For HTC: My suggestion for a new perk list('43~early '44 MA environment)

[Tilt]

Well argued and researched Kweassa.................

You make an initial point that a goal of this would be to make a free ride cut off point of circa 43...... this leaves the Spit 9 as a non perked ride............

We know that the present goal of perking is to add diversity

Do you think that this would become the new ride of mass choice?  I would expect it to ........ it became so in AW.

I presume you argue that the Typhoon is a 44 model.

What year were the FW 190 A8 and cannon equipped 205 introduced?(I have not checked)


I think I would like to take the "perk debate" further out of the box  for AHII than we have here...........

There are several linked issues that make the present perk/scoring/game balancers somewhat muddled and "unsimple" IMO.

Some general points/opinions on my part.........

The main perks of "trade" (if you will) are fighter perks. I would like to see the fighter/attack button removed and any (non level bomb site) AC automatically given "attack" status when carrying bombs, rockets or cannon over 30mm.

In the present system this would develop a separate  "attack" perk score.

I would like to see heavy ordinance purchased via the perk system (eg bombs over a certain weight) these would be bought with attack perks.

I would like to see some fighter armament options purchased via the perk system, eg the la7's B20 set up or certain wing gondolas and heavy cannon options on other AC.

I would not object to nearly every AC in the arena having a "perk" price (in which case "perk" would be the wrong word) provided even avarage players had ample oppurtunity to recover them if flown sensibly. The perk may be so low (or reward so high) that perks earned could easily recompence those lost if the trip did not successfully rtb.  

This would be a matter of good maths. But I would suggest that (as a complete package) it would add to diversity whilst also controlling many of the suicidal bombing tactics along with the "big cannon HO tendancy"


Graphically this would make the present hanger system redundant.(its not easy to use now) It would be so much simpler if the AC once selected from the clipboard drop down list appeared in its basic format and an armament and ordinance button on the clip board was available to open a clip board window similar to that on the present mission editor (if not the same) where ordinance options were chosen / purchased.

Indeed such an interface could be used to select tracer and convergence settings per AC.

Back to perks.......... some thoughts for consideration........

What would be your opinion of the effect now if the Spit XIV was un perked?

Would the skies be full of SpitXIV's flown as La7's are accused of now? or would it attract players from several of the now popular rides?

Unperking the Chog would make it the CV ride of choice IMO. I agree with your logic here.....besides its already proven.

The dynamic perk model................

we have one now (of sorts) and the way its set up induces increased use of 262's by a country with a significant number disadvantage. However I do not see even this (or the multiplier) actually balancing any game play its just a sort of reward  which is taken up by a few who would fly the 262 at reduced cost. We may as well make all rides free at the field local to the HQ.

With better maths a dynamic model could be made smoother but I doubt it could ever defeat the numbers game regarding the out come.....if it did then the ride quality diferential enforced would be very significant and very unpopular IMO.

The biggest problem with the dynamic model IMO is its inconsistancy........... folk do not know the cost of their ride or the value of potential reward. Its constantly changing. Surprising when consistancy and familiarity have been something that HTC generally (and rightly IMO) try to maintain in the MA.

I would drop the dynamic perk model as a game play control tool. To me gameplay is far more influenced by terrain design, its strat system and of course numbers. We cant do any thing (fairly) with enforced number control but we cann affect the other two. But thats for debate elsewhere.

Btw I agree with batz.......... if we are just talking about changing perk values in the present model then this debate should have been elsewhere.................... but then it seems to be every where
 lobbying is a wonderful thing.........

[Kweassa]

The Spit9 and the F6F-5 has me torn. Probably those two planes are the weakest link in my suggestion.


 Essentially, my perk agenda suggestion is based upon splitting monoplistic plane usage by limiting them with a price:

1) Limit the "one-plane-do-all" aspect
2) Limit the "exclusive performance margin" aspect
3) Balance the plane set according to (albet lossely) an era

 ...

