Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: BnZs on May 09, 2009, 08:02:48 AM
-
Doing sort giving top speed at low alt a weight of "1" and leaving the other categories at zero, the SpitXVI is number 15 in top speed out of 51 unperked fighters. That means it is faster than over 70% of non-perked fighters.
1 La-7 LaLa Russian Fighter L/M 6.08 6.35 8.53 5.71 7.55 6.00 5.00 6.49 5.81 2.65 6.75 6.42 7.63 2.97 2.88 1.16 6.08
2 Fw 190D-9 Shrike,Dora German Fighter/Attacker M/H 6.05 6.88 7.87 7.36 8.47 6.65 4.35 6.84 6.08 4.47 3.65 3.71 10.00 2.68 4.29 1.59 6.05
3 Bf 109K-4 Gustav German Fighter M/H 6.02 7.14 9.22 8.19 7.04 7.40 3.60 6.84 8.46 5.34 5.31 5.19 7.02 3.57 2.55 --- 6.02
4 P-51D Mustang, Pony American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.87 6.73 6.62 5.91 9.08 6.25 4.75 6.49 6.08 7.69 3.54 2.40 7.52 2.31 3.71 2.78 5.87
5 Typhoon Mk I Typhy British Fighter/Attacker L/M 5.76 6.19 5.93 4.62 7.23 8.00 3.00 6.49 4.97 4.44 5.06 4.32 3.00 4.08 3.78 2.17 5.76
6 P-47N Thunderbolt, Jug American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.72 6.80 5.46 5.49 8.44 4.50 6.50 6.05 3.42 8.88 4.70 1.79 8.30 2.76 6.02 3.52 5.72
7 P-51B Mustang, Pony American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.64 6.74 6.44 6.35 10.00 6.00 5.00 6.27 5.98 7.91 4.17 2.31 7.24 1.85 2.77 2.07 5.64
8 Ta 152H German Fighter M/H 5.62 6.50 6.70 6.08 8.86 5.00 6.00 5.83 6.30 6.92 4.25 4.41 7.34 4.59 3.83 --- 5.62
9 Bf 109G-14 Gustav German Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.60 6.39 9.25 7.94 7.04 7.00 4.00 6.05 7.83 4.96 6.10 5.37 7.02 3.57 2.55 1.49 5.60
10 F4U-1 Corsair, Hog American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.53 6.57 5.47 5.05 7.55 5.00 6.00 5.83 4.27 6.61 7.24 5.02 7.87 2.31 4.42 1.52 5.53
11 Yak-9U Russian Fighter L/M 5.53 6.46 6.87 5.71 7.75 7.00 4.00 5.61 7.15 3.56 5.56 5.02 7.73 2.07 1.36 --- 5.53
12 La-5FN Russian Fighter L/M 5.45 5.90 7.77 6.21 7.99 6.50 4.50 6.49 5.64 2.58 6.59 6.07 7.45 2.29 2.65 1.16 5.45
13 F4U-1D Corsair, Hog, D Hog American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.30 6.32 6.06 5.22 8.81 5.00 6.00 5.83 4.15 6.70 7.20 5.11 8.16 2.31 4.50 2.99 5.30
14 Bf 109G-2 Gustav German Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.15 6.14 8.27 7.10 6.57 7.00 4.00 6.05 7.87 4.98 6.50 5.89 7.17 1.75 2.16 1.23 5.15
15 Spitfire Mk XVI
As you can see, the only faster fighters that even have a claim to being more maneuverable are the F4Us, and that is debatable, while there are many slower fighters that are indisputably less maneuverable.
