Spit XIV and Ki-84

[Tac]

like I said, those who do not have an earlier variant would be judged according to their performance vs the unperked planeset. SpitIX is a mid war plane, it would not be perked since its not a late war. Spit15 oth, would be. I dont expect the n1k to "suck" next version, it was a good performing fighter. I do expect it to have its performance adhere to physics for once. Its bound to be a fast accel'ing spit with 4 cannons imo.

[Bullethead]

Karnak said:
 

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.

As it is, we already perk things case-by-case.  It has already caused whining.  It hasn't killed us yet so I figure we could stand to continue this system.

I also think this is the only way to decide on what gets perked IF the object of perking is to force greater variety in what gets flown day-to-day in the arena.  If the reason for lack of variety is a few "crescent wrench" planes in unlimited availability, then the best approach is to identify and perk them.  

This is regardless of when these "crescent wrenches" appeared in time or where they fall in the development history of a given plane.  If it's a question of game balance, then the perk system should concentrate on improving game balance for its own sake and not worry about ethnicity, dates, and sub-type designations.

 

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.

I thought the A6M5 appeared in mid-43.  But yeah, this would make the La7 even more the ride of choice than it is now.  Which is a reason for doing things case-by-case.

 

Basically I don't think that such things (perking all '44+ planes) are viable business moves for HTC, too many people really like the late war stuff.

No denying, late-war stuff draws crowds.  But how much of that is actual preference and how much is a perceived need for a crutch to be competitive?  I think most of it is the latter because more than half of all pilots have less than half of their possible total of individual skill.  Look at the numbers.  The more uber a plane is perceived to be, the more it gets flown.  And it gets flown in such huge numbers that the dweeb masses have to make up a significant portion of its pilots.

So I think the only way around this is to remove existing crutches and severely limit the introduction of new ones.  If a stallfighter is as fast or faster than most E-fighters, perk the Hell out of it.  If an E-fighter can turn with the best stallfighters over a tactically significant speed range, perk the Hell out of it.  If an E-fighter is just overly fast compared to the others, perk it a little bit.  If a stallfighter is a bit faster than normal but still slower than most E-fighters, perk it a little bit.

Unfortunately, this sort of system would probably only work for a mix of mid-war and late-war planes like we have now.  I don't see how you could fit in early-war planes very well because they'd always be facing at least some late-war jobs.  So the only ways I see to get early-war planes in the air (assuming HTC ever makes them) are either to put them in separate arenas or have a rotating plane set.

I don't think separate arenas would work well.  In AW, when they stopped alternating PTO and ETO TDs and put each in simultaneous arenas, nobody flew in the PTO until the ETO overflowed.  And I don't see many folks in the CT arena here.  So an Early War arena would probably also flop.

But I haven't yet seen an RPS that worked well.  AW never had one and nobody seemed happy with WB's version, that greatly compressed the 1st 4 years of the war and then stretch 1945 out forever.  Those who wanted to get some real time in early birds got only a token chance before they became outclassed.  Those who couldn't live without their crutch planes didn't fly "uber week".  Those who couldn't stand to see an arena dominated by crutch planes took "uber week" off.  And many of the latter also sat out the first few days until the earliest version of their favorite ride became available.  So it seemed like very few people flew all the way through the RPS and everybody squeaked about it.

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

[Hristo]

What set of wrenches crap ? Tell that to Ki84 fans.

Who is gonna decide which wrench can do what ? In the end we would have to be flying just one plane. Even if we would end with Spit V and Spit IX only, I am sure there would be "IX dweeb" calling etc.

If a plane gets overused (whatever that is), get used to meet it more. Fly your preferred ride and match it. If you think you can't do it, lobby for perking it.

The nations in WWII all tried to build the best planes possible. Ki84 and Spit XIV are some of the results. As well as D-9, P51 or Tempest. Why do you have problem with that ?

IMO, Tempest and La7 would own both Ki84 and Spit XIV.

[ 09-10-2001: Message edited by: Hristo ]

[Urchin]

Originally posted by Hristo:
What set of wrenches crap ? Tell that to Ki84 fans.

Who is gonna decide which wrench can do what ? In the end we would have to be flying just one plane. Even if we would end with Spit V and Spit IX only, I am sure there would be "IX dweeb" calling etc.