 The problem persists; despite the new suggested agenda, the Spit9 is the only plane that is on par in usage to other high-performance planes, despite the fact that it is essentially not a late war fighter, not an exceptionally high performance plane, nor a multi-purpose plane.

 Literally, it's a plane that claims usage, which has nothing to do with all of the three major points of above. Literally, it's an easy plane to fly.

 While a plane so simular in characteristics with the N1K2-J, the Spit9, the Spit9 lacks in spray quality.

 ...

 Also, as analyzed in how a crowd moves to other planes when one preferred plane becomes perked - naturally it can be expected that the usage of Spit9s will rise even higher with my suggested perks. In my previous analysis, I have made the conclusion that people flock to a certain plane of simular attributes - that means, naturally the N1K2 users will flock over to the Spit9s, which means the Spit9 usage will go over 12~13%.

 Now, the worst case scenario is, with the new perkage, all the former F4U-1C pilots who flocked to the La-7, would also move to the Spit9. That would "regroup" the former Chog crowd into the Spit9, but due to perkage, the people who would not fly Spits, N1K2s, La7s or Chogs anyway, would be more diversified in their choices.

 Thus, we would see one plane at the top, the Spit9 maybe doing about 15%, if worse 18~20%... and all other planes in equal 1~2% status.

 The new 'best contendors', such as the P-47D-11, Fw190A-8, P-51B, F4U-1.. the fastest free planes on deck, may do about 4%~5%.. but I don't think that would happen.

 People don't go to the 190A-8 or P-47D-11, F4U-1 just because they are the fastest planes - the 47 and the 190, F4U-1 are initially pretty hard planes to master.

 So, what I estimate is this - Spit usage goes way up, since the N1K2 people would flock to the Spit9.

 The La-7 crowd splits into two, a part of them forming the new "La-5FN" block, and another part of them assimilated in the Spit9 crowd.

 The P-51D people move over to the P-51B block, but the lack of P-51B's multi-purpose capabilities, and lesser firepower, limit their effectiveness.

 So, What I estimate is..

 Spit9 16%
 P-51B 7%
 La-5FN 5%
 F4U-1 3%
 190A8 3%
 P-47D-11 2%

 ...

 and all other planes, including lightly perked planes, diversely at 1~2%... and the 'beyond help', 1939~1940 planes at under 1%.


 So, I guess it comes down to this.

 In the worst case, how would it be, if all the La-7 and N1K2 crowd are assimilated into the 1 plane, Spit9? Would the overall frustration levels be the same?

 I think, maybe not.

 The Spit9, at least, hasn't got 4 cannons and 900 rounds. It's very close to the N1K2 in flight characteristics, but it has fine differences - it hasn't got the "UFO" quality. You see the N1K2 sometimes doing strange and incredible things, but you rarely see a Spit9 doing that. It doesn't dive as good as the N1K2, too.

 Also, it can't just run away at a whim(with the perkage suggested, none of the planes can!). It's not the fastest free fighter. Neither does it have that incredible climb rate from 0 to 5~7k alt, nor is it a high survivability fighter which covers up for lacking pilot skills - it has always been, and always will be a low survivability fighter(note, the La-7, despite it's high overusage (over 10%) from the "dweeb" crowd, still has over 1.0 K/D).


 So, for the price of seeing all the "dweebs" horded into one plane type, their overall effectiveness drops down dramatically. For the price of seeing as many Spits as all the former numbers of La-7s, N1K2s, and Spit9 gathered into a single Spit9, we achieve relative variety among all other fighters.

 ...

 That's the worst case scenario. At the very worst of the worst, the "variety" issue remains the same - but still, the jabo plane effectivity is in place, since heavy bomb fighters are perked. Of all those "dweebs" who just point nose down and run, still, they can be caught this time. Also, suicidal base porking is limited - at least it won't be that effective when they all have to carry only 500lbs and maybe two or four rockets.

 So then why don't we just perk the Spit9, too..?

 ..

