Full Rolling PlaneSet Rough Draft

[Tarmac]

This would be great.  

I'd encourage you guys to advertise this setup (if/when it comes to fruition) in the General forums, as I bet there are lots of people like me that enjoy the historical matchups but have become accustomed to ignoring the AvA arena.  

I share the concerns about Emil vs Spit V and Hurri IIC and Spit 9's without 190A-5's, but it sounds like you guys are already figuring that out.  I'd like to see subs (109F-4 introduced for F-2 and 190A5 being released earlier for the A3's and 4's), but that may just be my inner Luftwabble talking.    

[TheBug]

Originally posted by bozon

Most important is to sustain good matchups and good gameplay.

 

Agreed!

[Kev367th]

Originally posted by bozon
No need to religeously stick to actual service date of our specific model. 190A5 is close enough to represent all early A models and so it is in the era frame of the Spit9. The F6F-5 is very close to enter the era of F6F-3. I'm not familiar enough with the eras in the russian front or exact yak models, but I'm sure we can find the right era for them.

Most important is to sustain good matchups and good gameplay.

Bozon

Well you either want historical matchups or just selected planes outside their service date to 'balance' things.

I remember when the AvA first started, Spit V drivers had no qualms going up against 190's. Sure it was lopsided for a while, just as it was in reality.

Like I said if you want good balanced adversaries for the ETO, skip 1941, 1944/5.

One thing that really pees me off is the "lets take the service dates and mess with them" to allegedly improve gameplay.
no we'll never have every plane and sub variant that was available, but there is enough to run historical scenarios without messing with anything, especially for the ETO western front.

[storch]

Originally posted by Kev367th
Well you either want historical matchups or just selected planes outside their service date to 'balance' things.

I remember when the AvA first started, Spit V drivers had no qualms going up against 190's. Sure it was lopsided for a while, just as it was in reality.

Like I said if you want good balanced adversaries for the ETO, skip 1941, 1944/5.

One thing that really pees me off is the "lets take the service dates and mess with them" to allegedly improve gameplay.
no we'll never have every plane and sub variant that was available, but there is enough to run historical scenarios without messing with anything, especially for the ETO western front.

Kev, why would a spit driver have any qualms about going up against anything?  except for the A6M there isn't an axis plane in AH that can effectively compete if the players are of equal skill.

[Krusty]

Originally posted by Kev367th
I remember when the AvA first started, Spit V drivers had no qualms going up against 190's. Sure it was lopsided for a while, just as it was in reality.

Only... it wasn't realistic at all. The Spit5 was pretty damn uber, with 2x the ammo load it has now. It flew just as well then as it did now. The 190s, on the other hand, were horribly unstable, could not be turned or even banked at speeds below 250mph without snap-rolling to an inverted state -- NOBODY feared them back then, let alone spit pilots.

In regards to malta: Perhaps it was a bit more balanced after the new spits were added in round 2, but ONLY for the 109F4 pilots. We had very limitd supplies of F4s and were forced to fly E4s after the first sortie. It was whole-sale slaughter. The E4s were decimated, tons killed for few or no losses on the RAF side. The E4 can't really compete against hurr2c or spit5. It can probably get a few kills, but if you have group vs group it's toast.

Back to the lineup: Dates vs gameplay.

We have a pickle here. 190s were the scourge of the spit5s for a while. They forced the RAF to re-engine a spit to produce the spit9. Only we have the spit9 coming out almost a week before the 190 it was created to counter. Go either way and you have problems.

I suggest compromise. Somebody suggested introducing them at the same time. This means that the 190 drivers don't get to be **** of the walk for several days if the sub for A3 is used. This also means Spit9 pilots don't go around like **** of the walk for several days if production dates are used.

If you have 2 choices, both that will generate bad reactions from a lot of folks, compromise and take away the advantage from both sides. Split the difference, date-wise and put them both in at the same time. I know isn't the best but it would cut down on the complaints.

