Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Karnak on February 11, 2008, 11:03:56 PM
-
Here are what I think are the relevant statistics. I listed all the perk fighters because the Spitfire Mk XIV is perked and should be compared in kill/death ratio and usage with its fellow perk fighters. I selected the unperked fighters by picking high usage, powerful fighters that, with the exception of the La-7, tend to draw more experienced and better players to them. I think that using this selection of unperked fighters is fair as the people that tend to fly perk planes tend to be at least moderately experienced and to fly in a more conservative manner. I included both the post-perk Ta152H-1 and pre-perk F4U-1C as a comparison with the Spitfire Mk XIV's current performance.
Late War Tour 96, 1-01-08 to 1-31-08
Perked fighters in order of their kill/death ratios:
Tempest has 6136 Kills of All models and all models have 945 Kills of Tempest. 6.49 to 1 kill/death ratio.
Me 262 has 4103 Kills of All models and all models have 698 Kills of Me 262. 5.88 to 1 kill/death ratio.
Me 163B has 790 Kills of All models and all models have 160 Kills of Me 163B. 4.94 to 1 kill/death ratio.
F4U-1C has 9910 Kills of All models and all models have 3875 Kills of F4U-1C. 2.56 to 1 kill/death ratio.
F4U-4 has 2754 Kills of All models and all models have 1256 Kills of F4U-4. 2.19 to 1 kill/death ratio.
Spitfire Mk XIV has 1454 Kills of All models and all models have 1139 Kills of Spitfire Mk XIV. 1.28 to 1 kill/death ratio.
Unperked fighters with high kill/death ratios and medium to high usage, in order of their kill/death ratios:
Bf 109K-4 has 9344 Kills of All models and all models have 5981 Kills of Bf 109K-4. 1.56 to 1 kill/death ratio.
Typhoon IB has 17053 Kills of All models and all models have 11094 Kills of Typhoon IB. 1.54 to 1 kill/death ratio.
Ta 152H has 2999 Kills of All models and all models have 2042 Kills of Ta 152H. 1.47 to 1 kill/death ratio.
Ki-84-Ia has 9016 Kills of All models and all models have 6224 Kills of Ki-84-Ia. 1.45 to 1 kill/death ratio.
P-38J has 6562 Kills of All models and all models have 4525 Kills of P-38J. 1.45 to 1 kill/death ratio.
Fw 190D-9 has 13943 Kills of All models and all models have 9865 Kills of Fw 190D-9. 1.41 to 1 kill/death ratio.
La-7 has 33201 Kills of All models and all models have 26480 Kills of La-7. 1.25 to 1 kill/death ratio.
F4U-1A has 6568 Kills of All models and all models have 5381 Kills of F4U-1A. 1.22 to 1 kill/death ratio.
Tour 15, 4-01-01 to 4-30-01, the final tour with an unperked F4U-1C:
F4U-1C has 27717 Kills of All models and all models have 20022 Kills of F4U-1C. 1.38 to 1 kill/death ratio.
What do these statistics tell us? One, the Spitfire Mk XIV has, by far, the lowest kill/death ratio of any perked fighter. Two, the Spitfire Mk XIV has the lowest usage of any perked fighter save the Me163, and that is limited to one base per country. Three, unique among perk fighters, the Spitfire Mk XIV has a lower kill/death ratio than many unperked fighters. Four, the perked Spitfire Mk XIV has a lower kill/death ratio than the recently unperked Ta152H-1. Five, the perked Spitfire Mk XIV has a lower kill/death ratio than the unperked F4U-1C did despite the fact that the F4U-1C was at the time, by far, the most popular fighter and was used by more unskilled players than any other fighter.
What do I think an unperked Spitfire Mk XIV would be like? It would probably see higher usage in Spitfires than any of them other than the Spitfire Mk XVI and Spitfire Mk VIII, though the Spitfire Mk IX might also see heavier usage. It would probably have the highest kill/death ratio of any Spitfire. I doubt it would be a popular fighter after the initial "Ooh, it's free!" period had worn off and would instead find a solid place in the second tier of fighters used by more experienced players who can manage the quirks of these fighters. It does not handle like any other Spitfire and would be offputting to most casual Spitfire users.
I think the Spitfire Mk XIV is a good fighter, but nothing worth spending perk points on. As such, it should follow the Ta152H-1's example and be unperked.
-
Agree.
-
You can't use kills/deaths as a justification for REMOVING a perk, because anything perked (even slightly) significantly reduces its use in the MAs.
CHOG goes from 20% to "rare-ish" with a rather small perk price. We KNOW what would happen if it were unperked, but just looking at the kills/deaths you wouldn't be able to see that.
Just sayin'...
-
Originally posted by Krusty
You can't use kills/deaths as a justification for REMOVING a perk, because anything perked (even slightly) significantly reduces its use in the MAs.
.
Looking at the presented numbers, combined with the experience of unperking the Ta 152, you can.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
You can't use kills/deaths as a justification for REMOVING a perk, because anything perked (even slightly) significantly reduces its use in the MAs.
CHOG goes from 20% to "rare-ish" with a rather small perk price. We KNOW what would happen if it were unperked, but just looking at the kills/deaths you wouldn't be able to see that.
Just sayin'...
Your comment makes no sense. It is illogical.
The F4U-1C went from ~20% of the MA usage with a higher kill/death ratio to ~3-5% of MA usage, ending with a much higher kill/death ratio and still much higher usage rate when compared to the Spitfire MK XIV. How does it follow that unperking the very low usage, very low (for a perk plane) kill/death ratio Spitfire Mk XIV would see either its kill/death ratio go up or see it baloon to a massive percentage of the LWMA usage? If it follows a reverse of the F4U-1C it would see its kill/death ratio tank and its usage go up somewhere in the five to ten times area.
EDIT:
Perked units can also be expected to have much higher kill/death ratios than unperked units because they are both better than unperked units and are flown more conservatively than unperked units. Yet the Spitfire Mk XIV not only has a lower kill/death ratio than any other perk fighter, being the only one below a 2 to 1 ratio, but also uniquely among perk fighters of having a lower kill/death ratio than many unperked fighters. It barely edges the mass use La-7 in kill/death ratio despite how uncautiously many La-7s are used.
Personally, I think that says something about how capable it is in the AH2 Late War Main Arena.
-
Agree, unperk it, the Spit 14 is a quirkier ride anyways, most MA Spit regulars probably would not bother with it, sticking to XVIs, and VIIIs, and leaving the 14 in the hanger.
...P-51D, Dora, 109K-4, Ki-84, are not perked.
-
unperk it, I think the 109k4 is more of a threat anyway
-
no, and perk the la7 while your at it.
-
I think it should be unperked. The 109k4 is just as deadly and has no perk.
It is not an easy mode Spit like the 16 and 8. It does take skill to fly it on the edge.
Personally perks don't matter to me if I wanted to fly it I would. It will give the newer guys a powerful spit to fly rather than say an LA7.
Down low where most fights take place it gets out performed by most things, it comes into its own at higher altitudes and surely we would want to promote these kind of fights.
Bruv
~S~
-
I agreee. It should not be perked.
Nice job on the facts and figures too by the way.
:aok
-
I don't think a perk fighter that is hardly used and cannot maintain a kill/death ratio higher than all free fighters should be perked.
Likewise, I don't think a perk fighter that is just over a 2 to 1 kill/death ratio should be very expensive. The F4U-4 should be a budget perk plane. I think the Tempest, Me262, Me163 and F4U-1C are priced where they should be. F4U-4 should be cheaper and Spitfire Mk XIV should be free.
-
Originally posted by Bruv119
I think it should be unperked. The 109k4 is just as deadly and has no perk.
I can attest to this. I have a film of my Spit14 against a 109K4. The fight lasted for well over 12 minutes. Both he and I started out with B&Z style fighting, and then it turned into a mid-alt stall fight. In a Spit14 that is not easy because of the torque roll the engine/five-blade prop generates. I did manage to ping him once, but the only reason he lost in the end was because he ran out of gas and desperately tried to ditch.
to BW15 in the 109. That was some excellent flying.
I haven't posted the film do to the fact dial-up take ages to upload anything of size.
-
I agree, set it free.
I see the Spit 14 as one of the lesser threats in the game.
It has such a light perk on it anyway that un-perking it won't make a large difference. The only people who would be prevented from flying the Spit 14 due to lack of perks are also quite likely to be lacking enough skill to be any threat in it at all so I say go for it.
We luftdweebs got the 152, let the brits have their high-alt aircraft too.
It's so Golly-geened ugly that no one will fly the bloody thing anyway! :lol The cowling buldges are a travesty and that 5 bladed prop is horrific.
:rofl
All jokes aside..... Removing the perk for the Spit 14 would be a good decision, I believe.
-
Yeah! Unperk the 14 and put it on the La-7 or S%&#fire 16.
I hatez dweeeb rides..... :mad:
-
What do you fly?
-
Agreed, un perk.
-
[EDIT: Opinion alert!]
Disagree. Just because it doesn't turn like a spit5 it's not perkworthy? If it were named "numptydoodle.14" would it be any less powerful? About the only time I die in a spit14 is when I make a really stupid blunder. I use to fly it a lot. Several tours it was the only perk ride I flew (my reward, if you will).
It's a monster. Just because it doesn't turn like an early spit doesn't mean it's not one of the best (if not THE) climbers in the game, wicked fast, has 2 of the strongest 20mms in the game with the best trajectory, 2x 50cals with plenty of ammo to back them up, great visibility.
Except for roll, it's quite a bit like a -4 hog. Top tier, regardless of what the kills/deaths show.
Oh, and perhaps the lack of use on the Ta152 is more influence by the horribly buggly flight model, completely unstable flying characteristics, and not really being worth any perk price (self-limiting).
No, I don't think kills/deaths says much about a plane, because depending on how you look at them it could mean anything. 90% of newbies jump in an la-7, driving the deaths way up. Would you start thinking the La7 is any less potent if we got a sudden surge of 1000 newbies that droves the "deaths' Up without many additional "kills"? No, the performance stays the same.
-
So the Spit is a much better plane than its stats suggest, because most people flying the La-7 are noobs? That is some odd logic.
-
No, that's a simplified way of stating it to try and twist what I've said. If you're not contributing stop trying to trash things.
-
If the Mk XIV is as good as you claim, why is its usage and kill/death such crap? You keep focusing on the kill/death ratios, but I supplied usage numbers as well.
I think you're wrong. It is good, but nothing worth perks.
-
Your usage numbers ARE kill/death numbers.
You keep bringing it up.
I sure wouldn't mind a smaller perk, but the plane is definitely worthy of perkage. Hell it's way better now (~15) than what it was way back!
-
La-7 and Spit16 would deserve the perks much more than Spit14.
Yup, I agree on unperking 14.
-
Krusty,
Quit dodging the question. If it is as good as you claim, why do its numbers suck?
I'd rate the Spitfire Mk XIV as follows:
WEP Speed Low: Good
WEP Speed High: Excellent
MIL Speed Low: Average
MIL Speed High: Average
WEP Climb: Excelent
MIL Climb: Average
Firepower: Good
Handling Slow: Fair
Handling Fast: Poor
Visibility: Good
Fuel Endurance: Poor
Durability: Extremely Poor
-
Karnak, quit shifting the focus of your attack to me (aka dodging the question).
I wasn't dodging your question. I answered it. You asked me why I was bringing up kills/deaths, I replied "I'm not, YOU are."
You assume that the performance is linked with use. The 163 turns tighter than a zero, easy as pie to fly, climbs 20x faster than anything, can kill an entire formation of bombers in a second (or dogfight with any fighter in the game with ease). Considering HQ fields are very often a sector away from the front line on medium sized maps, they get a lot of use. Yet they would not warrant a perk by your numbers.
So the burden of proof is on you. YOU seem obsessed with kills/deaths. Prove it's the end-all, be-all of plane performance indicators. You haven't, and IMO you can't.
You want to petition for a perk-free spit14, do it. Just don't go cherry picking numbers to try and prove it.
P.S. You used to think the spit14 was worthy of a perk level many times what it currently is.
-
What is it about the 14 that would have a negative effect on gameplay if it wasn't perked? If perking is really about striking a balance, it's worked so well that the 14 is one of the planes you see least often in the MAs. In fact I see far more jets, rockets, tempests, 4-hogs, c-hogs, and even 234s. If the plane were such an imbalancing monster in the MAs, you'd see more of them, even with a perk cost. The fact that they are comparatively rare in the MAs suggests that the cost is too high, even though it's been reduced considerably.
I've flown it, and I, as an average pilot on a good day, would choose any of the other perk rides over the Spit. I just don't see why it is necessary to discourage its use- people are discouraged from flying it by its performance alone. I don't think the removal of its perk cost would have any real effect on its use in the MAs.
-
No, I never advocated it being perked in the first place.
Second, I am not cherry picking numbers. I posted every relevant number we can get. And I bluntly explained the Me163's numbers, if you'd actually read my post.
Now answer my question, if the Spitfire MK XIV is as much a monster as you claim, why are its usage numbers so low? I posted all the numbers you need, now explain them since you think my analysis is so flawed.
-
Im a dedicated SpitXiV flyer and I dont see any need to remove the perk on it, why not just perk the LA7, spit16 and Niki.