A search for top speed, "high alt", yields the following result:
1 Bf 109K-4 Gustav German Fighter M/H 6.02 7.14 9.22 8.19 7.04 7.40 3.60 6.84 8.46 5.34 5.31 5.19 7.02 3.57 2.55 --- 7.14
2 Fw 190D-9 Shrike,Dora German Fighter/Attacker M/H 6.05 6.88 7.87 7.36 8.47 6.65 4.35 6.84 6.08 4.47 3.65 3.71 10.00 2.68 4.29 1.59 6.88
3 P-47N Thunderbolt, Jug American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.72 6.80 5.46 5.49 8.44 4.50 6.50 6.05 3.42 8.88 4.70 1.79 8.30 2.76 6.02 3.52 6.80
4 P-51B Mustang, Pony American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.64 6.74 6.44 6.35 10.00 6.00 5.00 6.27 5.98 7.91 4.17 2.31 7.24 1.85 2.77 2.07 6.74
5 P-51D Mustang, Pony American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.87 6.73 6.62 5.91 9.08 6.25 4.75 6.49 6.08 7.69 3.54 2.40 7.52 2.31 3.71 2.78 6.73
6 F4U-1 Corsair, Hog American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.53 6.57 5.47 5.05 7.55 5.00 6.00 5.83 4.27 6.61 7.24 5.02 7.87 2.31 4.42 1.52 6.57
7 Ta 152H German Fighter M/H 5.62 6.50 6.70 6.08 8.86 5.00 6.00 5.83 6.30 6.92 4.25 4.41 7.34 4.59 3.83 --- 6.50
8 Yak-9U Russian Fighter L/M 5.53 6.46 6.87 5.71 7.75 7.00 4.00 5.61 7.15 3.56 5.56 5.02 7.73 2.07 1.36 --- 6.46
9 Bf 109G-14 Gustav German Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.60 6.39 9.25 7.94 7.04 7.00 4.00 6.05 7.83 4.96 6.10 5.37 7.02 3.57 2.55 1.49 6.39
10 La-7 LaLa Russian Fighter L/M 6.08 6.35 8.53 5.71 7.55 6.00 5.00 6.49 5.81 2.65 6.75 6.42 7.63 2.97 2.88 1.16 6.35
11 F4U-1D Corsair, Hog, D Hog American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.30 6.32 6.06 5.22 8.81 5.00 6.00 5.83 4.15 6.70 7.20 5.11 8.16 2.31 4.50 2.99 6.32
12 P-47D-11 Thunderbolt, Jug American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.12 6.25 5.57 5.41 8.09 4.75 6.25 5.83 3.75 4.41 5.82 3.53 7.73 2.76 6.02 1.20 6.25
13 P-47D-40 Thunderbolt, Jug American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.06 6.23 6.27 5.99 8.47 4.75 6.25 5.83 3.61 7.75 4.96 2.40 7.73 2.76 6.02 3.52 6.23
14 Typhoon Mk I Typhy British Fighter/Attacker L/M 5.76 6.19 5.93 4.62 7.23 8.00 3.00 6.49 4.97 4.44 5.06 4.32 3.00 4.08 3.78 2.17 6.19
15 Spitfire Mk XVI
So while some low-alt speed demons loose their place, the Spit16 retains its #15 slot. Once again, only the F4U is even arguably more maneuverable than the Spit16.
Doing a sort that gives equal weight to top speed at both high and low alt, once again the Spit16 makes 15th place out of 51 fighters.
Bf 109K-4 Gustav German Fighter M/H 6.02 7.14 9.22 8.19 7.04 7.40 3.60 6.84 8.46 5.34 5.31 5.19 7.02 3.57 2.55 --- 13.16
2 Fw 190D-9 Shrike,Dora German Fighter/Attacker M/H 6.05 6.88 7.87 7.36 8.47 6.65 4.35 6.84 6.08 4.47 3.65 3.71 10.00 2.68 4.29 1.59 12.93
3 P-51D Mustang, Pony American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.87 6.73 6.62 5.91 9.08 6.25 4.75 6.49 6.08 7.69 3.54 2.40 7.52 2.31 3.71 2.78 12.60
4 P-47N Thunderbolt, Jug American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.72 6.80 5.46 5.49 8.44 4.50 6.50 6.05 3.42 8.88 4.70 1.79 8.30 2.76 6.02 3.52 12.52
5 La-7 LaLa Russian Fighter L/M 6.08 6.35 8.53 5.71 7.55 6.00 5.00 6.49 5.81 2.65 6.75 6.42 7.63 2.97 2.88 1.16 12.43
6 P-51B Mustang, Pony American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.64 6.74 6.44 6.35 10.00 6.00 5.00 6.27 5.98 7.91 4.17 2.31 7.24 1.85 2.77 2.07 12.38
7 Ta 152H German Fighter M/H 5.62 6.50 6.70 6.08 8.86 5.00 6.00 5.83 6.30 6.92 4.25 4.41 7.34 4.59 3.83 --- 12.12
8 F4U-1 Corsair, Hog American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.53 6.57 5.47 5.05 7.55 5.00 6.00 5.83 4.27 6.61 7.24 5.02 7.87 2.31 4.42 1.52 12.10
9 Bf 109G-14 Gustav German Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.60 6.39 9.25 7.94 7.04 7.00 4.00 6.05 7.83 4.96 6.10 5.37 7.02 3.57 2.55 1.49 11.99
10 Yak-9U Russian Fighter L/M 5.53 6.46 6.87 5.71 7.75 7.00 4.00 5.61 7.15 3.56 5.56 5.02 7.73 2.07 1.36 --- 11.99
