Author Topic: Plane set change (Read 1427 times)

CurtissP-6EHawk · « **on:** March 15, 2004, 12:17:49 AM »

Why did the planes get moved?
1. No planes on CVs.
2. F6F removed from A10, added to A9 1 grid away.
3. F4U is added to A10 but is capped to much to depart in the slow moving pig.
4. F4U removed from A9 and the field north of the Slot. Closest F4U is three or four grids away unless u take a chance on getting vulched.
5. Remove commandable fleets(like it the way it was before Brady fixed it.)

This has turned into an F4F vs Ki-61 map.
Kill/Death ratio was near even before tha change.
Lets keep tabs on what may change with this change.
Score as of midnight sunday night.

Ki-61 has 76 Kills of F4F-4
F4F-4 has 57 Kills of Ki-61

Ki-61 has 166 Kills of F4U-1
F4U-1 has 141 Kills of Ki-61

Ki-61 has 218 Kills of F6F-5
F6F-5 has 222 Kills of Ki-61

A6M5b has 155 Kills of F6F-5
F6F-5 has 213 Kills of A6M5b

A6M5b has 101 Kills of F4U-1
F4U-1 has 116 Kills of A6M5b

A6M5b has 61 Kills of F4F-4
F4F-4 has 77 Kills of A6M5b

Looks like the the stats were so lopsided, the plane avaibility just had to be changed huh?...geessh!

Reschke · « **Reply #1 on:** March 15, 2004, 09:51:41 AM »

The F4U and F6F were not supposed to be at the same bases either A40 or A10. In fact it says so in the MOTD and was not that way on Friday after the setup was put in place in the map.

I fixed that on Sunday afternoon around lunch time (Central Time) after Brady and I got to talking. I don't know what has happened to the carriers but something is screwy with the way they work and I can't figure it out. It might be something with the way the table got loaded. I will check on that and may have to reload the table around lunch my time.

The day the stats are able to keep track of the altitude and composition of forces of the fights they will mean something more than they do now.

Squire · « **Reply #2 on:** March 15, 2004, 09:56:23 AM »

Do the IJN have any CVs? Just wondering.

Also C8 doesnt have the USN ac enabled?, but the other CV does.

Hawk, not every change is the result of a conspiracy, you know?

EDIT: I see the other post Reschke re CVs, thanks.

Grits · « **Reply #3 on:** March 15, 2004, 10:58:30 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Squire
Hawk, not every change is the result of a conspiracy, you know?

Oh yes it is!!! Just ask Storch!!

Löwe · « **Reply #4 on:** March 15, 2004, 02:29:44 PM »

I'm not sure, but I believe land based F6 units were few and far between. Most F6 units were CV based at time , and the F4U's land based.

Reschke · « **Reply #5 on:** March 15, 2004, 02:36:20 PM »

You are correct Lowe. The F4U units were Marine and VF-17 (only land based USN Corsair unit at the time since VF-12 had just transitioned over to Hellcats). The carrier based units in the area were either F4F or F6F at the time.

Arlo · « **Reply #6 on:** March 15, 2004, 05:08:56 PM »

I just want the VF-17 skin back, skipper.

CurtissP-6EHawk · « **Reply #7 on:** March 15, 2004, 06:11:38 PM »

I dont realy have a problem with the change but look at where you put them. The F4U needs room to climb. Kinda hard to do under the nose of the Ki-61. Switch the F4U and F6F at A9. The F6F can grab rather fast and hold its own. The F4U is only avaiable at A5 and A10. A5 is too far away and A10 is too close. The rest of the bases are out of play! I doubt you will see much base caturing to get the F4U closer (which is good...sort of). At least enable the F4U from the CV. Flying three grids to a fight where the F4U is not that much of a threat is a bit too much!

CurtissP-6EHawk · « **Reply #8 on:** March 15, 2004, 06:38:36 PM »

In just one day, not much time for a real change:

1. The Ki-61 and F4F are staying about equal.
2. The F4U has added only three kills of the Ki-61 and the Ki-61 has added 38 kills of the F4U. Im sure they are near vulches or low slow credits.
3. F6F vs Ki-61 is nearly untouched at 228 and 221 from yesterdays 222 and 218. However, being unable to up a caped field has helped the F6F stats.

So far, moveing the F6F and F4U has hindered the F4U and helped the F6F but still a bit too early to tell. Please move the F4U to A9.

Reschke · « **Reply #9 on:** March 15, 2004, 09:35:00 PM »

Short and simple answer to that one here Hawk. I am not going to shuffle around the location of the F6F and F4U.

On another note, the stats prove nothing except that people don't care about anything other than trying like hell to take off from a base that is all but wiped out.

For instance how many people have noticed the fuel burn rate in the setup prior to me bringing it up here? Do you have any idea how far a full fuel F4U-1 with a drop tank can fly in the arena before going down to having enough fuel to return to its original base? Well neither do I right off the top of my head and do you know why? Its because when I put this down a few weeks ago on the computer I knew exactly what sort of fights were going to take place.

