Keeping UberPlanes In Check

[Minotaur]

LOL  

For the record.  IMO the F4U-1C is not UBER, but no one will contest that it does very well, no matter the pilot.  I last time I checked it still leads A2A and pretty much still leads A2G.  Both by a noticable margin.

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

Funked;

I like your idea and have thought of suggesting it in the past.  But like Torque describes, "How do you define the criteria?".  I agree, the only way this can be done is for it to be totally dynamic within the game.

A simple algorithym that calculates each planes rating dynamically.  If the plane is doing well with in the game, it gets a lower rating and vice versa.  So currently the F4U-1C would have the lowest rating and say the Typhoon would have the highest. (Kind of reminds me of an on-line RPG set in the local of Brittannia)

Is this fair to players who like to fly the F4U-1C?  Not really...  To those that fly the Typhoon?  Not really...   However; it would have the effect of evening out scores and I assume this is what you would like to see.  

More importantly, IMO it will become a hotly contested and never ending debate. It would be very similiar to what exists now, but that debate could really turn ugly!  


------------------
Mino
The Wrecking Crew

[Gorf]

Well my 2 cents,

As new planes come into beeing some will be labeled uber planes and some won't.  In WB the SPit XIV and F4U-4 and Dora are Flown like mad in the later time set because the are all viewed as the UBER and in some ways they are, powerful motors, heavy firepower,etc..  

I think it would great to have planes appear in the arean that were produced and in active units in WWII.  Ex. F8F, F7F, TA152, etc..  I fell that all planes that appeared in WWII should be considered, even if it did not see action.  Of course some everybody would fly them as soon as it came out but then the pilots would slowly migrate back to there old faithful.  The good pilots would fly everything and the pilots that are just out to make everybody think that they are actually good pilots fly the Planes labeled as the Ubers.

THE POINT, its the pilot not the plane that makes it.  2 cases

I fly both AH and WB because I am a WWII aviation looney.  About a year ago when the rolling plane set begain,  There was a situation the proved it was the pilot.  The Pilots call sign was BBGUN and he was flying around in a VAL (jap dive bomber) with Doras and SPit 14s flyring around and the dude took out 8 planes before he ditched(not shot down)

Case 2,
In WB the KI43 is "supposedly outclassed" by later year planes.  In the late years I fly the KI-43..  I get no bigger joy then waxing a Dora, or a Spitxiv, or a F4U4 in my ancient Ki-43.  I get my best kill ration with this plane 2 to 1 in early years.. 4/5 to 1 in later years.  My longest streak is 28 kills in a Ki43.  I am not the hottest pilot but I can hold my own.  Ans as for a KI43 agaianst a Bearcat,  bring it on.  I get u low and slow.. your toast!

ANd as for this big FEAR of UBER PLANES.. well keep that mentatlity up and you will get your A#%# kicked.  Look at it as a challange.. you will WIN.

SO, I say BRING on whatever!  Uber..no uber, either way I will fly them all

GORF

[wells]

I like the popularity one Funked, seems really simple too!  Basing score on what everyone else has done with the plane is silly, IMO.  Likewise, trying to come up with criteria for how easy it is to kill with a given plane is very difficult.  Will it help?  Dunno...I guess it would show how many people really care about score!  

[tshred]

The a/c with the most alt and or friends is the uber a/c. None of them scare me unless the have alt and freinds. But I do think the F4U-1C still needs to go.

ts

[Skorpyon]

