SoW proposal: Merging different realism preference players online

[AndyJWest]

An interesting idea MikkOwl, but I don't think it will work. The way a pilot acts in a sim will be influenced by the particular 'scoring' he is eligible to receive. Pilots on 'easy' settings will always be more likely to take risks, simply because they have less to lose. If you try to 'level the playing field' by adjusting the scores, you will just end up with people attempting to find the 'easy way' and exploiting the inevitable limitations of any practical simulation. Personally, I'd rather fly on a simulation that attempts 'realism' even if it means I'm always on the losing side. It just makes the occasional kill more enjoyable.

[MikkOwl]

Originally Posted by AndyJWest

The way a pilot acts in a sim will be influenced by the particular 'scoring' he is eligible to receive. Pilots on 'easy' settings will always be more likely to take risks, simply because they have less to lose. If you try to 'level the playing field' by adjusting the scores, you will just end up with people attempting to find the 'easy way' and exploiting the inevitable limitations of any practical simulation.

I must disagree. One cannot generalize all pilots on easier settings (and this is a pretty wide range of settings we are talking about, including even quite hardcore pilots). Their motivations for flying with the aids they have is probably mosty because they cannot handle more at that point in time, or lack the hardware setup necessary to do it properly. Then that some will care about scoring, yes, that is true. But then if they cared so much about scoring that they would take more risks to get it, then they are likely to choose having less aids to maximize any score they get. In this sense, this proposal is unlikely to change the fact that some pilots care a lot about score while others do not. The proposal's only challenge is setting the ratios correctly so that there is no ideal sweet spot setup where one gets the most score.

Personally, I'd rather fly on a simulation that attempts 'realism' even if it means I'm always on the losing side. It just makes the occasional kill more enjoyable.

Me as well. Been flying mostly old Bf 110 G-2's versus 1944 Tempests, Spitfires and P-47's online. There are plenty of us like that. We can easily co-exist with those others who might prefer lower realism for the sake of some gain. They will suffer performance penalties (in a sense) as well as other penalties while not really giving them an advantage over us.

EDIT: I want to clarify that the lower realism settings (having aids) don't really give them benefits over those who understand how their plane works and how to fly it. It will never make them aim better or maneuver better. It will only help them avoid the kind of specific mistakes that the initiated avoids anyway, like blowing one's engine or crashing on take-off.

[13th Hsqn Protos]

[AndyJWest]

he proposal's only challenge is setting the ratios correctly so that there is no ideal sweet spot setup where one gets the most score.

This isn't just 'a challenge' it is probably impossible. Whenever a particular set of rules is established, people will look for the easiest way around them. This isn't anything unique to combat flight sims, or even to computer games in general. In any rule-based scoring system, people will find the best way to exploit he rules. The only way to avoid this is by not keeping score. That is probably to radical a suggestion for most online IL-2 players, but having spent years playing offline, where the only thing I could sensibly measure myself against was my own past performance, I don't have a particular problem with it.

If people find this difficult to handle, I'd just ask them one question. What was the final score in WWII? If you can't give a sensible answer to this, then why does scoring matter?

[MikkOwl]

I don't mind having no score at all either, and I would even encourage it. But IL-2 has score (on all servers I have ever tried, at least) and I did not think it would go away, thus if there is score, then apply penalties. Without score, there's still the ranks

[csThor]

1.) If I were to fly on a server I would want to see it ensured that everyone is flying at the same level of difficulty. No mixing between various levels.
2.) Score means squat. I mean it. You can't and won't change player attitudes or what they do (i.e. shoulder-shooting) by fiddling with something like score. That's a complete non-entity in that regard.

[MikkOwl]

Originally Posted by csThor

If I were to fly on a server I would want to see it ensured that everyone is flying at the same level of difficulty. No mixing between various levels.

Does it mean that you would prefer to not allow people to turn off their HUD icons, speedbar, and if it is possible in SoW for example, not to allow them to change fuel pump primer settings, manual fuel tank management and so on? The division of even those who fly together today would be very divided if your preference for uniformity was applied.

Score means squat. I mean it. You can't and won't change player attitudes or what they do (i.e. shoulder-shooting) by fiddling with something like score. That's a complete non-entity in that regard.

