Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: TBolt A-10 on May 06, 2004, 03:29:30 PM
-
from Kweassa's New Perk Agenda (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=87356&perpage=50&pagenumber=1):
Newly perked planes
--------------------------
LA-7: 5 points
TYPHOON: 3 points
YAK9-U: 3 points
P-51D: 4 points
190D-9: 4 points
F4U-1D: 3 points
109G-10: 4 points
P-38L: 3 points
N1K2-J: 3 points
P-47D-30: 3 points
2 quick notes:
1) I think you ought to add 8 to 10 perk points to each listed above.
and,
2) I would suggest that HTC consider (for both AH1 and AH2) requiring that each pilot earn a certain number of perkies in an earlier version before advancing to the later-model aircraft.
ie: Bf 109E -> promoted to Bf 109F -> promoted to Bf 109G2 -> promoted to Bf 109G6 -> promoted to Bf 109G10
P-51B -> promoted to P-51D
Spit V / Seafire -> promoted to Spit IX -> promoted to Spit XIV
etc., etc.
-
Umm, no perks for the F4u1d, Typhoon, Yak9u, p38, p47, possibly 190-d9.
La7, N1k if changed should be perked the same as the C Hog.
G10, 51d should be half that.
But that's if you feel like changing it. However, the La7 and N1k need to be changed.
-
I disagree about the P51D. Its only a great plane ONLY if you know how to fly it, therefore it should not be perked. Unlike 51, any noob or advanced pilot can fly the La7 and n1k, and its just as lethal as some of the most lethal planes out there...so those should be perked, indeed.
Also - ...I dont know how you would do this, but for intentional rams and suicides should count as a few perks being lost.
-
If they deducted perks for rams, there would just be whines about bad lag and cr@ppy connections. A ram is never the rammer's fault. :rolleyes: :lol
I still like the idea of making people work their way up to the uber rides (La-7, Spit 9, etc) in the M.A.
-
TBolt, i dont think people would be whining over a few perks...
-
Personally, I think its an interesting idea.
However after a few years I think I know how HTC operates, and what you're suggesting is something that could influence gameplay into something totally different - which, is what the HTC crew opt not do unless without very deep consideration that it is absolutely needed.
The NPA specifically aims to retain as much of the pre-application gameplay as possible - the perks are not applied to make players have to fullfil a certain condition to use a certain plane. It is there to merely slightly 'bend' a certain usage curve so the gameplay of the MA is overall more balanced and rounded-out. That is precisely the reason why the perks are light - its is at a price range where players don't need to really work their arse off to fly planes they want.
It is lightly perked so while flying them all of the time, using them with impunity, and doing poorly in it would result in a lot of perk loss, a quick few sorties with few kills would still be enough to allow them to use a late-war plane once or twice again.
The Chog, which showed a 23% usage at its prime, broke down to 5~8% after it was perked at 8 points. The four planes which are abused nowadays each show 10% usage. In the matters of balance it is not to be perked at more than 5 points, as what the NPA aims is not to suddenly decrease its usage so it is rarely visible in the arena. Rather, the NPA aims to see about equal numbers of mid-war AND late-war planes flying in the arena at the same time.
....
I disagree about the P51D. Its only a great plane ONLY if you know how to fly it, therefore it should not be perked. Unlike 51, any noob or advanced pilot can fly the La7 and n1k, and its just as lethal as some of the most lethal planes out there...so those should be perked, indeed.
Same logic applies to all planes. With the exception of the 262 and 163 which even the suckiest of individuals has no problem escaping away with, all the perks planes are "great planes ONLY if you know how to fly it". Really, the F4U-4 ans Spit14 does not deserve such a high penalizing price. Neither does the Ta-152 deserve a 20point perk.
P-51D is a balance buster not because it is the greatest plane to fly around - but simply because it is severely overused, and carries an ordnance load way too high - which effectively eliminates all the wonderful, specialized ground-attack planes which Supe and Nate went all the trouble through, to model. Really, why would we ever want to fly the lumbering Mosquito or the IL-2, when we could just up a P-47D-30 or a P-51D-20 which carries some 4000~5000lbs worth of ordnance? The late war planes, typically US fighter-bombers, carry more ordnance than most of the level bombers in the game.
Therefore, the perk is applied to influence the player choice so they would largely fly the P-51B in most occasions, and fly the P-51D when they really feel they can afford it without too much burden.
-
why dont we perk all the planes lol
-
Originally posted by yb11
why dont we perk all the planes lol
Why perk any? Why not _UNPERK_ all of the planes?
-
I don't think they should perk those until they make selecting perked planes easier. We should get hotkeys in the tower for selecting our favorite rides without having to scroll through that huge planelist from the hangar--especially if we're gonna be burning through perk points and changing planes often when we run out.
