Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Axis vs Allies => Topic started by: Urchin on February 29, 2008, 11:20:45 AM
-
I did some quick checking this morning, after a bit of flying last night.
Let me preface this by saying that last night was the most enjoyable time I've ever had in the AvA (CT, etc.).
I flew the Spit I last night, got into several 1v1s with Easyscor in an A6M2.
This is just a commentary on the planes and stats, not anything more or less.
It seems as though the Allied planes are at a bit of a disadvantage looking at the stats. As of this morning when I checked -
The A6M2 was carrying a K/D of 1.5, with its K/D against the Spit at 1.79, vs the P-40 1.44, and vs the Hurricane 1.2.
The 109 was carrying a K/D of 1.49, with a K/D of 1.7 against the Spit, 1.68 against the P-40, and 1.07 against the Hurricane.
The 110 is doing the worst, with a K/D of only 1.28. 1.31 against the P-40, 1.27 against the Spit, and 1.25 against the Hurricane.
The Hurricane has the best K/D for the allies at .86, followed by the P-40 at .67, and the Spit at .65.
Perhaps it would be a good idea after all to have the F4F included in the planeset.
What I find really interesting is how awful the Spit seems to be doing. I came out the worst in most of the fights I had with Easyscor, the Spit just didn't seem like it could keep up at all with the zeke. I think the only kills I got on him were from him losing control and augering. I stalled out a couple times and did some odd floating leaf stall into the ground - the Spitfire certainly does not seem to be a very forgiving airplane (which is odd, considering how docile all of the rest are, bar the Spit 14).
Perhaps I will try the Hurricane out tonight, I know from flying the two in the DA furball area that the Hurricane is much more agile (in my opinion, anyway).
-
There is a glaring hole in your analysis that negates your conclusion. You detail "plane" stats. Well those aren't plane stats those are players-in-planes stats. You left out the pile-lots in your considerations.
Edit: You were using the wrong tool against the zeke. The zeke2-hurri1 is a great match, and the 109e-spit1 is a great match.
-
Ah, so your presumption is that the axis pilots are, on average, much better than the allied pilots?
-
in a word-- yes
-
The axis are used to having a plane set disadvantage.
-
Those axis guys have been flying around alot together, and lets face it the Truekill, N72, Storch, Kong1,Tbarone killing squad is hard to beat. I'm not sure who we have on Allies to counter that bunch- I'm certainly no help.
With respect to the planeset, though, I have to say that I feel the hurri 1 is really a decent plane against what the Axis are fielding. Provided the enemy doesn't run away, the hurri can pwn against the 109 and 110. And, truthfully, I didn't see much running when I was on.
I don't know if the F4F would unbalance the setup, but I think the Allies are well-served with the planes we currently have. I was surprised at how docile and lethal the hurri is- I don't know if I've ever flown the hurri 1 until the last few days.
Just my opinions. I think Kong might be right that pilot skill is some factor in those stats. Most of those JG guys know the 109 inside and out- alot of us Allies (or me at least) are relative newcomers to the hurri and P-40.
-
Hi Urchin, those were fun fights, thanks. My tally has you beating my at least 5 to 3 however.
In the Spit v Zeke matchup, especially in the "AvA War", the Spit controls the fight. He can extend and leave the Zeke in the dust at any time. It's only when you choose to stay and fight, as you did last night, or while taking or defending at a base, do things get out of hand for the spit driver because he stays around and fights the Zekes fight.
-
Well, in my opinion, the Hurricane is clearly the strongest plane the Allies have. This is further evident in that it has the highest K/D by a relatively wide margin ... and even the experten in the 109 are being fought to a draw by the incompetent allied pilots in the Hurricane.
The fact that the 110 runs around a 1.25-1.3 K/D against all types seems to be clear evidence that most of the folks that fly it aren't turnfighting - if they were the K/D would skyrocket against the P-40 and plummet against the other two.
Personally speaking, I'd say that the Axis side has a much superior planeset.
Oh and Easy - my score says 3 kills vs 4 deaths to A6M2.
-
Originally posted by Urchin
Ah, so your presumption is that the axis pilots are, on average, much better than the allied pilots?
I made no presumption or assumption I merely pointed out that you did not factor in player skill.
