Spit XIV and Ki-84

[Urchin]

Originally posted by Karnak:
The Fw190D-9 has one short comming, it doesn't turn well.  In all other things it is near the top of the performance bracket.

Very poor turn rate.
Very poor turn radius.
Poor E retention.
2nd fastest non-perk fighter at AH combat altitudes.
2nd or 3rd best climber.
Best roll rate.
Good visibility.
Good ammo load.
Adequate guns (its second weakest point).
Plenty of fuel range.
Great acceleration.
Great zoom climber.
Great diver.

Compare that with the N1K2 that gets whined about so much:

4th best turn rate.
Good turn radius.
Great E retention.
Below average speed at AH combat altitudes.
Good climber.
Poor roll rate.
Good visibility.
Great ammo load.
Great firepower.
Plenty of fuel range.
Good acceleration.
Good zoom climber.
Good diver.

Why do we not hear about the advantages of the Fw190D-9?  All we hear are the whines about the N1K2.

The Ki84 will be a better rolling, worse turning, slightly faster (392mph at 19,000ft, not 400+mph and 345mph at sea level) and slightly worse turning fighter than the N1K2.  The Fw190D-9 and Bf109G-10 will still easily out fly it if flown to their strengths.

Why does it surprise you guys that Japan's late war fighters are capable?  They surprised us with the A6M Zero (the first carrier fighter to match the performance of land based fighters mind you), why would they suddenly be unable to produce good fighters?

I see so much ranting about how your 1942 and 1943 German fighters are at a disadvantage against late 1944 Japanese fighters.  Well, what did you expect?  Do you so believe the German propaganda that it is impossible for you to accept that a 1944 Japanese fighter will hand a 1942 German fighter its ass?

Do you want everything that gives your preffered ride trouble to be perked oe removed? How is that fair? Doesn't setting it up so that your 1942 or 1943 German fighter has the advantage just force the problem onto somebody else while eliminating most of the aircraft from the game?

Whay does a German fighter have to be the top dog?  What is wrong with a Japanese fighter being the top dog?

I think that the Ki84-Ia Hayate would be fine in the context of our late war planeset.  It'll annoy me in some ways, but it'll make a lot of other people happy and allow the to have quite a bit of fun? It won't replace the N1K2 due to its ammo load, but it will drain some of those guys off of the N1K2 numbers.

Karnak- I've got a question for you.  Why did you think the F4U-1C should be perked?  Was it because you weren't a good enough pilot to shoot them down?  That must have been it, since you think that is the only POSSIBLE reason anyone could EVER have for wanting to limit the availability of a plane.  So instead of saying that the F4U-1C needed to be perked, why didn't you "improve your skillz, get 1337", and shoot them down?

[Urchin]

Oh, lastly.  Nuttz, since you seem to firmly believe that I'm some sort of inferior pilot, lets head over to the DA someday soon.  We can even fly Niki's, since that is all you fly.  It'll be the same plane, so the only thing that will play a factor in the outcome will be the skill of the pilot.

[Hristo]

OK, whiners. If you will have trouble fighting Ki84 in 190D-9, then step out of the Dora. You don't know how to fly it right.

Geeez, take your plane the way it is. Fight anything in it. Stop those toejamty whines. Niki giving your Dora trouble ? Sheeesh, shut up already !

And any time you start whining about NIki FM this, Spit FM that, remember this. Fishu made absolute best streak in Fw 190A-8 !! 200+ kills, no deaths, against Nikis, P51s, 109G-10s, Spits, and La5s.

[ 09-09-2001: Message edited by: Hristo ]

[oboe]

I don't believe you guys who don't want the Ki.84 or Spit XIV are afraid to fly against them.  I think you're concerned that their introduction will lead to an arena dominated by one or two plane types, flown by a bunch of average pilots, who rely on the plane's superior performance for success rather than learning ACM.   And that makes for a boring arena after a while.   But isn't that what's going on right now with the N1K2 and LA-7?   And isn't that exactly the situation the perk point system was designed to influence, and proven that it can?