-
Why perk them? And if you talk about usage, why not perk the #1 fighter, the P-51D?
-
I was always in the unperk the XIV camp but, I've been flying it a bit more lately and it IS a monster.
I've been able to easily run down La-7's, Doras and P-51's with only a moderate (1-2K) alt advantage from the edge of icon range. And this is on the deck, not where this thing really shines.
Considering it can do this with ease, then out-climb and out-turn any of those planes once they're caught warrents a small perk price in my opinion.
Without it, the XIV will become the new La-7/Dora/Pony in the "I've got legs" catagory and compete with the XVI/N1K in the "all-around good planes" catagory. It will effectively reduce the use of 5 currently popular planes.
As to it's lowly K/D ratio and use, I have to believe that most who climb into it have no idea what it's about. They see a perked Spit and fly it like a Spit. They get killed and think "what a POS of a perk plane" and don't give it another try, reducing both K/D and usage.
I also don't think there's any comparison to the Ta-152. The 152 is not the fastest of the 190's, not the hardest hitting, not the best turning. The ONLY thing it has going for it is it's performance at altitudes that are rarely seen in the MA's.
Really, I can go either way on this but I think unperking the XIV will have a bigger impact than you might be imagining.
Just my $.02
-
Actually, I'd be fine with the Mk XVI being perked while the XIV is unperked. I think the Mk XVI is far more perkable than the XIV. All the XIV has on the XVI is a bit of speed, in all other categories the XVI matches or exceeds the XIV.
-
If wer are going to leave the perk how about giving the E wing option. In real life it had the clipped (E wing) or the standard wings...and give it 4 hispanos with the E wing just for kicks. I don't fly it much but in the last 3 sorties with the Spit14 I landed 12 kills with no deaths...or even any damage. I like it when you find someone up high (p51, dora, p38) and they think they can just outrun the idiot spit pilot.....surprise it's a 14!
-
It has an "e" wing. That has nothing to do with being clipped or not. Two 20mm + two .50 cals = e wing.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Actually, I'd be fine with the Mk XVI being perked while the XIV is unperked. I think the Mk XVI is far more perkable than the XIV. All the XIV has on the XVI is a bit of speed, in all other categories the XVI matches or exceeds the XIV.
The XIV actually has slight advantages in speed, acceleration and climb rate on the XVI. The XVI does match or exceed the XIV's climb rate through a small envelope, but overall the XIV has the advantage. In fact, the only advantage the XVI has is turn radius.
-
And roll rate, and almost any aspect of agility.
The acceleration advantage of the XIV over the XVI is such that it spends much more time flying faster than the XVI.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
I think its clear, based on Spitfire Mk IX numbers, that an unperked Spitfire Mk XIV would quickly imbalance the MA. Because I feel that is clear, I think that it must be perked, even though it is my favorite aircraft.
The question that I have is, how much does it need to be perked at?
This back when the perk price for the XIV was in the 50s or whatever.
(link: http://forums.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=48969&perpage=25&highlight=spit%20perked%20monster&pagenumber=2 )
"Now answer my question, if the Spitfire MK XIV is as much a monster as you claim, why are its usage numbers so low?"
You're still begging the question: Why are you so adamant that the kills/deaths ratio proves a plane should be perked/unperked?
I haven't got the burden of proof here, as you seem to imply. I don't have to tell you why the numbers don't add up. Rather, you have to tell ME why YOUR number system doesn't reflect the stats and capabilities of the plane itself. You tell ME why so few folks fly it?
The Spit8, by far one of the best planes in the game, a plane that lets unskilled newbies land 5 kills, had a kills/deaths of only 0.94 last tour. The Spit16, by all means a major contender for a small perk price, had a kills/deaths of 1.07. The spit9 1.02. Here comes the Spit14 with 1.27. A fairly major leap over all other spits. So, by your numbers system, the spit14 is 20% better than even the best unperked spit, and you want to unperk it?
I'm saying pulling kills/deaths doesn't relate to the qualifications of the plane itself, and can't be used as a reason to remove an existing perk price.
EDIT: I'm also of the mind you underestimate its impact if unperked, but my main grief in this thread is the argument/reason you give for it.
I might (maybe) have agreed with you if you'd just requested it (I'm a little on the fence, leaning to "keep a small perk"), but your support is flawed.
-
So, you can't actually explain why he's wrong in your opinion, but rather, he has to explain why what he believes is correct, is in fact wrong?
You are a real piece of work.
-
Is it possible once in a while that folks who like RAF birds might just want the XIV more accessible?
Consider that the XIV was in combat before it's counterpart the 190D9. D9 not perked. XIV perked. Ta152 unperked.
I also wish that in retrospect the LFXVIe had been called the LFIXe so that the 16 must be more uber then 14 crowd could get over that too.
I also realize that there will always be those LW guys who will never be convinced that anything flown by the LW isn't porked as naturally they should be better then any allied ride so clearly the Spitfire must be over modeled becomes the theme.
Unperk em all, quit complaining cause they're just cartoon airplanes, and go up and fight in em.
-
Krusty,
AH1 is not AH2.
Try again.
Are you daft?
One, the Spitfire Mk XIV is hardly used at all, seeing less use than any perk fighter other than the heavily field limited Me163.
That is a fact.
Two, the Spitfire Mk XIV dies far more often per kill gained than any other perk plane.
That is a fact.
Three, the Spitfire Mk XIV dies more often per kill gained than some free fighters. No other perk fighter fails to die less often per kill gained than any free fighter.
That is a fact.
These facts all support that the Spitfire Mk XIV is not worth spending perks on as it fails to even match the top ratio free fighters despite being flown more conservatively.
This is a theory.
Unperking the Spitfire Mk XIV would test the theory and if the Spitfire Mk XIV proceeded to dominate the arena it could be reperked.
This is a test method for the theory.
-
Been asking for an unperked for a long time now.
It is CONSISTENTY the lowest K/D ratio of ALL the perked planes, just check back through the tours.
It barely manages a 1.1 K/D per tour while all the other perked ones are into the 2.x and above.
It should follow the Ta-152 and get unperked (the now unperked Ta-152 manages a better K/D).
As for stronger 20mms Krusty?
They have exactly the same Hispanos as EVERY other Spit in the game.
I agree though, the XVI should have been called the LF IXe, it's what its FM (Merlin 66) is based on anyway, not a Merlin 266.
-
Agreed. Spit14 should lose the perk.
It's not as if more Spit14s will be any worse than the current situation of already abundant Spit16s, not to mention the basic specs concerning MA engagement conditions are unimpressive at best.
The Spit14 is to the Spitfires what the Ta152 is to the 190s. It's basically a less stable 109K-4 that turns a little better but has half the WEP duration. We've got the K-4s roaming around free - why should the Spit14 be perked?
-
Put any idiot in an F-16 and any expert in a SBD, and the expert in the SBD will get the kill.
The kills/death in this example does NOT reflect the capability of the ride itself.
Nor does karnak's or kev's insistence that kills/deaths is the ONLY indicator for why things should be perked. (or unperked)
Please, don't confuse my point. My point isn't about whether they should be perked or not. My point is your REASON for it is flawed. Horribly horribly flawed. Kills/deaths is no indication of the capabilities of the plane itself.
-
I often wonder if the major factor in the XVI hysteria is the fact it is listed as a XVI.
People not realising that apart from the .50 cals it is identical to a 1943 LF IX performance wise.
Especially considering the FM is based on a Merlin 66 (LF IX) not a Merlin 266 (XVI). Only difference is the Merlin 266 had an FTH 1000ft higher.
My own take on why its perked - Its the latest Spit in the game and it was probably felt a good idea to perk it.
I wonder if under the perked ord system we could have a free XIV at 18lbs (current one), and a lightly perked XIV at 21lbs.
Or add the F.21 which would be the only Spit really worth perking.
Can imagine the complaints now if we ever got a free Mk XII :) .
IF the majority of the fights occured over 25k it may be worth a light perk, in the low alt MA environment the XIV not worth the perk cost, nor will it ever be.
No K/D isn't the only indication, but its a hell of good pointer to a planes suitabilty in the MA environment.
-
Nor does karnak's or kev's insistence that kills/deaths is the ONLY indicator for why things should be perked. (or unperked)
...hence the abstractions derived from empirical logic concerning the people's preference on MA planes, which by the way, presents a compelling argument that the Spit14 should be fine without a perk - which, I might add, again even in this thread, most everybody agrees on except for you.
Besides, according to your own logic below;
Put any idiot in an F-16 and any expert in a SBD, and the expert in the SBD will get the kill.
... the MA is dominated by the idiots such as myself, which would imply that even if the Spit14 numbers would greatly increase, it'd most likely be piloted by people who'd get shot down by SBDs - which negates it as a factor that threatens balance.
Either way, your logic on why the perks should not be removed has self-destructed.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Put any idiot in an F-16 and any expert in a SBD, and the expert in the SBD will get the kill.
The kills/death in this example does NOT reflect the capability of the ride itself.
Nor does karnak's or kev's insistence that kills/deaths is the ONLY indicator for why things should be perked. (or unperked)
But that's the reason the perk system was introduced in the first place - to impose a limit on planes that are unbalancing in any way. And that is not based on "it could be" but on actual game data. Number of kills, and K/D.
According to your logic, we would have to immediately perk the La-7, Spit XVI, Typhoon, 109K ect ect ect...
There is no reason to keep the XIV perked. None. If it would truly be such an awesome dominating machine, the K/D would reflect it. It really is that easy.
-
No, it's not.
Karnak and Kev are calling the symptom the disease. Cause and effect. They're listing one of the effects, not the cause.
The reason the CHOG was used so extensively was the ease with which folks could get kills. The power, performance, firepower, and all around capability of the plane itself lead to 20% use. The use was just an effect, the cause was the stats of the plane itself.
The Spit14 has never been unperked, ever, so you can't use the "wild and free" stats to relate directly to its capabilities, as it's never been "free-range" (so to speak).
The lack of use is just one effect from several causes. It is parallel to the perk status, not directly linked to it. Hence why he's putting the cart before the horse. The performance is not the sole indicator of use (as he's implying -- his argument is that it's not used so it must not be a very good plane, why perk it?). Among other things are the plane's name, reputation, word of mouth, the perk price itself drives away 90% of most pilots (it worked for the chog!!!!), and the availability of "almost as good" options that are perk free lead it to be glossed over. All of these causes lead to the effect of "low player use" -- and are not directly tied at all to the reason it's perked.
Aside from a few folks that advocate removing ALL perks, you can't unperk the spit14 without unperking the f4u4, chog, or the tempest.
And yes, I've flown it enough to know that it's worth the perk, which is a measely 15-16 perks right about now.
EDIT:
P.S. It was perked by HTC the second it came out. Thus it was NOT perked because of player use. It was given said perk before any use. HTC perked it before even seeing how "popular" it would be, so you probably can't claim player use (kills/deaths) is the reason to unperk it.
-
Krusty,
First, stop putting words in my mouth. I never made or implied the things you say I did.
Second, either put up or shut up. Explain why the Spit XIV sucks compared to other perk planes.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Krusty,
First, stop putting words in my mouth. I never made or implied the things you say I did.
Second, either put up or shut up. Explain why the Spit XIV sucks compared to other perk planes.
Are you completely ignoring me, or purposefully trolling?
See this, right here:
Originally posted by Karnak
Explain why the Spit XIV sucks compared to other perk planes.
YOUR WORDS. Not mine. YOU are saying it sucks, NOBODY ELSE IS. YOU are making this claim that it's less capable than the other perk planes (with circumstantial evidence, sketchy at best!!) and you keep yelling at me to prove YOUR stupid claim.
YOU are claiming that the spit14 performs poorly because of a low kills/deaths. NOT ME. I'm saying your argument is false, wrong, horribly misleading, inaccurate, baseless, you name it.
Your pulling out kills/deaths means jack watermelon when trying to describe "why the spit14 sucks" and it's all you've got. So STOP telling me to "prove the spit14 sucks!!!" because you're the only one saying it.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Aside from a few folks that advocate removing ALL perks, you can't unperk the spit14 without unperking the f4u4, chog, or the tempest.
BS
The Mk XIV
1. carries no ords
2. Is no speed demon off wep.
3. Flies nothing like other Mks, unlike the hogs.
4. doesn't have the 4 cannons.
If you unperk the tempest you'll not see another tiffy.
You unperk the 2 hogs you will not see a d, 1, or 1a.
Unperk the Mk 14 and you'll still see the horde of 16s. The 16 is just so much easier to fly.
-
Bronk: anything off-wep is slow. The 262 carries no ord, nor does the 163.
Ignore the fact it doesn't fly like other spits. Call it a P-51 instead. It still out-runs all but about 7-8 prop planes in the game on the deck, outclimbs them all, outzooms most, shoots with the best, has good range, etc etc.
But, thank you for bringing up real points, other than just kills/deaths.
As an aside, yes I have noticed the Spit16 is quite uber. As is the spit8. I've said for a while the spit16 is as worthy of a perk as the la7 is.
-
Krusty,
I offered a theory as to why.
You offer "Nuh uh".
Try to offer a theory as to why its numbers are crap.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Aside from a few folks that advocate removing ALL perks, you can't unperk the spit14 without unperking the f4u4, chog, or the tempest.