-
Maybe for another arena. I agree with innominate. Perking more aircraft, even just a little, would have some serious backlash. Think of the newguy htat logs in for the first time looking to fly his favorite Corsair... imagine the dejected look on his face when he finds out he can't fly! :D
I dunno. Less perks for me.
-
Originally posted by Octavius
Maybe for another arena. I agree with innominate. Perking more aircraft, even just a little, would have some serious backlash.
Er, sorry, i think you missed the sarcasm tags.
Personally I'm all for more perk planes. Very low cost(under 10 points) perk planes are perfectly accessible to new pilots. The same arguments used against new perk planes(newbies cant fly it, why not perk them all, etc) work just as well for arguing to unperk the 262. Unperking the 262 is of course a silly proposition, and it's being perked gives a solid argument for perking new planes.
People commonly say that when the F4U-1C was perked, it was because the plane was scoring 20% of the kills. 20% is a misleading number, because at the time AH had a LOT fewer planes. So what if instead of ONE plane being vastly overused, it's three now? One other point with the F4U-1C is that, after being perked, it also had a lot of weight added to it that had been missing. So the F4U-1C we have today isn't quite the same one that caused the problems. (I still think it's a fair perk though)
The question isn't "to perk, or not to perk" but rather, where to draw the line.
IMNQSHO, the only plane which should be perked is the la7, because it's speed is only slightly worse than the tempest, while being more maneuverable. Planes like the niki, p51, etc, can be annoying, but don't posess the killer qualities making them worthy of a perk.
The biggest problem with perk planes, is perk tags. Especially with the F4U-4, 152, and spit14, which don't possess the killer performance of the tempest, 262, or 163. Players will go well out of thier ways, even to the point of suicide just to bag a perk plane. IMO perk tags should go away where appropriate. (F4U for f4u4, spit for spit14, 190 for 152, typh for tempest, LAV for la5/la7)
People commonly say that when the F4U-1C was perked, it was because the plane was scoring 20% of the kills. 20% is a misleading number, because at the time AH had a LOT fewer planes. So what if instead of ONE plane being vastly overused, it's three now? One other point with the F4U-1C is that, after being perked, it also had a lot of weight added to it that had been missing. So the F4U-1C we have today isn't quite the same one that caused the problems. (I still think it's a fair perk though)
More Perk planes are good. More cheap perk planes are good. The lesser perk planes need to be fun to fly, and not targets for gangbangs, or tools for distraction. The F4U-1C is a perfect example of how the prop perk planes should be treated.
Originally posted by Octavius
Think of the newguy htat logs in for the first time looking to fly his favorite Corsair... imagine the dejected look on his face when he finds out he can't fly!
What about the poor new guy that logs in for the first time looking to fly his favorite ww2 fighter, the me262. is that a valid reason to unperk it for him?
-
Yeesh! I retract my statement, I now disagree :)
By perking rides based on usage and other statistics, what do you hope to accomplish? Increase diversity? I just dont think taxing the individual is the right way to go. Unless perhaps a monthly (tour-ly) infusion of perks is given. That way, "the new guy" will have a choice when logging in for the first time.
I think ENY values should have a dynamic system to control diversity... something similar to the perk multiplyer based on the current roster numbers. Usage numbers could determine a plane's current ENY for the tour. That way, if a player wants to save up for "the good ride", they can achieve their goal at a faster rate by diversifying and killing in 'unused' planes. Maybe one tour the P51D will have a high ENY? Who knows... it offers some fluidity in the perk farming techniques.
I dunno. I rarely fly perks anymore and I dont really have a decent argument other than "I dont like it" for the time being. They'd be more important to me if I actually spent them... maybe I will in the future, who knows. I like the challenge of the P40, not the ease of the Tempest.
-
"The new guy" can go HO another plane and die of it with a C.205, and the chances are he'll have about 1.5 perks. If the "new guy" does that under a numbers disadvantage, he'll actually get something like 3 perks. Then, he can immediately choose to ride a P-51D in the next sortie.
One thing we have to understand, is the "new guy" is not always a "victim" to the vices of the MA. The "new guy" is also a perpatrator of it all - the overuse of La-7s, P-51Ds, N1K2s and Spit9s (each showing usage of 10% average for a more than 30 tours now, whilst the rest who are outside the "Big Five(including the Typhoon)", remain at 2~3% at most) are due to the "new guys", or rather, people who verily depend on their planes' pure ability to fight.
As much as they die, they also kill. Vast majority of planes that are used some five~six times more than other planes, fight against their same kind, in a perpetual state of gruelsome attrition. By that, they amass perks on their own. The "new guy" won't have some thousands and thousands of perks like the vets, but they certainly collect enough to use late war planes if they feel like it.