I'd really like to see the Japanese planeset expanded, so that PTO events and settings in the CT will be more interesting.   There were over 3500 Ki.84's produced and beginning in 1944, they fought in China and the Phillippines.  There were less than 500 N1K2's produced, and these were used mainly for home defence of the Japanese isles.  To me, its a shame that such a significant Japanese fighter isn't represented in the game.

[Tac]

Again, you people are comparing ONLY late war plane vs late war plane. Dora Vs. N1k, 109g10 vs n1k, p-51 vs n1k, la7 vs n1k...

These are only 5 planes in the game. Yet they are more than 80% of the planes that you see flying out there. Only a late war plane has a chance against the n1k, only a late war plane has a chance against the la-7, etc etc. When I say "chance" I mean that it is not overwhelmingly outmatched in one aspect of performance. 190A5/c205/109f4 vs n1k (or la7, etc etc)... the 190a5/// driver will have to be *quite* good with that bird when fighting a low skill pilot in a late warbird.

I stand with oboe 100% on his statement. HTC should control the use of late war planes by making them cheap perks (like the CHOG).

"Tac, at least you attack the plane and not the people who fly them"

Dont misjudge me, I consider any n1k driver to be the scum of the earth. Flying a plane with a known FM defect that gives it an unholy advantage is almost like exploiting a bug. The problem is with the plane yes (its getting fixed next version hopefully), but its the players that abuse it that imo are the biggest problem.

I hate to see a cloud of la7's, but ill engage them without any bad thoughts. I see a n1k, I start wishing a lightning hits his house, fries his PC and leaves him unable to go to the crapper on his own for a week.       *G*

[ 09-09-2001: Message edited by: Tac ]

[Hristo]

Tac, we have a perk system, you know.

Anyway, best planes will always be flown more than others. Be that Spit XIV, Bf 109E or Hellcat. Otherwise we all could just set for one plane type only and have one happy sim. BTW, what is a best plane ? Speed ? Guns ? Turning ? Quite a debate.

Personally, I would like both XIV and Ki84 unperked. A real challenge to take off in arena full of those   .

Niki pilot scum ? Nah, he is most likely Quakeish type who doesn't live long enough to see a FM bug. All he cares about is a good turner with big guns.

Most of our planes are with 10% performance differences. It really is a pilot who makes the difference. Got shot down in P-38 vs Niki ? You didn't stay high and expected more out of your ride. Be smarter next time. Spit shot your G-10 ? You most likely blew it. Concentrate on flying instead of whining about FMs.

Killing a Niki in 190A-8 is so sweet. Strafing chute of poor sob even sweeter. Please, keep the challenge.

[ 09-09-2001: Message edited by: Hristo ]

[Tac]

Right hristo. Here's what I mean:

P-51D Perked : 5 perks
109g10 Perked : 5 perks
190d9 Perked : 5 perks
CHOG Perked : 8 perks
La7 Perked : 5 perks
Tempest : Perked : 20 perks
Arado : Perked :10 perks
Me-262 Perked : 50 perks
(unfixed) n1k : 5 perks (unperked if fixed)
Ki84 Perked : 5 perks

Sort of like that. It aint punishing against the common player, it makes the planes accessible to them after a mission or 2, and it will trim down on the overpopulation of late war rides. Most planes in the MA now have an earlier version of them, I see no reason why it cant be done.

[Bullethead]

NUTTZ said:
 

Bullethead, Take your own advice and learn to fly the 202. You are seeking the same thing your complaining about.  Reread your post.

I don't know where you got that.

Look, maybe I'm just too old-school here but for game balance I like the yin-yang sharp divide between planes optimized for turnfighting and planes optimized for E-fighting (NOT BnZ, mind you).  When "dissimilar aircraft" really means something.  The E-fighter's guns and speed are balanced by its poor sustained turn performance and rapid E-bleeding during maneuvering.  The turnfighter's sustained turn performance and usually better E-retention through long maneuvers is balanced by its lower top speed and short clip.

When such planes meet, each pilot has to play a totally different game, using his plane's strengths which are opposite from his opponent's.  It's a total chess match requiring mastery of your own aircraft and thorough knowledge of how the other guy is going to play it and how you need to react to it.  Both planes have a real chance to win and the loser is usually he who makes the 1st mistake: getting out of one of his strengths, misjudging relative E balance, etc.  In such environments, you see both types of plane flown a lot.