-
That is because player skill is assumed to be a nonfactor.
Rather, it is assumed that players on both sides will have a population of roughly equal pilots, normally distributed.
-
You can't use kill stats to equate capabilities of planes. A few key other folks have been trying the same tactic to get planes unperked....
It doesn't tell you the capabilities of the plane itself.
Let me preface by saying I don't think the axis are better pilots per se. They just cluster up (when I've been in there) better, and tag team (good or bad, that's the term I use) better.
So regardless of the skill of a A6M pilot or a 109 pilot, 2 P-40B pilots working together in close coordination will kill him. The 109E is generally a better plane than the P-40B, and few will argue this. However the 109 will be dead. Why? Maybe the P-40Bs had alt, or lots of speed, or a better position, or perhaps the 109 was still pulling its gear up, or maybe the pilot got jumped while trying to figure out where the fight is on the map.
Kill stats are nice, but they don't tell you squat about the plane in question.
P.S. The negative G cutoff creates that fluttering leaf stall. It's a hole in the FM basically. Somebody at HTC admitted it's because the FM doesn't know what to do -- not really a bug, just an "issue" that's been around for a long time. Don't cut out your carburetor at the top of a loop and you'll be fine!
P.P.S. The 110c is IMO the best plane of the axis set. It is nimble enough that with any other planes around (if it's not the ONLY target) it can bring its firepower to bear and get lots of kills. The P-40B is definitely a strong player for the allies, due to speed and dive characteristics (try diving in the hurr/spit!), and because of the 50cal nose guns.
-
Originally posted by Urchin
That is because player skill is assumed to be a nonfactor.
Rather, it is assumed that players on both sides will have a population of roughly equal pilots, normally distributed.
You made a flawed assumption. The population of the AvA is too small to produce a equally distributed random sample. That would be a stretch even if team were decided by coin flip which it is not. So back to my original assertion: your statistical analysis is inherently flawed because it discounts a very important factor.
-
spit1-----d3a is a good matchup
usually whenever some one1 sees a d3a they think easy kill and make stupid mistakes.
-
Originally posted by KONG1
You made a flawed assumption. The population of the AvA is too small to produce a equally distributed random sample. That would be a stretch even if team were decided by coin flip which it is not. So back to my original assertion: your statistical analysis is inherently flawed because it discounts a very important factor.
It looks to me as if my assumption is that the K/D of a random allied pilot = K/D of a random axis pilot, and yours is K/d of a random allied pilot < K/D of a random axis pilot.
Is that a correct statement?
EDIT: Actually... what I really mean to say is that the true means would be equal, and you say that axis K/D is higher. Of course, the only way to test such an assumption would be to draw a sample of pilots and test the assumptions.
-
You assume pilot skill is the only outside factor, as well.
Aside from that major oversight, there's no way to show any 2 pilots even on the same team are "about equal" let alone that one session doesn't randomly have all the "about equal" pilots all on the same team.
It's like saying "Assuming 2 birds are the same" -- well there are so many birds out there that there MAY be similar birds but chances are they're not.
You preclude all other possibilities when you put it that way.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
"Assuming 2 birds are the same"
All birds pale in comparison to the Norwegian Blue, beautiful plumage.
-
I don’t know who is better than whom in what, and I really don’t care either. Right now the AvA is a lot of fun.
I will say one thing though, about the axis side. The majority of the guys playing axis, have extremely large amounts of seat time in the planes. All of them. As we saw last war, as the plane sets changed, the axis just rolled with it, even when it looked like they were at a disadvantage on the face of it. Going from the Emil to an A5 is like changing socks for a lot of the axis guys.
Seat time has some effect on performance. It has to. Also the axis side has benefited from long standing, organized squads making up the roster. Call it what you will, “Teamwork” when its you, “Ganging” when it’s the other guys…etc, etc, It plays into performance on the whole. It has to.
I think the Allies are getting tougher and tougher as they get more organized. Last night was some great action.
Any stick from the MA can jump in one night and rack up a great K/D in any plane. Just like any NFL team can beat another on any given Sunday. It’s the “season” long regular weekly wins, and consistency that makes a champion though.
