Author Topic: Unperk the Spitfire Mk XIV (Read 7414 times)

stroker71 · « **Reply #30 on:** February 12, 2008, 01:48:50 PM »

If wer are going to leave the perk how about giving the E wing option. In real life it had the clipped (E wing) or the standard wings...and give it 4 hispanos with the E wing just for kicks. I don't fly it much but in the last 3 sorties with the Spit14 I landed 12 kills with no deaths...or even any damage. I like it when you find someone up high (p51, dora, p38) and they think they can just outrun the idiot spit pilot.....surprise it's a 14!

Karnak · « **Reply #31 on:** February 12, 2008, 01:50:21 PM »

It has an "e" wing. That has nothing to do with being clipped or not. Two 20mm + two .50 cals = e wing.

BaldEagl · « **Reply #32 on:** February 12, 2008, 02:38:32 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Karnak
Actually, I'd be fine with the Mk XVI being perked while the XIV is unperked. I think the Mk XVI is far more perkable than the XIV. All the XIV has on the XVI is a bit of speed, in all other categories the XVI matches or exceeds the XIV.

The XIV actually has slight advantages in speed, acceleration and climb rate on the XVI. The XVI does match or exceed the XIV's climb rate through a small envelope, but overall the XIV has the advantage. In fact, the only advantage the XVI has is turn radius.

moot · « **Reply #33 on:** February 12, 2008, 02:51:53 PM »

And roll rate, and almost any aspect of agility.
The acceleration advantage of the XIV over the XVI is such that it spends much more time flying faster than the XVI.

Krusty · « **Reply #34 on:** February 12, 2008, 03:02:50 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Karnak
I think its clear, based on Spitfire Mk IX numbers, that an unperked Spitfire Mk XIV would quickly imbalance the MA. Because I feel that is clear, I think that it must be perked, even though it is my favorite aircraft.

The question that I have is, how much does it need to be perked at?

This back when the perk price for the XIV was in the 50s or whatever.
(link: http://forums.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=48969&perpage=25&highlight=spit%20perked%20monster&pagenumber=2 )

"Now answer my question, if the Spitfire MK XIV is as much a monster as you claim, why are its usage numbers so low?"

You're still begging the question: Why are you so adamant that the kills/deaths ratio proves a plane should be perked/unperked?

I haven't got the burden of proof here, as you seem to imply. I don't have to tell you why the numbers don't add up. Rather, you have to tell ME why YOUR number system doesn't reflect the stats and capabilities of the plane itself. You tell ME why so few folks fly it?

The Spit8, by far one of the best planes in the game, a plane that lets unskilled newbies land 5 kills, had a kills/deaths of only 0.94 last tour. The Spit16, by all means a major contender for a small perk price, had a kills/deaths of 1.07. The spit9 1.02. Here comes the Spit14 with 1.27. A fairly major leap over all other spits. So, by your numbers system, the spit14 is 20% better than even the best unperked spit, and you want to unperk it?

I'm saying pulling kills/deaths doesn't relate to the qualifications of the plane itself, and can't be used as a reason to remove an existing perk price.

EDIT: I'm also of the mind you underestimate its impact if unperked, but my main grief in this thread is the argument/reason you give for it.

I might (maybe) have agreed with you if you'd just requested it (I'm a little on the fence, leaning to "keep a small perk"), but your support is flawed.

hubsonfire · « **Reply #35 on:** February 12, 2008, 03:08:24 PM »

So, you can't actually explain why he's wrong in your opinion, but rather, he has to explain why what he believes is correct, is in fact wrong?

You are a real piece of work.

Guppy35 · « **Reply #36 on:** February 12, 2008, 03:25:55 PM »

Is it possible once in a while that folks who like RAF birds might just want the XIV more accessible?

Consider that the XIV was in combat before it's counterpart the 190D9. D9 not perked. XIV perked. Ta152 unperked.

I also wish that in retrospect the LFXVIe had been called the LFIXe so that the 16 must be more uber then 14 crowd could get over that too.

I also realize that there will always be those LW guys who will never be convinced that anything flown by the LW isn't porked as naturally they should be better then any allied ride so clearly the Spitfire must be over modeled becomes the theme.

Unperk em all, quit complaining cause they're just cartoon airplanes, and go up and fight in em.

Karnak · « **Reply #37 on:** February 12, 2008, 05:22:14 PM »

Krusty,

AH1 is not AH2.

Try again.

Are you daft?

One, the Spitfire Mk XIV is hardly used at all, seeing less use than any perk fighter other than the heavily field limited Me163.

That is a fact.

Two, the Spitfire Mk XIV dies far more often per kill gained than any other perk plane.

That is a fact.

Three, the Spitfire Mk XIV dies more often per kill gained than some free fighters. No other perk fighter fails to die less often per kill gained than any free fighter.

That is a fact.

These facts all support that the Spitfire Mk XIV is not worth spending perks on as it fails to even match the top ratio free fighters despite being flown more conservatively.

This is a theory.

Unperking the Spitfire Mk XIV would test the theory and if the Spitfire Mk XIV proceeded to dominate the arena it could be reperked.

This is a test method for the theory.

Kev367th · « **Reply #38 on:** February 13, 2008, 02:30:57 PM »

Been asking for an unperked for a long time now.

It is CONSISTENTY the lowest K/D ratio of ALL the perked planes, just check back through the tours.

It barely manages a 1.1 K/D per tour while all the other perked ones are into the 2.x and above.

It should follow the Ta-152 and get unperked (the now unperked Ta-152 manages a better K/D).

