Myth: SpitXVI is "slow"

[Karnak]

So that we can stop debating and gnashing teeth over it?   Truly, no one is convinced when an artificial term like "unbalancing" is left purposely ambiguous.  We're not talking about "love" or "good" or other terms that are part of the natural history of our species.

Moreover, in regards to artificial terms, if I can't interpret a consistent meaning from their use, then the speaker doesn't know what they mean, either.

Usage stats are a pretty good way to tell if something is seriously imbalanced and needs to be controled.  As has been pointed out repeatedly, the Spit XVI doesn't have those stats. It is obviously a very, very good fighter and nobody has ever argued otherwise, but it is not dominating the MA.

[Anaxogoras]

But we're going in circles again.  By this definition, if any plane were close to being unbalancing, even if we admit that none are unbalancing right now, then it would be the P-51D, which is absurd.

[grizz441]

Usage stats are a pretty good way to tell if something is seriously imbalanced and needs to be controled.  As has been pointed out repeatedly, the Spit XVI doesn't have those stats. It is obviously a very, very good fighter and nobody has ever argued otherwise, but it is not dominating the MA.

Exactly. 

Karnak, BnZ, here is where the gap lies between your argument.  BnZ says the potential of the Spit16 COULD allow it to dominate the MA.  Which is true potentially.  Karnak says it is NOT dominating the MA so no change is needed.  You guys are actually really close to being in agreeance.

[BnZs]

Where have I lied? I have not, unless you count the occasional gaff as a lie. I have absolutely no responsibility to be civil to someone who accuses me of being a liar out of the blue.

You are so convinced that only you have supplied data, but you reject all data that doesn't support your conclusion as invalid, thus permitting you to lie and claim nobody else has submitted data.

I have supplied data about relative performance. You have supplied data about usage and k/d stats. I have not denied that you supplied the data, I have merely pointed out that this data is irrelevant. The P-38J conundrum, need I remind you?

Also, I haven't used the "It is a 1943 fighter" as an argument for many years, so you are lying about that too.

Others have been using that very argument in this very thread. If I somewhere mistakenly attributed it to you, then it was just that, a mistake.

Also I note that you have already revealed your next crusade should you get the Spitfire XVI perked, and that is the La-7.  I imagine the Spitfire VIII would follow that.

I have thought that the La7 needs a light perk price on the basis of performance for longer than the I have said the SpitXVI needs a perk price. As I say, I used to be ignorant of the XVI's relative performance against the plane set as a whole. Looking at the big picture, I'd say the XVI has more impact on the viability various fighters in the MA than the La7, so I think it actually needs a perk price worse. I have already clearly outlined why the SpitVIII, although very, very, very good, has enough shortcomings relative the SpitXVI to justify its unperked status. You may remember I argued at length with Krusty regarding this very fact. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume this statement was the product of momentary confusion and not a black and deliberate lie.

[Guppy35]

And I fly a bloody A5 around quite abit when I could just as easily fly a Dora, but what is your point? Unperk the C-Hog and it will be majority of Corsairs. Mind you, its formidable gun package is *not* enough to justify perking it when other rides sport quad cannons, so the *only* reason left is to force people into other varieties of Hog.

Ahh, so thats it   The clipped wing Spit roll rate negates one of the advantages of the 190 series.  This of course was why they clipped the wing in the first place, to help it roll with the 190.

Why don't you throw your entire list of perk birds here too so we can see it all in the context of your larger plan.  Might as well see what planes guys could fly without perks first.  Looks like your list includes more then the Spit 16

As for the Spit VIII.  When I fly a Spit, that's the one I prefer.  I think it's a better bird then the 16.  I also believe given pilots of equal ability the VIII will beat the 16  90 percent of the time.

[Anaxogoras]

As for the Spit VIII.  When I fly a Spit, that's the one I prefer.  I think it's a better bird then the 16.  I also believe given pilots of equal ability the VIII will beat the 16  90 percent of the time.

Same goes for

P-51B vs P-51D
190A-5 vs 190A-8
F4U-1A vs F4U-1D
109G-2 vs 109G-6
P-47D-11 vs P-47D-25

[BnZs]

La7 is faster under 20k.

The Spit 16 does roll better.

The Spit 16 outclimbs the La7 with wep but w/o wep both have a near identical climb under 8k.

La7 out accelerates the spit 16.

From 100-250mph their accelerations are practically identical.

With no flaps the Spit 16 does out turn the La7 but it is somewhat close "ish".  Similar to a Spit 16 vs. a Niki.

Mosq's Data
No flaps radius

Spit16 590.2
La7     616

No flaps turn rate

Spit16 22.4 dps
La7     20.8 dps

2dps per is a pretty decent lead in rate.

Full flaps their turn rates are pretty much identical.

With a slight edge still going to the Spit. According to Mosq's data the Spit will still complete a full turn
~3 seconds before the La7 will, sustained. That is not an entirely insignificant edge. Getting into subjective handling is dangerous, but I'd say the Spit16 is easier and more stable "riding the edge" wouldn't you? Slots are problematic.

Looks to me like a very close match up with a huge edge to the La7 because of speed.  Because of that speed the La7 gets to dictate the fight.  So the La7 pilot not only can engage and disengage at will but if they so choose the La7 can drop flaps and stall fight 'em.

How exactly is that inferior in every way?  Sounds to me like the La7 has a pretty big edge.

