What is wrong with Scorepages?

'lucky mother, fuckbastard'

could also be viable uahauhaha

 

hi deadmeat,

i made the note about your traumatic mentioning of 'civilised warfare'...
why? well, in first order as i never found any connection between civilised behaviour and warfare! war is by far the most uncivilised action, which can be taken, war is just a dirty business.

you mention wolves and dogs. let me assure you, there is no (i repeat: no) genetically domesticated dog around! wolves and dogs can be domesticated both the same. dogs left in the wilderness will show after short the same behaviour as wolves do! grab a young wolven puppy and get him used to your home and family, and it will show the same behaviour as your favourite dog.
there is no evidence of successful breeding agressive dogs, despite some public opinion. pitbulls become dangerous because their owners teach them how to!

let's see how those 'wolf'-like africans do...
they miss the time-period to advance enough for handling atomic weapons? you mean like not having enough differences to 'wolves', compared to 'atomic powered' nations, who behave like 'dogs'?
considering, that probably african and asian civilisations are far older and experienced than any western superpowers, i do not really understand, which kind of advancement you mean? i guess, the ability of 'civilised warfare'!

what is, in your opinion, the base for 'civilised warfare'? the 'geneva conventions', maybe? so, which one of them? the first from 1846, or the one, which was actual during the 2nd world war? or the 'hague conventions' from 1907?
do you mean with un'civilised warfare' all the unspeakable crimes, which were subject to the 'nurnberg trials', or the bombardements of london, dresden and hiroshima?

maybe you mean the advancements in 'civilised warfare', which have been taken after nurnberg, and fixed in the 'rome statute', giving the 'international crime court' jurisdiction for warcrimes. which has been signed by 105 nations, 30 of which are african. but still missing the signing of usa, russia, israel, china, pakistan and india, which all have access to nuclear weapons!

pardon me, deadmeat, but neither do i know, what 'civilised warfare' is, nor do i see any connection to comparisons to a game, where you got shot by a group of others.
don't get me wrong, i don't like all the chat-howling as well, but i consider it more as grandma's coffee-round. it might as well be more fun ingame, if forces were better equilibrated.
but there is definitely something to reconsider in the way, you see 'civilisation' in real world!

 

Isn't the fact of separating the soldiers from their targets 'civilizing?' [Warfighting at a terminal, a gun turret, a plane....]
In the same way we separate the purchasing and eating of meat from the reality and the horror of the abattoir? Many people would not enjoy the abattoir and there is a very real possiblilty of many many many people adopting meat free diets [like Hindus].
Men more readily kill when the don't have to twist a knife in a opponent's guts while listening to his screams, his pleading and his screams turing to moans.
Many wouldn't touch meat if they had to cut an animals open while he was bound and on his knees in front.
Then again, many men still saw animals throats.
Civilization isn't humane and hasn't much to do with 'humaneness.'

 

civilisation

quite true!
probably the only sense of the word is in phrases like 'let's behave civilised', meaning 'let's wash our hands before having lunch' or 'let's don't fart in the presence of darling'. i am not sure, there is any meaning in 'civilisation' outside the cultural environment, where it is spoken.

i would like to add to your quote above, that 'humaneness' doesn't have the same meaning related to 'humane' outside the specific cultural environment as well.

 

Ledada,
imo u r an idealist...i have seen too many pitbulls,and i can say every one of them had aggressive behaviour.i know u would like to say every dog can be
"good" if it is raised in such family..but,that is not true..ur idealist..aggressive
behaviour comes from genetic predisposition to have so much energy...
aggressive behaviour can be manifested in so many ways..
with ur brain u can explain every natural law,but u cant explain it with ur soul..thats because ur human,with tendency to explain everything in positive way..
natural laws wont disapear just because u want to be "little more" human..
i can translate this to u if u dont understand point:

"Cut the Crap...Some of us like to play game by some Rules..Ok...mb some of these rules u cant see in wb tutorial,but not seeing them Is what separates
Us....U can bullshit forever about flowers and lions,i can even agree with many of ur thoughts,but truth is always the same:
1)better not let Iraq to have nuke
2)better not let monkies to play wb just because some ledada thinks we should be open minded,and let all human-looked-like things to play game
3) u can always find many pigs walking like humans,talking like humans,
but,they will always be ..pigs.

