Here is a blast form the past

[Noir]

someone call HTC 

[Yarbles]

someone call HTC 

Perhaps we should draw straws like in Oliver Twist.

[Kev367th]

IF the fights in the MA were all at high alt there would be a case for keeping it perked (maybe).

I don't think unperking it would make one iota of a jot of a difference. The XVI / VIII are far better suited to the low alt MA furballs.

At alts (25k+) where it can really perform there aren't any fights (or very few), you're more likely to run a buff.

On the odd occassions I flew a XIV and ran into a con at high alt they dove for the deck.
Two choices -
1) Stay high and hope for one that doesn't.
2) Follow him down where the XIV becomes just another bit of fodder.

Unperk it, see what happens.

[Krusty]

Lusche: don't be so literal. I meant the arena, the server, I was using the same meaning as you.

He didn't say "unperk it because it sucks" which is subjective opinion, he pulled out numbers, and tried to say "I have conclusively quantified that the spit14 is a far inferior plane than the spit16 because of these numbers, this number is less than that number, therefore the plane itself is less, and should be unperked" and in doing so has fabricated certain assumptions but not bothered to explain them.

Karnak: You have taken the most braod brush available and tried to imply the finest level of detail. You have to go into detail to explain how you are taking into account use of the plane for each sortie the impact of the perk price itself, the type of pilots that fly the 14 (those that are more skilled, die less, etc) and the other aspects of gameplay that will affect use and effectiveness of the kill/death ratio as an indication of its worth as a plane ranking number.

Instead you simply list the kills/deaths, totals, and assume by very very broad margins that these numbers imply a difference in QUALITY of the plane itself.

You do not go into any detail about any of the other aspects that can and do affect these numbers, but instead assume a number is a number, and that your first interpretation must be perfect.

I have second hand experience with quantitative analysis, and I can tell you any number of variables can and will skew your analysis and conclusions at the end, and those that do quantitative analysis (based on polling, raw numbers, etc) must take into respect MANY extraneous variables.

None of which you've even scratched the surface with.

You might as well use numerology, it will be as accurate in reflecting what you want as the way you've done it.

[Karnak]

Krusty,

If you'd actually read my posts you'd have noticed that I did lay all that out. All you seem to be able to see is that I used K/D as one of the supporting pieces of evidence.

You have still failed to give any reason at all for your claims or for why the data I submitted means something else.  You haven't offered any hypothesis of your own to match the data.


And I have never said it was far inferior to the Spit XVI.  I said it was less suited to the AH MA that the Mk XVI, which it most manifestly is.

What I have said is that it is inferior to other perk planes and is, in fact, not superior to all free planes.

[Yarbles]

I would really like a reasoned argument based on the in game data and compared to other perked planes as to why it should be perked.

Until the perk is properly justified surely as a significant Aircraft i.e. around 1000 built it has far more right to fly in the game unperked than say the Ta152.

[moot]

It's got nothing to do with that.  It's a matter of game balance, not production volume...

[Yarbles]

It's got nothing to do with that.  It's a matter of game balance, not production volume...

Takes nothing away from the case though either that there is no clear justification for the perk or so it seems.

[Yarbles]

P.S. nit-picking one comment I made doesn't negate the rest of the post I made, stating that the spit14 is still 20mph+ faster than the other spits, has hispanos, fast as a p51 (faster above 25k) and is still a monster of a plane.

This reference to the P51 is indicative of the concern I believe that the Spit 14 might replace the 51 in areas where the 51 is a good fighter and hence it is perked to insure the 51 appearsd more in the game.

I think this is unfair to the Spit as in many ways it probably was a better fighter just not a better long range escourt or ground atack plane. Neither the 51 or the 47 had to prove themselves as air superiority fighters/interceptors because of overwhelming numerical superiority. People will still fly them because they like them as they do now not necessarily because they are any good.

I have shot down great sticks in 51's and 47's in low turn fights because they put themselves at such a disadvantage and probably were happy to test and demonstrate their skill in this way. They are the 2 planes I fear least in the game along perhaps with the P38, p40. I think the F4's and F6 better suit the game. I am not sure if this says anything about US WW2 Fighters but I do think the 51,47, and 38 might be particularly vulnerable to the Spit 14. If this is the reason its perked it seems a bit unimpartial a view.

     

[Yarbles]

I was right 

[nrshida]

I always suspected HTC had got the centre of pressure and mass relationship not quite right. No supporting info in pilot comments about ghastly handling, only most didn't like the opposite prop rotation. AH Spit14 has a viscous departure which makes the Ta152 feel like a Jaguar MkII on a summer's evening. 

[BOBO]

I was right 

I think it might should be perked like it used to be.

[DmonSlyr]

Yeah Spit14 never needed to be perked. What should have replaced it was the la7 and Spit16 though. Far more effective planes and overly used.

[icepac]

Avoid fighting between 17k and 22k.   
Engine has a lot less power than either higher or lower.