If a plane gets overused (whatever that is), get used to meet it more. Fly your preferred ride and match it. If you think you can't do it, lobby for perking it.

The nations in WWII all tried to build the best planes possible. Ki84 and Spit XIV are some of the results. As well as D-9, P51 or Tempest. Why do you have problem with that ?

IMO, Tempest and La7 would own both Ki84 and Spit XIV.

[ 09-10-2001: Message edited by: Hristo ]

Hristo, what plane do you fly?  I'm just curious.  Can't find your name in the "score pages", or I'd look it up myself.  

Undoubtedly you are correct that the "tempest and the La7 will own the Ki-84 and SpitXIV".  Actually, I don't have a friggin clue who would own what, but that is niether here nor there.  So an La7 will "own" a Ki-84 one on one.  Thats nice.  How will it "own" it?  Will it outrun it or outturn it?  I'm guessing it will outrun it.  How well will the La7 do against 2 or 3 Ki-84s that jumped into a 1 on 1, or 1 on 2 knifefight on the deck?  Probably pretty poorly, just the like the 109 and 190 do poorly against a spit or n1k in that situation.  Well, WHY, you may ask, does the 109 and 190 perform poorly in those situations?  Well, it is pretty easy.  The 109 and 190 are inferior to those planes in just about every department except for the "run like hell" department.  And when you get low and slow, you lack the means to run like hell, so you are pretty much toast.

So your La7 can fly around, cruising for people to bounce, but as soon as he gets into a REAL fight, the Ki-84 that he "owns" is going to come down and hand him his ass.

As an aside, take a look at the "Tour 19 fighter stats" that Dejavu posted.  I found it interesting that the 5 most numerous planes in the Main arena had more kills than every other plane in the set combined.  I guess that is niether here nor there, since you psychologists already KNOW the real reasons I want to see some planes perked.

[Karnak]

Urchin,

Points that the Fw190D-9 is better than the Spitfire MkIX at:

Acceleration
Climb rate
Roll rate
Diving
Speed
Ammo endurance
WEP endurance
Fuel endurance
Zoom climbing
Visibility

Points that the Spitfire MkIX is better than the Fw190D-9 at:

Turn rate
Turn radius
E retantion while turning
Bullet trajectory

It seems to me that you are functionally saying that the only thing that matters in a fighter is its turning performance.  If that is the case, why do you fly German aircraft?  Fly British and Japanese aircraft.  They are the ones that emphasize turning. Don't demand that aircraft that turn be removed so that you can fly German aircraft and not worry about turners.

Every post you've been making is ignoring the strengths of the German aircraft.  They aren't the same strengths so please don't complain when they have to be flown differently to be successful.

There will always be aircraft that are more popular than others. Period. Most people like to turn fight, therefore the most popular aircraft will be turn fighters. If turn fighters are removed from the game the game will die.

To me a fast fighter is far more of a threat and far more likely to be a game ruiner than a slow turn fighter. I can avoid/ignore the slow turn fighter, but the fast fighter forces me to deal with it. Fast fighter are not rendered useless by turn fighters but many aircraft would be rendered useless by fast fighters.

Urchin, what do you want the MA to look like?

[Urchin]

No Karnak, I'm not saying that the only thing that matters is turn performance.  In a fight, here is what I see as "mattering"

- Acceleration
- Turn rate
- Roll rate
- Visibilty
- Firepower

The SpitIX will accelerate as fast, or faster, than the D9, at speeds under 300mph.  It also turns better at those speeds, and in my opinion has better firepower than the Dora.  Can the SpitIX kill a Dora 1v1?  No, absolutely not, unless the Dora pilot is dumber than a brick.  Can a spit pilot dive into someone elses fight and kill a Dora?  Absolutely.  Can a Niki?  Absolutely.  Can a Ki-84 or a Spit 14 or 21?  Bet your ass.  Can they do it better than the SpitIX or the Niki?  Uh HUH.

   

It seems to me that you are functionally saying that the only thing that matters in a fighter is its turning performance. If that is the case, why do you fly German aircraft? Fly British and Japanese aircraft. They are the ones that emphasize turning. Don't demand that aircraft that turn be removed so that you can fly German aircraft and not worry about turners.
 