11 Typhoon Mk I Typhy British Fighter/Attacker L/M 5.76 6.19 5.93 4.62 7.23 8.00 3.00 6.49 4.97 4.44 5.06 4.32 3.00 4.08 3.78 2.17 11.95
12 F4U-1D Corsair, Hog, D Hog American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.30 6.32 6.06 5.22 8.81 5.00 6.00 5.83 4.15 6.70 7.20 5.11 8.16 2.31 4.50 2.99 11.62
13 P-47D-11 Thunderbolt, Jug American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.12 6.25 5.57 5.41 8.09 4.75 6.25 5.83 3.75 4.41 5.82 3.53 7.73 2.76 6.02 1.20 11.37
14 La-5FN Russian Fighter L/M 5.45 5.90 7.77 6.21 7.99 6.50 4.50 6.49 5.64 2.58 6.59 6.07 7.45 2.29 2.65 1.16 11.35
15 Spitfire Mk XVI
So, in conclusion. 1. The machine is faster than 70% of the unperked plane set. To say it is relatively slow is simply a lie. I would appreciate this lie not being repeated in the future. 2. No unperked plane that is faster is more maneuverable, except arguably the F4Us, and that is *highly* debatable. (Slightly smaller sustained turn radius, greatly inferior sustained turn rate) 3. Of the 36 planes, or, 70% of the unperked set that is slower than the Spit16, many are inferior in turn, and nearly all are inferior in climb, acceleration, and roll.
-
<yawn>
-
That's a lot of work just to whine about spits, also too many numbers for us poor spit drivers to read we just prefer flying and having fun instead of that "work".
-
Can't see much, the table's unclear. You should dump it to excel and post a screenshot.
-
Am I the only one seeing an obsessed mind on a futile crusade?
-
You haven't explained what those numbers mean and how they were derived- all i see is numbers. Bnz, how frequently seen in the LW MA are the 70% fighters that the spit16is faster than. Also, what alts are you deriving aircraft speed or is it top speed? those tables you posted are an absolute mess.
-
spit 16 is pretty slow though.
I'll back that claim up when i get a spare hour or three.
-
Where are these numbers from?
Found it: http://www.jcsautomation.com/AH_View_Planes.asp (http://www.jcsautomation.com/AH_View_Planes.asp)
-
Charts are sooo much better than a wall of abstract numbers :)
(http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/7716/clipboard01zir.jpg)
(Disclaimer - Most numbers are derived right off the speed tables and some may be off by maybe 1 or 2 mph. If anybody spots a major error, please say so.)
-
Lusche I think it's one of the more interesting subtleties of the plane set. What would be interesting would be seeing a graphic of the XVI's top speed, level acceleration, and e retention in shallow/steep zooms vs. a number of reference models, like the other ENY 5 planes, a couple of perk planes, contemporaries, etc. I think just looking at the XVI's 3 digit level speed figure on paper is a very poor indicator of what the XVI actually performs like.
-
Maybe someone will come up with that. My point was more a technical one about data presentation ;)
-
Ranking speed with 1, 2, 3, 4... is way too simplistic to give an accurate picture of how the aircraft stacks up against the competition.
Here are the Zscores for speed on the deck. Zscore = (speed - average speed) / standard deviation
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3611/3515874114_b51a98366a_o.png)
-
I have a headache now
-
So, in conclusion. 1. The machine is faster than 70% of the unperked plane set. To say it is relatively slow is simply a lie.
well we all know its faster than a P-40, how does it compared when stacked up against other late war fighters?
-
Lusche I think it's one of the more interesting subtleties of the plane set. What would be interesting would be seeing a graphic of the XVI's top speed, level acceleration, and e retention in shallow/steep zooms vs. a number of reference models, like the other ENY 5 planes, a couple of perk planes, contemporaries, etc. I think just looking at the XVI's 3 digit level speed figure on paper is a very poor indicator of what the XVI actually performs like.