There is also the unspoken, but certainly tangible camaraderie and “never say die” mind set among the axis guys that is a lot of fun to be part of. All in all, it’s a blast flying with the axis guys.
-
well spoken, well said!! :aok
-
Originally posted by Urchin
It looks to me as if my assumption is that the K/D of a random allied pilot = K/D of a random axis pilot, and yours is K/d of a random allied pilot < K/D of a random axis pilot.
Is that a correct statement?
Your statistical analysis is once again flawed because you have missed a very important factor. Equal K/D statistics in no way equate to equal piloting skills. That stat does not take into account the risks a pile-lot takes. A good player may place himself in unfavorable circumstances for the pure fun of it while a poor player may play it safe thus earning the poor player a much higher K/D stat.
More importantly since the arena is Axis v Allies. If the average K/D of the Axis planes is better than the allies, then mathematically speaking, the average K/D of the axis pilots will surpasses the average K/D of the allies.
Therefore if you choose "random allied players" and "random axis players" repeatedly thus depleting the sample of players you would find that more often than not the K/D of the "random axis player" would exceed that of the "random allied player".
-
Well, it is my opinion that the flight modeling of the Spitfire Mk I and Hurricanes Mk anything are significantly off.
Read pilot commentarries on the two from pilots who flew both, such as Robert Stanford Tuck.
In short the Spitfire responded effortlessly, you didn't sit in the Spitfire, you wore it, you thought about where you wanted to go and it did it without any consious effort.
The Hurricane's praise was in the lines of, it was a good, stable gun platform, it was a rugged aircraft, it had better visibility over the nose than the Spitfire.
Now, which fighter in AH responds effortlessly? For my part, when flying the Spitfire Mk I it feels like I am wrestling against it constantly whereas the Hurricane Mk I, while slow, responds easily and rapidly.
I am also quite skeptical of the Bf110's flight modeling, for what it is worth.
-
Originally posted by Stampf
I don’t know who is better than whom in what, and I really don’t care either. Right now the AvA is a lot of fun.
I will say one thing though, about the axis side. The majority of the guys playing axis, have extremely large amounts of seat time in the planes. All of them. As we saw last war, as the plane sets changed, the axis just rolled with it, even when it looked like they were at a disadvantage on the face of it. Going from the Emil to an A5 is like changing socks for a lot of the axis guys.
Seat time has some effect on performance. It has to. Also the axis side has benefited from long standing, organized squads making up the roster. Call it what you will, “Teamwork” when its you, “Ganging” when it’s the other guys…etc, etc, It plays into performance on the whole. It has to.
I think the Allies are getting tougher and tougher as they get more organized. Last night was some great action.
Any stick from the MA can jump in one night and rack up a great K/D in any plane. Just like any NFL team can beat another on any given Sunday. It’s the “season” long regular weekly wins, and consistency that makes a champion though.
There is also the unspoken, but certainly tangible camaraderie and “never say die” mind set among the axis guys that is a lot of fun to be part of. All in all, it’s a blast flying with the axis guys.
Can't get any simpler than that. :aok
-
Originally posted by stodd
spit1-----d3a is a good matchup
usually whenever some one1 sees a d3a they think easy kill and make stupid mistakes.
yup D3A is a surprisingly nimble lil minx for sure.
-
Originally posted by KONG1
Your statistical analysis is once again flawed because you have missed a very important factor. Equal K/D statistics in no way equate to equal piloting skills. That stat does not take into account the risks a pile-lot takes. A good player may place himself in unfavorable circumstances for the pure fun of it while a poor player may play it safe thus earning the poor player a much higher K/D stat.
More importantly since the arena is Axis v Allies. If the average K/D of the Axis planes is better than the allies, then mathematically speaking, the average K/D of the axis pilots will surpasses the average K/D of the allies.
Therefore if you choose "random allied players" and "random axis players" repeatedly thus depleting the sample of players you would find that more often than not the K/D of the "random axis player" would exceed that of the "random allied player".
Actually, I sort of think that taking stats over multiple tours would tend to mitigate that factor. Also, I think one could assume that there are just as many careless 'skilled' fighters on the allied side as on the axis one, and careful 'unskilled' ones.
