Archive > Support

2008-01-18: ProPilot FAC reset

<< < (3/5) > >>

EHM-0654 Murray:
So, a fairer FAC should be our goal? I've thought for a long time that the FAC should be a much lower numbered thing (points out of 10, sort of thing), so rather than the many thousands, most pilots would be in the hundreds, and there would be no negative scores at all.

Just throwing this out there for discussion, perhaps we should work on the assumption of positive re-enforcement - a good flight with no penalties is worth a FAC of X, and penalties remove points from X down to a minimum of 0 (for a full-on crash). Even if you get all other possible penalty, there needs to be a positive score for that (a crash being the only way to not get a positive X)?

BTW, I don't want to discuss individual penalties at this juncture, just the over-arching FAC calculation.

EHM-2097 Andrei:

--- Quote ---Just throwing this out there for discussion, perhaps we should work on the assumption of positive re-enforcement - a good flight with no penalties is worth a FAC of X, and penalties remove points from X down to a minimum of 0 (for a full-on crash). Even if you get all other possible penalty, there needs to be a positive score for that (a crash being the only way to not get a positive X)?
--- End quote ---

In my (more or less humble) opinion, Y E S - and I don't have a large enough font to write this word. This is the kind of scoring I dream of...

Andrei

EHM-1570 Bruce:
If I am reading this right, what you are saying is that  a particular penalty free flight would be worth for example an FAC of 100, this figure would then be added to your cumulative FAC total, however the same flight incurring penalties of say 50 would only add the remaining 50 to your cumulative FAC, and a crash wouuld wipe out the possible 100, and your cumulative FAC would remain unaltered. If this is correct then I would be happy to see this implemented.
After reading one suggestion that wants to introduce a financial incentive, I would totally disagree with that.

EHM-1001 Robert:
I think too that the idea is good. Although I am not sure how the calculation works now. Is it a kind of average score now ? I thought the current system is cumulative too, so basically we are gaining points which is scaled somehow regarding the activity in time ?

What I see a problem is the amount of penalty points. For example with a 2-3 hours of flying and hard concentration you can earn some 100 points, but if you forget to turn ON the beacon in time, you can loose 180. I think if the points would balanced better, the current system could be good too.

EHM-0654 Murray:
@ everyone that replied to my suggestion thus far, EXCELLENT! And thank you.

Bruce, precisely. A good flight will be worth a fixed value, published and not at all secret, and penalties will take away from that fixed value. As long as you don't crash, you'll get some sort of "score" for the flight (even if you get everything else wrong) Potentially, this could be either a cumulative score, or alternatively it could be an averaged score (and if we work with 100 as you suggest, it's simple to describe it as a percentage...); either is "good for me" :)

Robert, the current FAC calculation is very much a similar idea, only the other way around. You start at 0 (pretty much) then penalties cumulatively come off that (and yes, it's easily possible to get a vastly negative score for a flight, and that without crashing even). If and only if you get no penalties is there then a small "bonus" of points. Yes, time and online flying provide a weighting to that outcome value, but the "balance of power" in the current system lies with penalties. There's no reason why time and online flying shouldn't have a positive effect in the new formula I've very loosely outlined, but again, that's something to be not talked about right now.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page