I said inferior in every way except top speed. It turns that the La7 is also identical in low end, and superior in top end acceleration. Mea culpa. I think it is rather dangerous to discount roll rate, climb rate, Hispanos, and yes, the Spit's slight edge in turning, which IMO is not as slight in reality as it appears on paper.

And I agree that I would rather see a Spit 16's than La7's.  The typical dweeb 16 pilot tends to fight it out.  I also agree that the La7 should have a light perk (2-3 perks) for the 3 gun package.

Actually, you've made quite the good argument for assigning the La7 a perk price also. Very nice.

[BnZs]

Ahh, so thats it   The clipped wing Spit roll rate negates one of the advantages of the 190 series.  This of course was why they clipped the wing in the first place, to help it roll with the 190.

Once again, I must ask you, in an airplane blessed with top of the line turn, top of the line climb, top of the line acceleration, why must you also demand the blessing of top-of-the-line roll rate? Seems a bit greedy to me. No, more than a bit.

[BnZs]

Exactly. 

Karnak, BnZ, here is where the gap lies between your argument.  BnZ says the potential of the Spit16 COULD allow it to dominate the MA.  Which is true potentially.  Karnak says it is NOT dominating the MA so no change is needed.  You guys are actually really close to being in agreeance.

I don't think any plane could "dominate" the MA to the extent some are requiring as a prerequisite for perkage, even many of the currently perked rides, if any at all. There are too many different kinds of fighters now, and every one of them has some loyal following that will fly them, hell or high water.

[grizz441]

I don't think any plane could "dominate" the MA to the extent some are requiring as a prerequisite for perkage, even many of the currently perked rides, if any at all. There are too many different kinds of fighters now, and every one of them has some loyal following that will fly them, hell or high water.

Yeah, "dominate" is a subjective word when referring to MA performance.  Do you see a Spit16 problem in the MA though?  Or do you just think its general performance warrants a small perk tag?

Personally I see no spit16 problem and while I could see it having a light perk tag based on its performance characteristics, I don't think it's necessary nor would it change much.  It's right on the borderline, could go either way, I just don't think it matters enough since it by no means is a problem in the MA.

[BnZs]

Yeah, "dominate" is a subjective word when referring to MA performance.  Do you see a Spit16 problem in the MA though?  Or do you just think its general performance warrants a small perk tag?

Personally I see no spit16 problem and while I could see it having a light perk tag based on its performance characteristics, I don't think it's necessary nor would it change much.  It's right on the borderline, could go either way, I just don't think it matters enough since it by no means is a problem in the MA.

It looks to me like every fighter plane in the set has a tiny slice of the pie, as I'd expect with there being what, 60 different kinds of fighter to choose from? I think if perkage is based on the prospect of one fighter claiming 1/5th of the pie or so, then might as well unperk 'em all, it ain't gonna happen, not with the number of models we have. Not even the Me-262 or Tempest, IMHO.

EDIT: I realize that I didn't answer your question. Yes, I think a certain level of relative performance merits a perk tag, even if was only 1% of sorties.

[SlapShot]

Truly, no one is convinced when an artificial term like "unbalancing" is left purposely ambiguous.

It is more than likely left ambiguous so that HTC can implement ENY as they see fit without painting themselves into a corner and not giving "twits with a cause" any foothold to argue with what HTC deems necessary and not necessary.

All this gnashing of teeth on the BBS about perk this and perk that means doodily squat. One can argue all they want on this BBS, but if one has not taken the time to personally present valid and convincing data to HT and Pyro, and in a manner that does not reflect the stamping of feet by a child who demands something ... you might get somewhere.

I don't know HT or Pyro on a personal level, but I have been to enough cons and spoken to/challenged them at length on a few things ... and the one thing that I have learned, the "squeaky wheel" does not get the grease ... the louder the squeak, the less they hear ... it's the "smart wheel" that will get the grease, or a chance to get greased ... and all these perk the Spit 16 threads seem to come across as a very large squeak.

[Kev367th]

BnZ - I seem to remember that toward the end the old Spit Vc usage actually out-stripped the IX usage. Once the masses realised that down low the uber-boost Vc was every bit as good as a IX, but with the Vc having a superior turn.
Kinda wish we had kept it now.

CHog - could it be it remains perked for one reason? Unperk it and thats about all you would see off CVs? Just a thought.

[whels]

BnZ - I seem to remember that toward the end the old Spit Vc usage actually out-stripped the IX usage. Once the masses realised that down low the uber-boost Vc was every bit as good as a IX, but with the Vc having a superior turn.
Kinda wish we had kept it now.

CHog - could it be it remains perked for one reason? Unperk it and thats about all you would see off CVs? Just a thought.

Kev post less FLY MORE   good too see u .

whels

[Guppy35]

Once again, I must ask you, in an airplane blessed with top of the line turn, top of the line climb, top of the line acceleration, why must you also demand the blessing of top-of-the-line roll rate? Seems a bit greedy to me. No, more than a bit.

So we're back to the clipped wing bit.  So in essence what you are really asking for is HTC to redo the Spit LF16E as a full span wing Spitfire LFIXE.  Same exact bird but the wings aren't clipped. 

If that's what this is really all about, then go for it.

And remember I fly the 38G in latewar and enjoy fighting Spit 16s.  I'm not demanding anything for my bird of choice.  I just don't see any issue with the Spit 16.  In essence you are demanding that they give you back more of an edge to your A5 by not having a Spit that can roll with it as well.  So how bout a clipped LFVb instead?  They started clipping the wings on Spits in 42, again to counter the roll rate of the 190 so why not