Some points about the "Big-Four" and the Chog, from a previous line of thinking, by me:
"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. "
.....
"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%.
* P-51D - 10%
* Spit9+N1K2J - 10%+10%
* Chog - 10%
The "new plane", La-7, is now 10% in usage. The "Big Four" phenomenon, wasn't caused by perking the Chog.
In previous theory:
1) 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.
2) 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.
3) 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. "
....
" The truth:
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.
....
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 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". "
...
" 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. "
...
Another interesting thing to consider is, people immediately relate to the concept "taking away a choice" when someone suggests a perk on a certain plane.
If they suggest to pull the plane out of the planeset, that'd be taking away choices. If they suggest it needs perks above what average people can easily collect and use, that's limiting choices.
But 3 perks for a cost? People are talking like 3 points on a plane will suddenly kill a plane and make P-51s or stuff inaccessible to the general public. I don't think that's true. 50~200 perks may kill motivation, but 3 points is just enough to boost motivational qualities and promote a more careful line of flying, but not high enough to feel punitive when the plane is lost.
..
More details on various thinking in the link attached at the sig below.