Problems arise when you introduce planes that blur the distinction between turnfighters and E-fighters.  Call these things double-advantaged planes.  They put traditional E-fighters right out of business because they are largely immune to the tactics E-fighters have to use.  Furthermore, most E-fighters can't even safely disengage from them.  They also put a crimp on traditional turnfighters because they have more options in the fight:  they can turn AND they can use E-tactics, and swap back and forth during the fight.

With planes like this always available, the arena becomes a boring place.  E-fighters largely disappear except for jabo and CV ops.  A lot of the slower stallfighters also disappear.  And you get herds of these double-advantaged planes running around.

We already have this situation.  I'm sure many agree it's not optimal.  Adding more of these double-advantaged planes will NOT improve things.  Might as well just reduce the planeset to this type of plane because they get the vast bulk of the use.

If you believe that perking is the answer, then I suggest that the perk itself and its cost should be based on driving the average plane mix in the arena toward the desired state.  If the desired state is the great divide between turnfighters and E-fighters, so that we see a lot of both of them flying, then double-advantaged planes should be perked very expensively, planes that come close should be perked cheaply, and planes that are firmly in one camp or the other should not be perked at all.

[Hristo]

So, it boils down to that you don't want plane XXX because it is too good ?

This is a WWII planes sim. If plane XXX was in WWII, it should be in this sim.

[Tac]

Yes hristo is right. give the me262 unperked. Lets see how the arena turns out after a week. *sigh*

[Bullethead]

Hristo said:
 

So, it boils down to that you don't want plane XXX because it is too good ?

  OK, I'll try again, hopefully in terms you might be able to grasp.....

A plane set in a game like AH should be like a set of wrenches.  None of them can do everything but each does something very well.  Therefore, you always see a wide variety of plane types in the air because no plane is totally outmatched--all of them have a specialty they can use.  You have interesting dissimilar aircraft match-ups all the time.

When you start adding "crescent wrench" planes, however, you lose this.  Planes that can do everything in terms of air-to-air combat come to dominate the population.  This isn't speculation, it's friggin' fact.  Look at the stats for the last few camps.  The reason is obvious--these planes work very well in all situations, not just some special niche.  Sure, most such planes can't carry much so you'll see something else used as a jabo now and then, but for just fighting the arena becomes boring.  Same planes in droves, same match-ups all the time, mostly vs. similar if not identical aircraft.  Yawn.

Is this a result of these planes being "too good"?  At the bottom line, you could call it that.  But the main reason I don't want such planes around is because they make the arena a very boring place by upsetting the balance struck by older, more specialized planes.

 

This is a WWII planes sim. If plane XXX was in WWII, it should be in this sim.

Regardless of its effect on game quality?  That's not a smart way of doing things.  Lower-performance early-war and mid-war planes don't get flown when more capable, late-war planes are in unlimimted availability.  

If you want to have these late-war superplanes in the game, then you either have to perk them severely so that they are very rare, thus allowing other planes to get some use, OR you have ONLY these late-war superplanes because that's all that's going to see much action.

[oboe]

I think Bullet has valid concerns here, and it sounds like he's been around sims long enough to see bad things happen to play balance when dominant planes are introduced.
   
I do think perking is the answer to the arena imbalance, but I wouldn't base the perk value entirely on the aircraft's performance stats.  That would open a big can of worms.  We can't even agree on the Ki.84's max speed-- how could we ever agree on a plane's instantaneous or max sustained turn rate?  (And I won't even touch weapon lethality).  

I'd simply base perk values on the aircraft's use in the arena.  If an aircraft starts dominating the arena in terms of sorties flown and kills made, then next tour it gets automatically perked.  The greater its use percentage and K/D ratio, the higher the perk cost.   And perk costs don't have to be in the 50-70 range to be effective.   Even a cheap perk cost like 8 pts took the F4U-1C off the top of the list and dropped it to a more reasonable level of use in the arena.   If a perk plane is seeing very little use, then next tour its cost could be lowered by some amount.