You can, because the impact of C-hog and Tempest would be quite a different than that of a Spit 14.
And you can squeal and wiggle all you wannt, K/D is about the best indicator of impact of a figher on MA gameplay we have.
Spit XIV has a lousy K/D even now, when it's perk status restricts it's usage to those players that can affort flying perk planes. If you set it free you really expect to skyrocket? Do you really thing it will dominate the MA when a XVI is a better weapons platform at the altitudes the fights usually at in AH2???
And why is the TA suddenly unperked, when it was even much rarer than a Spit 14 in real life? ;)
(http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/2442/kdwu9.jpg) (http://imageshack.us)
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Krusty,
I offered a theory as to why.
You offer "Nuh uh".
Try to offer a theory as to why its numbers are crap.
I offered one in my post near the top of this page... :)
[EDIT] Whoops, you guys are posting too fast. Now it's near the top of the LAST page.
-
Lusche, the fact it was perked before ever GETTING a "rank" in player use indicates the perk itself is not because of its use/overuse.
Even so, given the very similar power curve and climb charts on the 14/16, why does the 16 suck so much? Answer: It doesn't. You're trying to make a qualitative answer with quantitative data.
To quote a certain robot, "ERROR. DOES NOT COMPUTE."
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Bronk: anything off-wep is slow. I suggest you look at doc gonzos pages. Look at the temp and 4 hog at ah combat alts.
The 262 carries no ord, nor does the 163. Apples and oranges. Jet and rocket powered ac are on a whole different lvl. Are you suggesting that they are not?
Ignore the fact it doesn't fly like other spits. Call it a P-51 instead.You cant ignore that fact, it's a spit. It still out-runs all but about 7-8 prop planes in the game on the deck, outclimbs them all, outzooms most,Yes for 5 count em 5 min then it becomes another spit. That I'll remind you doesnt fly like a spit.
shoots with the best, Irrelevant all spits cept the 1 have hizookas.
has good range, etc etc.What??!!?!?! This is one of the thirstiest AC in game.
But, thank you for bringing up real points, other than just kills/deaths.
Kills/deaths are part of it. It's not as effective as the 8 or 16 at AH combat alts. Now if most fights were at 22k you'd have a leg to stand on.
As an aside, yes I have noticed the Spit16 is quite uber. As is the spit8. I've said for a while the spit16 is as worthy of a perk as the la7 is.
People new to the game need a crutch to get started. Perking those 2 AC just makes it that much harder for them. I would however like to see a perk on the 3 gun LA.
Now whats your take on why the 109k isn't perked?
One of the fastest, best climbing and fastest accelerating AC in game , at almost any alt. OHH not to mention 9 min of wep?
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Lusche, the fact it was perked before ever GETTING a "rank" in player use indicates the perk itself is not because of its use/overuse.
Even so, given the very similar power curve and climb charts on the 14/16, why does the 16 suck so much? Answer: It doesn't. You're trying to make a qualitative answer with quantitative data.
To quote a certain robot, "ERROR. DOES NOT COMPUTE."
You are illogical on so many levels I don't even know were to start (again)
Honestly, if all your "arguments" were presented by a new registered user, I would call "nice trolling". The sad thing is, you really believe
I can not say more than I and others already have.
Lusche out.
-
"Yes for 5 cont em 5 min then it becomes another spit. That I'll remind you doesnt fly like a spit."
You meant 5 minutes at a time between engine coolings. 5 minutes of continuous WEP in a combat setting is a long time and is only very rarely needed.
-
Lusche, don't tell me the sales of a product denotes the quality of said product. I know you are smarter than that.
You're counting numbers (quantity) not value (quality).
Karnak's entire argument is "nobody's using it (quantity) so it must not be good (quality)" and the two are unrelated, and in the realm of statistics you've just mixed two research types that are normally mutually exclusive.
EDIT: P.S. Sometimes it's cool to look at numbers, to see trends. That doesn't tell you much other than public opinion, and any president will tell you that changes often.
-
Krusty -
Who do you need to tell you that the Spit 14 isn't a high "quality" ride so that you'll believe it?
Does someone have to take you into the DA and kick your butt six ways to Sunday in a half dozen planes for you to "believe"? Or will you then come back with "Its the pilot, not the plane!".
The Spit 14 doesn't deserve to be perked. I don't believe I've EVER advocated a perk for it (not that it matters), but feel free to search through 7 years of posts.
The La-7 is better in all respects than the Spit 14. The 109K-4 is a roughly equivalent plane, I'd still take the 109 in a fight though. The Spit 16 will take apart a Spit 14 in a fight.
The most rediculous thing about it is that the La-7 is unperked and the Spit 14 is perked. The La-7 will run down a Spit 14 and force it into a fight that the Spit 14 cannot win.
The plane isn't a BAD plane, but it certainly isn't a GREAT one. It is better than the Ta-152, but then again, what isn't?
I said for years that the Ta-152 could be unperked and nobody would fly it. I was right. The Spit 14 could be unperked and nobody would fly it either. The Spit 16 is better for the MA.
-
No, I am pointing out that not many are using it and those that are, are doing poorly with it despite paying for it and thus being more cautious with it.
That you cannot see the connection is mind boggling.
-
Originally posted by Urchin
Krusty -
Who do you need to tell you that the Spit 14 isn't a high "quality" ride so that you'll believe it?
Does someone have to take you into the DA and kick your butt six ways to Sunday in a half dozen planes for you to "believe"? Or will you then come back with "Its the pilot, not the plane!".
The Spit 14 doesn't deserve to be perked. I don't believe I've EVER advocated a perk for it (not that it matters), but feel free to search through 7 years of posts.
The La-7 is better in all respects than the Spit 14. The 109K-4 is a roughly equivalent plane, I'd still take the 109 in a fight though. The Spit 16 will take apart a Spit 14 in a fight.
The most rediculous thing about it is that the La-7 is unperked and the Spit 14 is perked. The La-7 will run down a Spit 14 and force it into a fight that the Spit 14 cannot win.
The plane isn't a BAD plane, but it certainly isn't a GREAT one. It is better than the Ta-152, but then again, what isn't?
I said for years that the Ta-152 could be unperked and nobody would fly it. I was right. The Spit 14 could be unperked and nobody would fly it either. The Spit 16 is better for the MA.
To take this on a practical level...
In the current AvA setup, where Each side has point's for the introduction of different A/C, one of the Allies' choices was to introduce the Spit XIV. I took one, and pitted it against the latest offerings' from the Axis (109K-4, KI-84, ME-262, N1K2) and here's what I myself noticed...
At AvA combat alts, the Spit XIV can hold it's own in the range between 10 and 20K. Not many fights' above 20, and alot of those engagements' work their way lower. At 10k and below, is where my rant starts.
(1.) This Spit has a higher wing loading than any other. It has to, the way it will snap-roll and spin, especially in a flaps' down flat scissors' at speeds' of 200 or less.
(2.) In a flat scissors', much like the one I described above, I tried to match a turn with Oldman in a KI-84, Myself in a Spitfire XIV. We entered into the manuever at about the same speed, around 250, at about 4k. Right at the edge of blackout, I had both outer wing peices' break off...and this is the only Spit I myself have ever had this happen in. Oldman's KI made the turn without incident. He mentioned to me that he'd never seen anything of the like in a spit, either.
(3.) This Spit does not like to get the nose up, like the Merlin-engined spits, either. I believe a 109K-4 will actually nose-up easier in a sustained turn.
Lastly, with the absence of appreciable amounts' of High-alt fights' in AH, I shall also cast my vote to see the perk cost be removed from the Spit XIV, because at the typical AH dogfight range (5-10k) It is at an actual disadvantage.
my .02$.
-
Originally posted by Lusche
(http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/2442/kdwu9.jpg) (http://imageshack.us)
I call shenanigans! This chart is not up to date and cannot be used in the present debate! If it was we would all see the 152's k/d is in the toilet and cannot be used to support the aforementioned posts.
-
Originally posted by FrodeMk3
(2.) In a flat scissors', much like the one I described above, I tried to match a turn with Oldman in a KI-84, Myself in a Spitfire XIV. We entered into the manuever at about the same speed, around 250, at about 4k. Right at the edge of blackout, I had both outer wing peices' break off...and this is the only Spit I myself have ever had this happen in. Oldman's KI made the turn without incident. He mentioned to me that he'd never seen anything of the like in a spit, either.
I just tested this offline using the Spitfire Mk XIV, Spitfire Mk VIII and Mosquito Mk VI, all at 50% fuel. The Spitfire Mk XIV easily sheds its wings. The Mk VIII creaked a bit, but didn't lose anything. The Mosquito didn't even creak. The Spitfires should be able to take as many Gs as the Mosquito, if not slightly more.
-
I think interesting points have been made on both sides. An interesting fact about statistics is that they typically generate more questions than they answer.
For example
Why did the C-hog kill to death go from 1.38 – 1 to 2.56 – 1 after it was perked?
Was it because the plane got deadlier? Or was it that the people that didn’t know how to fly it well stopped flying it because they didn’t see the benefit of paying the perks. As a result all those people with low K/D ratios left resulting in the average K/D ratio going up.
Another question I have is why is my prime ride (Mosquito) only ranked 38th in K/D ratio with a K/D well less than 1? Am I mad? (That question is not to be answered) Why do I fly this plane? Well my K/D ratio in the Mossie this tour is 3.23. Hmmmm better that the C-hog. Then again why is my C-hog K/D ratio only 0.5 – 1. We should really be talking about perking the Mossie and freeing the c-hog?
Well no!
We really need to look at more factors than just the final stats. Why are my K/D so high in the Mossie as opposed to the average? Well I have flown it a lot. I know its strengths, I know its weaknesses, and I fly it in the envelope that maximizes my success. Did I always have a good K/D in a Mossie, well no! In tour 79 when I started to fly it my K/D was 1.6. So what changed? I learned to fly it well as mentioned above.
I think this is the point Krusty is trying to make. He (and others) has flown the Spit XIV quite a bit and has leaned its flight model. As a result he can fly it to its strengths and sees it as a formidable plane. On the flip side though the average usage and K/D numbers are bad.
So another question! Why is that? Well, one possible answer is that a new player might see spits as being a great plane to learn in so he/she flies the 16. Then they get some perks and think I’ll upgrade to the 14 (cause it’s perked) and try to fly it the same as a 16. Not smart! They have a bad experience and don’t fly it again. So, low usage and low K/D ratio.
So that all being said is the 14 really going to make a big difference to game play if unperked. Perhaps not initially, but maybe overtime as the flight model is learned and people will learn to fly it, not like a spit, but more like a P51 (I don’t know if this is how it should be flown, it’s just an example), we may see the K/D ratio grow. Enough to put it in the top 5 category? Don’t know, but then again my Mossie is. ;)
So as stated earlier stats generate as many questions as they answer. To answer these questions you sometimes need to experiment. Maybe a valid experiment is to unperk the 14 and track its usage (understanding there will be a spike initially) and then see how it effects game play as skill in the plane increases.
-
There is only one reason for the Spit 14's low numbers-
The pilots that fly it.
This is simply because 9 out of 10 guys who jump into it to try it out don't have any idea what they're getting into.
It's a red-hot drag racer hell bent for leather.
Flown right, it's a terrible monster in a fight. All you have to do is wait for someone to do something stupid- like turn. Then keep 'em committed in the turn, and haul back on the stick, come over the top, unload and punch wep. You'll go from 150 to 350 in no time flat in an unloaded acceleration dive.
Next thing you know you're right on their ass, hispanos blazing, and they fall.
Against an LA7 raid it's the best thing in the inventory. I *LOVE* this spit.
Unperking it because of it's low k:d is rather premature, but the idea has merit. Why punish the guys who know how to fly it well?
The answer is "because the performance is too great"- and *that* point has a lot of merit too.
Trust me- if left unperked, the word would get out, and you'd have a new nightmare in the arena. I rather like it being the dark horse of the apocalypse that it is- a misunderstood death machine on a wing. :D :aok:
-
XVI would still get, I think quite more usage than the XIV, even if the XIV had no perk cost.
The XIV would probably get more usage as a base defense/interceptor because of it's climb but even then,,, I still think most would use the XVI anyway.
I don't see how this plane would become omnipresent or unbalance anything if free.
Unperk it. ;)
As an aside the XIV is my favorite Spitfire, and if I take up a Spitfire it's this one.
-
I think this is the point Krusty is trying to make. He (and others) has flown the Spit XIV quite a bit and has leaned its flight model. As a result he can fly it to its strengths and sees it as a formidable plane. On the flip side though the average usage and K/D numbers are bad.
Individual pilot performance is irrelevant to the matter at hand.
Bring in Widewing and his SBD Dauntless and he'd have a K/D of over 5.0 in that thing, whereas I can barely manage a K/D of over a 1.0 in a Bf109K-4. Surely, Widewing has learned to fly it to its strengths and sees it as a formidable plane - does it mean what he can do in that thing should be used as a basis for determining the SBD is more of a dangerous plane in the MA than the Bf109K-4?