 That's what gets me torn. The perk agenda has a nice, rounded form thanks to the fact that it shifts certain segments of the planeset into a uniform "late '43"(maybe with the exception of the P-47D-11, which is essentially not that different from '43 P-47Cs or Ds) era - probably one of the reasons it seems so reasonable.

 But what if we try to perk the Spit9 also? A 1942 plane?? At least the Chog was a late war, very rare plane with incredible multi-purpose qualities - despite the official reasons given reflects only the usage levels, people still were reasonably calm due to the fact that it was "a rare, late-war fighter anyway.. I understand that".

 But if we perk the Spit9, I fear that the people, especially the RAF fans, will not tolerate that. A plane which only advantage comes from the fact that it has a balance of speed and maneuverability, a 1942 plane, has to be perked because it's a good plane? When all other planes of 1943 even, are unperked?

 There's gonna be a huge ruckus, one, that we can't just calm it down with the single reason of "arena balance".


 ....

 Thus, I hope to leave the Spit9 alone.

 Even in the worst case scenario, the monopoly of the single plane visible, is still better than the monopoly of three free planes, vastly less effective than the former version of it(N1K2+La7+Spit9). This monopolized plane, at least, is not the fastest nor a heavily armed "UFO".

 Even at it's worst, the other reasons behind the suggested perkage - limiting sucidal jabo effectiveness, giving dedicated jabo planes their roles back, relative diversity among majority of the planes - is still valid.

 Or, there still may be hopes that "lazy" people, who are now only limited to the free spits, would actually try other planes from the Spit - if they want the fastest plane to run away with, they've got various choices - P-51B is probably the most worthy consideration, but at least it has two less MGs, and can't carry huge ordnance. The La-5FN only has two ShVAKs with 50 less rounds.  

 ....

 
 The F6F-5 is giving me the trouble that it's a free fighter with largest ordnance loadout now. Will people still neglect jabo planes, and flock to the F6F-5?

 ..

 
 Thus.. there might be a need to consider perks for the F6F-5 and the Spit9, too - even smaller, 2 points perhaps.. but still, it's a path I'd like to stay away from.

 It'd be great if there was an opportunity to experiment these setups right now, so there can be more fine tuning.. but as it is, it stays only a possibility..

[bozon]

Kweassa, I agree with most of your agenda and support it heartily.

What people fail to understand is that this WILL NOT eliminate p-51D, La7, D9, G10, N1k from the areana. These planes are lightly perked and this will give people something to use their perks on. Now, we have lots of vets with thousands of perks in their account and they use it perhaps for an occasional 262 ride. Other then that, they just pile up.

If people think 4 perks is alot, you may even go down to perking planes by 1 perk - the psycological effect will be that people would rather not spend their precious perks. If one side is vastly outnumbered, costs will go down as well with the dynamic perk system (which I like by the way).

There is just no excuse for perking the spit9 inspite the overuse. I bet the La5 and p-51B would get a much larger croud then expected.

Bozon

[SELECTOR]

i like the ideas

[Charon]

Great proposal. I have always liked this general idea and feel it would certainly open up my plane choices in the MA.

As for the Spit 9... It is a 1942, plane but it's a pure interceptor that can catch anything given a 2K alt advantage.

How about 3 pts for the Spit 9 and 8 pts for a new Spit 16 LF?

Charon

[SFCHONDO]

Love the idea as i stated before, but I still think the Spit9 should be perked. I also have another idea I thought you may like to hear. Instead of perk points, what about the concept of percentage. For example, and this is merely an example:

ME262 - 10%
Spit14 - 8%
Tempest - 5%
LA7 - 3%
NIK2 - 3%
and so on.

In this manner it wouldn't matter if you where new to AH with 50 perk points or an old vet with 1000's of perk points racked up. The cost to fly a perked plane would be based on costing you a certian percentage of your total perk points. Not sure if anyone has brought up this aspect. This way if a newer guy wanted to risk a certain % of his points to fly a 262 he wouldn't have to wait months to build up his perk points to do it. May need to incorperate a minimum amount of points before you could use them. (I.E. 50 points and the percentage lose can't take you below 10 points for example) Might be hard to calulate if a guy only has 3 perk points and wants to gamble 10% of his points for a 262. So they should have a predetermined amount before being able to use them. Just another idea for you all to think over.

