For starters, the current balancing mechanism will have a neutral or positive effect on the way I play the game. So this isn’t a complaint. However, I would respectfully disagree with the position that the perk points were actually given a chance to balance the arenas. In marketing there is a thing called price sensitivity -- the price point at which you change behavior. I would contend that the adjustments to perk points and eny values were never sufficient to change behavior.
I haven’t flown a huge amount since the start of the New Year, for a variety of reasons, but when I fly I almost always fly for the country with the lowest numbers. And, when I fly with my wingman/squadmate we often consider taking up a perk plane for a patrol. I can say that at no point (IMO and with my limited data set) was the perk differential sufficient that the decision to fly a perk plane would have been any different than before the changes were put in place. The reasons:
1. Maybe its just me (I think a subset of others too) but for whatever illogical reason it’s hard to spend perk points. Wasting a perk point is like throwing away a dollar (I know, absolutely crazy, but what can I say). I’m no more likely to throw away $35 dollars than I am to throw away $60, whether or not I have $200 or $2,000 in the bank. Oddly the same applies to 35 perk points. It’s interesting that even adding 8 perks to the C-hog (which lacks the Icon too) resulted in a reduction from 23% usage to 2% according to what I’ve read on the board. I have never seen the cost of a Tempest or Spit 14 at this level, though I wouldn’t be surprised if near reset you could get this price (but not be able to get off a runway with it). Most people can afford 8 points, but there is apparently a block in place for a significant number of people who used to fly the C-hog that even just 8 points can’t overcome, and again, even without the tag.
2. Flying a perk plane with any aggression in the MA (pre or post perk adjustments) is likely to end in death and a loss of the points noted above. You are flying a Tempest (with its perk tag) against the side with the most numbers. The Tempest is best at low to medium altitudes so that is the altitude you should fight at. Any number of planes with altitude can run you down when you are at low to medium altitudes, and when slow, any number of planes will out turn you after that happens. You either have to fly timid or understand that you will likely be throwing away those points (see above) as you become the center of attention. At no point (I believe) was the side with the most numbers faced with a wall of tempests or Spit 14s for these reasons.
I know HT has stated clearly that he are going with the new model. Personally, as noted earlier, it won’t impact my flying either way. But for potential future consideration, either with balancing or with perk adjustments in general, take the current balancing model and run it in reverse. Be far more aggressive with perk values. If a Tempest became free, or cost 2 or 4 points you might actually see some in the air opposing the hordes. I truly believe that free to 2-4 points would pass the price sensitivity barrier. If you don’t lose any points (or only a psychologically acceptable amount) then there is going to be a lot more usage and a lot more aggressive flying when the planes are used. Similarly, if the point gain for shooting one down is minimal (and there’s no additional “spoiling your points” motivation in the kill), then the icon tag doesn’t particularly matter. You can engage a tempest, but that Tempest may just put up a fight instead of running.
I think that if the country with the horde found itself facing a wall of co-alt Tempests with a high cover of Spit 14s (instead of one or two to hunt as trophies) while on the way to target with a gang of heavy P-51s -- there would be no problem balancing the arenas. FFIW, my .02 cents, etc. The current changes are probably a net positive for me as they stand, but the perk model/values have been on my mind for a while.
Charon