K/D ratio may not reflect everything there is to, but compared to the garbage reasoning Krusty is spewing the thread with, the K/D at least attains a good amount of objectivity in that it reflects the gross average of what kind of results the people are getting in the MA - whereas Krusty doesn't have any point to his arguments at all.
He adds nothing to the present discussion whether the Spit14 should be perked or not - he argues the K/D cannot be used as an objective factor for determining perks.
Then what?
Karnak and others have questioned him - he casually refuses to answer. All he's adding to the thread is needless arguments against a factor which HTC already has used time again as an important part of the baseline datamining used to perk ACs and vehicles. True, K/D is not the only factor. But it is one of the most important. He refuses to accept that as a fact.
So that all being said is the 14 really going to make a big difference to game play if unperked. Perhaps not initially, but maybe overtime as the flight model is learned and people will learn to fly it, not like a spit, but more like a P51 (I don't know if this is how it should be flown, it's just an example), we may see the K/D ratio grow. Enough to put it in the top 5 category? Don't know, but then again my Mossie is.
You're not acknowledging the fact that massive arenas are dominated by the rule of the average. You assume an unperked Spit14 would start to have more impact - since people will have more chance to fly it and get to know its strengths better.
Unfortunately, the rule of the MA average dictates that when a plane does not present some amount of combatworthiness under typical MA conditions, people don't fly it in the first place.
Again, like others have mentioned, the most powerful example of this happening is the Ta152. The Ta152 is to the Fw190s what the Spit14 is to the Spitfires.
The Ta152 has distinct advantages over the 190s in that it is a high-alt fighter. It turns marginally better than the Fw190D-9. It's faster than the 190s over 25k, and as a matter of fact, is the fastest prop-plane in the entire plane set. Unfortunately, this is all a moot point as the Ta152 is missing all the factors which makes the Fw190D-9 such a popular plane in the MA; the D-9 is faster at typical MA engagement altitudes, rolls faster, and accelerates faster.
The end result is what we have.
The Ta152 has been unperked for a while. We're not seeing many people "learning to fly it to its strengths", since they have no reason to choose it over the Fw190D-9 in the first place.
So tell me why the Spit14 should be any different.
Go to the AH Fighter Performance Comparison (http://www.gonzoville.com/charts/index.php) page and select the Spit16, Spit14, and the Bf109K-4 side-by-side.
By all means, the Spit14 is actually closer to the Bf109K-4 rather than the Spit16. The K-4 is superior to the Spit16 in almost all areas except the turning ability, and yet people flock to the Spit16s.
This is because the traditional strength of the Spitfires is in its manueverability - one of the best turning planes in the game, and yet has some amount of comparable speed performance, unlike the other "pure turners" such as Hurricanes or Zeros. The Spit14 gives up that trait to push its performance specs upto 109K-4 standards.
You think the average MA folk who fly Spitfires will give up their Spit16s and change to the Spit14?
-
Originally posted by Solar10
I think interesting points have been made on both sides. An interesting fact about statistics is that they typically generate more questions than they answer.
For example
Why did the C-hog kill to death go from 1.38 – 1 to 2.56 – 1 after it was perked?
Was it because the plane got deadlier? Or was it that the people that didn’t know how to fly it well stopped flying it because they didn’t see the benefit of paying the perks. As a result all those people with low K/D ratios left resulting in the average K/D ratio going up.
Another question I have is why is my prime ride (Mosquito) only ranked 38th in K/D ratio with a K/D well less than 1? Am I mad? (That question is not to be answered) Why do I fly this plane? Well my K/D ratio in the Mossie this tour is 3.23. Hmmmm better that the C-hog. Then again why is my C-hog K/D ratio only 0.5 – 1. We should really be talking about perking the Mossie and freeing the c-hog?
Well no!
We really need to look at more factors than just the final stats. Why are my K/D so high in the Mossie as opposed to the average? Well I have flown it a lot. I know its strengths, I know its weaknesses, and I fly it in the envelope that maximizes my success. Did I always have a good K/D in a Mossie, well no! In tour 79 when I started to fly it my K/D was 1.6. So what changed? I learned to fly it well as mentioned above.
I think this is the point Krusty is trying to make. He (and others) has flown the Spit XIV quite a bit and has leaned its flight model. As a result he can fly it to its strengths and sees it as a formidable plane. On the flip side though the average usage and K/D numbers are bad.
So another question! Why is that? Well, one possible answer is that a new player might see spits as being a great plane to learn in so he/she flies the 16. Then they get some perks and think I’ll upgrade to the 14 (cause it’s perked) and try to fly it the same as a 16. Not smart! They have a bad experience and don’t fly it again. So, low usage and low K/D ratio.
So that all being said is the 14 really going to make a big difference to game play if unperked. Perhaps not initially, but maybe overtime as the flight model is learned and people will learn to fly it, not like a spit, but more like a P51 (I don’t know if this is how it should be flown, it’s just an example), we may see the K/D ratio grow. Enough to put it in the top 5 category? Don’t know, but then again my Mossie is. ;)
So as stated earlier stats generate as many questions as they answer. To answer these questions you sometimes need to experiment. Maybe a valid experiment is to unperk the 14 and track its usage (understanding there will be a spike initially) and then see how it effects game play as skill in the plane increases.
Not knowing you personally, and only going by your stats in the LW MA... I'd say you do well in the Mossie by flying it very cautiously, and probably with a lot of company around you. Bear in mind the only real evidence I have for this is your K/T of 4 kills an hour, which is less than my K/T of 8.5 ish - which I've gotten in the G-6 and Ki-61. Both of those planes are crap for the MA, so I've been flying them much more cautiously than I normally would. Hench the decent K/D and low K/T I have in them.
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
Again, like others have mentioned, the most powerful example of this happening is the Ta152. The Ta152 is to the Fw190s what the Spit14 is to the Spitfires.
True and not true.
The 152 is to the FW's as the XIV is to the Spits in that they are both excellent high-alt performers (over 23K).
At normal MA alts, the D9 is faster that the 152, the A5 out turns it, the A8 hits harder and the F8 is a better attack platform and they all outperform the 152 in a dive and in roll rate.
Conversely, the XIV out-accelerates, is faster than and climbs better than any other Spit. Yes, it does give up it's turn rate to do so, but unlike the 152, it's the top of the Spit performance ladder in a number of respects (much like the C-Hog (hitting power) and 4 Hog (Speed) are to the F4U's) and that's why I think it was (and is) perked, and why the 152 was unperked.
The question is, is that enough reason to keep it perked.
I think, given it's performance envelope, and with the time and perks to learn to fly it that it is worthy of the small perk it now carries, but again, I could go either way on this.
I think that if the perks were actually increased, you'd see the K/D go up with little impact to use, while if it were unperked, the K/D would go down with a reasonably large increase in use, at least initially.
-
Splitting hairs, but the 152 dives better than any of them past 400mph or so. It only rolls less well but more importantly retains its E better.
Urchin is going to disagree with me, but I think the 152 edges out the 190s. 1:1 it will only consistently lose if the fight starts out very slow.
Versus an A8 it can maneuver for a killshot; and only needs one. Versus an A5 it is most likely dead in the water unless it manages a solution early on. Versus a D9 it is done for only if it mismanages its E.
At this point the 152 out does the D9 in any sustained maneuver I can think of. Not by much but enough in my opinion to really be the best of the 190s... Even more so if its FM changes for the better if it ever sees a revision more towards AH1-agility.
-
The unperked Spit 16 is 1200 lbs lighter than a Spit 14 with performance that is similar, same armament, same range.
I could see perking it if it say had 4 x 20mm, like the Tempest, but it does not.
To have the 190D-9, 109K-4, and the LA-7 unperked in comparison is a joke, (all fighters that came into service LATER, btw).
-
So what.. It's not WWII in the MA, it's a performance-biased dogfighting arena. Chronology has little to do with it. The 152 would still be perked if people bothered to learn proper ACM and tactics.
-
BaldEagl,
The Spitfire Mk XVI actually out climbs the Spitfire Mk XIV at very low altitudes and there is little to choose between them until well above AH combat altitudes in terms of climb and acceleration. The Spitfire Mk VIII is right there with them too. Only once you pass 320 or 330mph on the deck does the Spit XIV really start to pull away from the others.
-
Originally posted by moot
So what.. It's not WWII in the MA, it's a performance-biased dogfighting arena. Chronology has little to do with it. The 152 would still be perked if people bothered to learn proper ACM and tactics.
Not more than La-7, Spit-16, 109K-4 ect ect...
-
None of them are as smooth as the 152 at very high speeds and able to hit as hard (and with as much ammo) and do it at all altitudes.
IMO the reason (not HTC's, but effectively) the 152 is unperked is because it's too difficult to control.
I think the closest analog is the 47N, which also falls short of a perk because of its thrust/mass.
And back on topic, I think the XIV would eat a fair share of the total spit usage.. I think it's worth a perk point or two at most.
-
Originally posted by moot
None of them are as smooth as the 152 at very high speeds and able to hit as hard (and with as much ammo) and do it at all altitudes.
But each of them has other strenghts : acceleration, turning radius, maneuverability, climb rate - Very important assets in the MA environment, especially when most combat is way below 10k.
The 152 particular strenghts just do not justify a perk price as they do not raise the TA that much above the competition. A well flown 152 is akilling machine - but so is a 47, a Spit 16, a 109K-4. And neither does the 14 has advantages that it has a edge that big that aperk price is justifed. The would be an increase in usage for sure when being unperked, but it wouldnt be detrimental to gameplay, unbalance the arena or whatever. A fair share of usage as such should never be a reason of restricing it. Only balancing.
Many arguments against unperking the 14 are more of a subjective kind , a la "people use it the wrong way" "it's much better than K/D indicates" - you say that about a whole lot of other, highly capable but unperked planes too.
And like in many discussions about planes, people lose objectivity when talking about planes they do like or despise, often confusing their own skill level and the corresponding results in the arenas with general capabilities of a plane. (Remember that guy constantly claiming Ki-61 does easily outturn all Spits but Spit I? Well he may easily outturn most other Spit V pilots, but that's because they suck and he doesn't :D)
-
What Lusche said. My point stands either way. There is no reason to perk it based on other non perked a/c specs, or any other reason.
The109K-4 is faster than a 109G-14, how about we slap 15 perks on that in the next update, sound good? I can use all your arguments.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
I don't think a perk fighter that is hardly used and cannot maintain a kill/death ratio higher than all free fighters should be perked.
Likewise, I don't think a perk fighter that is just over a 2 to 1 kill/death ratio should be very expensive. The F4U-4 should be a budget perk plane. I think the Tempest, Me262, Me163 and F4U-1C are priced where they should be. F4U-4 should be cheaper and Spitfire Mk XIV should be free.
Karnak, your right, the Temp, 262, 163, and chog r right, -4 should be less, but 14 shouldnt be perked. with this new update coming up next week or when ever it is we getting the 39, they should at least do sumthin about the perk price on the -4 and spit 14
-
Lusche I'm not going to derail the thread.. We can discuss it in another if you want, but I'm pretty sure none of those planes can compare with the 152 in a high speed fight. Especialy not above 30k or so.
All their other strengths are void when they can't be used, just as against the 262's speed despite the jet having one of the worst turning/rolling/acceleration.
Squire the date of introduction in WWII is irrelevent in the MA.
-
Originally posted by AAolds
Im a dedicated SpitXiV flyer and I dont see any need to remove the perk on it, why not just perk the LA7, spit16 and Niki.
Cuz the N1k2 lacks speed and turning ability.
-
Originally posted by moot
Lusche I'm not going to derail the thread.. We can discuss it in another if you want, but I'm pretty sure none of those planes can compare with the 152 in a high speed fight. Especialy not above 30k or so.
All their other strengths are void when they can't be used, just as against the 262's speed despite the jet having one of the worst turning/rolling/acceleration.
Squire the date of introduction in WWII is irrelevent in the MA.
Yes and no. If you are a Luftwaffe fan, all the birds are available. If you are an RAF fan, the two latewar birds, the Temp and Spit XIV are not.
Again I'm of the unperk em all crowd and let folks fly what they want so it doesn't really affect me. But the XIV just doesn't seem like one that needs the perks. I'd rather see it used.
Many have pointed out, that folks don't know how to fly it as they think it should fly like a Merlin Spit. But the LW guys get to jump from the A8 to the D9 or Ta152 without penalty. Seems like the RAF fans should have the same option.
-
Originally posted by moot
Lusche I'm not going to derail the thread.. We can discuss it in another if you want, but I'm pretty sure none of those planes can compare with the 152 in a high speed fight. Especialy not above 30k or so.
.
I wouldn't argue that.. but how many fights happen up there? ;)
And down low the Ta isn't as dangerous overall as other, and rightfully perked planes thus it's non-perk status. It's K/D reflects it. Call it "misuse" of its qualities, but the k/d (which is currently massively distorted by your sorties btw ;) ) reflects the MA realities. Just like the LA-7 has a K/D way below it's theoretical capabilites - it's a result of the specific MA environment in a broader sense. Just like it is with the 14.