[qts]

Somewhat of a hijack but I think that having different sets of perk values for different years is a good idea. So when themap gets reset we may get NDIsles with a 1940 planeset or Uterus with a 1945 planeset or something else.

[JustJim]

PERK EVERYTHING

this way you 50 or so guys  out of 100's that play this game can have it just the way you want it,   but enjoy it for it will not last long as many people will cancel their memberships and AH will go tit's up.

Just my Nostrohandsomehunk prediction.

100's of people pay $14.95 to play but it seems 50 or so want it their way.

Fly what You want let the rest of us fly what we want.

Looking forward to having ya on my 6

[Kweassa]

Some more thinking..

1) The Chog was doing 20~23% alone.

2) The P-51D always had a stable rate of 10% - regardless of the Chog.

3) The Spit9 and N1K2 share a total rate of 20% - this means the overall rate of those two is set at about 20%, and which plane's more used, fluctuates throughout the tours. ie) In some tours, the Spit9 does 7%, and the N1K2 does 13%. In other tours, the Spit9 might do 12%, and the N1K2 8%.

4) The La-7 saw steady but continuous increase until recently, where it blew over the 10% line.

5) The Typhoon, which claims 5%, is probably the most intersting case of them all. It remains about 5%/fifth place ever since Tour29. The top five is set since that tour, up to today. (*note: recent stats of Tour41, is also very interesting in the fact that a change of terrain, can also significantly effect plane usage. "Bigisles" no doubt, is the main reason behind the Seafire and the F6F-5 getting more used than the Typhoon!)

6) The Seafire and F6F-5 is hard to track - only within three~four tours since they appeared, the La-7 and the Fw190D-9 appeared, and then, the Chog became perked. The usage fluctuates anywhere between as low as 1% to as high as 7% - with these difficulties in consideration, a lot of guesswork has to be made in its usage levels. About 1% each, is what I estimate as the "true" figures, before the Chog became perked. All the figures above that, is a result of new planes introduced in too quick a time period.

 ...

 Comparative analysis of above five points, suggest:

* Point 2) suggests that there's a stable P-51D crowd, who are uneffected by whatever may happen or whichever new plane might come around(unless it's something like a P-51H ) - probably due to its high fame, and high versatility as a MA fighter. They have no reason to falter whether or not the Chog was around.

* Point 3) reveals the fact that the N1K2 pilots are also Spit9 pilots. They too, fly nothing else. When someone gets bored with the N1K2 they take out a Spit9. Vice versa with the typical N1K2 pilot. This means the N1K2/Spit9 crowd is also set.

* Points 4), 5), and 6), reveal where the Chog crowd went. We can track the "actual" usage of the Chog as a fighter, with slight assumptions and some clever sleuthing, based on the facts in the three points above.

 It's 23% impact, as previously analyzed by many, comes from its significancy as a do-it-all plane. After the Chog was perked, the Typhoon saw significant increase. A 1% plane, suddenly jumps up to about 4% immediately after it was perked. Over the tours, it stabilizes at 5%.

 The significancy of the Typhoon, reveals the fact that a large share of Chog usage was due to its jabo capabilities. People who don't fly Chogs regularly, would still up a Chog when doing jabo, or when they had to fly off a carrier. Therefore, it is often misleading to see the "23%" figure and think "great, 23% of fighters in MA is the Chog" - this never happened.

 From point 6), we can see how much the F6F-5 and the Seafire was increased in usage - those two planes are each about 4% in average since Tour29. Thus, over the tours, they saw total increase of 6%.

 Point 4), thus, is where the secret lies. The Chog crowd, has been transformed into the La-7 crowd.