I'm not arguing that the average K/D of axis planes is higher, that is something I truly do not know. I do think that in this particular setup they have better planes.
Karnak - I wonder at that myself. If the Hurricane I was so much better than the Spit I, and the Hurri IIc was so much more effective than the Spit V... why do we have Spit IX, VIII, and XIV? I would've been pumping out Hurricane VIII, IX, and XIVs...
-
Originally posted by Urchin
Karnak - I wonder at that myself. If the Hurricane I was so much better than the Spit I, and the Hurri IIc was so much more effective than the Spit V... why do we have Spit IX, VIII, and XIV? I would've been pumping out Hurricane VIII, IX, and XIVs...
If I may quote a pilot who actually fought Hurricane Mk II's, Hans Wind, a Brewster pilot at that time:
The easiest one to shoot down of the enemy fighters is the Hurricane. It is totally helpless against us below 3,000 meters. It is slow and very clumsy and unmanoeuvrable. Whenever you meet a Hurricane, engage it in a turn-fight, where it is totally at our mercy. It is best to shoot this plane in the forward part of the fuselage when it almost immediately bursts into flames.
, facing the Soviet air force.
-
Originally posted by Urchin
Ah, so your presumption is that the axis pilots are, on average, much better than the allied pilots?
Cause he's tested the theory in a most unbiased and scientific way, yaknow. ;)
But since suspician equals facts I suspect the Axis players are well aware of the carb starve on a couple of planes and managed to perfect the skill of nosing down alot during the stick-stirring evasive moments therefore buying time for one of their six wingies to eventually line up the shot. And I suppose that's a skill worthy. But I'm sure, with practice (given time, opportunity, etc) even a mediocre spit/hurri jockey might develop a method or two to cope. Especially with Zeke drivers that like alt. You know ... those pilot skills known as alt, numbers. We *know* it can't be any advantage in planeset. All planes are essentially the same, anyway. So there .... my suspician plus Kong's, of a similar nature but obviously offset arrogance, *must* be fact. :)
Now ... having stuck my nose in the whinefest. *IF* it's the challenge ... don't whine. *IF* it's an advantage ... don't whine. Don't whine that I told you all not to whine, either. Nevermind, do whatever. :D
-
I never typed "the axis pilots are, on average, much better than the allied pilots". Urchin did. If that's the way he feels then that's the way he feels.
If I wanted to say that, it would go more like this:
"Chumps couldn't organize a Tupperware Party."
or
"Those guys couldn't fly a flag."
Not that I'd ever say anything like that.
-
Originally posted by Urchin
Karnak - I wonder at that myself. If the Hurricane I was so much better than the Spit I, and the Hurri IIc was so much more effective than the Spit V... why do we have Spit IX, VIII, and XIV? I would've been pumping out Hurricane VIII, IX, and XIVs...
I think the Hurri's roll rate is too fast, perhaps as much as 50% too fast. I think the Hurri's roll acceleration may be too high. I think the Hurri's instantaneous turnrate may be too high (it did turn tighter than a Spit in sustained turns, no question). I think it is hardly affected by rising airspeed, which cripples both the Bf109E and Spitfire Mk I, even though the Hurri's ailerons are fabric like the Spit's. I think the difference in durability between the two is overstated in AH, namely that the Spit is excessively fragile while the Hurri may be a tad tough.
None of this do I have any data for as I have absolutely no Hurricane date at all other than speeds. Stoney did mention a lecture in which the speaker, and RAF guy of some sort (not WWII for sure), referenced the Hurri's time to complete a full roll as 4.5 seconds and in AH it takes about 3 seconds.
But essentially I have had your very thought on many occasions. If these models are near correct, why was it the Spitfire F.Mk XIV and Bf109K-4 at the end in reality and not the Hurricane F.Mk XIV and Bf110K-4? Sure, they'd both have been a bit slower, but I'd bet a Griffon 65 powered Hurri would top 425mph and a Bf110 with a couple DB605s would top 440mph, and both without the crippling high speed limitations on handling of the Spitfires and Bf109s.
EDIT:
The RAF considered the Hurricane Mk IIc so outclassed as a fighter compared to the Bf109F that it was considered a ground attack aircraft. Many (most?) pilots of the twelve .303 armed Hurricane Mk IIb had the outer four guns taken out, leaving it with the same eight guns as the Mk I, as they had such a negative impact on manueverability.
