Remove Perks from C-Hog

[mtnman]

I like the current perk set-up for the hogs.  I think it keeps the usage about right, the cost mirrors the effect the cannons have, but is still cheap enough to amke it available to pretty much anyone who wants to fly it.

When I was a wet-behind-the-ears hog pilot I thought the C-Hog was the best of the lot.  I honestly couldn't understand why any of the hogs were perked, and saw very little reason why the -4 was perked as high as it is.  The -4 perk cost actually looked like a waste of perks for a plane I stood little chance of returning to the runway.

Now, with a little experience I have to say I agree with the perk costs as they stand, and don't want to see them changed.

[Anaxogoras]

The whole point of ENY is to maintain game balance. Weren't there only 200 C-Hogs built? The current system works just right in respect to the F4U family IMO.

Yup, about the same number as La-7s with 3x20mm cannon, and wayyyy more than the number of Ta-152s that saw combat.  ENY has nothing to do with historical production numbers.

[Vudak]

How often do you guys see a -1, -1A, or -1D in furball lake?

How often do you see a -1C, or -4?

Leave it as is...

[Anaxogoras]

How often do you guys see a -1, -1A, or -1D in furball lake?

How often do you see a -1C, or -4?

Leave it as is...

Right, I agree with your point, but the principle you're advocating here is not Perking.  There has to be a difference between personal preferences and opinions, and remaining consistent within the law.  It's only on the basis of the latter motivation that I would say "unperk the C-Hog."  Perks are not for encouraging the use of earlier, more-common variants, just look at the La-7.

Personally, I don't want to see the C-Hog unperked.  But from the perspective of how the ENY/Perk system is supposed to work by and large, the C-Hog no longer merits it.  I've been to furball lake, and the XVI is still the aircraft of choice.

[SmokinLoon]

The funny things is, the C-Hog is quite capable in just about any role.  BnZ, turn fighters, air to ground, bomber hunter, etc.

No other single engine aircraft can carry the ord nor firepower like the C-Hog.  It isnt slow, either.

If anything... perk it more.  The tiffy and Nik2 are not that far off, either.

[Westy]

"How much of it is due to the 20mm ammo? "

 A lot!  The large 1C ammo load gives a whole new meaning to the term
"spray and pray" and that is what every nob and dork will do with it.
 With .30 or .50 cals just a round or two hitting your target may get you
some kind of damage on the enemy but with the 20mm? One ding and
you probably caused a crippling wound. More than one and you have a
kill.

 

[Vudak]

Right, I agree with your point, but the principle you're advocating here is not Perking.  There has to be a difference between personal preferences and opinions, and remaining consistent within the law.  It's only on the basis of the latter motivation that I would say "unperk the C-Hog."  Perks are not for encouraging the use of earlier, more-common variants, just look at the La-7.

Personally, I don't want to see the C-Hog unperked.  But from the perspective of how the ENY/Perk system is supposed to work by and large, the C-Hog no longer merits it.  I've been to furball lake, and the XVI is still the aircraft of choice.

I wasn't around from before the C-Hog was perked, but every post I've seen detailing the time has led me to believe it was perked because it saw a massive, massive use.  To the point where that was all you'd see (exaggerated). 

Now, considering how many old hands talk about how the Corsair never used to be "uber" back then like it is today, this couldn't have been because the plane was "too great."

Further, just to put another thing in perspective...  With my style of fighting, I often get brief snapshots, and with the 50's, this often is not enough to knock the other guy out.  Many of my deaths are directly attributable to not killing quickly enough.  Give me four hizookas for free, and I wouldn't be surprised to see my k/d go from an average of 1.5-2 up to 4, or even 6.

I wouldn't be surprised to see similar results for other people.

[mtnman]

In the case of the LA-7 and the spit16, I don't think keeping consistency across the board is necessarily the best answer either. 

If we kept things totally consistent, only those with the skill required to earn perks would fly the perk planes.  The "beginners" would have to fly the lower-performance planes.

That sets up a possible "vets in uber-rides vs newbs in early rides" scenario, which wouldn't be very fair either.

I think it's an important game-leveler to have a few "uber" rides be free, when "consistancy" would mean perking them.  The LA-7 and Spit16 fit the bill perfectly, IMO.  Let 'em have a ride they can experience some success in, learn some basic skills in, but earn few perks in them, so they have an incentive to try some of the other planes as thier skill improves.

[Anaxogoras]

Vudak, XVI wasn't around when the C-Hog was free.

[Vudak]

In the case of the LA-7 and the spit16, I don't think keeping consistency across the board is necessarily the best answer either. 

If we kept things totally consistent, only those with the skill required to earn perks would fly the perk planes.  The "beginners" would have to fly the lower-performance planes.

That sets up a possible "vets in uber-rides vs newbs in early rides" scenario, which wouldn't be very fair either.

I think it's an important game-leveler to have a few "uber" rides be free, when "consistancy" would mean perking them.  The LA-7 and Spit16 fit the bill perfectly, IMO.  Let 'em have a ride they can experience some success in, learn some basic skills in, but earn few perks in them, so they have an incentive to try some of the other planes as thier skill improves.

Yeah, I agree completely.  This game is tough enough as is.

Vudak, XVI wasn't around when the C-Hog was free.