+1 Yup,. it's stellar acceleration is a big factor in the MA
-
well dang maybe we should make one of the fastest also.. Along with its super climb/rate/acceleration/turn radius bla bla bla :eek:
-
well we all know its faster than a P-40, how does it compared when stacked up against other late war fighters?
+1
-
Am I the only one seeing an obsessed mind on a futile crusade?
Nope.
ack-ack
-
Lusche your chart says P3-38J where it should say P-38J :).
-
Charts are sooo much better than a wall of abstract numbers :)
(http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/7716/clipboard01zir.jpg)
(Disclaimer - Most numbers are derived right off the speed tables and some may be off by maybe 1 or 2 mph. If anybody spots a major error, please say so.)
where is ki84?
-
well we all know its faster than a P-40, how does it compared when stacked up against other late war fighters?
So, you want me to compare it to fighters that are *only* available in LW?
You DO realize that will remove the P-51B, 109G2, P-47D-11, La5Fn, F4U-1*, and Typhoon from the list of fighters that are faster at either high or low alt, as well as the bunch of slower birds you're thinking of, correct? :D While still leaving, just off the top of my head, the late war fighters P-47D-25, P-47D40, P-38L, and Ki-84 on one or both of the "slower than" list.
EDIT: Lets face it, the LW *is* the MA. As long as Early and Mid war fighters are available in it, that is where people will go to fly whatever when they want an environment with targets, especially at off-hours time. So yeah, comparing it to the whole range of fighters is fair.
*It should be noted that the F4U is slower than the SpitXVI between 5K and 10K. The low alt measurement was apparently taken on the deck, the "high alt" above 10K. So me calling the unperked F4Us faster is in and of itself debatable.
-
Am I the only one seeing an obsessed mind on a futile crusade?
Lusche, insult is the last refuge out the out-argued. I would have expected this out of the typical trash who for some reason want to continue arguing after their arguments are proven to have come from a position of ignorance. But out of you? Shameful.
-
*It should be noted that the F4U is slower than the SpitXVI between 5K and 10K. The low alt measurement was apparently taken on the deck, the "high alt" above 10K. So me calling the unperked F4Us faster is in and of itself debatable.
Uh, no she's not. The F4U-1 and 1A are both faster than the Spixteen at all altitudes (the 1C and D lose ~25mph top speed due to the permanently fixed pylons). W/O WEP it's a margin of nearly 40MPH ASL (WEP makes it closer, but there's still a good 7-10mph difference) and closing the gap as altitude increases. The C and D are slower within that 5-10k range, but the margin is VERY negligible.
At least if Gonzo's comparisons (http://www.gonzoville.com/ahcharts/index.php?p1=f4u1&p2=spit16) are to be believed (to get the 1A's stats combine the speed curve of the -1 with the climb and acceleration of the 1D. 1A is slightly faster than the 1, and the 1D climbs slightly better, but this will be more or less accurate).
-
EDIT: Lets face it, the LW *is* the MA. As long as Early and Mid war fighters are available in it, that is where people will go to fly whatever when they want an environment with targets, especially at off-hours time. So yeah, comparing it to the whole range of fighters is fair.
So you've demonstrated that an ENY 5 plane is faster than almost all the ENY 25-30 planes. But the P-40B, 109E-4, and A6M2 aren't the planes the Spit XVI is being measured against when (endlessly) debating whether it should be perked, whether it's more uber than all the other uber planes, whether it's more of a n00b plane than anything else, etc.
-
So you've demonstrated that an ENY 5 plane is faster than almost all the ENY 25-30 planes. But the P-40B, 109E-4, and A6M2 aren't the planes the Spit XVI is being measured against when (endlessly) debating whether it should be perked, whether it's more uber than all the other uber planes, whether it's more of a n00b plane than anything else, etc.
I have above demonstrated that removing everything but LW only rides from the equation may not have the desired effect. :devil
-
I have above demonstrated that removing everything but LW only rides from the equation may not have the desired effect. :devil
It removes a few of the planes that are faster than the XVI and every plane that's slower with a single exception. I'd say that's the intended (not necessarily desired) effect.
The XVI is slow compared to all the other "uber" planes except the N1K2.
-
It removes a few of the planes that are faster than the XVI and every plane that's slower with a single exception. I'd say that's the intended (not necessarily desired) effect.
The XVI is slow compared to all the other "uber" planes except the N1K2.
