Unperk the Mosquito Mk. XVI

[Lusche]

Seems to me on any perk ride the question is how effective is the perk value on the control of the planes usage?

Depends a lot on circumstances - how much the plane would dominate it's particular niche and the actual magnitude of the perk price. Going from 0 to a slight perk cost has, in my experience, a more drastic effect on usage than going from 50 to 100 perks. Examples: The M4(76) was starting to dominate the AH battlefield after introduction. Putting a slight perk on it (2 or 5 at that time) did cut the numbers down significantly. On the other hand, going from 50 to 100 perks did not impact the Me 163 usage much at all.
Another histoprical example (actually the one which did introduce the perk system), the F4U-C, which had it's usage cut down to about 10% of it's original value.

[ReVo]

I don't really understand why it's so important to OP to have this plane un-perked. It survives 99% of the time anyway so why worry about the cost? Unless you just want a new super-fast bomb and bail ride.

[Karnak]

I don't really understand why it's so important to OP to have this plane un-perked. It survives 99% of the time anyway so why worry about the cost? Unless you just want a new super-fast bomb and bail ride.

He wants to use it in ways that it is unlikely to survive and the perk price is a barrier towards that kind of use.

[Lusche]

On a related note: In the age of central strats I was using the three perk bombers, Arado 234, B-29 and Mossie XVI extensively to bomb the City/factories.

The Mossie was the only perk bomber fully sustaining it's perk costs on its own, i.e. I was gaining more perks from those missions that I was losing in them. In the 234 and 29 I suffered a considerable net loss of perks by combat losses (more than 3500 in the B-29)

[Vinkman]

Your statement was very straightforward: " No one catches any 28K bombers."   And that IS hyperbole, as it is entirely untrue. While it is safer than lower alts for sure, it's not safe.
I have killed many, many hundreds of them at that altitude... in fact, the vast majority of my 233 B-29 kills had taken place at that altitude or even much higher. Many other players have done similar, including shooting down quite a number of my own buffs over the strats.

It's difficult, it's a challenge, but it's definitely doable.
However, the Mossie has much better cards than the other bombers, as the window of opportunity for the would-be interceptor to identify the threat and get into position for a successful intercept is so very small.

Your being pedantic. Stop it.   I didn't mean that a 28K bomber is never shot down. Ghost stated that 25K Mossies will be untouchable, as if that will be a paradyme shift in bomber ops. My point was most fighters won't attempt to go after buffs that are 25K if they are at fighter sweep alt [0-10]  So if you are defending a base and high buffs show up, they're safe up there whether they are Mossies or not. Ever try to catch Havermyr in his Ki-67s at 30K? You'd better bring all your patience and a lot of gas.

Waiting in advance of Buffs ends this problem as you described, so again you aren't safe in a Mossie from a 28K fighter on station waiting for you. So either way, a Mossie doesn't change much except for Bozons point about the speed making it easier for mossies to get to those alts in less time, so more of them will be up there than say B-17s.  

[Lusche]

Your being pedantic. Stop it.   I didn't mean that a 28K bomber is never shot down.

I would not have been that pedantic if you had not told others they being hypocritical and then being even more hypocritical yourself. The good old pot meets kettle.

So if you are defending a base and high buffs show up, they're safe up there whether they are Mossies or not.

It's not that simple. As already explained in this thread, the time window is much smaller when a mossie comes in. There is much less time to identify the raider and get up and into position. That makes a huge difference.

Ever try to catch Havermyr in his Ki-67s at 30K?

Yes, a lot of times. Much easier than catching Mossies, because you can even catch him when he's still above you. It's a very much different thing with the mossie, because if you are not already in position, you have a big problem

[Vinkman]

I would not have been that pedantic if you had not told others they being hypocritical and then being even more hypocritical yourself. The good old pot meets kettle.

But I wasn't. I was adressing his point clearly. You chose to read it in a way that I didn't mean it, even though my meaning was clear.

Vinkman=not hypocritical.
Snailman=pedantic. 

[Tilt]

I think the fear of abuse by NOE is a dead duck..........Tu2s is far better  for NOE suicide raids............ by some 1600lbs per ac

[Rich46yo]

25 to 28 K, with a full bomb load, how fast will this Bomber go at full speed? Disregard, we have a performance chart. At its sweet spot is cruises at about 390 mph. Thats purty bloody fast for a Bomber and it sounds like 20 perks is about right. Its a good ord raider but now that we have the TU I doubt I'll ever even use it again. But its a great addition to the set I think. It just shouldnt be unperked.