I like the cheap perk idea Tac suggested a few posts up, but I think even a cost of 1 or 2 points would make a difference.  We just haven't seen much experimentation with perk costs, so its hard to say for sure.

[Karnak]

Originally posted by Urchin:
Karnak- I've got a question for you. Why did you think the F4U-1C should be perked? Was it because you weren't a good enough pilot to shoot them down? That must have been it, since you think that is the only POSSIBLE reason anyone could EVER have for wanting to limit the availability of a plane. So instead of saying that the F4U-1C needed to be perked, why didn't you "improve your skillz, get 1337", and shoot them down?

No, I almost always had a positive K/D ratio against them.

The reason that I wanted the F4U-1C perked was because it did too many jobs too well.

Need to do a fighter sweep?  Fly an F4U-1C.
Need to attack and airfield? Fly an F4U-1C.
Need to attack GVs? Fly an F4U-1C.

When the answer to each question is the same fighter, unless you want to take a disadvantage, the thing needs to be perked.

Right now there are a lot of N1K2s and Spit IXs because those are relatively easy to get kills in, but they can hardly do all the jobs (N1K2 shouldn't be the tank kiler it is, new armor model in 1.08 should fix this).

Need to do a fighter sweep?  Fly an N1K2-J.
Need to attack and airfield? Fly a P-47D-30 or P-38L.
Need to attack GVs? Fly a Typhoon.

I am happy that the most popular aircraft (both of them) are some of the slowest.  It helps keep the MA at a more reasonable speed.

Tac,

What confirmed error in the N1K2's FM?  Last I heart HTC was going to look at it.

[Tac]

Lift, E-retention. Wasnt all this mentioned in an old thread Pyro put a while ago?

I prefer making all these late war planes cheap perks. It worked with the CHOG, not many people take it up in the unholy swarms of past tours. It proves the perk system does work to control such planes. No need to make them overly expensive. Planes with too much advantage (me 262 for example) should retain a relative high perk cost, as they would be hard to shoot down too. If a late war plane has an earlier variant of itself, perk the late variant. Those who dont have earlier variants, look at their performance vs the early planeset and either perk it cheaper accordingly or dont perk it until the earlier variant is put in (to this I can point to the P-38. Its the "late war" variant, yet it nominally outperforms the rest of the early planeset.. and the 38 we have here is for all purposes, a slow & heavier 38J since the dive flaps hardly work... or the c205..its the "later" version but it doesnt outperform the rest of the planeset, this it doesnt get perked).

[Karnak]

Tac,

As I recall he was guessing that something in that area might be off not confirming that something was off.  FWIW I am expecting a revised N1K2-J FM in 1.08, but I'm not expecting it to suddenly suck like many seem to be hoping for.

The problem with making the late war stuff a perk is that there is very little non-late war stuff in the game.

If 1944 and 1945 stuff were all perked, we'd have the following as freebies in 1.08:

B-26B
C-47A
F4U-1
F4U-1D
LTV-2
LTV-4A
M3
M8
M16
P-51B
PT Boat
TBM-3

Bf109F-4
Bf109G-2
Bf109G-6
Fw190A-5
Ju88A-4
Panzer IV H

Hurricane MkIIc
Hurricane MkIId
Mosquito FB.MkVI
Seafire MkIIc
Spitfire MkVb
Spitfire F.MkIX

La-5FN
La-7
Il-2M
Yak-9T

C.202
C.205

If we go about perking stuff based on whether there is an earlier version, where do we draw the line?  The Spitfire IX is a 1942 fighter with a 1941 version in AH as well.  Does it get perked?  What if the MkXIV is added? Does the MkIX get unperked at that point? What if the MkI is added? Does the MkV now get perked?

If we leave single versions unperked that would mean the N1K2-J would not be perked due to the lack of the N1K1-J in AH.

Things could be perked on a case by case basis, but imagine the constant whines and justifications to get this plane perked or that plane unperked.

I happen to like the list of pre-1944 aircraft I provided except for two things, it has the La-7 in it and it lacks all Japanese aircraft.

Basically I don't think that such things are viable business moves for HTC, too many people really like the late war stuff.