Aircraft performance and ENY

[Anaxogoras]

The last list I posted was just an experiment, saxman.  Fwiw, the intention of these ratings is to reflect the ability of our aircraft in an arena setting, and for that the Tempest might be superior.  Otherwise I wouldn't be weighting speed at sea level so much, either.

I think there's a bug in the acceleration category.  The Hurri IIC and A6M would do much better if I only used acceleration up to 250mph.

[Lusche]

For that matter, the Tempest doesn't belong at the top of the list. She's fast, yes, but maneuverability is average at best and performance begins to drop off significantly with altitude. 1v1 and assuming equal pilots and starting positions the F4U-4 will win about 90% of engagements between the two unless the Tempest turns tail and runs away (which is usually what happens).

But that's the reality of MA combat, and that's what's makin the Tempest so dangerous: The ability to engage & disengage at will combined with massive firepower.
In a pure duel, F4U4 would rule, but the Tempest pilot doesn't have to play the F4U-4's game. Hence the Tempests much higher perk price
In a DA ranking, I would place the -4 above the Tempest, but not in a MA list.

If you look at the some of their parts, I would HARDLY rate the 110G over ANY F4U (much less the 109K-4, P-51D, any Jug, the N1K2, etc. etc. etc.) in terms of overall combat capability. It's a good gun platform and strike craft, and if someone isn't paying attention she can give you a nasty surprise, but the 110 is THOROUGHLY out-classed as an air-to-air combatant.

But Axas list is envisioned as being a base to compute ENY. ENY has to take lot more ino consideration than pure air combat performance. Again, imortance for and impact on gameplay is playing a huge role.

[Bronk]

Otherwise I wouldn't be weighting speed at sea level so much, either.

Hmm you'd need different eny for each side. Since rooks are at 1000k, bishies flying the horde noe and nits who couldn't find their arse with a map.
 

[442w30]

Why no 262 or 163?  Do they skew the data that much?  Did you remove them from your averages?

Yes.  Looking at just top speed; adding both of them would make the difference between the propeller driven a/c's top speed negligible. 

[Steve]

Hmm you'd need different eny for each side. Since rooks are at 1000k, bishies flying the horde noe and nits who couldn't find their arse with a map.
 

I fly nit some.  The only arses I'm looking for are rooks and bish.  I do just fine finding them.   

[moot]

The planes' effective performance are more than the sum of their many attributes. I bet anyone 10$ that they never could come up with a numbers based system that beats "subjective" human attribution of ENY.  Everything else being equal, the human hunch-based system will win every time.

[Anaxogoras]

Here's the deal, no matter what you do with the modifiers, the one-trick wonders are never going to do well with the scheme I'm presenting here.  Most of all, I'm talking about the A6M and Hurri IIC.  Both of these aircraft make a living scavenging off the enemy aircraft their faster countrymen force into a defensive turn.  Even if I change the acceleration figure to only 150-250mph, these aircraft still do not match up well against the rest.

Even the 110G, besides being off the chart in firepower, has good energy retention, turns surprisingly well, and carries lots of ordinance.  That's enough to move it up the list with the right modifiers.  To move the Hurri and A6M up in the list, I would have to weight turn rate and turn radius and almost nothing else.

[Anaxogoras]

The planes' effective performance are more than the sum of their many attributes. I bet anyone 10$ that they never could come up with a numbers based system that beats "subjective" human attribution of ENY.  Everything else being equal, the human hunch-based system will win every time.

Just like the 5 ENY of the Ta-152, eh?

[442w30]

One thing I notice is that you seem to be rating on a linear system.  Once top speed drops to a certain point turning and firepower count for more than speed.  I expect other traits will also fallow a curve as well.

One of the statistical issues with this is that some categories are rated more than once.  Top speed has three categories, ASL, <10k, >10k.  So out of 24 categories it represents 12.5% of the total (raw) result.  Of course if it gets distilled down to just Top Speed, then the P47N would be the top of the heap and this is meant to be for MA play, not FSO play. Turning also has 3 categories.  Gun package has more than that, lethality, firing time, and muzzle velocity; and all three are for primary and secondary guns, 25% of the raw score.

