P-63 King cobra & the French.

[Vinkman]

Overall 'usage' and k/d of fighters in tour 12 - two months before perk system was started to being introduced:

(Image removed from quote.)


Even more telling way to determine the arena "dominator" is to put K-D in a chart - how much more does a fighter kill than it's being killed, in comparison to all other fighters

(Image removed from quote.)

Looking at this I have a problem with the data. The K/D includes C-hogs killed by C-hogs, correct? What are the kill ratios of the planes, with kills from the same type filtered out? this I think would be a better indicator of what you are trying to say.

the data displayed says the C-hog has a fractionally better K/D than the next closest planes. No big deal. The fact that everyone chose to fly it large numbers is not clear why from the data. By your data the plane accounted for 21% of the total usage. 

What percentage of the total usage is a plane supposed to be limited too?
what were the max usage% for Spit and Pony?

Could it be that 20% was too high for a plane that barely saw service? 

Now I'm going to guess that if you take the C-hog kills and deaths out of the C-hog data it's kill ratio will go up. [I think that's a mathematical certainty]. But if the K/D "against other types" graph would clear this up and the K/D axis would be a much truer measure of the plane's capability vs other aircraft. 

[Lusche]

Could it be that 20% was too high for a plane that barely saw service? 

 

[Vinkman]

 

Don't give me the eye roll. Lol.  That's a fair question. You're whole case is that perks are for "balance", but you haven't defined "balance." 

[Wmaker]

Could it be that 20% was too high for a plane that barely saw service?  

Nope. Lusche is 100% correct and you're just reaching.

I recall Pyro saying at the time that it was the amount it was used and the fact that, at the time, they didn't want to stretch then new eny system to any lower values.

All HTC has ever talked about is perking units that would be unbalancing, not a word about "rareness".

Perks are a way to balance the arena, not so much a means of classifying planes.  How many were produced or what its combat record was is not relevant.  Some planes intended to be perks may not need to be while others that weren't intended to be may end up getting perked.  Right now, the F4U-1C is accounting for about 20% of all kills in the arena.  I don't want to push the score values any further so perking it is about the only option left.  I don't really like the idea of making a carrier plane unavailable from the carrier.

[Lusche]

You're whole case is that perks are for "balance", but you haven't defined "balance." 

You either have not read my posts or are ignoring them on purpose. It's not "my" case - I gave you the exact quote from HTC what perks are about. My own definition of balance doesn't matter, it's HTC's definition which counts.

[Vinkman]

Nope. Lusche is 100% correct and you're just reaching.

I recall Pyro saying at the time that it was the amount it was used and the fact that, at the time, they didn't want to stretch then new eny system to any lower values.

All HTC has ever talked about is perking units that would be unbalancing, not a word about "rareness".

Wmaker, our history is not great on this board, but I want you to know I do respect your opinion so my continued discussion here is just for the purpose of discussion. I think there is more to vet in understanding what HTC means by balance, and does that definition not include, in any circumstance, helping to limit planes that saw very little action. They may not have said it, because no one ever asked. I get my impression from veteran players who have posted in this board that planes like the P-63 will need to be perked to keep them rare. They could be wrong.

 Lusche, Yes I understand it's not your case but you are stating HTC case and providing the data you think backs it up. And HTC hasn't weighed in yet so....

Conceded, C-hog "unbalanced" game play. let's move on from the C-hog because I agree a plane being UBER is a reason to perk it. now the question is to see if keeping rare planes rare might also be a reason. A lousy rare plane doesn't need to be perked because no will fly it anyway.

But there are a few planes that are very good, but not really UBER that they justify being perked. I'm wondering if their low numbers in the war were a factor in that decision because they have being produced n low numbers in common. these would be....

TA-152
F-4U-4

Are these planes really perked because they would unbalance game play? please explain. 

[PJ_Godzilla]

So, this appears to boil down toa question for HTC. I've read the quote -and thanks for that, Lusche. I understand your position, I believe, when you say that it's not your def of "unbalancing" that is relevant. It is htc's. I also "get" Vinkman's frustration. What does HTC mean by this term? Because: when I look at lusche's tour stats for the pre-perk c-hawg, I too see a marginal k/d advantage but huge usage. This begs the question Vinkman's voiced. Is there some disposition on staff against dominant usage of a type, whether this correlates to über ness or a merely marginal advantage ( define either -both terms get used a lot...) or not?

So, perhaps we could eschew some of this obfuscation and mind-reading by conjuring HTC himself.

Also, how dd we get here from p-63?

I'd also like to voice my opinion. I'd like to see more variation in usage and so support more "perking". In part, it's because I've got a decent bank from my occasional (maybe two hours a week when I'm lucky) use of the g14 over the last 4-5years, but also because I'm a bit bored with an arena stuck on may '45 stupid. Thus, I'd like to see all the top dawgs perked: gay4, lame7, easy16, runs tang d, alle... Alles clar? Sorry, but all this time in Deutschland is getting to me....

- from the Lufthansa 747-8 passing over...

[Lusche]

But there are a few planes that are very good, but not really UBER that they justify being perked. I'm wondering if their low numbers in the war were a factor in that decision because they have being produced n low numbers in common. these would be....
TA-152
F-4U-4

The Ta 152H is NOT perked. And it's about the rarest (real world) plane in the planeset.

[Saxman]

F4U-4

Are these planes really perked because they would unbalance game play? please explain. 

First: Fixed the designation.

Second: Apparently you haven't paid attention to ANYTHING I've said about the -4 if you're still asking whether unperking it would unbalance gameplay.

[Vinkman]

The Ta 152H is NOT perked. And it's about the rarest (real world) plane in the planeset.

Hmm was sure it was perked. Was it ever perked? 

[Lusche]

Hmm was sure it was perked. Was it ever perked? 

Only until September 2006

[Karnak]

Hmm was sure it was perked. Was it ever perked? 

It was perked when added, as was the Spit XIV.  Probably because HTC thought they would be imbalancing if not controlled, but that proved not to be the case for those.  We know the F4U-1C needs to be controlled, and the Tempest and F4U-4 both have robust use and K/D ratios despite being perked, things the Ta152 and Spit XIV could not achieve while perked.  There are no signs that any of the current perk planes ought to be unperked.

[Vinkman]

First: Fixed the designation.

Second: Apparently you haven't paid attention to ANYTHING I've said about the -4 if you're still asking whether unperking it would unbalance gameplay.

Thanks for correcting the designation.

Don't be so offended. I read every word of what you said. sorry If I didn't reply. I'll do that now. It's a good plane, and yes it has an edge in capability over a pony. but with Pony usage a big as it is, and F4U-4 usage as low as it is, perhaps the perk is overkill.

HTC hasn't perked the pony or the Spit16 to curb their over use.  

[Vinkman]

It was perked when added, as was the Spit XIV.  Probably because HTC thought they would be imbalancing if not controlled, but that proved not to be the case for those.  We know the F4U-1C needs to be controlled, and the Tempest and F4U-4 both have robust use and K/D ratios despite being perked, things the Ta152 and Spit XIV could not achieve while perked.  There are no signs that any of the current perk planes ought to be unperked.

What is the F4U-4 usage?

[Vinkman]

...
Also, how dd we get here from p-63?
...

Because it was mentioned that it would have to be perked.  not on performance.....but If it real life usage....Oh never mind.