Again, I don’t think you know anything about it, and I doubt you’ve done any true coding.
Should’ve just stowed your computer science quip that you threw out before.
1 Like
Saying this doesn’t mean I’ll believe it, when it’s clear that common sense isn’t your specialty it seems. Maybe YOU should stop trying to strawman basic coding jargon.
You saying this literally proves why it wouldn’t work, ever wondered why some people see clouds and some people don’t in the exact same match? Not to mention you just used server replays as an example, when it is quite literally just a screen recording that’ll replay it to the game client, hence why the file sizes are so damn small.
This is a totally undeserved kill in your minds, then?
The only way your flight is unaffected by someone being under 1 km is if you’re completely unaware of them, which happens either:
- They’re booming and zooming you and they missed and blew past (less than 30 seconds in range)
- They’re sneaking up on your tail from your blind spot and you’re dead either way.
Sim, in that situation would be fine. I’m talking strictly about the most popular and used game mode RB, where the game will just be a mess.
1 Like
I don’t care if you believe it, I know it’s fact.
I feel as though that’s you throughout this thread.
See this, because that’s you…
Absolute nonsense… This also has nothing to do with the weight of code that you’re trying to make out.
I used that, because that’s what YOU put forth as a weight and a demonstration of your ‘knowledge’, and it’s about time I can just say you actually, really, don’t know anything, because your argument is just dumb in terms of true development and implementation.
You say all those words, but I really doubt you have ANY experience.
Doesn’t make a single difference in terms of code. So yea, you are really just digging a hole and making your own grave.
1 Like
See the system you linked that supposedly would ‘work’? You still haven’t argued against that and I’m waiting on it, and again, you still haven’t even argued WHY I’m wrong, just ‘saying’ that I’m wrong, which isn’t exactly much of an argument…
I didn’t link anything, so what are you on about?
Like, seriously.
You really haven’t got the knowledge or the conceptualization to put something in, and thus you can’t see it being brought in and make these sorts of claims, which make it clearer that you truely don’t have a clue.
If you think that to gauge kills and activity in the game, you have to make a logfile, to then go through and read, to find out who got what, when the game is already doing the calculations, then it’s absolutely you being out of your depth.
I would’ve thought you’d have read the points made, but it’s clear you’re more wanting to argue, and say it can’t be done.
And yes, I HAVE pointed out why you are wrong, you just don’t want to see it.
1 Like
Still waiting on a new suggestion from you that would actually work 100% in-game, you saying that I’m now arguing for the sake of arguing, is ironic. How on Earth would code be able to differentiate between player’s intentions in real time? It can’t, because that’s just how video games work… this system would absolutely make mistakes, whether you like or not, and again, Gaijin will not award free frags, period.
I already stated about the proximity check and checking how close someone shot to someone…
Because that’s how code works.
Nonsense…
If you know how edit works, then why do you spam multi-post to put more nonsense out there… This thread really doesn’t deserve it.
Period.
I have already given you an example why that wouldn’t be an accurate system, both for proximity checks and your ‘fired near enemy’ suggestion. See below:
Again, off topic.
🍿🔥
I cannot think of two enemy planes flying within 1 kilometer range NOT affecting each other’s decision making.
If two planes are within 1 kilometers:
- BnZ, short time spent in range, affects decision making. If guy crashes from dodging - no credit given, but we accept that as the time and energy investment is low so it’s not that painful. Also, no free kill if the guy BnZing you misjudges your altitude and eats dirt from diving through on their shot
- Sneaking up from your blindspot. You’re dead unless you’re very lucky or the enemy has bad aim or runs out of fuel before reaching convergence range
- You’ve spotted the enemy on your six and have began to make decisions that ideally increase your survivability. The guy on your six is now forced to make decisions to avoid overshooting or letting you escape. Your flight patterns are now intrinsically tied to each other.
Case 3 only awards a maneuver kill if you’ve spent at least 30 seconds CONTINOUSLY under the 1kilometer range, or spent more than 30 seconds with short interruptions (say from very wide scissors or attempts to disengage or fancy energy fighting trickery) within effective gun range. The second part makes it more likely than not that you do not get the maneuver kill still.
Now, if multiple planes are within range rather than an 1-on-1 - the guy who spent more time within effective gun range (either of the enemy, or theirs pointed at the enemy) I feel more than deserves the kill if neither of the 2 planes landed a single shot.
Now…
“This works in ASB but not ARB.”
Give it to ASB then. Also make the J-ing out work reliably.
It was really awkward in my aforementioned F8U-2 fight that I had to go, “Hey, I’m out of fuel. Pls hurry up shooting me so I don’t crash and deny you the kill.” We were lucky we were fighting at 1km so I had plenty of glide left in my with flaps but still.