Again: Perk status should be based on actual impact. In my opinion, based on actual data, the 14 is far from having any specific impact. Usage is low, success is low, both pale in comparison to other LW rides and not only the perked ones.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
I just tested this offline using the Spitfire Mk XIV, Spitfire Mk VIII and Mosquito Mk VI, all at 50% fuel. The Spitfire Mk XIV easily sheds its wings. The Mk VIII creaked a bit, but didn't lose anything. The Mosquito didn't even creak. The Spitfires should be able to take as many Gs as the Mosquito, if not slightly more.
I tested them tonight too. What I found is that the SpitVII, SpitXIV and SpitXVI will all break wings at 570 mph @ 6.5g. In contrast, the SpitIX does not do so. It requires 7g to break a wing at that speed. It's simply a function of weight. The heavier aircraft will impart greater load at any specific g loading. The greater the weight, the lower the g value required to attain a load that results in failure.
On the other hand, I can't break an F6F-5 under the same speed and g loading.
My regards,
Widewing
-
I pulled into the turn at 450mph. 570mph would have ripped the control surfaces off of the Mosquito in my test. :p
I thought the Spits were rated for more than 7 Gs though.
-
Widewing, I don't really want to trouble you, but do you have the wing-loading data for the spits' you tested? I'd just like to see them to compare, for future reference.
And if you see Oldman, hit him up about Spit's shedding wings, he had a good view of me loosing them in a XIV in the AvA.
-
A careless wobble of the stick will tear the wings off at speeds below 400. I have done this in a XVI on several occasions, and caught one on film. Pulled too hard for a second, the accelerometer pegged, wings flew off, end of sortie.
I'm guessing that's what happened to you as well.
-
I've done it below 400... Possibly as low as 350 or so. I pulled into a normal duel merge and the wings were off before the nose got to 45deg above the horizon.
Originally posted by Lusche
Call it "misuse" of its qualities, but the k/d (which is currently massively distorted by your sorties btw ;) )
:eek:
-
Originally posted by Lusche
I wouldn't argue that.. but how many fights happen up there? ;)
And down low the Ta isn't as dangerous overall as other, and rightfully perked planes thus it's non-perk status. It's K/D reflects it. Call it "misuse" of its qualities, but the k/d (which is currently massively distorted by your sorties btw ;) ) reflects the MA realities. Just like the LA-7 has a K/D way below it's theoretical capabilites - it's a result of the specific MA environment in a broader sense. Just like it is with the 14.
Again: Perk status should be based on actual impact. In my opinion, based on actual data, the 14 is far from having any specific impact. Usage is low, success is low, both pale in comparison to other LW rides and not only the perked ones.
Which makes total sense.
XIV - optimised for med to high alts is nothing stellar in the MA.
I can only imagine that was the reason the Ta-152 was unperked, and the P-47N was introduced unperked.
Both are high alt performers and nothing exceptional down low.
Still think the majority would stick with the XVI even with an unperked XIV.
Just seems that as Dan said the RAF are left out in the cold when it comes to getting any sort of high performing plane (as in the La-7, 190D9, Pony D etc) free.
In fact out of the 3 major planesets the RAF is the only one not to have a true 1945 bird!!!!
-
I can't see a reason to keep XIV perked either.
-C+
-
"What I found is that the SpitVII, SpitXIV and SpitXVI will all break wings at 570 mph @ 6.5g. In contrast, the SpitIX does not do so. It requires 7g to break a wing at that speed. It's simply a function of weight. The heavier aircraft will impart greater load at any specific g loading. The greater the weight, the lower the g value required to attain a load that results in failure.
On the other hand, I can't break an F6F-5 under the same speed and g loading."
F6F had a slightly thicker profile when compared to relative thickness of Spitfire's wing.
F6F: NACA 23015.6 / NACA 23009
Spit: NACA 2213 / NACA 2209.4
It is possible that the wing of F6F needed to be somewhat stiffer since the landing gear is further in the wings and they need to endure carrier landings with weight of 12,000 lbs where as the Spit had the landing gear attached nearer to fuselage with weight of 8,000 lbs and less wingloading so the structure could have been slightly lighter.
190s had small stiff wings and a reputation of being able to pull tremendous amounts of Gs without wing failures and even some Ta's still had the shorter wing. The G loading may build up quite abruptly along the wing span being heaviest a the tip, and of course if it does not bend it breaks and that is why I think the Ta with long wings surely had smaller load limit than those of the short span wings.
I think it is strange if the Spit loses a wing totally since the spar was designed to endure lots of dynamic load without breaking so the designers knew that the large wing would be under tremendous loads in high speed maneuvers. The drawback is that the tubular spar structure is quite heavy so AFAIK it did not expand all the way to the tip. Did the Spits IRL really shred off all the wing or just parts of it?
-C+
-
Well - I've read that the Spit XIV has never been unperked.
So basically these are all theories about what would happen. Why not unperk and just see what happens in reality. If 50% of all planes are now Spit XIVs and the arena blows up, could always reperk. ;)
-
In fact out of the 3 major planesets the RAF is the only one not to have a true 1945 bird!!!!
Assuming you are including the VVS in there, which produced and fielded more combat aircraft during the war than any nation except the United States - the Lavochkin 7 is a mid 1944 aircraft.
A Yak 3 with VK 108 engine, or VK 107A, would be suitable for the über VVS fighter.
-
The spit 14 is really only a threat over 10k, and in the hands of a good pilot.
If flown by any of the vast number of average seafire, spit 8, 9, 16 pilots it would not be anything special. Its time to try dropping the perk on this one and watch it for a couple of tours.
I really don't think after the first 2 weeks you'd see many people in it.
Mostly because it really doesn't fly like an average spitfire.
I've said for years that it acts like a 109 in spits clothing. Kind of a hybrid between the 2 or something.
Before we got the unperked spit 16 I can see why it was perked.
But with the situation we have now lets let it out of the bag.
-
Originally posted by moot
Splitting hairs, but the 152 dives better than any of them past 400mph or so.
In terms of pure speed, any of the 190's will outdive the 152. The 152 needs to stay below ~450 mph while the others are easily capable of 500+.
Originally posted by Karnak
BaldEagl,
The Spitfire Mk XVI actually out climbs the Spitfire Mk XIV at very low altitudes and there is little to choose between them until well above AH combat altitudes in terms of climb and acceleration. The Spitfire Mk VIII is right there with them too. Only once you pass 320 or 330mph on the deck does the Spit XIV really start to pull away from the others.
Go look at Doc Gonzo's charts. The XIV holds a marginal climb advantage over both the XIII and XVI up to ~11K. It then clearly out-climbs both until 18K. From 18-23K the VIII and XVI actually out-climb the XIV, then the XIV takes control again. With WEP these numbers change somewhat, but the effect is the same.
As far as acceleration, the XIV out-accelerates the XVI by 2.0 seconds from 150-300 mph and the VIII by 4.7 seconds. This isn't a marginal difference.
[EDIT] In fairness, most of that is between 250 and 300 mph.
Originally posted by Widewing
On the other hand, I can't break an F6F-5 under the same speed and g loading.
Try that with ord strapped on and I bet you'll snap one or both wings at the mid-point.
-
Originally posted by Urchin
Not knowing you personally, and only going by your stats in the LW MA... I'd say you do well in the Mossie by flying it very cautiously, and probably with a lot of company around you. Bear in mind the only real evidence I have for this is your K/T of 4 kills an hour, which is less than my K/T of 8.5 ish - which I've gotten in the G-6 and Ki-61. Both of those planes are crap for the MA, so I've been flying them much more cautiously than I normally would. Hench the decent K/D and low K/T I have in them.
I don't know where you get a K/T of 4 for me. I fly the Mossie in attack so you cannot pull out the Mossie Stat as it is mixed with other planes. I fly it from fields under attack, in furballs, and on strike missions. I mix it up and am not afraid to turn with 51s, spits, 38s, nikis, although I know if I miss my first opportunity (not a ho) I'm dead. I would not consider myself to fly cautiously although that is my perception which may be different to others.
This is all irrelevant to the spit perk issue anyway.
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
You're not acknowledging the fact that massive arenas are dominated by the rule of the average. You assume an unperked Spit14 would start to have more impact - since people will have more chance to fly it and get to know its strengths better.
Kweassa
I don't think I am assuming this. I was making the point that you are making that K/D is not the be all and end all. The effect on game play of an unperked spit 14 is what really is the question. At the end of my post I did say an experiment of unperking the Spit 14 is probably in order.
I think we are agreeing.
-
I have seen (and flown) more spit14's in this tour...maybe some good hard data can be gathered. Spit14 has had 679 kills of all models. All models have had 511 kills of Spit14. Looks like the spit16 is the biggest problem for the 14 with 50 kills on it. Followed closely by the P-51D at 46. 14 still has a 1.32 K/D ratio. Not sure this helps any.
-
Just did alittle more research. The C-hog holds about the same perk cost as the 14. I just used tour 95 as a random point. C-hog K/D for tour 95 is 2.45. The 14's K/D for same tour is 1.19.
I say either kill the perk or make it a very very light perk cost.
-
I think it should be a light perk cost that way all the little noobies and the 2 weekers could atleast fly a low perk plane and feel specail....:D
-
Originally posted by angelsandair
I think it should be a light perk cost that way all the little noobies and the 2 weekers could atleast fly a low perk plane and feel specail....:D
That is the F4U-1C (and should be the F4U-4 as well, but isn't). On the strength of the data I do not think the Spitfire Mk XIV performs well enough to justify being perked.
-
Originally posted by angelsandair
Cuz the N1k2 lacks speed and turning ability.
The N1K2 is a deadly turn fighter in the medium to slow speed ranges, don't delude yourself into thinking different.
ack-ack
-
I'm surprised, because I flew the 14 next to the Tempest when they were released, and it was pretty much everyone's conclusion that it was the best furballer in the game at the time. It and the Tempest were on both sides of the outright BnZ/E-TnB divide.. I don't remember if we still had the G10 back then, but it didn't match the 14.
I fly the Spit14 now and it doesn't seem all that good..
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
A careless wobble of the stick will tear the wings off at speeds below 400. I have done this in a XVI on several occasions, and caught one on film. Pulled too hard for a second, the accelerometer pegged, wings flew off, end of sortie.
I'm guessing that's what happened to you as well.
Had two guys in Spitfire XVI's bouncing me from their perch 5,000ft above me. Watched them as they dove straight at me and then turned hard into them, forcing them to either turn hard and tight to get a brief low probability snap shot or to level out and extend into a shallow climb. Both Spitfires went for the hard turn for the snap shot. Both had to have been 400+ in their dive because as soon as they both pulled in hard to make their turns, I watched as their wings folded and came off and got the proxies.
ack-ack
-
Originally posted by Charge
"What I found is that the SpitVII, SpitXIV and SpitXVI will all break wings at 570 mph @ 6.5g. In contrast, the SpitIX does not do so. It requires 7g to break a wing at that speed. It's simply a function of weight. The heavier aircraft will impart greater load at any specific g loading. The greater the weight, the lower the g value required to attain a load that results in failure.
On the other hand, I can't break an F6F-5 under the same speed and g loading."
F6F had a slightly thicker profile when compared to relative thickness of Spitfire's wing.
F6F: NACA 23015.6 / NACA 23009
Spit: NACA 2213 / NACA 2209.4
It is possible that the wing of F6F needed to be somewhat stiffer since the landing gear is further in the wings and they need to endure carrier landings with weight of 12,000 lbs where as the Spit had the landing gear attached nearer to fuselage with weight of 8,000 lbs and less wingloading so the structure could have been slightly lighter.
190s had small stiff wings and a reputation of being able to pull tremendous amounts of Gs without wing failures and even some Ta's still had the shorter wing. The G loading may build up quite abruptly along the wing span being heaviest a the tip, and of course if it does not bend it breaks and that is why I think the Ta with long wings surely had smaller load limit than those of the short span wings.
I think it is strange if the Spit loses a wing totally since the spar was designed to endure lots of dynamic load without breaking so the designers knew that the large wing would be under tremendous loads in high speed maneuvers. The drawback is that the tubular spar structure is quite heavy so AFAIK it did not expand all the way to the tip. Did the Spits IRL really shred off all the wing or just parts of it?
-C+
What hurts the Spitfires at high speeds are the extremely sensitive elevators, which are well modeled in the FM.
At 575 mph, you cannot get enough elevator displacement in the 190s/152 to load the airframe enough to break the wings. Likewise for the P-51s. In these types, you pull back the stick to its stops, but you can't pull to blackout until you bleed off considerable speed. In contrast, you can get more than enough elevator displacement in the Spitfires to instantly blackout and strip off the wings in the blink of an eye.
It's simply a matter of fully knowing your airplane. I'd wager than the majority of players have absolutely no clue why some aircraft suffer airframe failures and other do not. I'll also bet that very few know how to avoid that problem. Far too many players just slam the stick about with abandon. I constantly tell pilots that smooth is always better. You not only avoid over-stressing the airframe, you also conserve E. "Slow is smooth and smooth is fast."
As to the F6F-5, I suppose that HTC modeled it based upon the design limits. Both the F6F and F4F demonstrated the ability to withstand g loads of up to 12g and in one well documented case, 13g. These loads were measured during max performance pullouts. In several cases, the engine A frames bent slightly, but the airframe itself sustained no damage. Grumman "over-engineered" their aircraft, being willing to trade a bit of performance for shear strength. That was the crux of their design philosophy; "build them simple, build them strong" - Leroy Grumman.