Uber, Shmuber.... let's not mince words.. usually this reference is in regards to the 1-C, and I agree with both sides.  Yes, Torque, it takes a very skilled pilot to fly the hawg effectively, considering its many shortcomings.  My only question, which I have asked several times with only one possibly adequate answer, is this..... are the guns on the C hawg modeled accurately to its real life counter part?  Were the 20mm cannons on the hawg that vastly superior to the same number of cannons of a different type that was on a LW or Japanese plane?  If so, what is the difference?  Lacking a concrete explanation of how the real life versions of this armament configuration could be so vastly superior, the rational conclusion is that the guns are over modeled.  Not the plane... just the guns.  The only rational attempt at an explanation that didn't involve the huffing and puffing of chests and the veiled insinuations back and forth came from indian, who claimed that the hawg's cannons had a higher rate of fire than comparable weapons in axis A/C.  Can anyone publish actual stats to verify this?  There seems to be no shortage of stats (stats, shmats) on all sorts of useless topics, but no one as yet has shown any documented reason the hawgs cannons should be more lethal than the same number of cannons on any other plane.  Come on everyone, let's quit with the uber plane, lousy pilots vs. God's gift to aviation pissing contest and deal in facts... Oh, and btw Torque... drive a tank more often.. it was quite satisfying knowing my shells had the same oomph as your shells the other night, especially when after the dust cleared I was still alive... twice.. and you weren't.    

------------------
   
Skorpyon
I/JG2 ~Richthofen~
"Feel the Sting......"



[This message has been edited by Skorpyon (edited 05-02-2000).]

[funked]

Yeah forget the multiplier based on score.  

The multiplier based on popularity is better.

Even though I think Pongo's prediction's WON'T happen they sure COULD happen and that would screw up the idea.

Anyways, do the multiplier based on popularity and then we don't have to deal with the "Is it the pilot or the plane?" argument.

[StSanta]

With regards to "it's the pilot, not the plane", it is certainly a valid point.

However, when comparing planes, one should assume that the pilots are as skilled in their respective planes, and one should take them to a neutral alt - that is, the alt where both perform as equally as possible. In the case of aircraft where an alt advantage is almost a prerequisite for attack, it should be granted one (albeit as small as possible.

Aircraft with similar characteristics, such as the 51 and F4U, could start off with co alt.

No matter what you say, I bet I can shoot down Chuck Yeager when he flies a WWI aircraft, while I mooch around in my Frogfoot. He is clearly the superior fighter,  but the skill multiplier factor must be extremely high to to compensate.

Therefore, I suggest a simple equation that can probably be improved by many of you.

Total Lethality = aircraft multiplier * skill multiplier

In the Yeager vs Santa case, my TL would be say 100*1, a total of 100. Yeager's would be say 1*50, making him 50 times as good as me, which I quite frankly do not think he is. Also, the 100 number for the Frogfoot is probably way low.

In this case, I'd kill him twice for every time he kills me.

So, the original statement is true, but only within certain limits.

Comments, anyone?


------------------
--
StSanta
II/JG2

[popeye]

I really don't think a score multiplier will have much effect on which planes get used the most.  Most guys are going to fly whatever they like, for a lot of reasons other than score -- historic interest, most effective killer, looks cool, squad affiliation, need for variety, etc, etc.

As Wells pointed out, a score multiplier WILL show who cares most about score.

Pyro hinted that they have some plan for making early war planes competitive.  I'm very interested to hear the details.

popeye

[eskimo]

Here is a different approach to balancing the plane set:
All planes are ranked 1 of 3 ways:

+ plane (has a good kill ratio)
- plane (does poorly)
neutral plane (average)

All pilots must spend as much time in "- planes" as they do in "+ planes".  Want to fly the F4U-1C?  You can take off as long as you have at least 1 second more flight time in a lame duck (F4U-1D, 109F-4, Buffalo, etc.)  
If you had 1 second more in a + than in a -, and then you were to then fly a 10 minute F4U1-C sortie, you would then need to spend 10 minutes or more in a - plane before you could go uber (+) again (or even fly a neutral plane).  
If you always fly planes that are ranked as average, the system will not effect you.
This would force everyone to not spend all of thier time in uberplanes, regardless of whether or not they gave a darn about scores.
It would also cut the number of uberplanes in the sky by at least 1/2.
Most importantly, new guys would stand a better chance against more experienced pilots.

For those who say that there is no such thing as an uberplane; Why do you fly the plane that is refered to as uber?  If they are all the same, why don't you try something else?  I don't mean this as a bash.  I am sure that most guys who fly the F4U-1C could kick my but 1 V 1, F4U-1C vs. F4U-1C.  I would just like to fly without billions of 20mm shells and hundreds of 450 mph blue streaks wizzing everywhere!

eskimo