If they are motivated by say, score and only score, they will attempt to find the highest level they can fly well at and score kills with (with this proposal). If they don't care at all about score, then they may care about the ranks showing their settings to everyone. And if they don't care about ranks, then they might care about the limited performance envelope they can get from using any kind of aids. And if they don't care about even that, then they can just fly at whatever level they think is the most satsifying for them regardless, and still be able to fit in.

[Desode]

Originally Posted by AndyJWest

This isn't just 'a challenge' it is probably impossible. Whenever a particular set of rules is established, people will look for the easiest way around them. This isn't anything unique to combat flight sims, or even to computer games in general. In any rule-based scoring system, people will find the best way to exploit he rules. The only way to avoid this is by not keeping score. That is probably to radical a suggestion for most online IL-2 players, but having spent years playing offline, where the only thing I could sensibly measure myself against was my own past performance, I don't have a particular problem with it.

If people find this difficult to handle, I'd just ask them one question. What was the final score in WWII? If you can't give a sensible answer to this, then why does scoring matter?

What was the final score in WWII ? Geez , I understand what your getting at but, It will never work. Competition is at the very core of any MP experience. Its the desire to strive to be the best. Therefore one cannot be the best if there is no score. This is even more so in Flight combat. I mean thats what made a Ace a Ace. Sure you can have ranks but a rank carries no weight if there is no score attached to it.


As for the final score in WWII ? I can say this, Nazi Germany lost so many planes and good pilots that they lost air superiority and that was the start of their End. Even though I don't know the exact number, of aircraft they lost. I know that it was great enough that they could no longer defend the skys over their land.

More importantly , just as you asked "what was the final score in WWII ?" to make a point. I will in turn ask " How many people know what Ace shot down how many aircraft ? "
I'm sure just about anyone on here, can tell you how many planes each Ace shot down.

Now if a flight game was say a persistent MMO style battle where one side as a whole won every 6 months, based on a Ticket bar that just represented how one side was winning or losing,,,,,,,, Then you may be able to do away with individual scores, however I doubt it. I personally could deal with that, as long as I knew it was helping my side. Thats just me though and I'm a very team work kind of gamer.


DESODE

[MikkOwl]

Originally Posted by Desode

What was the final score in WWII ? Geez , I understand what your getting at but, It will never work. Competition is at the very core of any MP experience. Its the desire to strive to be the best. Therefore one cannot be the best if there is no score. This is even more so in Flight combat. I mean thats what made a Ace a Ace. Sure you can have ranks but a rank carries no weight if there is no score attached to it.


As for the final score in WWII ? I can say this, Nazi Germany lost so many planes and good pilots that they lost air superiority and that was the start of their End. Even though I don't know the exact number, of aircraft they lost. I know that it was great enough that they could no longer defend the skys over their land.

More importantly , just as you asked "what was the final score in WWII ?" to make a point. I will in turn ask " How many people know what Ace shot down how many aircraft ? "
I'm sure just about anyone on here, can tell you how many planes each Ace shot down.

Now if a flight game was say a persistent MMO style battle where one side as a whole won every 6 months, based on a Ticket bar that just represented how one side was winning or losing,,,,,,,, Then you may be able to do away with individual scores, however I doubt it. I personally could deal with that, as long as I knew it was helping my side. Thats just me though and I'm a very team work kind of gamer.


DESODE

I want to add my thoughts on the purpose of scoring.

The problem is that there's no wingmen that vouch for your accomplishments to the squadron/wing commander. There's no rewards. Nothing to prove how good you are performing to yourself and others, how much you have really helped your armed forces. And, without score, one cannot even compare one's performance to others (beyond statistics, which do not care about one's accomplishments, only keeps track of how long, how much, how many).

This is why I like score. But I don't like score that is not implemented well (shoulder shooting should not even exist mechanically. Steps should be taken to assign the kill to the person who did the most system critical damage and so on). When score is badly implemented, it promotes bad behaviour, and so then I would rather not have score to discourage that behaviour.

[robtek]

for shoulder shooting part of the cure would be that if just one of your bullets hits a friendly your score would be nil and you must join again.