So I'll say it again the stats mean exactly jack squat about the effectiveness of an aircraft in a setup. The day they start being able to track the altitude of the fight and composition of the fight then they will mean much more in the context of how an aircraft in the game effects the setup.

daddog · « **Reply #10 on:** March 16, 2004, 10:11:01 AM »

Quote

The day they start being able to track the altitude of the fight and composition of the fight then they will mean much more in the context of how an aircraft in the game effects the setup.

I think your right on Rescheke.

------------------------

CO CM daddog
332nd Flying Mongrels
Roster
Noses in the wind since 1997.

When a man's best friend is his dog, that dog has a problem. Edward Abbey

Soulyss · « **Reply #11 on:** March 16, 2004, 10:25:17 AM »

there are stats in this game?!?!

CurtissP-6EHawk · « **Reply #12 on:** March 16, 2004, 05:09:12 PM »

"So I'll say it again the stats mean exactly jack squat about the effectiveness of an aircraft in a setup."

CMs remind me of poloticians. They promise everything then when they get into office, they become just another prettythang when they get there

If you think for one minute that stats dont mean squat then you are extreamly ignorant.

This brings up another thought. If the allies always out number the axis and if the allied planes are always superior than the axis planes, then how do the less superior axis planes always end up capping an allied base, even when out numbered 2 to 1? If it is because the allied pilots are stupid (as stated in an above reply by Reschke, then why do the axis pilots whine about the allies being stupid? Shut up and enjoy the stupid allies letting you kill them......agian, I am surounded by idiots!

Storch whines about axis planes being crap buit yet axis get most of the kills and capture most of the bases.

Reschke says axis gets most of the kills because they cap and vulch. Not sure how they can cap and vulch if the allies have more numbers and better planes. Oh wait, here is an example stated again by Reschke; "Do you have any idea how far a full fuel F4U-1 with a drop tank can fly in the arena before going down to having enough fuel to return to its original base? ". Another; "So I'll say it again the stats mean exactly jack squat about the effectiveness of an aircraft in a setup." I would say the agility, time-to-climb-to-target speed and capping ability of the axis aircraft, along with the stupid allied pilots trying to depart the caped bases, make them superior not the allies!

Hmmmm, stats begining to make sence yet?

I say its the plane set and how the planes are enabled on certain fields.

Grits · « **Reply #13 on:** March 16, 2004, 06:16:03 PM »

Same thing happened last week, allies had 2 v 1 odds and all were in GV's at 12 or gettign vulched, donno why.

I dont, on balance week to week, find either side has a great advantage in equipment. Sure, one week might tip allied, next week might tip axis, but pretty much they seem even to me.

The only set I have played so far that I thought seemed way out of balance was Hungary, Allies had the two best turning planes, and the fastest, and the best climbing with the La7 and Yak 9. Funny thing is if you check the stats that week they are nearly even despite the Allied advantage in hardware.

I think WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY too much is made of "Uber" plane this, "Uber" plane that. To paraphrase Squire and Sakai:

Screw balance. Pick a time period, a theater, fill the planeset with planes that fit, and fly, everything else will settle itself out.

Reschke · « **Reply #14 on:** March 16, 2004, 10:16:38 PM »

Quote

Ki-61 has 76 Kills of F4F-4
F4F-4 has 57 Kills of Ki-61

Ki-61 has 166 Kills of F4U-1
F4U-1 has 141 Kills of Ki-61

Ki-61 has 218 Kills of F6F-5
F6F-5 has 222 Kills of Ki-61

A6M5b has 155 Kills of F6F-5
F6F-5 has 213 Kills of A6M5b

A6M5b has 101 Kills of F4U-1
F4U-1 has 116 Kills of A6M5b

A6M5b has 61 Kills of F4F-4
F4F-4 has 77 Kills of A6M5b

Looks like the the stats were so lopsided, the plane avaibility just had to be changed huh?...geessh!

These "stats" are what I mean by statistics for aircraft in a setup. Not Time to altitude, "agility", roll rate and all the other things that people call stats and what you allude to in your closing statement Hawk. The statistical "kills" in a setup mean exactly nothing in a CT setup and isn't even something that I take into account when putting one in place.

When I asked the question about how far the Corsair would go on a full fuel tank it was to point out one thing. That most likely no one, yes not one person takes aircraft fuel state and engine settings into account when they are hopping into the game for a little while. They may do it in a Special Event but almost never (only exception would likely be a squadron mission) in the MA or CT. If they did then it would be a different situation altogether.

So fire away and call us promise breakers, prettythang's, whatever you wish to. When I was asked to be a CT Staffer I made one promise about this game. To make sure I treated everyone the same regardless of friendship, affiliation, squadron, etc... So far I think I have done that.