In global, one long haul would get you a lot of xp. I think it’s too easy to get to Grade 3 and expert server. I know there’s another topic about expert for grade 4+ but I think grade 3’s should be able to access expert.
My idea is to increase flight time, landing and xp to be able to get into expert.
I think it should be changed to:
Flight time / Landing/ XP
Grade 2: 10 / 25 / 20,000
Grade 3: 100 / 50 / 100,000
Grade 4: 200 / 150 / 250,000
Grade 5: 500 / 300/ 500,000
You may been thinking… 500,000xp for grade 5?! The number looks big, but it’ll probably take the same time as flying in regions aiming for 150,000xp.
I think this is needed because so many inexperienced pilots will get access to the expert server easily.
In my humble opinion, as others have mentioned on previous threads. We don’t need an increase of Flight time, landings, and XPs. Instead, we need a ratio between XP and Flight time you have already accummulated and Total violations/Total ghostings (all time) requirements for all Grades. As it’s not rare to see a Grade 5 which should be an experienced pilot, trolls or acts immature in front of other players. Just my $0.02 😉
I like everything except Grade 5 xp amount, isn’t that a little low? I’m not there yet but I’m gonna hit the amount quite soon and I don’t like how quick it has taken me. Also if you’re going 500,000xp then you will need higher flight time as xp to flight time ratios are decreasing with the introduction of 20 hour flights
Nice, I think I see your thinking here.
I do know that the Grade system is currently under review.
As mentioned by me in previous posts about this topic, the ONLY key thing is: when are pilots allowed on Expert server. All other Grades are nothing but status, looking wonderful to others with my peachy coloured name over my aircraft.
When are pilots allowed on Expert…
If we don’t want to go down the road of passing some sort of test, then I think XP’s are most important - as they are now. XP are the only (yes, limited) indication of experience and skills.
Grade 5
If we want Grade 5 to be cool - instant respect & friends - then XPs is the word here. I propose to use a ratio system: for Grade 5 your ratio XP / flight-time should be over 1000, with a minimum XP of 500,000.
For example: if you’ve have done 650 hours, and made 700,000 XP, then the ratio is 1077, which is more than sufficient to make or maintain Grade 5.
I think status should not be measured just by flight time, but a good combination (ratio) of XP and flight time. We dont want Grade 5’s who know how to fly around the globe, but don’t know how to do a touch and go with a Spitfire.
If the idea is to promote acceptable flying behavior and that Expert Server should be about flying abilities AND the ability to adhere to common courtesies maybe we could try a different concept. How about ATS awarding positive affirmations for adhering to ATS control and flying accuracy (take off and landing skills). After all it is about rewarding those who do want to take part in the multi player experience and follow direction.
Build up reputation with ATC on practice server and once a certain level of reputation is reached be able to fly in Expert. Infractions and ghosting loses reputation. Following ATC and being scored by ATC for having an acceptable landing would increase reputation.
Would also be cool to track how many different airports one has visited. Percentage of all airports visited. Of course this is more for show and should have no impact on access to Expert.
Maybe some sort of flight rewords system would work for this instead of grading base on flight time grade it on things like taxi speed spacing with other aircraft and follow atc instructions. For each one, you earn points towards things like expert and maybe even free live pro for a mouth. Or getting a free plane or something might motivate people to obey rules also an air police should be added of ts1 to enforce some bands as a grade 2 it can get out of hand at KJFK or EGLL
Since global came out, I, like many other players, have been doing exclusively long haul flights. They generate thousands of EXP, but simultaneously generates 1 or even 0 landings per flight. Now, i know touch and goes make it easier for making your landings skyrocket, but some people including me 😂 just don’t have the time and/or patience. So, some users are going to get a ratio of, for example, 5,000:1 (XP:Landings). And since landings are also an important factor in the ranking system, i believe that it balances it out. I could be wrong, so please correct me if i am 😂
As always Laird Kilt of McHaggis speaks true sense!
I have suggested on other threads that access to Expert Server should be on several factors rather than just total Time / Landing and also same over last 90 days.
A ratio between Landings / Violations (Ghostings count as 3 viloations) over both a total period and also in last 90 days need to be considerd as a KPI for allowing access to Grade 3 and Expert server.
A second KPI would be that a a Grade 3 and above needs to complete a number of ATS operations on the Training Server in a 90 day period so that they can remain as a Grade 3. This way it will help a pilot to understand the ATS procedures which will help them when on the expert server as well as also give more experionce to controllers on the TS server.
I actually agree with your reasoning panther because a grade 3 like myself… It took me only 19 landings to go from grade 2 to grade 3 in one week… despite the fact I already know how to communicate with atc, I think The xp should get higher so we can let people not only build up their flight time, but experience using their aircrafts.
Would say you still need to include a total landings as well as landings in last 90 days. But then add the requirements of ratio of landings / violations both in total and also in last 90 days.
So if I read your idea correctly, you are proposing that ATCs on Expert will be equipped with system where they can submit an ‘ok’ to a pilot when he sees good behaviour and flyng skills. These ‘ok’s’ add up to a score, which then, in some way, contrbute to a (higher) Grade. In the same way, ATC’s can give out a ‘not ok’, when he spots a crap landing or bad behaviour, meaning the pilot would loose points on his score and eventually end up with a lower Grade.
Is this what you mean, or did I now ran way with your idea completely? 😊
@azeeuwnl you got the jist of my thoughts. Firstly there is no real need to fly Expert if you are not interacting with ATC after all if you have no reason to want to fly with others and interact with ATC then you could simply just fly in Casual. Secondly if you are just learning how to interact with ATC and how to take off and land in my opinion it is good to get feedback from the ATC in the Training Server. This lets both the trainee ATC and trainee pilot blossom. Once a certain competency is reached then it would make sense to be given your wings to fly in Expert.
I would hope that the Expert ATC have a high level of skill, maturity and values and that they can act in a more coach like role and award positive affirmations.I would reserve negative affirmations for those who deliberately flaunt expectations.
Bottom line is as long as one is civil and adheres to the norm then ATC can award with some form of skill points.
I would propose that ALL ATC are equipped with the ability to award an acceptable take off or landing and that a minimal amount of ATC witnessed events occur before access is given to Expert. Also where bad behavior is witnessed these points are deducted and that the pilot needs to meet the minimum ATC acceptance on Training before being allowed back on Expert.
I like this idea, at a slight tangent I have always said that a key part of flying on expert server is that you should have so much experience as an ATC in each 90 days, either as IFATC or on the TS, as part of the way to remain 'current '.
Back to @Kilt_McHaggis suggestion, only issue I see with having ALL ATC able to give grading points is that whilst IFATC members are a known quality as they have been tested, ATC on TS range from highly experienced people to those who are still wet behind the ears and so the quality is unknown and will be veryable.
My view is that the grading algorithm needs to be something that the system does in order to remain consistent. Either as a ‘test landing’ or similar as @Maxmustang favours ( happy Thanksgiving BTW) or if it is driven by other factors such as violations versus flight time which I and others suggest.