 

Why still unavailable?

 

Maybe it was determined that score-pages are "uncivilized"?

 

Or statistics are maybe made in "west" too so it's bad for Russian ppl as Mart said, like AIDS, etc...

 

"Gentlemen" never keep score........

 

well they never keep, but they do score

 

Nope. Because flying like a maniac, not caring about Kill/Death ratio (not saying YOU neccessarily don't, looseleaf, I mean the whole thing I'm writing here in general), in a flight sim is what you can call uncivilized. Because it means nothing. When in real life someone is ready to engage in an action where he might lose his life, it might well be honorable. In an online flightsim, it means nothing. Most of the time it just means the guy is incompentent and has no idea about ACM, thus has no chance anyway, so he doesn't even try. Instead he just keeps sticking on the target, get target fixated, blowing all his E, having no SA, because what can happen? All that can happen is he gets shot down, which in this "online flightsim world" will just enable him to respawn even faster than had he went rtb. Too many people already which should rather play Quake. Scorepages, and in fact *only* the K/D ratio, shows who is who. Because in RL, all the kills you get, you only get them until D of the K/D ratio goes to 1. Total numbers of kills or kills per mission tells NOTHING about the skill here. You can easily get 4+ kills per sortie if you don't care about rtbing safely. The whole thing about air combat is killing the bandits while not getting yourself killed at the same time. That's what most air combat maneuvers and tactics are based on. Again, if someone in RL indeed didn't care about it and killed 4 enemies to be shot down himself in the process, it might well be honorable. But because there is no real courage etc. involved in a freaking online flightsim, it just means shit. Everybody can get himself killed in a damn game. Though that shows neither courage, nor skill then. Total number of kills / kills per sortie / even total number of field captures or whatever means nothing. If you want to talk about skill, it's the ratio that counts. Anyone can run his head into a wall a million times in a virtual reality. In real life, you can do that exactly ONE time. And then you might well be a hero, because you indeed did sacrifice something (usually your life). But what does it mean in this virtual air combat environment? It means nothing. So not adhering the K/D ratio just indicates lack of skill, lack of proper respect towards RL tactics, SA, you name it. Because here, it is not a "sacrifice" if you get killed while not caring, it's just dumb, because anyone can do that. What counts is the ratio. And also, only THEN, if you care about the ratio, it means anything if you let someone ditch and forget about the kill added to your tally (which is funny in itself, cause iRL it would have counted as a kill, even if the target ditched the plane in its own territory).

I often wish for a server setting where when you get killed (not neccessarily bailed out, but *killed*), you cannot fly for a month. Because one of two things would happen then: There would be either just 4-8 pilots left after just a few hours, or people would actually start to fly more realisticly (things like *not* sticking to your target when you see its wingman coming down on you with guns blazing). If you THEN STILL dare to do things which harbor a high risk to yourself but still do them, THEN one could talk about something remotely resembling courage. But until this server setting, not caring about Kill / Death ratio means nothing. If anything, it means a perversion of RL air combat tactics / maneuvers.

 

Good point, but some people will say the whole idea of a WW2 flight sim means nothing either.

I think the score pages will never reflect any player's 'skill' other than making high numbers in the score pages.

Without even using all the cheats, one only has to do is fly the uber planes exclusively, do some really conservative vulching and run away.
That's if the player wants to play the "score pages game".
What about winning the war? Didn't some commanders send their pilots into 'certain death" missions?
They must have known that there were going to be sacrifices made in order to win the war.
So then maybe a player is not playing that he/she is 'super fighter hero/ace of WW2' but the player is pretending to be the 'lost squadron" whose brave and relentless air attacks brought down the enemy's will to fight and won the war for "God and country" or for the State, or for the Free World, or for Free Beer after 11... who knows what motivates self-sacrifice or the need to do so?

Also think about some of the people here and how much time they can dedicate to this game or any other online game. Some folks have just a few hours a month or a week? Maybe can steal away during some lull in the day to unwind, maybe a half an hour at a time? How do you expect them to fly one sortie , screw-up or get vulched and then they are out for a month??? Not Good.

