] x [2 - (LK / TK)]

 

Kill score for Frederic player = 100 x [TP / FP] x [2 - (FK / TK)]

 

Where: TP = Total number of players on server; LP and FP = number of Lagg and Frederic players respectively, at that instance; LK, FK, and TK = number of kills for Lagg, Frederic, and Total respectively.

 

Hence for a server with 20 players, 12 flying Frederics, and 8 flying Laggs; the first German victory will score = 167 pts. And if the next two victories are also German wins, they will also score 167 pts respectively. But if the fourth victory is made by a Lagg flyer, then they will score 438 pts. Whilst if the fifth victory is again a German win, he will score 200 pts. The slight increase is due to the Lagg player scoring a kill, thus making them 'more dangerous', and thus worth more points.

 

Finally, for when there are more plane types, the score equation will generalise to:

 

Kill score = 100 x [TP / AP] x [2 - (AK / TK)]

 

Where AP and AK = number of players flying type A aircraft, and number of kills scored by players using aircraft type A.

 

Needless to say, better equations can be developed if needed, with any number of extra parameters to help level the score incentives; much in the same way that golf handicaps work. Without such a measure, I predict that many disappointed players, as distinct from 'historians', will start altering the server set-ups to help create level playing fields, at the expense of fidelity, and we will have two tribes form from the community, which is already a slim group.

[SvAF/F19_Klunk]

As much I appreciate the work you've put down mate... really.. I still think easy is best... I would guess that such a solution would make the guys scratch their heads and try to discern how they got their points... and I can only imagine the discussions in the forums about the best and most fair calculation...

 

For me.. The easy way? I'd say a certain fixed point (1 or 10 or 100 whatever) ....for a downed fighter .. Shared equally if many are at it... Double p for a bomber.

 

Let's keep it simple.. I could even go for 1 p... Lets talk about how many planes you have downed instead of points or scores..

2 cents

Edited December 11, 2013 by F19_Klunk

[ParaB]

I don't think I even took a look at my "score" when doing MP in any flightsim in years.

 

[JimmyGiro]

Westwood Studios used to have a little algorithm that adjusted the scores for their Command and Conquer ladder. Their system gave more points to those who could beat players with a higher rank than themselves; whilst stopping the runaway scores of top players beating noobies.

[Marcomies]

I'd prefer having both systems.

 

A scaled point system that gives score depending on the used aircraft, downed aircraft and the skill level of both pilots. This should also have proper "assist" points for sharing kill's and being involved in the fight. This would be good for those players who just like simple competitive team deathmatch.

 

Then there should be the basic kill system where you get one kill for every downed plane and that's it (maybe with the national variations for shared kills?) This would better fit cooperative and historical gameplay where most players would presumably be more interested in authentic experiences than the size of their score compared to others.

Edited December 11, 2013 by Marcomies

[1./KG4_Blackwolf]

 

I'd also settle for a simple solution: one kill, one point. Or make it 1 kill, 10 points, to give the posibility of "quarter" and "half" kills.

 

Yup..but how to score bombers? Most bombers get the short end of the stick  when it comes to scores in games. I can kill a train, 7 cars, land and get 1 point?  Take a fighter up,get a kill for 22? I'd go for the 1 kill= 10 points, bombers air kills 10 points, ground kills (AI's not static buildings) 10 points. 

[dkoor]

Well... I support JimmyG's idea.

 

In game you could have 1 point = 1 kill, but on some sort of stat page, serious one, Jimmy's formula would be waaay more appropriate.

 

So people who tend to "love stats" wont scratch their heads, because if they are soo important to them they would quickly learn all the needed formulas.

[Feathered_IV]

Points awarded for a victory over a bomber or transport aircraft should be 5x as high as those given for bringing down a fighter. Likewise, successful transport and bomber pilots should receive big points for completing their missions.

[=AH=_Sid_]

....... A better way would be to allow a dynamic scale to be calculated according to the population on a particular server, as a free market model. For example, a standard base score of '100 pts' is set for any kill; this is then modified according to the ratio of friendly to foe types of planes on each server. ......

 

ROF has this already, so I would expect BOS to be the same, an air kill is worth a base of 10 points if side balance is even, If your side is out numbered two to one, your side will get 20 points for a kill and they will only get 5.

 

But I have to admit I hate the scoring system in ROF and I really hope they finally sort it out for BOS, a few examples;

 

Example 1. If someone rams into you (intentionally because they're losing the fight), they get awarded the kill as long as they're firing when they hit you, it doesn't matter to the scoring system whether they die in the process or not.

 

Example 2. You take a few hits and decided to RTB, having landed at base, the rough running engine quits on you. Your opponent is awarded a kill on you, despite you landing back at base (you have to exit mission before your engine is deemed not to be able to produce full power or you're counted as shotdown).