-
If I wanted to say that, it would go more like this:
"Chumps couldn't organize a Tupperware Party."
or
"Those guys couldn't fly a flag."
Not that I'd ever say anything like that.
:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol
-
Originally posted by Karnak
I think the Hurri's roll rate is too fast, perhaps as much as 50% too fast. I think the Hurri's roll acceleration may be too high. I think the Hurri's instantaneous turnrate may be too high (it did turn tighter than a Spit in sustained turns, no question). I think it is hardly affected by rising airspeed, which cripples both the Bf109E and Spitfire Mk I, even though the Hurri's ailerons are fabric like the Spit's. I think the difference in durability between the two is overstated in AH, namely that the Spit is excessively fragile while the Hurri may be a tad tough.
None of this do I have any data for as I have absolutely no Hurricane date at all other than speeds. Stoney did mention a lecture in which the speaker, and RAF guy of some sort (not WWII for sure), referenced the Hurri's time to complete a full roll as 4.5 seconds and in AH it takes about 3 seconds.
But essentially I have had your very thought on many occasions. If these models are near correct, why was it the Spitfire F.Mk XIV and Bf109K-4 at the end in reality and not the Hurricane F.Mk XIV and Bf110K-4? Sure, they'd both have been a bit slower, but I'd bet a Griffon 65 powered Hurri would top 425mph and a Bf110 with a couple DB605s would top 440mph, and both without the crippling high speed limitations on handling of the Spitfires and Bf109s.
EDIT:
The RAF considered the Hurricane Mk IIc so outclassed as a fighter compared to the Bf109F that it was considered a ground attack aircraft. Many (most?) pilots of the twelve .303 armed Hurricane Mk IIb had the outer four guns taken out, leaving it with the same eight guns as the Mk I, as they had such a negative impact on manueverability.
Two things I think you are forgetting or overlooking. First, AH dogfights and real life dogfights are generally nothing alike. In real life, speed was relied upon much more to evade your enemy and get home alive. The low, slow turnfight that the Hurri excels with in the AH world was not a situation real life pilots wanted to be in. The spitfire was faster, was a more modern design, and could thus "advance" whereas the Hurri was considered a technological dead end.
Even in AH the IIC is dreadfully slow and can be picked apart if you are patient and maintain your speed advantage. Surely this was not overlooked by those flying it in real life . . . on either side of the conflict.
There is also a matter of pilot ergonomics. We "cartoon pilots" have the same ergonomic feel in any airframe, which just isn't the case in real life. "You wear a spitfire." That has wasn't necessarily due to its performance, but ergonomics. If you as a pilot felt like you were driving a truck in a Hurri but riding a race car in the Spitfire, regardless of the comparison of the actual stats, you are going to like the plane that "feels good" better, and sing its praises.
Just some food for thought.
-
E25380,
I don't think you are entirely right. I think you are exagerating the differences. In all the reading I have done on WWII air combat there have been many, many, many accounts of manuever fights. Many more so than the blow through and keep running fights you seem to say were the vast majority.
And look at Panzzer's Finnish front quote. That is a turn fight.
I have killed many a Hurri in AH doing what you describe, it takes a long time. Nothing at all like the Finnish pilot described.
In addition I have read quite a few accounts of Spitfires coming home shotup, but in AH if it is tougher than an A6M I can't tell.
-
Originally posted by Urchin
It looks to me as if my assumption is that the K/D of a random allied pilot = K/D of a random axis pilot, and yours is K/d of a random allied pilot < K/D of a random axis pilot.
Is that a correct statement?
EDIT: Actually... what I really mean to say is that the true means would be equal, and you say that axis K/D is higher. Of course, the only way to test such an assumption would be to draw a sample of pilots and test the assumptions.
Statistically speaking, I would say that the Axis MEDIAN is higher than the allied median. I fly axis, but I did spend a day at the allied camp. I think pilot skill is definitely a big factor this time around.
-
the few times I've made it in, I have enjoyed the planeset .. much better than trying to match them up historically where it usually made things lopsided