As for stronger 20mms Krusty?

They have exactly the same Hispanos as EVERY other Spit in the game.

I agree though, the XVI should have been called the LF IXe, it's what its FM (Merlin 66) is based on anyway, not a Merlin 266.

Kweassa · « **Reply #39 on:** February 13, 2008, 03:03:40 PM »

Agreed. Spit14 should lose the perk.

It's not as if more Spit14s will be any worse than the current situation of already abundant Spit16s, not to mention the basic specs concerning MA engagement conditions are unimpressive at best.

The Spit14 is to the Spitfires what the Ta152 is to the 190s. It's basically a less stable 109K-4 that turns a little better but has half the WEP duration. We've got the K-4s roaming around free - why should the Spit14 be perked?

Krusty · « **Reply #40 on:** February 13, 2008, 03:12:09 PM »

Put any idiot in an F-16 and any expert in a SBD, and the expert in the SBD will get the kill.

The kills/death in this example does NOT reflect the capability of the ride itself.

Nor does karnak's or kev's insistence that kills/deaths is the ONLY indicator for why things should be perked. (or unperked)

Please, don't confuse my point. My point isn't about whether they should be perked or not. My point is your REASON for it is flawed. Horribly horribly flawed. Kills/deaths is no indication of the capabilities of the plane itself.

Kev367th · « **Reply #41 on:** February 13, 2008, 03:14:41 PM »

I often wonder if the major factor in the XVI hysteria is the fact it is listed as a XVI.
People not realising that apart from the .50 cals it is identical to a 1943 LF IX performance wise.
Especially considering the FM is based on a Merlin 66 (LF IX) not a Merlin 266 (XVI). Only difference is the Merlin 266 had an FTH 1000ft higher.

My own take on why its perked - Its the latest Spit in the game and it was probably felt a good idea to perk it.

I wonder if under the perked ord system we could have a free XIV at 18lbs (current one), and a lightly perked XIV at 21lbs.

Or add the F.21 which would be the only Spit really worth perking.

Can imagine the complaints now if we ever got a free Mk XII

.

IF the majority of the fights occured over 25k it may be worth a light perk, in the low alt MA environment the XIV not worth the perk cost, nor will it ever be.

No K/D isn't the only indication, but its a hell of good pointer to a planes suitabilty in the MA environment.

Kweassa · « **Reply #42 on:** February 13, 2008, 03:20:17 PM »

Quote

Nor does karnak's or kev's insistence that kills/deaths is the ONLY indicator for why things should be perked. (or unperked)

...hence the abstractions derived from empirical logic concerning the people's preference on MA planes, which by the way, presents a compelling argument that the Spit14 should be fine without a perk - which, I might add, again even in this thread, most everybody agrees on except for you.

Besides, according to your own logic below;

Quote

Put any idiot in an F-16 and any expert in a SBD, and the expert in the SBD will get the kill.

... the MA is dominated by the idiots such as myself, which would imply that even if the Spit14 numbers would greatly increase, it'd most likely be piloted by people who'd get shot down by SBDs - which negates it as a factor that threatens balance.

Either way, your logic on why the perks should not be removed has self-destructed.

Lusche · « **Reply #43 on:** February 13, 2008, 03:21:11 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusty
Put any idiot in an F-16 and any expert in a SBD, and the expert in the SBD will get the kill.

The kills/death in this example does NOT reflect the capability of the ride itself.

Nor does karnak's or kev's insistence that kills/deaths is the ONLY indicator for why things should be perked. (or unperked)

But that's the reason the perk system was introduced in the first place - to impose a limit on planes that are unbalancing in any way. And that is not based on "it could be" but on actual game data. Number of kills, and K/D.

According to your logic, we would have to immediately perk the La-7, Spit XVI, Typhoon, 109K ect ect ect...

There is no reason to keep the XIV perked. None. If it would truly be such an awesome dominating machine, the K/D would reflect it. It really is that easy.

Krusty · « **Reply #44 on:** February 13, 2008, 04:07:12 PM »

No, it's not.

Karnak and Kev are calling the symptom the disease. Cause and effect. They're listing one of the effects, not the cause.

The reason the CHOG was used so extensively was the ease with which folks could get kills. The power, performance, firepower, and all around capability of the plane itself lead to 20% use. The use was just an effect, the cause was the stats of the plane itself.

The Spit14 has never been unperked, ever, so you can't use the "wild and free" stats to relate directly to its capabilities, as it's never been "free-range" (so to speak).

The lack of use is just one effect from several causes. It is parallel to the perk status, not directly linked to it. Hence why he's putting the cart before the horse. The performance is not the sole indicator of use (as he's implying -- his argument is that it's not used so it must not be a very good plane, why perk it?). Among other things are the plane's name, reputation, word of mouth, the perk price itself drives away 90% of most pilots (it worked for the chog!!!!), and the availability of "almost as good" options that are perk free lead it to be glossed over. All of these causes lead to the effect of "low player use" -- and are not directly tied at all to the reason it's perked.

Aside from a few folks that advocate removing ALL perks, you can't unperk the spit14 without unperking the f4u4, chog, or the tempest.

And yes, I've flown it enough to know that it's worth the perk, which is a measely 15-16 perks right about now.

EDIT:

P.S. It was perked by HTC the second it came out. Thus it was NOT perked because of player use. It was given said perk before any use. HTC perked it before even seeing how "popular" it would be, so you probably can't claim player use (kills/deaths) is the reason to unperk it.