My regards,
Widewing
-
I am quite aware of the Spitfire's elevator issues in both AH and reality. I went into both of my tests gentle (as the Spit VIII's survival indicates) rather than just seeing if I could spike the Gs and take the wings off.
And I think what the problem FrodeMk3 had was that he wasn't even pulling a full blackout when his outer wings snapped off:
Originally posted by FrodeMk3
(2.) In a flat scissors', much like the one I described above, I tried to match a turn with Oldman in a KI-84, Myself in a Spitfire XIV. We entered into the manuever at about the same speed, around 250, at about 4k. Right at the edge of blackout, I had both outer wing peices' break off...and this is the only Spit I myself have ever had this happen in. Oldman's KI made the turn without incident. He mentioned to me that he'd never seen anything of the like in a spit, either.
He was att he edge, but wasn't pulling enough G force to even fully black out. That doesn't indicate a spike overload to me.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
I am quite aware of the Spitfire's elevator issues in both AH and reality. I went into both of my tests gentle (as the Spit VIII's survival indicates) rather than just seeing if I could spike the Gs and take the wings off.
That's fine, but I wasn't responding to you, so there's no reason to get defensive.
And I think what the problem FrodeMk3 had was that he wasn't even pulling a full blackout when his outer wings snapped off:
That doesn't mean that he didn't spike. Stick slider settings can induce overload.
He was att he edge, but wasn't pulling enough G force to even fully black out. That doesn't indicate a spike overload to me.
Does FrodeMk3 have his stick set up with all the sliders pushed all the way up or even aligned across the scale? If so, that's the usual cause of unexpected overloading.
I've flown the SpitXIV and every other one into momentary blackouts (especially reversing off a merge) thousands of times and have never suffered a wing failure of any kind.
Trust me, it's not the flight model. I'd bet that 99% of the time, the problem lies in stick scaling or simply a stick that spikes.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Sorry, didn't mean to come across as defensive. I wasn't feeling defensive, just clarifying that I hadn't abused the light elevator controls.
And you're right, FrodeMk3 may very well have spiked the G forces. I can't really think of a way to test spikey behavior very well though.
-
Is the blackout rendered in films? I know I can't see anything in mine, even though I hit nearly 9Gs a few times, and there's nothing at the point the wings go their separate ways.
-
Originally posted by Widewing
At 575 mph, you cannot get enough elevator displacement in the 190s/152 to load the airframe enough to break the wings.
I've snapped the wings in a 152 at far less than 575 mph, but never in a 190.
Originally posted by Widewing
As to the F6F-5, I suppose that HTC modeled it based upon the design limits. Both the F6F and F4F demonstrated the ability to withstand g loads of up to 12g and in one well documented case, 13g. These loads were measured during max performance pullouts. In several cases, the engine A frames bent slightly, but the airframe itself sustained no damage. Grumman "over-engineered" their aircraft, being willing to trade a bit of performance for shear strength. That was the crux of their design philosophy; "build them simple, build them strong" - Leroy Grumman.
Again, I can snap the wings off an F6F at will at far less than 12G's, even with no ord (well... half of one or both).
I'd be willing to give demonstrations :)
Conversly, I've only ever snapped a wing on a Spit once when I was pulling out of a high speed dive well past the planes limits (the wings should have snapped before I ever tried to pull out). In Spits it seems, you'll usually black out well before you reach the stage where a wing will snap.
Not arguing, just pointing out my experiences.
-
Originally posted by BaldEagl
I've snapped the wings in a 152 at far less than 575 mph, but never in a 190.
Again, I can snap the wings off an F6F at will at far less than 12G's, even with no ord (well... half of one or both).
I'd be willing to give demonstrations :)
Conversly, I've only ever snapped a wing on a Spit once when I was pulling out of a high speed dive well past the planes limits (the wings should have snapped before I ever tried to pull out). In Spits it seems, you'll usually black out well before you reach the stage where a wing will snap.
Not arguing, just pointing out my experiences.
Try snapping the 152's wings again without fuel in them.
-
I'd like to see a corrected FM for the Ta152, but I don't know if the sources exist for it. I tried to find such data on the Mosquito FB.Mk VI and it is a mess for that much more common aircraft produced by a nation that was not in chaos.
-
agreed pls unperk the 14
-
Karnak this is a Spitfire topic, please don't hijack :p
[/rib]
-
I was playing around with a Spit14 last night. Went to about 16k and leveled out...thing will move up there. SO I desided to go higher and when I hit 20k it was like someone turned the engine off. It had no power and would not climb past 20k...like there was a glass ceiling. I always thought the 14 was made for that alt.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
I'd rate the Spitfire Mk XIV as follows:
WEP Speed Low: Good
WEP Speed High: Excellent
MIL Speed Low: Average
MIL Speed High: Average
WEP Climb: Excelent
MIL Climb: Average
Firepower: Good
Handling Slow: Fair
Handling Fast: Poor
Visibility: Good
Fuel Endurance: Poor
Durability: Extremely Poor
WEP Speed Low: Good
WEP Speed High: Excellent
MIL Speed Low: Good
MIL Speed High: Good
WEP Climb: Excellent
MIL Climb: Good
Firepower: Good
Handling Slow: Fair (any experience makes this manageable)
Handling Fast: Average
Visibility: Good
Fuel Endurance: Poor
Durability: Extremely Poor
Just can't sit by and see the 14 unfairly judged. It is one of the best planes in the game. I'd go ahead and say it's second best to the F4U-4. The spit 16 is close behind.
-
Originally posted by stroker71
I was playing around with a Spit14 last night. Went to about 16k and leveled out...thing will move up there. SO I desided to go higher and when I hit 20k it was like someone turned the engine off. It had no power and would not climb past 20k...like there was a glass ceiling. I always thought the 14 was made for that alt.
It has a dead zone between 20k and 23k. You can really feel the blower kick into the next gear when you pass 23k. Still, even in the dead zone it should climb at about 2,000ft/min on autoclimb. Something in your settings must be off.
Originally posted by trotter
ust can't sit by and see the 14 unfairly judged. It is one of the best planes in the game. I'd go ahead and say it's second best to the F4U-4. The spit 16 is close behind.
It cannot roll against the torque when going fast. I'd say that is pretty poor myself.
As to how good it is, well, the only numbers we have to work with, unless we want to use Krusty's voodoo system, are total kills and deaths and the ratio thereof. And doing that, even discounting the inherently higher kill/death ratios perk planes normally have, it isn't as good as many free planes. If we factor in the superior kill/death ratio effect of a perk plane then it drops to levels far below the average free plane.
The fact is that it is a tricky aircraft to use and paying points to try to learn it well is disuasive. In addition people go out of their way to kill, or try to kill, perk planes, even cheap ones. Yes, a skilled player in one is nigh untouchable, but the same is true of a skilled player in a Bf109K-4, La-7, Typhoon Mk Ib, Fw190D-9 and P-51D or B.
-
Originally posted by trotter
WEP Speed Low: Good
WEP Speed High: Excellent
MIL Speed Low: Good
MIL Speed High: Good
WEP Climb: Excellent
MIL Climb: Good
Firepower: Good
Handling Slow: Fair (any experience makes this manageable)
Handling Fast: Average
Visibility: Good
Fuel Endurance: Poor
Durability: Extremely Poor
Just can't sit by and see the 14 unfairly judged. It is one of the best planes in the game. I'd go ahead and say it's second best to the F4U-4. The spit 16 is close behind.
Not in the Altitude environs' we usually fight at in AH, Trotter. Fly one down low, and watch all the Spit IX's, VIII's, and XVI's eat it alive. That's where most of our fights' are. Otherwise, people fly it like a Dora with Roundels on the wings.
-
just un perk it and see what happens, give it one, maybe two tours, and even then, keep evaluating its usage and success levels constantly. I know i would learn it if it cost maybe 5 perks, but i cant afford it at 15 perks. I'm not an amazing stick, and i die far more often than not, but i certainly would liek to give the plane a try.
-
2 tours is only 2 months; we've lived with the unperked Spit XVI for what, since it's inception?
Try unperking it, see what will happen. Hell, leave it's ENY value, just in case. I'd like to see it's usage when unfettered by the perk. After a Dora ran away from me on the deck yesterday (and ripping the wings' off) I'm not too convinced of it's perk value, anyway.
BTW Widewing, I'm running my X-52 with the slider settings' out-of-the-box. Haven't messed with them.
-
I fly the spit 14 and My thoughts on it....Please un-perk it. That plane flown in the BnZ role is awesome and in a stall fight if flown with throttle and RPM controlled, and its climb rate, and not to mention its acceleration, its hard to beat...and I'd put it up against the 8 and 16 any day (in the right hands) of course. It doesn't turn Like the 9, but its close. And I think if they were to un-perk that plane you would see its full potential... :salute
-
I actually had a long e-mail debate with Soda on why the 14 should be unperked and the 16 should be perked. We came to the conclusion that we agreed to disagree. :salute The problem as i see it is the 14 rocks once you get it up high, and i mean high! I noticed the same fall off of performance between 16k and around 20k but it still was better than almost all of the planes at that alt. Get it to 25/26 k it flat out rocks. The Spit 16 though is a great plane from ground level up to about 16k then it kind of takes a dump compared to the 14. Based on the current level of most flights and fights the spit14 finds little use due to it's more of a high alt plane were as the spit16 is low to mid alt fighter. I'd say unperk the 14 and perk the 16 and see what happens.
AKsleepy
-
The fact is that it is a tricky aircraft to use and paying points to try to learn it well is disuasive. In addition people go out of their way to kill, or try to kill, perk planes, even cheap ones. Yes, a skilled player in one is nigh untouchable, but the same is true of a skilled player in a Bf109K-4, La-7, Typhoon Mk Ib, Fw190D-9 and P-51D or B.
Add the P47 to this list
Okay, the arguement for unperking the Spit14 is that it does not cleanly whip the other Spits in dogfighting, so why have a perk price on it? But to understand why it absolutely must remain perked, you have to compare it something besides Spits.
See the planes in bold? Spit14 can run them down (okay, it might have to dive slightly for some of them) at medium to hi alts and just plainly whips them in maneuveribility. (You'll notice the LA7 is not highlighted. Perhaps it can turn well enough to challenge the Spit14 down low). The inexplicably unperked LA7, by being faster than everything and turning much better than any non-perk in its speed class, has already gone a long way towards rendering the other high-speed E fighters more or less obsolete below 8-10K (Where most of the fun is, of course) And you want to worsen the problem? For an average flyer to shoot down another average flyer in an engagment where one is slower and turns much worse is NOT tricky at all. And this is what unlimited Spit14s will be used for, not turning engagments with Spits 8 through 16, Niks, Hurris, etc.
The unperked LA7s down low and unperked Spit14s up high could potentially make the Pony, 109, or 190 about as competitive, and thus as rare, as the P40 in late war.
-
Add the P47 to this list
Okay, the arguement for unperking the Spit14 is that it does not cleanly whip the other Spits in dogfighting, so why have a perk price on it? But to understand why it absolutely must remain perked, you have to compare it something besides Spits.
See the planes in bold? Spit14 can run them down (okay, it might have to dive slightly for some of them) at medium to hi alts and just plainly whips them in maneuveribility. (You'll notice the LA7 is not highlighted. Perhaps it can turn well enough to challenge the Spit14 down low). The inexplicably unperked LA7, by being faster than everything and turning much better than any non-perk in its speed class, has already gone a long way towards rendering the other high-speed E fighters more or less obsolete below 8-10K (Where most of the fun is, of course) And you want to worsen the problem? For an average flyer to shoot down another average flyer in an engagment where one is slower and turns much worse is NOT tricky at all. And this is what unlimited Spit14s will be used for, not turning engagments with Spits 8 through 16, Niks, Hurris, etc.
The unperked LA7s down low and unperked Spit14s up high could potentially make the Pony, 109, or 190 about as competitive, and thus as rare, as the P40 in late war.
Unfortunately, I don't think this is alltogether true, on several points.
For one thing, Yes, the Jug should be included. Many a suprise is handed out by a good stick in a jug. But how can you not compare it to other spits' that aren't perked, that outperform it in AH's usual combat altitude environs? The Spit XIV beats it below 10k, no doubt about it. Taking a XIV into a slow rolling scissors, below 10k, against even the other planes on your list, is writing a check many pilots' can't cash.
Also: Below 10k, in actual combat, with full WEP and at about 8k, A XIV still won't catch a Dora, or a Pony, a LA, Yak, or quite a few of the others planes' in LW.
The LALA can be outturned by quite a few planes, even a P-47, or an F4U or F6F, if the pilot keeps' his head, and uses throttle and flaps. A KI-84 will or a N1K2 will eat a LALA in a turn fight. A Spit XVI will chew up LA's in a turn all day long, but a XIV seems' worse turning. At best, it turns' at the same rate as a LA flown by an inexperienced stick. It's handling is pretty good up high, I'll give it that; But when was the last time you upped from a base that was flashing under attack, and all the attackers' were over 24k? Everyone underestimates' planes like the 109K4; I've seen K4's turn with XVI's. I know for a fact that they have the ability to turn with a XIV, easily.