It seems to me that you are functionally saying the only thing that matters in an aircraft is level speed.  If that is the case, why are you flying Japanese or British aircraft?  Fly German, Russian, or American aircraft, since those emphasize speed over turning.  Don't demand that faster "turning" aircraft be added so you can fly them and not worry about the German, Russian, or American aircraft.

   

Fast fighter are not rendered useless by turn fighters but many aircraft would be rendered useless by fast fighters.
 

No, but fast aircraft ARE rendered useless by fast aircraft that turn better.  Someone said that the Ki-84 is faster than the P51D below 10k.  Since you aren't stupid, I won't remind you that 99% of fights in the MA occur under 10k.  Whoops.  Anyway, that would make the Ki-84 the 3rd fastest "non-perk" plane on the deck, and 4th overall.

So as I see it, what you and the others are saying is "Gee, my La7 sure is fast, but there are some planes that can outturn me, and the fuel and ammo load on this plane are pretty small." or "Gee, this Niki sure does turn nice, and it has a lot of firepower, but there are so many planes out there that can just run away from me".  What both of those trains of thought have in common is the ending.. i.e. the Ki-84.  

And no, to be honest I don't even care if the ki-84 is put in the game.  I hope they put it in the game, with the 2x20mm and 2x30mm cannon option that people want, and I hope they don't perk it, ever.  Then they can just start removing the planes that see no use, and replace them with different paint jobs for the Ki-84.  That way you will still be able to get some recognition, despite the fact that you are flying the exact same plane as 75% of the other people in the MA.

Oh, and by the way, I agree with you that if the "turn-fighters" are removed, the game will die.  It may take a while, but it would happen eventually.  But I will ask you to kindly point out where I "DEMANDED" that the Spit and N1K be removed from the game.  Can you do that for me?  I forgot which thread I said it in.  You "turn-fighters" obviously are fairly content with the planes that are available, seeing as how the top two fighters are turnfighters, with something around 30% of the total kills.  Why add more turnfighters that can run down the "energy fighters"?

[ 09-10-2001: Message edited by: Urchin ]

[ 09-10-2001: Message edited by: Urchin ]

[Hristo]

Originally posted by Urchin:



Hristo, what plane do you fly?  I'm just curious.  Can't find your name in the "score pages", or I'd look it up myself.  

Hmm, you must be new to this game. I used to fly from 1st day beta.

Look from beta tour 1 to tour 5 (handles : Hristo, Hristos, Stoickov, enemy).

Then tour 17, under Hristo2W.

My personal best was in tour 4, 190 vs 28 in Fw190A-8, as Hristos.

Planes I fly. You dare to ask me that ? Luftwaffe all the way. 9./JG54 anyone ?

[ 09-10-2001: Message edited by: Hristo ]

[Urchin]

Oh, and to answer your "question", I fly the 109 and 190 because I can hand the other guy his bellybutton more than he hands me mine in them.  A P51, P47, or F4U is going to end up dead if he fights me prolly about 75-80% of the time.  A P38, F6F, La7, or yak is going to be dead probably 60% of the time, even if he bounces me.  Even the Spits, I'll usually take 75-80% of the fights from.  N1K2, really depends on the circumstances, but I'd say prolly 40-50% of the time I'll win.  

Why do I fly the "German planes"?  I fly them for a few reasons.  I fly them because they are comparitively rare in the MA.  That gives me an advantage, because not everyone knows what they are capable of.  It also makes (at least a few people) wonder- Hum.. this guy is pretty good, wonder who he is?  Which gets me recognition, which I enjoy.  I fly them because that is what I started with when I started flying Aces High.  I still feel the most comfortable in a fight when I'm sitting in a 109 or 190, despite the fact I could probably hop in an La7 or N1K and double my K/D ratio.  I fly them because I've heard of them, because they enjoy reputations as some of the greatest warbirds of all time.

And as far as what I'd like the MA to look like, it doesn't matter to be honest.  People are basically herd animals, so the MA I'd enjoy flying in will never come to pass.  I know what disgusts me, however, and that is the fact that the N1K, SpitIX, P51D,La7, and F4U-1D had more "fighter to fighter" kills than the other 27 planes in the set put together.  I'm not going to bother trying to figure out what their total percentage was, because that doesn't matter either.  I know that if, or when, the Ki-84 and the Spit XIV or F21 come into the game, I'll be disgusted by the fact that the top 2 airplanes had more kills than the rest of the planeset combined.

