Ta152 ENY

[EskimoJoe]

Oh alright, 10ENY would be fine 

[moot]

Where?   I didn't say that you said it, I said you have to assume it (to rationalize your argument).

Secondly, moot, I've seen you do this before... "wrong" with no argument.  What gives?  As if your case is so strong that you don't have to argue for it?

Convoluted arguments as always. The thread is about the 152's eny.  It doesn't deserve 5, I'd say 12-13 tops, 10 or so minimum.  What do you say?

[Anaxogoras]

On this point we are in agreement.  The 152's ENY is way too low.  Did HTC give it an ENY of 5 because so few 152s saw combat?

[moot]

Probably because they followed the same absolute measure I hinted at, rather than the effective average exploitation the average player makes of the full potential.  <--gotta be drunk to say that seriously and mean it.
And it was introduced in AH1, where it was a bit more effective than it is now.  I could match N1Ks' and Spit9s' first one or two turns/reverses with it.

[Kev367th]

On this point we are in agreement.  The 152's ENY is way too low.  Did HTC give it an ENY of 5 because so few 152s saw combat?

ENY values no longer mean what they were originally intended for.

It is now used to limit planes based on player numbers. Obviously HT feels that like the XVI, La7, Me262 etc etc it needs an ENY of 5.

Used to be ENY 5 planes were rare.

 

[Ghastly]

I thought the question was whether the 47N was a better aircraft than the 51D for the arena, not whether it was good at 35k ft.  Same reasoning for the 152 vs the 190D-9?  Normally I don't praise majority opinion, but for the purpose of determining the best arena aircraft, the public has spoken.  I think the biggest weakness in your argument is that you have to assume that "most players" are less intelligent than they really are, because even mediocre pilots can figure out which aircraft perform the best with a little time.

I disagree - mediocre pilots rarely realize how to take any aircraft to anywhere near it's full potential, so they essentially figure out which aircraft are easiest for a mediocre pilot to get the most out of. This is a very different thing.

<S>

[BnZ]

I'd say the P-47N and the P-51 are about equal. One must remember that the N-Jug only performs with the Pony at low altitudes for 5 minutes...without WEP it is signifigantly less in all performance parameters. I'd say the Pony is the better pure BnZer, because it does have an edge in non-WEP performance and zoom climb. I'd say the P-47 is just plain better as a down-and-dirty knifefighter, and its 8 guns make it deadlier. But really, I hate to cite the P-47's superiority as an angles fighter over the P-51, because this is no evidence of anything other than just how badly the AHII Pony is modeled compared to it's historical performance.

As for 152...I'd say down low it seems to be between the Dora and A5 on the performance/maneuverability curve, but lacking the roll rate and pleasant steadieness as a gun platform possessed by the latter two.

[Anaxogoras]

I disagree - mediocre pilots rarely realize how to take any aircraft to anywhere near it's full potential, so they essentially figure out which aircraft are easiest for a mediocre pilot to get the most out of. This is a very different thing.

<S>

If you could give some examples of aircraft that are overlooked, it would be a good place to start.  If I were taking your side of the argument, (we already have the 152 and 47N) I would add the 109K-4 and Yak-9U as aircraft that potentially dominate the arena but require a skilled pilot.

Now, to take my own side again, I have to give reasons for why even in the hands of a skilled pilot, these aircraft fall short of dominance, and most of all when matched up against the traditional "best aircraft," e.g. Spit16, La-7, P-51D, N1K.  These are the 4 most popular aircraft, and I have said that likely makes them the best arena aircraft.

First, I will grant that all of these popular aircraft are easier to fly than the non-traditional candidates listed above.  Still, it is easy to tell when a great pilot is in a Spit16 vs. a point-and-shoot turn-in-the-horizontal type.

Second, any comparisons for "best arena aircraft" should assume altitudes below 20k ft.

The easiest one to discount as "best arena aircraft" is the 109K-4 because of its heavy controls in a dive.  It may be the only major weakness it has, but it's a huge limitation nonetheless.

The 152 has good performance and firepower, but below 20k feet it is not superlative.  Many aircraft run it down, or out-turn it, or out-roll it, or out-accelerate it.  Still, it performs well enough in these areas to be very competitive, but success in it requires strong SA, which is universal to all aircraft and not a kind of knowledge or know-how about that aircraft in particular.  Unlike the 109K-4 with its monster acceleration and high-speed, the 152 does not have an ace-in-the-hole to get out a jam.