Unperked XIV's will be forced to fight at an unadvantageous altitude, just like the Pony, P-47N, Tempest, etc. simply because that's where the fight is. There is no incentive to fight up high, It takes too much time to get there, and you can't vulch from 20k, so you won't see those planes' up there.
On a side note, keeping the fights' in AH low, is what made planes that got beat by all these LW monsters' suddenly a contender again. Have you ever tried to fly a HurriIIC in a fight at 25k with a Pony? How about an A6M? I've seen P-40's hold their own, even triumph against the very planes that made it obsolete, because the altitude environ is more favorable to the slow turnfighter down low. Here's the best one yet: Take the LA-7, which is an undisputed monster below 10k, And try to engage a P-51D at 20k, without diving to a lower alt.
The XIV won't ruin the other LW planes if it's unperked, for sure. More likely, it will see a little more usage, by the curious, but not much more.
-
Never see the LA7 perked in my opinion. You can make a case to perk almost every plane in the late war set and others can probably make a case not to perk them. If i remember correctly the spit14 was perked for the same reason people are calling for the spit16/la7 to be perked. To many people flying them, mostly unskilled at that. At the time the 14 came into the game the fights were mainly at higher alt's if i remember right, thus tons of people would grab a 14 zip up high and rule. This actually forced what we have now a lot of lower level fights, they got there uber ride at 20k plus, fine i'll bomb and fight at 6k. Kind of makes me think of the quote "for every action there is a reaction".
-
everybody gets tha perks
-
The inexplicably unperked LA7
There is nothing inexplicable as to why it's not perked. There is no need to perk it, it does not unbalance the game play in any way other than in the incorrect perception of a few.
ack-ack
-
If i remember correctly the spit14 was perked for the same reason people are calling for the spit16/la7 to be perked. To many people flying them, mostly unskilled at that.
You remember incorrectly. Perks placed on planes have never been because they are "popular" rides and too many fly them.
ack-ack
-
i can understand it being perked if fights regularly happened at alts over 20k, but they dont anymore, so it needn't be perked anymore. lets un-perk it, and c what happens. whats the worst that can happen? 1 tour has an imbalance of spit14s? i doubt it.
-
I think it might be reasonable for the perk price on the Spit14 to be slashed, and made similar to the C-hog's price. I don't believe situation for the Spit14 warrants complete unperking, as it did for the TA-152, a plane whose only big advantage over much of anything is great performance at very high alts that are deserted in the MA.
There is nothing inexplicable as to why it's not perked. There is no need to perk it, it does not unbalance the game play in any way other than in the incorrect perception of a few.
ack-ack
You need to explain just where I am incorrect Ack-Ack...of course, my assumption here is that the perk system should be based on head-to-head performance at typical MA alts, not numbers of X plane built in what month in 1945, how a plane would perform in the MA's empty stratosphere, how (un)popular it is in the MA month to month, or how far you can go between gas stations.
The LA7 enjoys near absolute air-to-air superiority over the planes I highlighted, down in the weeds. If MA combat were evenly spread out from the deck to 30K that would be meaningless, but at least 80% of the combat is below 10K. And even if the fight begins higher, the LA7 can take the fight to its best performance band and/or disengage by diving. I never said it was a magic plane that could dominate the best TnB planes in angles fighting, but then again it doesn't have to, with its speed. I think it outclasses too many LW planes too greatly at typical MA alts, and is only held back from being a bigger unbalancing factor by AHII's culture of contempt for the thing. This is a plane that basically translates to a slightly slower, but more maneuverable poor-man's Tempest at typical MA alts. The Tempest is the highest priced prop-driven perk ride in the game, so why would putting a small price around 5 points on the LA7 would be unreasonable?
Here is the argument that will inevitably be thrown out by someone. "Well, I can kill your average LA driver in the weeds driving any plane you pick. It can be done, so there!, you miserable pudknocker."
--I say, so what? I have killed the darn things in a freakin' A5. But killing an LA in a co-alt co-e fight down low in a Pony, 190, late 109, or Jug requires some fairly large, no, HUGE, mistakes on their part. If we hold a given plane to be no good because there are many inexperienced people flying them, then the Spitfires are hands down the worst planes in the game. Obviously, this argument doesn't work.
And next, someone will say "Well, SOMETHING has to be the fastest."
--Obviously. But let us look at five other late-war low alt-speedsters....
190D9-The second fastest non-perked plane at sea level. Good climb, Good guns, amazing roll. Also, the absolute WORST turning fighter in the game, except for the A8 and F8. That is what I call a balanced trade-a plethora of strengths paid for by one glaring weakness. Is out-run, outclimbed, out-turned, and out-accelerated by the LA7 below 8K.
109K4-The fastest non perk from 5K to 25K, which in the MA, might as well be saying it's the fastest from 5K to outer space. Climbs like a monkey on speed. Can turn some, but not really great. Probably the strongest plane among these five. The fact that it is dive-limited, has some truly terrible views, and a truly difficult elephant gun in the nose mitigate against perking it. A gifted K4 flyer give an LA7 driver a rough time, but the LA7, with its better turning, better dive, and competitive performance, remains the easier plane to win with in this sort of duel.
P-51D/B-Its advantages over a FW190D9 basically boil down to "It can turn signifigantly better than a 190D9". But it doesn't beat much else outside the 190s in a slow fight. Great views (in the case of the P51D), zoom climb, a fairly high top speed, and not much else, are what it has going for it. Of the four most popular planes (Spit, LA7, Nik, P-51), I consider this to be the only one whose popularity is more due to sentiment than any attribute of the plane itself. Hooray for sentiment. But it is out everythinged by LA7s at non-nosebleed alts.
P-47 Is actually kind of slow at MA alts, except the N, which is kind of fast for 5 minutes. Has an unreasonably large number of .50 cals. It climbs like a monkey who thought about going up a tree, but then smoked a joint and decided to lie around the house all day, listening to BOC and eating microwave burritos. Most non-bnz kills in a jug come from forcing overshoots from a disadvantaged position, which should tell us something. Is potentially dangerous in a low maneuvering fight because of the exceptional sticks flying it as a labor of love against those who show it no respect. Once again, hooray for sentiment. Against the LA7, P-47 has pretty much the same disadvantages as the P-51, except that the LA7s might at least think twice before HOing the Jug.
Typhoon-Only really fast below 6K, not super fast and a poor climber much above this alt. Nothing to write home about in the turn department either. Bad roll. LA7 runs it down and outmaneuvers it.
Another will say "There need to be SOMETHING for Russian enthusiasts to fly".
--I agree completely. The Russian plane set could use some expansion, no doubt. The P39 constitutes a step in this direction. However, the LA7's popularity I daresay does not stem from any great attachment of most AHII players to the history of Russia's airwar (They don't call 'em "Forgotten Battles" for nothing), but rather, its performance. For true afficianados, the equally iconic and quite effective Yak-9U and La5 would remain unperked.
Finally, someone will say "I need something to run down a vulching Pony/CHog"
--If you are really concerned about vulchers, learn to shoot in an Ostwind/Field gun and keep your runway cleared of all comers. Still need to run him down, take a D9 or a K4, they are fast enough to do the job. Or pay your perks and take something REALLY fast, a Tempest/F4U4. Of course, I suspect what people who say this really want is something to not just to chase down that Runstang, but also out everything it in a dogfight. (If they took a Dora, they couldn't just turn and they'd have to think WAY too hard to win.) And they want a plane to do this with for FREE, on top of it all. (Of course, pilots being equal, the LA7 will rarely beat the afore-mentioned Hog 1v1, but thats okay, the real point is to slow the thing down and get it anchored to one spot for the rest of the horde to fall upon. We all know this to be true-but I digress.)
And praytell, what non-perk ride does one use to run down a vulching LA7? Hmmm......
-
You need to explain just where I am incorrect Ack-Ack...of course, my assumption here is that the perk system should be based on head-to-head performance at typical MA alts, not numbers of X plane built in what month in 1945, how a plane would perform in the MA's empty stratosphere, how (un)popular it is in the MA month to month, or how far you can go between gas stations.
The LA7 enjoys near absolute air-to-air superiority over the planes I highlighted, down in the weeds. If MA combat were evenly spread out from the deck to 30K that would be meaningless, but at least 80% of the combat is below 10K. And even if the fight begins higher, the LA7 can take the fight to its best performance band and/or disengage by diving. I never said it was a magic plane that could dominate the best TnB planes in angles fighting, but then again it doesn't have to, with its speed. I think it outclasses too many LW planes too greatly at typical MA alts, and is only held back from being a bigger unbalancing factor by AHII's culture of contempt for the thing. This is a plane that basically translates to a slightly slower, but more maneuverable poor-man's Tempest at typical MA alts. The Tempest is the highest priced prop-driven perk ride in the game, so why would putting a small price around 5 points on the LA7 would be unreasonable?
Planes on perked on the basis if they will unbalance the gameplay if they weren't restricted in some fashion. This was the case with the C-Hog when it was first introduced and why it was perked. That plane, unrestricted did cause a major inbalance. However, while the La-7 is a dominate fighter at low altitudes and has the speed to get out of trouble and maneuvers well enough that it can get itself out of a scrape if caught, it does not in any way unbalances the game play. For every strength you mentioned about the La-7, there are major weaknesses that go along with it.
When the Spitfire Mk XIV was released, I think HiTech had nightmares of the C-Hog all over again and perked it. Frankly, I never thought it should have been perked in the first place, same with the Ta-152. I don't think the Spitfire Mk XIV without perks would have a negative effect on the game play, I would like to see that revisited and hope the perks are removed.
Here is the argument that will inevitably be thrown out by someone. "Well, I can kill your average LA driver in the weeds driving any plane you pick. It can be done, so there!, you miserable pudknocker."
Frankly, I've always held the belief that those calling for planes like the La-7, P-51D, N1K2 or the FW190D-9 to be perked are those that don't quite yet have a full grasp of tactics. Yes, they may know ACM but they don't know how to string along those maneuvers into tactics to fight against these planes. They think that since they know ACM or at least have a grasp of it and still get beaten by the La-7, that it must be the La-7 that is uber. So they blame the plane for their losses and which then reinforces the false belief that the La-7 needs to be perked since it's so uber that it dominates. Basically, they want to perk what they can't fight.
--I say, so what? I have killed the darn things in a freakin' A5. But killing an LA in a co-alt co-e fight down low in a Pony, 190, late 109, or Jug requires some fairly large, no, HUGE, mistakes on their part. If we hold a given plane to be no good because there are many inexperienced people flying them, then the Spitfires are hands down the worst planes in the game. Obviously, this argument doesn't work.
If I encounter a La-7 that is at the same alt and energy on the deck, if the La-7 decides to try to turn fight or take the fight vertical, I'm going to rape the watermelon out of it like a bunch of priests at an alter boy party.
And praytell, what non-perk ride does one use to run down a vulching LA7? Hmmm......
Basically, you want it perked because you can't chase one down if it runs from you.
You really haven't shown any valid reasons to why it needs to be perked, no one has. Just do a search of the forums and you'll see the same arguments for perking it and yet no one has been able to show any evidence that the La-7 needs to be perked because it somehow unblances the game play. I'm sure if you could find such evidence then HiTech and cronies would place a perk on it.
ack-ack
-
Put any idiot in an F-16 and any expert in a SBD, and the expert in the SBD will get the kill.
what kind of idiot are you talking about man. like forest gump or homer simpson.
i think forest gump could still kill the experten from four or five miles away. as simple as getting lock and pressing a button. lol :rofl :rofl :rofl
that line just struck me funny
-
Frankly, I've always held the belief that those calling for planes like the La-7, P-51D, N1K2 or the FW190D-9 to be perked are those that don't quite yet have a full grasp of tactics. Yes, they may know ACM but they don't know how to string along those maneuvers into tactics to fight against these planes. They think that since they know ACM or at least have a grasp of it and still get beaten by the La-7, that it must be the La-7 that is uber. So they blame the plane for their losses and which then reinforces the false belief that the La-7 needs to be perked since it's so uber that it dominates. Basically, they want to perk what they can't fight.
I knew it. I mention that the LA7 is problematic because it holds all the advantages in dogfights at typical MA alts against several important families of LW aircraft, and the response is to imply I don't know what I'm doing. Insult is the last refuge of the out-argued, you know.
P-51, N1K2, and the Dora? The N1K is a slower angles fighter with a pedestrian climb rate, Dora is an energy fighter, and the P-51D falls in between. With these three, as with most planes in the arena, there is some sort of rough balancing and tradeoffs between speed and maneuveribility. This is not, however the case, when considering the 109G/K, 190, P-51, P-47, or Typhoon versus the LA7 at typical MA alts. And this is what I consider a problem.
If I encounter a La-7 that is at the same alt and energy on the deck, if the La-7 decides to try to turn fight or take the fight vertical, I'm going to rape the watermelon out of it like a bunch of priests at an alter boy party.
Uh yeah, okay, very colorful phraseology there. I'm quite sure you beat LA7s regularly in your P-38, those who who don't hit WEP and dive away anyway. This bit of self-promotion is irrelevant to my point though.
"Basically, you want it perked because you can't chase one down if it runs from you."
I want it perked because it completely outclasses too many aircraft. I never said it dominates ALL aircraft in ALL areas. Obviously, LA7s can't out-turn the Spits, Hurris,N1Ks, etc. But neither can a Tempest.