Real Life has a way of taking-up huge amount from game play.



Face it; there is not ever going to be an acceptable way of making an "honest" online game. The term is too subjective.
Unless the teams and/or players decide the rules beforehand, I just don't see the relevance of having the score pages in the form that was.

Let's see what they come up with next and hope it's equitable for all or at least most.

 

Agreed mostly. The whole point of what iRL are *military demands / orders* people are faced with and are like totally missing here is a *major* factor to take into account in this equation. Here, you can "pick" your targets / mission anytime, while only very few could iRL (think "Free Hunt" sorties in WWI). However iRL, coming up with missions where the win/loose ratio / chances mattered was an important factor most of the time, because no one could sustain adverse ratios here. And imagine that "extreme" server setting I described above while people would still aim for capturing the fields. Things would become *way* more realistic I think. You would prolly have CAPs, Fighter Sweeps, Bomber escorts etc, not the lemming-like respawn again and again as soon as you die.

So, yes, I see your point. And of course, all this is just a game and in the end it is of course ridicoulus to try drawing comparisons between flying here and people flying in a real war in real planes. It's just that taking the K/D ratio into account would lead to more realistic engagements because otherwise it's all too easy to "sacrifice" your "life" in a virtual environment and thus negate tactics / maneuvers which were of major importance iRL.

 

Well put heartc and loose. I must say I never really flew for a streak, if it happened it happened. I usually didn't notice I had one until I died. and when I did notice I had a nice streak I found myself being a bit more careful. But many times my loner attitude didn't help keep it going either or I flew into a swarm, though can be fun to duke it out, in those situations even relative newbies in flocks can ruin your day.

In my early days here i rarely made it home but loved fighting to the bitter end. Though it may not be realistic it was fun and invigorating, but over time became a tad boring, it meant more to go home with kills. Points still really dont mean that much. I never really understood why one plane should have a huge multiplier and another got so little. Just pick your plane and do your best. I liked staying with an older model in most cases but Sometimes you need to pick the best plane available to give yourself a fighting chance. Scores and streaks are nice but should be second to returning to base always. Some slack can be given to newbies to learn how to fly. <S>

bullet

 

Well put yourself, Mr. B.

Three of the best times I had playing online were in no particular order:

When it took me about four P-38s to take out a CV and a few escorts while the rest of my friends were busy with another base. The CV group was heading towards them and I got a big WTG from those guys.

When Igot jumped by 5 or more (at least it seemed like that many! ) coming to defend a field with a little snoopy plane. I managed to shoot down two or three in a vicious furball and get two more on a maneuver kills.
It was one of those fights to the bitter end like you said. I didn't make it back or I crashed when landing- don't remember and it didn't matter. I beat the odds and got a good laugh from all the guys.

One time when there were just a few of us around and we decided to go after a base or two. There was an opposition force that out-numbered us by we went for it. With a little talk we each took a roll at what we did best or could do best- I guess I just made an easy target. But we tried and after a few set-backs we took care of business and got the job done, joking and making fun of our attmepts and escapades. It was very close and we just barely did it but it was one of the greatest online experiences of this game.

I think the secret was that we didn't take it so seriously, we were there to do as best as we could under the circumstances. We were there to have fun and make it fun for the others. I don't think anyone of us in those times cared one bit about what our score pages would look like.

Maybe if the stats were private that would satisfy the people who needed to know and they could trade their score cards among themselves?

 

that would seriously suck for squads

 

They could work around it:

Squad members could hand-over their reports to their leaders/person in charge and they in turn could communicate to the representatives of other squads.

An association of squads could be formed and they can report the standings among themselves.

Let the people motivated enough get organized and do the work.

 

just wondering
if you dont care about scores, why do you need them kept private?

if you dont care - dont check them

 

I meant keep them private ONLY in the scope that it is less work for the admins and less room on the server.

You're right if it's the same amount of work, private or public and there's no advantage of server overhead -bandwidth or storage space, then there is no point to keep it private.

I just presumed it was a lot of work and takes-up a lot of time and space.

 

good point spuint

Score pages are great, please fix!