The Yak-9U is limited by its ammunition clip and short range.  Good pilots will get in close and some can squeeze 6-7 kills out of it (I can't), but those same pilots could get twice as many kills if the Yak-9U had the firepower and ammunition clip of its cousin the La-7.

Lastly, 47N might be the best of all these 2nd tier aircraft.  I've seen some great pilots who can knife-fight in the vertical with the best of them in the 47N.  It has great range, great firepower, great low speed handling for making those high-aoa shots when the bandit least expects it.  What the 47N lacks, and this was pointed out above, is a good amount of WEP.  Without WEP, the 47N is actually slower than its D model brothers, and tops out at a paltry 328mph at sea level.  Perhaps it would be fair to say that the 47N can be the best arena aircraft for 5 minutes.

Well, that's my case.  For every aircraft here I have pointed to specific weaknesses that a great pilot cannot overcome, and so they cannot be the best arena aircraft.  I probably didn't convince anyone, but it's always worth trying.

[TonyJoey]

*Puts on turban*, preparing to hijack the thread . Speaking of ENY do you think the f4f and the K4's ENY should be the same...I didn't think so...so FIX IT!

[Ghastly]

I'd put forth that the F4U-1A in the hands of a skilled pilot is a "better" plane than the 4 you put out, simply because it can counter almost every other plane's strength with either greater speed, better high speed maneuverability or better low speed handling - depending upon the weakness of the other aircraft. I'd argue that the Yak is a better plane as well for the same reason, but again, it takes a little more skill to get the most out of it.

I don't think the average pilot picks the plane(s) that performs best - I think he picks the planes that performs best given his/her skill level.  Which is a horse of a different color.  For this reason, I don't think that popularity necessarily equates to overall performance, as long as we have a significant percentage of newer players who aren't yet "experten". I'll use my step-son as an example, he started out in the P51 (it was a plane he'd heard of before) and switched to the Spit 9 because he could found that he could win turn fights in it.  There are at least a dozen planes that outperform the Spit 9 - including other Spits - but it was the plane that gave him the "best" combination of handling, speed, lethality, and maneuverability at his level of expertise. Using him as a sample set, it would be the most popular plane in the game. 

But it would hardly be likely to be the best for a more skilled pilot.  Which is the point I'm making.

Determining which plane is "best" is a bugaboo anyway, because so much of it comes down to evaluating which factors play to your particular fighting and defense styles.  A good example of this is the KI-84.  It's a hard plane to handle when it's in the hands of a skilled pilot - but for me, the inability to use a high speed dive without shedding the elevator turns it into a death trap - for me.  I've lost more battles in them to overspeeding and having to rtb than I've lost to other players shooting me down. 

<S>

[spit16nooby]

I think what the pilots wants most in a plane is what determines what plane he chooses.  Your mindset also plays a part in this.  When I first started I had the mindset that I'm going to dominate in something other than a 5 Eny plane.  Thus I started with planes like the 109g-2, 109k-4, p-38L, and 190d-9.  I found out that my 2 favorite qualities in a plane were speed and climb, which knocks out the 109g-2(lack of speed) and the p-38(lack of speed also).  I then was down to the 190 and the 109.  I found myself getting more kills in the 190 and started to lean towards it until i found that you had only roll to get you out of tight situations.  I then found myself more and more in the 109k-4 with its higher climb and only barely lacking of speed along with better maneuverability a better trade for the 190's roll.  I now fly almost solely the 109 but still sometimes visit the 190 for fun.

[Anaxogoras]

Did you know that the 109K-4 is faster than the 190D-9 at most altitudes except for below 5k ft?

[toetoe31]

have you ever acually gotten the chance to fly the 152 at 35k? you never get other enemy planes that high anyways

[Lusche]

have you ever acually gotten the chance to fly the 152 at 35k? you never get other enemy planes that high anyways

Let's say: rarely.
My highest actual dogfight in a started around 32k (of course we ended up the deck, but it took us a long time to reach it ). The highest altitude so far reached in combat in a 152 was 42k, when I tried to climb above an extremely high HQ mission with escorts in the >35k range

[Saurdaukar]

It doesn't deserve an ENY of 5.  The P51D merits a lower ENY than it, and is at 8.  The 152's ENY should be around 10 or so.

+1.  Its a garbage airplane.  Definitely not worth a 5 ENY rating.