Imagine fighting a plane 0.7 BR higher than you in a matchmaker you can just choose not to uptier taking a risk having seen kill feed knowing it is likely low on missiles and ammo, dancing for 4:40 whole minutes and then… you’re denied the kill because she ran out of fuel - the very thing you sought to exploit and exploited well. 4:40 whole minutes of flying circles around each other as this stupid 10.0 american UFO refused to die until it suddenly died.
Nothing I’ve said has been off-topic, it’s just pointing out falacies in your angles.
The furball and frags for nothing are absolutely just gatekeeping.
It’s not mode dependent, it’s not even a weight in code. If it were a weight in code then the killfeeds and the various actions of everyone would be a thing, but it’s not, and never has been.
This just screams “I have no idea what I’m talking about”, really.
Have you seriously never played a 4.0 match where multiple 109s, spitfires, zeroes, P-51s are absolutely slogging it back and forth between each other in a furball in Air RB? It’s pretty common at those BRs, not so much top tier though.
This handles itself, at high-altitudes this is fine, but you’ll probably argue “well what if they were to crash at low-altitude” well, what if there are multiple friendlies trying to go for the same person, all trying to shoot down the same enemy? I’ve seen this happen way too many times, unfortunately. Would it award the closest or the person who’s fired the most shots near the enemy aircraft? (Hits would count as a kill, so that would explain itself.)
This would be mostly accurate, but in a furball situation this still doesn’t seem likely, say for instance another teammate decided to join in behind said enemy behind you, trying to shoot them down, if they (somehow) do not result in a hit and the enemy crashes after they have ALSO reached the threshold of being awarded a manoeuvre kill, which of you would get the reward if both teammates stayed within 1km?
This still wouldn’t exactly be fair in an instance where if I were to join in halfway through the 1v1, you RTB due to low ammo and I then contribute directly to the enemy crashing in a manoeuvre kill, you would still get the rewards even after you had left to RTB.
This still wouldn’t exactly be fair in an instance where if I were to join in halfway through the 1v1, you RTB due to low ammo and I then contribute directly to the enemy crashing in a manoeuvre kill, you would still get the rewards even after you had left to RTB.
That’s fine, due to ASB being significantly different to RB and AB, the J’ing out mechanical is well, Gaijin’s fault. Whether they have changed it or not I do not know, but it should be reverted, since J’ing out directly means the player IS denying someone a kill by actively leaving their aircraft, instead of the accidental crashes one might face due to bad hit boxes, or wing-overloading, which you’ll get punished for anyways.
[quote=“FlyingDoctor, post:93, topic:199574”]
Nothing I’ve said has been off-topic, it’s just pointing out falacies in your angles.
[/quote
^^ Literally has nothing to do with “Manoeuvre kills in War Thunder” instead you’re just complaining that I am posting?
So… you think that video game code can tell what every player is thinking, 24/7, and what their intentions are? Since that is what I’ve been telling you the game just will not be able to 100% accurately predict.
Using n = 3 s = 1, if you exceed 3 km range your counter is reset to zero.
The person with the highest count. More time spent within effective gun range is more risk taken - either evasive flying or tunnel vision trying to get a shot in and spending precious energy staying within threat range.
Counting bullets fired heavily favours high ammunition aircraft that can spray blindly (F4U-4 with its infinite ammo vs Yak-3 as extreme examples)
You guys are over complicating this. Closest player within 5km, done. This is how the J-out credit system that we already have works, and it’s fine.
It doesn’t have to be 100% perfect, because no system is. It would, however, be infinitely more correct than the current system of rewarding no one.
To be not be a hypocrite, if one argues against prox credit because it’s not perfect, they must also argue even harder against the current system.
Edge cases do not make for a counter arguement.
1 Like
I mean, if people were to figure this out, then in a dive if they outrun you, exceed that 3km limit, they could then just crash anyways, which would lead us back to Square one.
J’ing out is different than crashing into the ground by mistake. J’ing out requires purposeful player input into leaving the game and immediately leaving the game, directly denying someone a kill. But crashing due to unfortunate circumstances with frags being awarded to the closest player is just not something Gaijin will do, they’ll probably argue that it wouldn’t take effort, and now that I think about it, bots in that instance could be weaponised to essentially just crash near a player, whether that could be done, I don’t know, but War Thunder has had a bot problem for a while and I don’t know if they’ll want to open Pandora’s box on that one.
I’m just being realistic, I don’t like the current system, but alas I take comfort knowing that people get punished for crashing anyways.
1 Like