[Vinkman]

25 to 28 K, with a full bomb load, how fast will this Bomber go at full speed? Disregard, we have a performance chart. At its sweet spot is cruises at about 390 mph. Thats purty bloody fast for a Bomber and it sounds like 20 perks is about right. Its a good ord raider but now that we have the TU I doubt I'll ever even use it again. But its a great addition to the set I think. It just shouldnt be unperked.

Is that empty weight or fully loaded?

[Lusche]

25 to 28 K, with a full bomb load, how fast will this Bomber go at full speed? Disregard, we have a performance chart. At its sweet spot is cruises at about 390 mph. Thats purty bloody fast for a Bomber and it sounds like 20 perks is about right. Its a good ord raider but now that we have the TU I doubt I'll ever even use it again. But its a great addition to the set I think. It just shouldnt be unperked.

A Mossie 16 with 4k of bombs and 50% fuel will cruise 385mph at 25k and 380 at 30k

[Karnak]

Waiting in advance of Buffs ends this problem as you described, so again you aren't safe in a Mossie from a 28K fighter on station waiting for you.

Depends on the fighter now, doesn't it?  An F4U-1A cannot catch a Mossie XVI or Ar234 at 28,000ft, but it can catch any other bomber, even the B-29A.  There are almost no fighters, perhaps none at all, that a Ki-67 will outrun at 30,000ft.  The window to intercept is also much smaller for the Mossie than any other piston engined bomber.  Being at 28,000ft still doesn't mean your intercept is a sure thing.

[Tinkles]

I recall doing a fun NOE (across difficult terrain) in the Mosquito MK.XVI with a few squaddies to hit the HQ, will have to find the film.  What's funny was a lone 262 came out just as we were climbing to run away, he chased me down for 4 sectors before he finally got me. But it was my fault, first time in the plane, made a mistake.   Still had fun though  

Not really sure why I mentioned that, but I'm sure it relates somehow  

I see where you are coming from Tuton.  You don't think the perk cost is justified based on the use of this aircraft and based on the limited bombload and the fact it is un-armed. The problem is though, I don't think the reason why HTC perked the Mk.KVI was because of the bombload, but because of the speed of the craft at 'bomber altitudes (20k+).   I don't want to see Mk.XVI's bombing CVs like we see water-sucking lancs and b26s do now.  

While I do agree that it may not see much usage in the MA (at least compared to some of the other bombers, (like the B26s/B17s), and that it is unarmed, I think that it would be a serious error to allow this aircraft to be un-perked due to it's capabilities.    The perk price is a deterrent from simply charging into a fight with no care for your planes well-being. If you take that away I think you may be surprised at how quickly these things will start appearing. Even without guns. Those who have NO care for their planes' lives, don't shoot back at me. Just look at bomb-n-bailers or those who charge CVs with B25s (hehe), B26s or Lancs.

I think the most I would be willing to accept would be is a lowering of perk cost, but right now it's low as it is. 20 to 60 perks for a really fast bomber.

On a side-note, I wonder if HTC could implement a testing system, where if a wish like this comes up HTC would unperk certain rides that were requested (that are potentially debatable, I'm not saying unperk the 262 or 163 here).  And find out (like with the Spit14) if unperking the ride is really necessary. (Will it increase usage? Was the perk price too much, Too little? etc.)   Then POST the tests here on the BBS and somewhere on the front page (under a link or something or a new tab) showing the results.  So if it comes up again "we already tested that, and these are the results".


-1 to the OP, but I do understand where you are coming from.

 

[Lusche]

There are almost no fighters, perhaps none at all, that a Ki-67 will outrun at 30,000ft.  

It takes a (coalt) 109K at mil power almost three times as long to catch up with a Mossie at 30k than with a Ki-67, while the Mossie covers 40% more distance than the Ki.

[Vinkman]

Depends on the fighter now, doesn't it?  An F4U-1A cannot catch a Mossie XVI or Ar234 at 28,000ft, but it can catch any other bomber, even the B-29A.  There are almost no fighters, perhaps none at all, that a Ki-67 will outrun at 30,000ft.  The window to intercept is also much smaller for the Mossie than any other piston engined bomber.  Being at 28,000ft still doesn't mean your intercept is a sure thing.

Thanks capt obvious. this was all on P 1 of this thread.