"Just do a search of the forums and you'll see the same arguments for perking it and yet no one has been able to show any evidence that the La-7 needs to be perked because it somehow unblances the game play. I'm sure if you could find such evidence then HiTech and cronies would place a perk on it."
Okay, I'll bite, what is the definition of "unbalancing the gameplay here"? Is it pure numbers of the aircraft used in the MA? If that is the case, then Spits are an "unbalancing" factor. Obviously going by numbers doesn't work. Or is it the performance of the fighter itself that matters? If this is the case, I'd consider a fighter that out-runs everything and out-maneuvers quite a few to be a prime candidate for perking.
-
getting a bit off topic here,
Un-perk the Spit 14!
Perk the Spit 21 :D
-
getting a bit off topic here,
Un-perk the Spit 14!
Perk the Spit 21 :D
i dont think we need another spit, but at least we have some1 on topic again ^_^
-
Okay, I'll bite, what is the definition of "unbalancing the gameplay here"? Is it pure numbers of the aircraft used in the MA? If that is the case, then Spits are an "unbalancing" factor. Obviously going by numbers doesn't work. Or is it the performance of the fighter itself that matters? If this is the case, I'd consider a fighter that out-runs everything and out-maneuvers quite a few to be a prime candidate for perking.
Do a search for the C-Hog and look at the threads around the time AH went out of beta to live and you'll see what is meant by a plane unbalancing the game play. Then is should be a little more clearer why the La-7 doesn't. Again, I will also state my stance...the majority that want the La-7 perked do so because they either 1) don't know how to fight one or 2) want it perked because they can't catch one in a foot race.
so please, post any evidence, which you have failed to do by the way, that the La-7 so utterly and completely dominates the arenas that it unbalances the game play.
ack-ack
-
Again, I will also state my stance...the majority that want the La-7 perked do so because they either 1) don't know how to fight one or 2) want it perked because they can't catch one in a foot race.
I don't know any sure and certain method of beating a plane that badly out-everythings the one I'm flying, in a fair fight against someone who knows what they are doing. I don't find this shaming to say because no one does. All this "LA7 is an easy kill" bravado comes from 1. LA7s attempting to turnfight planes that turn better, everything is an easy kill when doing that, or, 2. Encounters with noobs that don't even know how to merge or that the throttle can be moved backwards. But the day has long since passed when the LA7 was flown by the clueless only.
I've always felt like the C-Hog needs to be perked alot less than the LA7 does, although it should remain so to keep .50 Corsairs from falling into disuse. It is just an ordinary F4U with some big guns in the wings after all, and getting in front of a Hog's 6 .50s can send you back to the tower almost as quickly. Not to mention that the LA7's 3 centerline mounted cannons are pretty deadly themselves.
I will state my stance again: I want the thing perked because it more or less mauls the other non-perked LW speedsters at typical MA alts, and because its performance is only slightly inferior to the two most heavily perked prop planes in the game, and because doing so wouldn't really deprive enthusiasts of Russian planes, anymore than perking the C-Hog and 4-Hog deprives Corsair fans.
-
I don't know any sure and certain method of beating a plane that badly out-everythings the one I'm flying, in a fair fight against someone who knows what they are doing. I don't find this shaming to say because no one does.
Sounds more like operator error than the plane.
All this "LA7 is an easy kill" bravado comes from 1. LA7s attempting to turnfight planes that turn better, everything is an easy kill when doing that, or, 2. Encounters with noobs that don't even know how to merge or that the throttle can be moved backwards. But the day has long since passed when the LA7 was flown by the clueless only.
No, it's called experience. Every plane has weaknesses that can be exploited for your gain, it's just a matter of learning what those weaknesses are and learning how to exploit them. In time, I'm sure you will develop those skills.
I've always felt like the C-Hog needs to be perked alot less than the LA7 does, although it should remain so to keep .50 Corsairs from falling into disuse. It is just an ordinary F4U with some big guns in the wings after all, and getting in front of a Hog's 6 .50s can send you back to the tower almost as quickly. Not to mention that the LA7's 3 centerline mounted cannons are pretty deadly themselves.
You weren't around when the C-Hog wasn't perked, if you were then you would truly know what it means when a plane unbalances the game. As I stated in my previous posts when you wanted an example, the C-Hog is a perfect one. The La-7 is no where near the levels the C-Hog was when it was unrestricted. Just because a lot like to fly them, it's no reason to perk it.
I will state my stance again: I want the thing perked because it more or less mauls the other non-perked LW speedsters at typical MA alts, and because its performance is only slightly inferior to the two most heavily perked prop planes in the game, and because doing so wouldn't really deprive enthusiasts of Russian planes, anymore than perking the C-Hog and 4-Hog deprives Corsair fans.
Which just proves what I stated previously, you want it perked because you either die by them a lot or you can't run from them. Either way, you still have yet to present any valid evidence why it should be perked.
ack-ack
-
I'd love to go 1v1 co-alt in the DA/TA with you Ack-Ack. Perhaps you could show me how to kill an La-7 in a P-38.
Later today good for you?
-
Okay, I was going to leave this thread alone, but I got to make a suggestion in regards to Urchin's idea: P-38 is fairly strong against the LA7. I don't know that it actually out-turns an LA7, but it comes close enough. Rarely fly a P-38 in MA, but have made the LA7s take to their heels when I have. Last time I tried this matchup in the DA with a squaddie, killed the LA7 easily.
I'd suggest matching a 190 of some sort or a Pony against the LA7 below 8K instead, since according to some these planes have usuable advantages against the LA7 at these alts that I'm too callow to see.
-
Oh, I already know the La-7 completely outmatches the P-51 and any 190. It is also better than any 109, but the margin of superiority is less. However, the La-7 is also double superior to the P-38 (it turns better and is faster), so I really would be interested to see why Ack-Ack feels as though the La-7 has some weakness that can be exploited by the P-38.
-
off topic again, no need to perk LA7, just unperk the spit14!!! :aok
-
Later today good for you?
Weekend is probably better, out of town for the day and not sure if I'm going to make it back tonight or get stuck and have to take the red eye back to LA in the early morning.
ack-ack
-
Ok, I'll try to keep an eye out for you. Thanks.
-
yes after hours of reading through the jungles of this post im finally at the end it was quite an adventure to get here now my opinion unperk the Spit 14
on the off topic la-7 even though i still havent killed one to date which is my ultimate goal in this game it doesn't need a perk and in my opinion use the 109-g2 against it
-
Two things I discovered...
1. AHII website gives the same normal loaded weight (8500 lbs) to the Spit16 and Spit14. The 16 has a 32' wingspan, the 14 has 36' feet. Yet the 16 can turn much better than the 14? How and why?
2. On the deck, the 14 is notably faster than the 16. So still, its not like the 14 ever has to fight the better-turning Spits if it doesn't have the advantage.
-
Two things I discovered...
1. AHII website gives the same normal loaded weight (8500 lbs) to the Spit16 and Spit14. The 16 has a 32' wingspan, the 14 has 36' feet. Yet the 16 can turn much better than the 14? How and why?
2. On the deck, the 14 is notably faster than the 16. So still, its not like the 14 ever has to fight the better-turning Spits if it doesn't have the advantage.
The XIV has monster torque.
-
Unperk it, I'd like to see more of them in my 152... It would make for an interesting high-altitude fight.
I don't see the Spit 14 as being any more dangerous than the 152... Just give it a 5 ENY value and set it free, it doesn't need a perk.
-
Unperk it, I'd like to see more of them in my 152... It would make for an interesting high-altitude fight.
I don't see the Spit 14 as being any more dangerous than the 152... Just give it a 5 ENY value and set it free, it doesn't need a perk.
Tell me this is a joke please....
Just what does the 152 do that is exceptional, except achieve 470mph somewhere in the stratosphere?
What fighter turns worse than the 152, outside of the 190s?
Whereas the Spit14 is has fair-to-good low level speed, excellent high level speed, monster climb and still has fair-to-good turning. Totally incomparable with the 152. Stick to comparing the SpitXIV with the LA7, KI-84, Spit16, etc, that at least makes some sense.
-
Indeed, the Spit 14 is such an outstanding airplane, that almost no one intentionally flies it.
-
Everyone that posted in this thread needs' to go out and fly one. Go into a furball with all the other LW planes' mixed in. No, it's not gonna dominate the fight; It will actually be at pains' to cope with some of the other aircraft in here.
-
For what it is worth...
I fought some duels with a Spit14 against a Spit16 with a squaddie who is about my level. Alternated with 16v16 duels for a control group. My impressions...
Duelling a 16 with a 14 is tougher than 16v16, that is for sure, you can't just get a good angle initially and keep on turning until the inevitable kill shot. But it is not guaranteed victory for the 16 guy either. 14 is not nessecarily dead meat in a scissoring fight with a 16. Although their listed climb rates at low level appear nearly identical, I think the 14 may zoom climb better. The fact that the 14's engine rotates the other way may confuse people, I dunno. The 14 should avoid duelling the 16 in its supercharger dead band, that too is for sure. So a Spit16 does tend to have an advantage in a co-alt, co-e turning duel. HOWEVER...a Spit16 beats a Tempest even worse in that situation, so this argument is abit weak for un-perking.
Spit14 can still do what Jugs, Typhs, Ponies, 109s, LA7s, Yaks, 190s and Tempests typically do fighting Spits-engage with a workable E advantage, disengage with speed when it is lost. And the Spit14 climbs and turns alot better than most of those planes listed, and it will be able to run them down AND out turn either outright or with a slight dive alot easier than any other Spit.
My verdict? The main problem with the Spit14 is that people think it needs to be like the other Spits, instead of its own beast. I think a good 109K pilot would be hell-on-wings in the Spit14. Reduce the perk price to around 5 points, same as what the LA7 needs.
-
unperk spit14 ! :t
-
I agree, unperk the Spit14!
Not because of a low abilities of those that use it, but because I am a god with it in my hands.
But that shouldn't really swing you one way or the other. I had the ability to make some planes sing, and some I could barely get off the ground even with a lot of practice.
Since I just joined again, I'm reearning perks so I can take this bad boy out. I've named her S.V.
-
wow, this thread keeps going and going. Especailly for a Wishlist thread. P.S. I'm with ya all the way :salute
-
this thread wont die til its unperked! :furious
unperk it! :rock
-
I was knockin' around in a 152 tonight at about 20k... prowling for high fights when I came across a co-alt Spit 14.
How exciting, one might think, a high-alt duel between the very best of the Axis and Allied high-alt fighters!
Alas, it was not to be, I gained what was beginning to be the upper hand in the fight (1 v 1, no cons in sight) and the Spit 14 got spooked and ran for the relative safety of 10k.
Perhaps the Spit pilot might have been more inclined to stay and fight to a stand-still at 20k+ if his aircraft was ENY 5 like mine?
I've flown the Spit 14 once... I hated it. I have no interest in flying it....... but I would LOVE to come across a few more high-alt fights against them... however, as it is at the moment I've seen 2 Spit 14s in the last 3 months.
The Spit 14 has only the ability to fly at high altitude more effectively than the Spit 16 (and let's face it... that's hardly a game-throwing attribute in the MA).... and perhaps an exponentially increased ugliness factor.... and that's hardly relevant to perk value.
To finish my little story from the MA tonight I eventually managed to bag that Spit 14 who insisted on trying to protect his small amount of perks when he got focused on an out-numbered squadie. I managed to execute a nice little stealth hit on him and his perked Spit split in two aft of the cockpit in due order. I had to blow my attack on a very, very high flight of B 26s (which would have been great fun) in order to get him but the end result was a Raw Prawn sortie which achieved a 12-0 kill ratio with all 3 aircraft returning to base successfully.
In summary, I was having a blast prowling at 20+k tonight (I was genuinely looking for high-alt fights and buffs, not cherries) and it would have been nice to have a more readily available opponent to fight up there.
Unperk the Spit 14.... give it an ENY 5 rating and let it roam the upper edges of the fight. They dive like absolute chit, so they're no cherry-picking threat :rofl They're more likely to blow their own wings off than yours. :lol
-
I flew into a enemy base a few tours ago in a spit 14...came in at around 15k. Saw a dot that was higher than me by a few thousand feet...so I hit the autoclimb and zoomed up to co-alt. Icon showed up as F4U...ok so I merged and HO by either of us. Then saw it was a F4U-4...thought cool both good hi alt planes. Then what did the F4U do...dove away. I don't generally chase and was really disappointed. Mainly because it was him and I up that high...I just wanted to have a good fight. I desided to start on some lower cons only to have the F4U-4 come back at alt and start picking people. I just stayed clear of him. He wasn't interested in a fight anyway...only wanted to pick. To the point...unperk the 14! When this thread was started wanted to fly the 14 more. In that tour I got a 8.8 K/D ratio in the 14.
-
Free the 14!!
donkey
-
Free the 14!!
donkey
well said :salute
-
IMO, in LW Arena , only planes that need a perk are the 262 and the 163 .....
-
IMO, in LW Arena , only planes that need a perk are the 262 and the 163 .....
Tempest absolutely needs to be perked too.
-
Won't unperking the 1C kill the 1D?