 In conclusion, of the 20~23% kills achieved by the Chog at it's prime, 4% of them are from Jabo attacks. 6% was due to carrier duties. That's 10%. About 10~13% of the Chog kills, is achieved during regular, land-based, non-jabo fighter duties.

 This, reveals a shocking truth on overusage.

 Some of the claims of people skeptical on perking the Chog, turns out to be true: "I don't see that many Chogs to be a problem." Yes, the Chog never was 23% in "true fighter" usage. It's actual usage as a regular fighter, was 10%!

 Which part is so shocking? This part, where we arrive at this  fact...


* P-51D - 10%
* Spit9+N1K2J - 10%+10%
* Chog - 10%

 What does current stats say? The new plane, La-7, is now 10% in usage. This is some serious shi*..!

 The "Big Four" phenomenon, wasn't caused by perking the Chog!!

 In previous theory, supposedly the pilots of the perked planes, moved over to "next best planes" - and thus, when 1 plane was perked, the "next best planes" quickly became the new head honchos of the MA.

 Thus, this led to the assumption that perking planes, just cause more whinings, people continuously asking to perk the best planes until every plane was perked - freedom is clasped in chains, and AH dies.

 The whining about the "big four", was the result of the Chog being perked, and the classic case of perks decimating freedom of choice, and causing more and more whining.

 My latest analysis, totally blows away that idea. It never was like that.

 The "Big Four" did not appear suddenly. The Chog seemed to be overused only due to the fact that it was a do-it-all plane. Remove the do-it-all aspect and observe it's nature as a normal fighter, the Chog was actually doing 10%! This magic number, "10%", is also what the P-51D, Spit+N1K2 has.

 We always thought in the past days, only the Chog was a scourge-terror, everywhere you run into you see only Chogs. That's how we were all brainwashed by the "20% kills" figure. That thought was practically embedded in our heads that we never saw the truth.

 We never thought the P-51D, Spit9, N1K2 was a serious problem, because to us, it always seemed like:

"Yeah, the P-51D, Spit9, N1K2 is used a lot.. but never like the Chog. The Chog is the real problem - anywhere you go, you see them always. For god's sake, they claim 23%!"

  In shocking truth, the "Big Four" phenomenon - where four of the top fighters sharing about an equally high rate of usage and kills claimed - was already there.

 It was always the "Big Four". After the La-7 came and Chog was perked, all the Chog pilots moved to the La-7, and formed a new "Big four". The rest three planes of the Big Four, were always as much a problem as the Chog.

 The current stats of plane usage, is nothing but a reflection of what was past - The Typhoon, F6F-5, Seafire and the La-7, are direct heritage of what was once, superbly overhyped as the "Chog".

 I was wrong, perking the Chog did not increase diversity and split its usage among four other planes. Like many, I had that thought embedded in my head, too. Ofcourse, this does not falter the potential of perk points used as a method of limiting usage.

 The perking of the Chog did what it was intended to do - it split some of the multi-roles the Chogs carried out alone, to different planes. However, it did not increase 'diversity' as what one would expect in normal fighter-to-fighter combat in AH.

 This, is not because perking itself is wrong. It is a direct result of wrong method of perks applied - adding in a new super-plane which immediately replaced the perked one.

 Thus, in the end, these newly revealed facts ultimately strengthens my agenda: unless an entire section of certain fighters are perked, perking individual planes will not help in variety.

[Kweassa]

While the suggested constant perks remain intact, a system of dynamic perkage which calculates the kills achieved by a certain fighter type in a set 24hour period, and perks it accordingly would assure that some of the "nightmares" stay away.

 What I envision as a sub-system of the proposed new perk agenda, is system which collects stats by a 24hour period. A much simpler system to model, than some of the other dynamic perkages suggested by others - ones that calculate all the take-offs of planes, and determines a perk price for every plane.

 In what I envision, a standard of 6% kills in MA would be used. This 6% would be subtracted from the total percentage of kills that fighter achieved during the given 24hour period.