Yes Karnak all of these scores are on a curve. The Z-Score curve is a bell curve.  -2.00 = a score that is just over 2% better than all the rest of the POSSIBLE scores. Possible not necessarily meaning exisiting.  -1 = better than just under 16%, 0.00 = right at 50%, 1.00 = better than just over 84%, 2.00 = better than just over 97%. So you see (or maybe not) that the better or worse a score is, the further up the curve it is and in reality the more impressive it is.  

Because of the nature of Z-Scores and the bell curve, a 2.00 in one category is the SAME as a 2.00 in another, or any other like number.  Z-Scores turn apples and oranges comparisons into Apples to apples.  That is true of the raw z-scores of course. Adding any modifiers like Anax has done changes that to some extent, but only in so far as it makes the new ratings tailored to a specific subject, in this case MA A2A.  Naturally it goes without saying that those modifiers are subjective.  

[thrila]

you must take into consideration that it's often only a couple of factors that make a plane successful/popular i.e

good guns + good turner = win
good guns + fast = win
fast + good turner = win
good guns + lot of ammo = win

your new lists suggests the mossie better than the tiffie? not a chance.

Not that i agree with ENY by numbers, but if i a plane excells at 1 or more categories perhaps a multiplier should be applied.

[442w30]

P-38L..109K4...Ki-84


I think the list's clearly show that the result is not better in any way than what we have now. Still inconsistancoes, and it's still highly debatable. The individual category rankings are quite objective, but the assigned weight is purely subjective.

No one would be delighted more than old Lusche to have a trulyy objective, rational, easy computable system... but I can't see how that could be done.

Unfortunately you are probably correct ...  What I do think this can be used for best, is for the individual to figure out certain things.  An example: Someone who struggles with gunnery and need guns that shoot for a long time, require less lead. They also are much better when in a turn fight than when BnZing. They would put in modifiers to emphasize what they need from the a/c, and de-emphasize what is moot for them.  The result, all things being equal, would be the rides that would suit them best.  I have used a trimmed down version of this for comparing my FSO ride vs the expected opponents rides to figure out where we have a usable advantage.  A real advantage not an opinion based advantage.  Sometimes you are surprised by how little a difference really is.  Or how large it is!  

[Anaxogoras]

your new lists suggests the mossie better than the tiffie? not a chance.

Yes, that was with a modification to emphasize the ability to gun down a town.

This list is maybe the best yet?

Tempest   0.77
F4U-4   0.67
Spit XIV   0.63
Spit XVI   0.63
F4U-1C   0.52
LA7   0.40
F4U-1A   0.39
Spit VIII   0.39
P47N   0.38
P38L   0.36
F4U-1D   0.32
190D-9   0.28
KI84   0.27
P51D   0.27
109 K-4   0.26
P51B   0.26
P47D-40   0.23
F4U-1   0.22
N1K2   0.21
P38J   0.21
TA152   0.21
Typhoon   0.21
110 G   0.20
Spit IX   0.16
109 G-14   0.15
190A-8   0.15
LA5   0.15
Mossie   0.14
P47D-25   0.14
P47D-11   0.13
F6F   0.10
190A-5   0.06
YAK 9U   0.06
109 G-2   0.01
C205   0.00
109 F-4   -0.01
Spit V   -0.01
109 G-6   -0.10
P38G   -0.10
Seafire IIC   -0.11
190F-8   -0.13
Hurri IIC   -0.17
YAK 9T   -0.21
KI61   -0.24
P-39Q   -0.29
P40E   -0.31
C202   -0.34
FM2   -0.34
P-39D   -0.45
A6M5   -0.54
110 C   -0.56
Spit I   -0.64
F4F   -0.66
Hurri IID   -0.75
109 E-4   -0.81
Hurri I   -0.84
A6M2   -0.94
P40B   -0.96

[Lusche]

Not an actual new ENY proposal, just for discussion.. how about this:



If interested, I can post the formula which was used to devise the "new " ENY values.

[Bronk]

Nice list lusche only thing is why the jump of "5". Eny IMO should be more progressive and not as "notchy" as a 5 point jump.

[moot]

Just like the 5 ENY of the Ta-152, eh?

I didn't say HTC were a perfect model of inerrant attention to keeping the ENY values up to date..  If they were, though, no number crunching could compare.