I don't understand why you think the XVI is such a problem.  I can think of perhaps five players that know what they're doing and consistently fly it.

[Anaxogoras]

I don't understand why you think the XVI is such a problem.  I can think of perhaps five players that know what they're doing and consistently fly it.

Why do you believe I think it's a problem?  What I do believe is that it's competitive with the C-Hog and prevents it from being too ubiquitous, as evidenced by the furball pond in the DA.

It's pretty humorous to me that we've come full circle in opinions depending on what is at stake.  When someone complains about the XVI or La-7 and says "perk them!" we all step up and tell them to stop whining, get some training, those two aircraft are not perk worthy, etc.  Now when someone says to unperk the C-Hog, we tell them there are already perk-worthy aircraft they can fly for free, i.e. the XVI and La-7.  Really, what kind of position can we stand firm on?

[Vudak]

Why do you believe I think it's a problem?  What I do believe is that it's competitive with the C-Hog and prevents it from being too ubiquitous, as evidenced by the furball pond in the DA.

Sorry, I think I might be confusing you with another player.  Which one's the Luftwaffe guy that's always upset about the XVI again?

It's pretty humorous to me that we've come full circle in opinions depending on what is at stake.  When someone complains about the XVI or La-7 and says "perk them!" we all step up and tell them to stop whining, get some training, those two aircraft are not perk worthy, etc.  Now when someone says to unperk the C-Hog, we tell them there are already perk-worthy aircraft they can fly for free, i.e. the XVI and La-7.  Really, what kind of position can we stand firm on?

As far as I can tell, the perk and ENY systems for that matter are just...  Weird.  14's perked*, 16's not, D Stangs low ENY, B Stangs relatively high ENY, etc.  So I'm not really sure that I can answer your question



*  (although perhaps with Krusty finding the error, they now deserve to be?  I don't know, but it'll be interesting to see that argument)

[BnZs]

I don't understand why you think the XVI is such a problem.  I can think of perhaps five players that know what they're doing and consistently fly it.

Are we assigning perk/ENY values based on aircraft performance or are we assigning them based on whether or not vets like that model?

[Anaxogoras]

Sorry, I think I might be confusing you with another player.  Which one's the Luftwaffe guy that's always upset about the XVI again?

Well, there was a time when I said the XVI deserved a small perk (like maybe 3-5) because its over all ability makes it competitive with some of our perk rides like the C-Hog.  Then some smart people here at the boards said they'd much rather see something unperked then perked: why take away a plane that's good for beginners?  "Ok," I thought, if two planes are about equal, then it shouldn't happen that one is perked and the other is not, so unperk the C-Hog.

Anyway, as best I can, I've always tried to present arguments and reasons here instead of the emotional rants you see sometimes for perking things that shoot you down.

As far as I can tell, the perk and ENY systems for that matter are just...  Weird.  14's perked*, 16's not, D Stangs low ENY, B Stangs relatively high ENY, etc.  So I'm not really sure that I can answer your question



*  (although perhaps with Krusty finding the error, they now deserve to be?  I don't know, but it'll be interesting to see that argument)

Hey, we agree there!  There's a lot of weird ENY/Perk values.  Personally, I don't think the XIV deserves a perk either.  It looks great on paper, but it's a pain in the neck to fly and aim with, and it's even a rare sight in the DA pond where it's free.

[BnZs]

The Lala is not actually particularly "easy to fly", easy to fly for a noob usually meaning some combination of turning ability, stability, and user-friendly gun package. There are a dozen airplanes that are "easier" than the La7 in that sense. No, what the La7 brings to the table is the ability to *completely outclass*-outrun, out-turn, out-climb, out-accelerate-literally the whole field of unperked high-speed E fighters in the LW arena. Its non-perk status is literally unconscionable.

The Spixteen is a couple notches easier, but still probably not so "easy" as its stablemates, the V/IX/VIII. Once again, what it brings to the table is double-superiority as a fighter to a huge chunk of the LW plane set.

Honestly, if your idea is to distribute a plane that will gives noobs a chance, by all means, unperk the F4U-4.

Say what you will about the C-Hog (and I'm not advocating unperking it) but it has one important, glaring weakness that neither of the above have: Thrust/weight ratio near the bottom of the barrel. This is a weakness that will haunt the C-Hog whether it is trying to stay fast and E-fight/bnz or getting bogged down in a furball. This is weakness that is very exploitable by a large number of other fighter types that simply does not exist for the La7 or Spixteen. I think entirely too much emphasis is being placed on the gun package and not enough on whether or not most planes have a corner of the envelope they can exploit against X to avoid being in the gun sight in the first place.

In the case of the LA-7 and the spit16, I don't think keeping consistency across the board is necessarily the best answer either. 

If we kept things totally consistent, only those with the skill required to earn perks would fly the perk planes.  The "beginners" would have to fly the lower-performance planes.

That sets up a possible "vets in uber-rides vs newbs in early rides" scenario, which wouldn't be very fair either.

I think it's an important game-leveler to have a few "uber" rides be free, when "consistancy" would mean perking them.  The LA-7 and Spit16 fit the bill perfectly, IMO.  Let 'em have a ride they can experience some success in, learn some basic skills in, but earn few perks in them, so they have an incentive to try some of the other planes as thier skill improves.