Also would suggest this for the SpitV and 109F4. Same reasons. SpitV was entered early but totally blows our early E4 away. We don't have E4/Ns or E-7s, or E-7/Ns with stronger engines to compete with the spitV, which the LW had in real life. We can't sub anything in either. So split the dates and introduce the spit5 and 109f4 on the same date. They've historically had one of the best matchups of all time in the AvA.

If you find other aircraft with similar problems (no subs, outclasses its opponents, that sort of thing) I say play with the dates.

You can't stay 100% true to dates if you have a woefully incomplete planeset. That's the sad truth of it. My mind on the matter says to stay as true as you can, and make exceptions where needed.

[Platano]

Is it just me or does everyone s*** on the 109E-4??

[Mister Fork]

Like I said before, we don't have 1000+ aircraft to balance the gameplay.

Imagine if we did though....  the headache of balancing the entry of every model... ugh!

[bozon]

Originally posted by Kev367th
One thing that really pees me off is the "lets take the service dates and mess with them" to allegedly improve gameplay.
no we'll never have every plane and sub variant that was available, but there is enough to run historical scenarios without messing with anything, especially for the ETO western front.

Hold your horses.
RPS is not a scenario. Service dates have no historical value save for the absolute earliest date you could meet that specific model in the air.

What I did suggest is to take the service dates list and instead of cutting it into equal 2 months bins and take what ever comes out, use some more imagination in deciding the time frames. They don't have to be equal in time and by expanding some time frames or contracting others, the resulting matchups in each frame would be more interesting and fun, WITHOUT breaking any historical validity.

The other part of my suggestion was less historical. If aircraft manufacturer X took his plane, replaced the pilot seat cusion and advanced the model number by 1, in my eyes it is still the exact same plane for our purposes. So I don't mind if you count 190A5 as A3 or what ever was the 1st A 190 to see real combat and use the earlier service date. Same goes for some 109Gx models, F6F5/3 or P47D5/11.

Or, you can ingnore all that, the spit9 would enter before the 190s and the numbers in the areana would likely stay below 10 because frankly - it's just not fun sometimes.

Bozon

[Oldman731]

Originally posted by Platano
Is it just me or does everyone s*** on the 109E-4??

I think the Emil is one of the more difficult planes to learn to fly well.  That said, once you figure it out, it does fairly well against the current version of the Spit 5, although the Spit clearly has the advantage.

- oldman

[Shifty]

Well Splat take heart in that you fly it extremely well. Last time I tangled with you I assumed you were in a an F or G2. Not until after the fight did I realize you were in an emil.

[Platano]

I'd like to tangle with someone 1v1.. me in Emil vs Spit5 and see the outcome.....

1v1 I think the emil will win...but outnumbered and getting ganged (which is becoming common in the AvA for both sides) spits will win...

[Oldman731]

Originally posted by TheBug
It would be a 5 week rotation

Staffers all agree, if you folks can compress this into a three week rotation, we'll run it.  Current RPS has about a week left to run, so there's your time goal.  Don't know if you want to do it as a true, day-by-day sort of RPS, like the ETO RPS Sable came up with, or as a multi-phase RPS, like the current PAC setup; either will be fine.  We can try different maps, too.

- oldman

[Mister Fork]

And make sure you include yer maps you want us to use but keep in mind that some maps are difficult to setup (i.e. Slot).  Also, include any special arena settings you want us to use (check out the list of arena settings in the setup menu).  

Also, include downtimes for objects, and object strength.

[Krusty]

Originally posted by Oldman731
Staffers all agree, if you folks can compress this into a three week rotation, we'll run it

Well, first off, if you want to compress it, you DON'T need a full week of BOB. While fun on its own, if you're doing a RPS that's just dragging your feet. Day 1 stays in effect until Day 5 or 6 or something. Change that to just a couple of days. See if there are similar large gaps elsewhere.

[storch]

BoB or any other period for a week is just far too long, 3-4 days per period is about fine IMHO.