The perks suggested are cheap. It's certainly cheap enough to blow away in stupid flying, hording, sucidal attacks and etc etc.
However, like a drop of water will ultimately pave the stone, if they remain in their muddles of stupidity and careless actions they will ultimately face the penalties of not being able to fly what they want at all.
If they don't want that, they'll either have to start to learn to fly a bit more carefully, so they at least earn more than 3 perks than compared to each time they are shot down in a 3 perk point plane - as long as they do that, or they are willing to do that, they'll always have some spare perks they can use to fly the late war monsters more often that not. It's not like a 200point 262 they have to risk. It's 3~5 points suggested, for crying out loud!
If the human decency of it all was enough to cure the MA, it'd already have happened a long time ago.
We used to believe the natural "intuitions" of a flight sim enthusiast, would lead the player to try and fight in different planes. While there was always a favorite plane, still people would love doing combat in various planes against various planes. And a "noob" slowly progresses into a "vet", he'll naturally start having the cravings of challenge. And what comes naturally, would ultimately leave the arena in a state of balance - that's what we used to believe: the Laissez-faire of the MA.
Well, it turns out that failed pretty much miserably. People now couldn't care less of ACM or the joy of "flight" at all. They don't want to be a "vet" at all. All they need is a good plane with a good gun. They don't care how much they die. They don't wish to become better and not die. They live for the fight itself without any further purpose of it.
While that kind of cravings itself is not something to criticize, as it is a mere difference in preference, what those cravings does, is ultimately destroy the balance of the arena and turn it into a monopoly of dull planes. Same planes, same suicidal dweebery over and over and over and over again.
So, if that should be, then I don't see why not the "noob" should do that same thing in mid war planes. Since the perks apply to everybody else, then the chances are all the other "noobs" which they usually fight against will also be in the same planes - they aren't "disadvantaged" in anyway.
However, if they really want to fly things like La-7s or P-51Ds exclusively, then they've got no choice but to become a decent pilot - at least decent enough to maintain a certain K/D ratio to collect small amounts of perks regularly, to always maintain at least 3~5 perk points so they can always ride what they want.
And that process which they must go through, I am hoping, will naturally turn them into better pilots with better perception of balance.
No, I wouldn't say it's a "tax".
It's more like prying the nipple away from the 3 year old, and urging them to use a spoon and a fork and start eating meals with their own twi hands, instead of remain in the bosom of Mommy Latewarmonstroisty. ;)
-
A perked P-38 come on LOL.
-
A perked P-38 is a perked 4,500 lbs ordnance carrier.
If that helps people into flying more A-20s, Mossies, 110s, Il-2s, Ju87s, Bostons ... I'd say it's not a 'come on'.. wouldn't you agree? ;)
-
Kweassa did you ask the CM for try in the CT arena ?
It can be used to test IRL your idea and have some feedback.
I know it doesn't fit exactly the CT as it's not an historical setup,but well you don't risk anything at trying ;)
-
Excellent post Kweassa!
Camo
-
straffo, I'm aware that some of the staff use a simular regime.
In the CT it's either one of two in regulating usage to the "historic" agenda:
1) limit use by limiting available fields
2) or, limit use by something simular to my suggested NPA
Some of the staff gave positive feedback that it works well, but frankly I think the CT is very limited as an 'experiment'. The historic planesets means that the 'usage curve' is already artificially tampered with to a certain extent, and the perkage applied is more of a secondary fail-safe device to intensify the historic aspect. Also, the pilot numbers are too few.
The only way to see if it works or not, is to apply it to an arena and give it an experimental run for about 6 tours. First few tours to accomodate for all the complaints and gripes, and threats to quit AH if it doesn't stop ;).. and the real results would be available for analysis after the 4th or 5th tour after it is implemented. :D
-
Asking for a tour in the Main won't work IMO :)
I'm aware the CT staff use something like that but as you said limiting planeset an field to keep thing historical.
My proposal was more to test the with whole planeset like it could have been setup for the main.
-
Another point you could make kweassa:
It's my opinion that there is a chance that more perk rides especially low perk value rides could possibly lessen the currently very common mentality of killing a perk plane at any cost.
I like the NPA very much, sadly I don't think that a CT implementation would do any good at providing viable test data.
This is something that would have to be implemented in the MA to see how it would play out. In essence, yanking out the pacifier. I'm sure this would cause turmoil amongst the dweebish player base, but that may not necessarily be a bad thing. That being said, I'm not holding my breath.
If I did hold my breath would HTC do it? :D
I beleive you make very good points kweassa, I'm sure this idea will be mulled over by the HTC crew otherwise it would be a disservice to AH.