Pointless man, he’s trolling enjoyer. He understands everything very well. (I don’t believe he is that dumb).
Before you flag this warrior: I’m not saying “you are dumb” i said “i don’t believe you are dumb”. It’s different things, at least for normal people.
Update: And still you flagged this comment warrior
He’s still going to report you
Of course he will
Once again…there are no strictly ‘air players’ in RB GFs. Everyone used GFs at some point, including the tankers who fly.
As for the results, they were handled in the manner they were for the reasons I explained. The data is not specific enough to do it accurately in any other way.
Nope…there’s no trolling in understanding how to comprehend and extrapolate the data.
When you want a sober, serious look at the effectiveness of aircraft, you look at what they did and how much it cost. This means counting all means of loss to enemy fire, not just one subset with insufficient data filtration.
Incorrect. I handle discussions by presenting arguments and facts. I don’t need to resort to false flagging as some others regrettably do. I win the arguments by dealing in the truth, as I have.
It’s disappointing that you don’t see that…sensible people reading my posts understand what I have to say and I have been thanked many times for putting forward informed and insightful analyses. Those are rarer on the forums than they used to be.
Answer the question. How many planes are taken out by tanks versus how many tanks are taken out by planes.
Ohh my god man 🤣🤣
Okay I’ll try 1 more time:
Effectiveness of aircraft right?
Okay air got 6.2k ground kills
ground and air together got 7.2k air kills
air to air was 3.4k kills
Ground killed 3.9k air
You took air to air 3.4k + 3.9k ground killed air, i got it, but talking about air effectiveness 6.2 ground kills, why you don’t add to this air to air 3.4k kills???
Air killed 6.2k ground target and + 3.4k air target = 9.6k. If your logic is right, why you ignoring air to air kills??
Air to air losses is air effectiveness too right, so why not add??
If you are making this kind of “analysis” i understand why compliments are rare 😅
He was (or still is) one of those “Pointdexter” kids.
The 3,412 aircraft killed by aircraft were included in the loss tally…they were counted.
It’s very simple:
Emphasis mine…we’re looking at the matter of how many tanks are killed by aircraft and at what losses to enemy aircraft/ground fire aircraft encounter in the sessions during that pursuit.
The data is only detailed another to allow for broad analyses (it cannot tell us exactly how many aircraft were committed to CAP or CAS) and these limitations have already been noted.
That is the limit of what the data can say…there’s really no going further with it as-is and that prevents an in-depth analysis of other research aspects like air-to-air effectiveness (which is also more complex than a simple exchange rate calculation).
Nope, I did not report your comment.
If I’d actually reported you, there’d be a marker saying as much in the lower right corner…none there.
Chances are you got hit by the false flaggers who are rampant on the forums and commonly stir up trouble even over innocuous posts. Those are the trolls and they should be punished for abusing the flagging feature.
Back when I posted frequently, they were relatively common (even more so by PM). The new forum is smaller and inferior to the old forum, so I don’t post as much (and thus am not seen or conversed with so often).
I explain matters to help others and that’s a reward in itself…the compliments are just a bonus when they come along.
I believe you mean poindexter…I can confirm I have always been studious, but otherwise that phrase doesn’t fit. I’d elaborate, but given it is off-topic it’s best l save the rest for my biopic.
Come on guys when will you realise he just does not want to see it?? He will keep arguing until the dawn of time and you cannot change his mind. Just accept it. Some people and arguments are lost causes and you will just stress yourself out for no reason.
Let the guy live in his delusions.
I have seen nothing to ‘change my mind’ because what I’ve stated stands proven and validated…correct. Adhering to the facts is neither a lost cause nor a matter of delusion…it’s just doing what’s reasonable and proper.
I’m just a straight shooter, regardless of how popular the truth may be at a given time.
This entire debate has been based on SPAA effectiveness on aviation. THERE IS NO NEED TO INCLUDE AIR ON AIR ELIMINATIONS BECAUSE THEY ARE IRRELEVANT TO THE DISCUSSION! Are you intentionally daft or are you this SpEd that you cannot comprehend the simple argument of Air vs Ground eliminations?
Don’t bother and let him have the final word, that makes him happy so it will be healthy for the topic as no more bloating and destroying of it will continue.
Everyone knows what stats show and prove, there is no reason to prove to flat earther that earth is not flat.
Think what you will and see the world through your own lens I really don’t care.
I like this chart, AA kills about 1.5x CAS kills, CAP is even less effective, and ground on ground goes just fine as the ground mains like
Nah, I was raised by a single mum, I revel in this sort of pettiness. It’s like I was made for this.
Lol, pressing Gaijin adding TO mode like waiting another 5 year before they add it to keep the players happy.
Couldn’t careless what that guy think or say since he agreed or disagree make zero impact for the outcome. Like why would anybody care for someone so unimportant that his pet cat unfollowed him on Instagram?
I did not characterize or frame my analysis in the manner you suggest…I discussed the number of ground units destroyed by aircraft and the number of aircraft lost to all causes to achieve that tally.
When you are analyzing the exchange rate (kills versus losses) of aircraft and enemy ground units, you must factor in all of what killed the aircraft or you’ll have a botched comparison.
Actually, the main issue others seem to have with my posts is their very advanced nature…a lot of people here seem to be struggling to keep up. To your question, we cannot look at SPAAs’ effectiveness (the table doesn’t class SPAAs on their own).
The nearest analysis we can do is look at what all ground units managed. Even so, we can discuss it if you’d like:
Aircraft deaths to ground units (no type specified): 3,939 aircraft killed
Ground unit deaths to aircraft: ----------------------------> 6,219 ground units killed
By these numbers, the kill share of ground units versus aircraft is about 63% of the value of the kill share of aircraft versus ground units. More directly, the tally is ~10 ground units lost to aircraft for every 6 aircraft lost to ground fire.
Another important aspect that weighs in on this effectiveness analysis is SP costs; these vary widely, but GFs (even respawns) cost considerably less than aircraft.
Because the table does not specify the nature of the ground units, we must consider all types and their full range (which varies by match BR) because the reality of the data is that it could be attributed to any mix of them:
Ground unit costs:
Aircraft costs:
Ground units require only about 15% to 33% of the SP costs of even the cheapest aircraft (nevermind more expensive aircraft) but yield about two-thirds the kill share of aircraft. Accruing 63% of the kill share for 15-33% of the cost is a marked advantage for cost-effectiveness. Furthermore, despite their lower costs, ground units possess the main means of influencing the match while aircraft lack this (capture point interaction).
Based upon this, we can see that a team could potentially lose multiple ground vehicles in the pursuit of destroying a single aircraft and emerge with the advantage as long as the aircraft ends up killed.
Back in 2017 (that data table is circa 2017), myself and numerous took advantage of the above realities…
…it was a strategy to coax the enemy team into aircraft…then gun them down with SPAAs and aircraft. By killing players in aircraft rapidly, they would have limited SP to respawn with and it’d often force them out of the match.
The above was prior to the 2018 SP costs changes, which have damped the effect of this strategy by allowing cheaper GF respawns…but someone like @JuicyKuuuuki really has the potential to carve up enemy teams’ SP even today.
As in the other analysis, ground units’ results are quite respectable.
I wanted to know what this was about but it goes so far back I gave up.