 For instance, when a typical Spit9 achieves 8.4% kills that day, this figure would be rounded out as an integral number of 8. Subtract 6 from that 8, and you get 2.

 In the next 24hour period, the Spit9 would be perked at a price of two points! Not a too high perk prices, and comparable with the constant perked planes(which are perked between 3~5 points).

 If incredible overuse makes some plane do 20%, it would become a 14point perk plane.

 Let's say the P-47D-30, a constant perk plane of 3 points, is for some reason used 7.89%(which, I don't think it's a likely thing).. the 7.89 turns integral to 8. 8 minus 6 equals two, and thus, two dynamic perk points are added to the constant perk point. It becomes a five point plane!

 These perk costs, are ofcourse, finally calculated through the perk multiplier as we have now.


 ...

 The reason I had to come up with this sub-system, is that the latest analysis in the prior post, shows a grim truth about the people's tendency in plane choices.

 There's a fixed, unmoving crowd for a certain plane of overuse(which, the real standard for 'overuse' is actually 10%). The P-51D crowd remained constant 10% both before and after the perking of the Chog. It was a part of the previous, "hidden Big Four", a best suited plane for MA.

 The Spit9/N1K2 crowd also retained added total of 20%.

 The Chog crowd dispersed into four planes - Typh, La-7, Seafire, F6F-5.. among them, the normal conditions as a land-based pure fighter is represented by the La-7. The La-7 also remains at 10%.

 These constant crowd, searches out for an alternative plane that most closely resembles their plane of main use, if for whatever reason it becomes unavailable.

 Thus, in my darkest nightmare, even if the new constant perk agenda I have suggested, the problem of variety remains the same. Some problems - such as sucidal jabos, and over abundance of late war fighter-bombers - will be solved, and with great confidence I can say so. However, the variety may remain same!

* The P-51D crowd moves totally to the P-51B.
* The N1K2 crowd flocks entirely to the Spit9.
* The La-7/former Chog crowd, now flocks to the La-5FN.

 10% P-51Bs, 20% Spit9s, 10% La-5FNs, even under the suggested new perk agenda...! Overusage problem of the Spit9, is now totally serious - the Chog 20% figures were achieved by combined usage of jabo, carrier duty and fighter duty. Now, the Spit9 is doing 20% entirely in fighter duty alone!

 Oh my god, I've created a monster!  

 The only solution, if this nightmare comes true, would be going back to the original AH perks(not an option: will kill the positive changes), or slap up an another constant perk value for 1943 era(not an option: since initial costs for the new perk agenda was low, the 1943 planes would be even lower 0.5, 1 points.. this will rid of the effectivity. Thus, 1943 planes will have to be set at 3~5 points, and this will result in upping the 1944~'45 planes to 8~10 points, which in turn, will result in the originally perked planes becoming even higher in prices).

 While there are some optimistic points that might regulate this from happening too seriously..


* limited armament, shorter range of the P-51B
* limited armament, smaller performance margin of the La-5FN
(This may cut off about 3% top from these planes, in optimistic estimates. But the Spit9, is totally unaccounted for. It could still be 7% 51Bs, 7% La-5Fns, and 20% Spit9s)


 ... it still is a very risky gamble. I can't take that chance. "Dweebery", is the most powerful force in AH, and that, just cannot be disputed.
 
 Thus, a second CP(constant perk) for 1943 era is impossible. The only real option left, is to run a dual perk system that uses a combination of CP and DP(dynamic perk) factor.

* The positive changes with CP applied to '44~ planes will be retained.
* The DP will regulate remaining potentials of overuse not by a fixed CP value, which is vastly incompetent and inefficient, but a DP value based on a 24hour collection of kill percentage.

 Thus, planes with estimated figures over the standard of 6%, will be perked between 4 points(10% kills) to 14 points(20% kills). If people lazily just flock over to the Spit9, P-51B, and the La-5FN, even when a nice-guy NPA(new perk agneda) CP has provided a good and fair 1943 environment for varous fighters, bombers and jabo planes... the DP will make sure they decline from that path.