[Urchin]

Originally posted by Hristo:



Hmm, you must be new to this game. I used to fly from 1st day beta.

Look from beta tour 1 to tour 5 (handles : Hristo, Hristos, Stoickov, enemy).

Then tour 17, under Hristo2W.

My personal best was in tour 4, 190 vs 28 in Fw190A-8, as Hristos.

Planes I fly. You dare to ask me that ? Luftwaffe all the way. 9./JG54 anyone ?

[ 09-10-2001: Message edited by: Hristo ]

No offense intended, as I said when I asked you.  I was just curious, given your attitude towards adding the Ki-84.  190 to 28 is an enviable record in the A8, I <S> you for that.

[Karnak]

Urchin,

1) Anything can dive into anything's fight and steal the kill.  Yes, N1K2s and Spits are better at it, but I have seen all kinds of fighters do it.

2) The Fw190D-9 easily out accelerates the SpitIX across the speed spectrum.  The Spit is not a particularly good accelerator.

3) I fly all aircraft, not just British or Japanese. In my opinion all aspects matter to some degree or other.  For the ease of a kill I think that turning and guns are the important features of a fighter. For survival, controling the fight, and in the end best feature, is speed. I think that the Fw190D-9 is one of the best fighters in AH and would take it over a Spit IX or N1K2 if my life depended on it.

4) The Ki84 will do 348mph at sea level according to Mitsu's numbers. The P-51D will do 367mph at sea level. The Ki84-Ia will max out at 392mph at 20,000ft. The P-51D maxes out at 437mph.

5) Is the Ki84 a perk plane? Maybe, I don't know.  Is the Spitfire MkXIV a perk plane?  I certainly think so.

Remember, the Ki84-Ia is armed with 2 12.7mm Ho-103 machine guns with 350 rounds per gun and 2 20mm Ho-5 cannon with 150 rounds per gun.  That is far lighter than the N1K2-J crowd is used to in both firepower and ammo endurance.

The only way to get people out of turn fighters is to remove them.  I extrapolated that you would enjoy an arena with no turn fighters more than an arena with turn fighters from your continued comments against them.  I apologize.  It wasa rude and argumentative thing to insinuate.

FWIW, in Tour 20 I have the following record:

2 kills and 2 deaths in the A6M5b
1 kill and 0 deaths in the Bf109G-10
6 kills and 1 deaths in the Fw190D-9
7 kills and 3 deaths in the Typhoon MkIb

When the Mosquito is available I will spend a lot of my time in it.  Please don't lump me in with the "turn fighters" or any other specific style.  Thanks.

[ 09-10-2001: Message edited by: Karnak ]

[oboe]

Well now it is starting to sound like the anti-Ki.84/Spit XIV people want them excluded from the game because they may/will out-perform their favorite or usual ride.

Certainly you guys must see the illogic in arguing to exclude from a game that is fundamentally about WWII air-to-air combat, the two finest fighters produced by Japan and Great Britain in WWII because they are too good?  How bad a business decision for HTC can that be?

[Jochen]

Hristo is just pissed because everybody didn't like his beloved Il-2 and now he is trolling and acting like a 8 year old.

[Urchin]

Originally posted by oboe:
Well now it is starting to sound like the anti-Ki.84/Spit XIV people want them excluded from the game because they may/will out-perform their favorite or usual ride.

Certainly you guys must see the illogic in arguing to exclude from a game that is fundamentally about WWII air-to-air combat, the two finest fighters produced by Japan and Great Britain in WWII because they are too good?  How bad a business decision for HTC can that be?

You are correct of course.  Of course, the other edge to your sword is that the Me262 is the finest [/b] fighter produced by Germany in the war, so lets have that unperked as well.

[oboe]

Hehe...Urchin! I never said whether they should be perked or not- I just would like to see them available in the game.   If they unbalance the MA, then by all means they should be perked.

[Urchin]

Then we are in agreement.  I could care less if they are in the game, but it is my belief (and purely my belief ) that they WILL unbalance the arena.  Of course, the idea of balance is purely subjective- it might be perfectly ok for 3 planes to have 90% of the kills, while 30 planes have the other 10%, at least to some people.  I don't mind if they are in the game, but they will need to be perked if you want to see many other planes in the game.