 

Example 3. You take a few hits and see you have a fuel leak, you exit the fight and climb knowing you won't make it back before the engine runs out of fuel. Despite a skilful dead stick approach and landing back into base (with an aircraft that just needs it's fuel tank patched), your counted as shotdown as soon as the engine stops and a kill awarded against you.

[Tone71]

Maybe we should take a step back and approach this a different way. First, ask ourselves what exactly are the points for? What are they telling us?

If it's "who's the best pilot", then we should ask "what makes a good pilot?". Someone who scores the most kills? Someone who returns back to base (very important IMO! )? Someone who covers his wingman, or helps others? Someone who completes the objectives?

If it's "which side is winning", then we should ask "how do we measure the balance of a war?". Is a kill for the underdog worth any more than a kill for the enemy? Likewise, is a kill for the outnumbered pilot worth any more than that of his foe? If you're outnumbered 10 to 1, kill 9 and then get shot down, you've still lost.

 

Personally, I'm in the same boat as ParaB; I never take notice of my score, or where I am in any sort of table. I rate myself on whether I think I made a difference, no matter how small (and whether or not I had fun regardless!).

[dkoor]

Points awarded for a victory over a bomber or transport aircraft should be 5x as high as those given for bringing down a fighter. Likewise, successful transport and bomber pilots should receive big points for completing their missions.

This can't be stressed enough.

That is the natural way of things.

 

War isn't won by eliminating fighters but bombers and attack planes.

Fighters are their mere SERVANTS large portion of their combat flying time.

 

No knightship flying the big bad bomber?

Who cares, they are busy winning the war.

 

So yes, Feathered is right.

[1./KG4_Blackwolf]

Points awarded for a victory over a bomber or transport aircraft should be 5x as high as those given for bringing down a fighter. Likewise, successful transport and bomber pilots should receive big points for completing their missions.

Yes ..that's what I'm saying..sure fighters have to gain control of the that air so us buff's can do our stuff..but give us some points for doing it and coming home!

And I think..don't come home..no points. That's just me though. I bet a whole lot of players would fly very differently with those stats/scoring.

Edited December 12, 2013 by Blackwolf

[1./KG4_Blackwolf]

Yes ..that's what I'm saying..sure fighters have to gain control of the that air so us buff's can do our stuff..but give us some points for doing it and coming home!

And I think..don't come home..no points. That's just me though. I bet a whole lot of players would fly very differently with those stats/scoring.

I hate I can't edit after 15 minutes for typos!..

Yes ..that's what I'm saying..sure fighters have to gain control of the air so us buff's can do our stuff..but give us some points for doing it and coming home!

And I think..don't come home..no points. That's just me though. I bet a whole lot of players would fly very differently with those stats/scoring.

[1./KG4_Blackwolf]

@Blackwolf: my post was about dogfight kills, I'm not the heavy type, forgive me...

But do you remember the old Il-2 kill score system? As far as I remember, ground targets (moving or stationery vehicles) were rewarded

with 5 points, whereas air targets were in the hundred's - 100 for single engine, 200 for twin, 400 for 3 and more engines. 

 

If I flew a fighter sortie and scored three fighters, I got 300 points, whereas my buddy in his B-whatever only scored 75 because he had wiped out

an entire command column with bombs and strafing fire.

 

If I took this as an example and considered the fact, that with a belly full of bombs, well placed, of course, I could annihilate 10-15 targets at once,

while I have to do a 10min+ dogfight if I came up against the wrong opponent, I'd say, yes: more bombs - less points.

 

Seen in this light, 12 for an aircraft kill (no matter how many engines or skill) and let's say 3 to 9 for soft (Jeeps) to hard (tanks) ground targets is only fair.

Perhaps there could be an option in the upcoming full mission builder to reward extra points for primary, secondary and hidden targets.

 

If you ask, why I changed my score suggestion per A/C from 10 to 12, it's because 12 is easier to share... 3 Mustangs on 1 '190 = 4 pts. for each pilot.

Well yes I see the 12 points easy to share but in my B-whatever bomber( I like that BTW) If i wiped out an entire column I should get more points than a pesky fighter kill would. Just because I killed more objects/trucks/people/ than just one fighter. It doesn't make any sense that you take the time to fly high, get alt, level up, drop , blow the crap out of everything, come home and land and see 5 or 10 points. I'm not whining..well kind of, but why take the time to do it if you cant get a pat on the back in the score system for doing it or maybe just a hug?

[II./JG27_Rich]

This is good news. I read on Wikipedia that the Yak 1 was better than the 109 E. That's pretty good. Lots of Russians are going to be shooting me down if I don't watch out.