 It's a harsh system, and yes, it takes away some of the freedoms. But the truth about people's choices, is even harsher.

 It's not as menacing as a RPS, nor complicated as a 'true' DP system. Implied DP prices will fluctuate everyday, and the more they try out various planes, the more planes become totally free. (The planes that were not on the NPA CP list, but became perked due to overusage, will ultimately become free, when they grow under 6% usage)
 
 It doesn't really take away the choices. It just makes sure that there are consequences following a choice. Not too scary to totally drive people away, but not a slouch, either.

ps) Then why don't we just do away with the NPA, and apply the whole plane set with the suggested "6% DP" system? That's because the NPA is not just about achieving the fun of variety. It has secondary goals which are just as much, maybe even more, important as variety.

[scJazz]

Still support the idea
-----------------------------------------------------
A few points I would like to make...

First, do not get too focused in analyzing events and data involving the F4U-1C "Hog" specifically. The fact that this plane saw inordinate amount of usage is, in fact, not the issue. The issue is the "+20 vorpal bunwhacker" to which I have already referred. It is always natural, and in fact, correct behavior for individuals to always choose the "best", whatever that may be. The psychological reason for the choices in planes that we are seeing is because they are the "best". These late war planes, which have the best handling characteristics, speed, guns, etc; are the natural evolution of the "Age of Flight" (prop style)(after a 6 year war killing millions and encouraging improvement). As such they are the apex predators of the game. The cause for concern lies in the fact that out of a set of 35 to 40 planes (haven't ever counted) a mere fraction can command such an overwhelming amount of usage. This is the issue, which must be addressed.

How can it be addressed? By "charging" for the ability to use such weaponry and by adjusting the charge dependant on strategic situations.

Regarding a dynamic system, do not focus on a 24 hr based system. Such a concept would cause problems in that players in certain geographical locations will end up with an advantage (Europe, Asia, etc) because they are at the "reset point" while also being around 6PM Local Time. The exact region ending up at the apex of such a system depends on arbitrary information and is as likely to end up being U.S. Pacific as it could be Russian Eastern. Due to this inserting randomizing factors in how often these statistics might assist... 24hrs +/- 12hrs per harvest of stats with the second and third elements of the function being random numbers and the first being some arbitrary value, would be such an example. Note that, HTC already avoids day/night issues by mating the Arena clock to a value that isn't 24hrs so that people all across the world can enjoy having their HQ bombed in the dead of night when you can't see a thing. Another idea would be to set the dynamic perk cost of a plane according to "old data", for instance last week and saying OK this is the costs for this week for a 190D9, etc. The initial seeds for such a formula would be "The Last Tour" or anything else that amuses you, "1.0 for instance". The effect of any dynamic perk point system or lessening of only the late war plane effect is a tendency toward a median capability plane without enforcing it. Allowing people to choose any "cool toy" they want while insisting that the "coolest of toys" comes at a price.

[Ecke-109-]

I support Kweassas perk list, too.

Ecke

[Tumor]

I can't freeking believe the Spit9 was left off the list.  No vote here.  Perk the "overabundance" planes or just leave it alone.

[Karnak]

Tumor,

Kweassa's list is based purely on date.  The Spitfire Mk IX doesn't make it onto the list because it is a 1942 aircraft.  Kweassa wants a 1943 arena, not the 1944 one we have.

[Tumor]

Originally posted by Karnak
Tumor,

Kweassa's list is based purely on date.  The Spitfire Mk IX doesn't make it onto the list because it is a 1942 aircraft.  Kweassa wants a 1943 arena, not the 1944 one we have.

All I'm looking for is more (better) variety in the MA.  I don't care what plane, the year, or the "side".  This is why the only "perk agenda" I'll ever seriously support will include the top 4-5... and preferably ALL of them.  Truthfully... I want easy-mode perked.