Comparing only ENY 5 planes instead of all planes or at least all LW planes is a piss poor way of going about it. But since you brought it up...we have the La7...much faster..but out-rolled, out-climbed, out-turned, out-gunned. P-47N-much faster...for five minutes. Vastly inferior in climb, turn, acceleration, and even inferior in roll. N1K...slower, poor climber, much poorer roller, and not even clearly the better turner. Spitfire is hardly outclassed by them, that is for certain. The planes in this group that are actually faster than the SpitXVI are also vastly less capable as dogfighters and are much, much, much easier to deal on average.
The late-war only P-47D-25, D-40, P-38L, and Ki-84 are also slower than the SpitXVI.
-
Unperk the Spit 14 and F4U-1C. :D
-
You are correct Sax, however, according to DokGonzo's the top deck speed of the F4U-1 is 358, compared to the Spixteen's 344, 14mph difference, with the gap appearing to actually narrow 'till above 10K. And then narrowing back in again quite a bit above 20K, although that is almost completely unimportant for MA purposes.
-
So, you want me to compare it to fighters that are *only* available in LW?
if its easy to do, i dont have anything to prove, just interested :)
-
Doing sort giving top speed at low alt a weight of "1" and leaving the other categories at zero, the SpitXVI is number 15 in top speed out of 51 unperked fighters. That means it is faster than over 70% of non-perked fighters.
1 La-7 LaLa Russian Fighter L/M 6.08 6.35 8.53 5.71 7.55 6.00 5.00 6.49 5.81 2.65 6.75 6.42 7.63 2.97 2.88 1.16 6.08
2 Fw 190D-9 Shrike,Dora German Fighter/Attacker M/H 6.05 6.88 7.87 7.36 8.47 6.65 4.35 6.84 6.08 4.47 3.65 3.71 10.00 2.68 4.29 1.59 6.05
3 Bf 109K-4 Gustav German Fighter M/H 6.02 7.14 9.22 8.19 7.04 7.40 3.60 6.84 8.46 5.34 5.31 5.19 7.02 3.57 2.55 --- 6.02
4 P-51D Mustang, Pony American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.87 6.73 6.62 5.91 9.08 6.25 4.75 6.49 6.08 7.69 3.54 2.40 7.52 2.31 3.71 2.78 5.87
5 Typhoon Mk I Typhy British Fighter/Attacker L/M 5.76 6.19 5.93 4.62 7.23 8.00 3.00 6.49 4.97 4.44 5.06 4.32 3.00 4.08 3.78 2.17 5.76
6 P-47N Thunderbolt, Jug American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.72 6.80 5.46 5.49 8.44 4.50 6.50 6.05 3.42 8.88 4.70 1.79 8.30 2.76 6.02 3.52 5.72
7 P-51B Mustang, Pony American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.64 6.74 6.44 6.35 10.00 6.00 5.00 6.27 5.98 7.91 4.17 2.31 7.24 1.85 2.77 2.07 5.64
8 Ta 152H German Fighter M/H 5.62 6.50 6.70 6.08 8.86 5.00 6.00 5.83 6.30 6.92 4.25 4.41 7.34 4.59 3.83 --- 5.62
9 Bf 109G-14 Gustav German Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.60 6.39 9.25 7.94 7.04 7.00 4.00 6.05 7.83 4.96 6.10 5.37 7.02 3.57 2.55 1.49 5.60
10 F4U-1 Corsair, Hog American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.53 6.57 5.47 5.05 7.55 5.00 6.00 5.83 4.27 6.61 7.24 5.02 7.87 2.31 4.42 1.52 5.53
11 Yak-9U Russian Fighter L/M 5.53 6.46 6.87 5.71 7.75 7.00 4.00 5.61 7.15 3.56 5.56 5.02 7.73 2.07 1.36 --- 5.53
12 La-5FN Russian Fighter L/M 5.45 5.90 7.77 6.21 7.99 6.50 4.50 6.49 5.64 2.58 6.59 6.07 7.45 2.29 2.65 1.16 5.45
13 F4U-1D Corsair, Hog, D Hog American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.30 6.32 6.06 5.22 8.81 5.00 6.00 5.83 4.15 6.70 7.20 5.11 8.16 2.31 4.50 2.99 5.30
14 Bf 109G-2 Gustav German Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.15 6.14 8.27 7.10 6.57 7.00 4.00 6.05 7.87 4.98 6.50 5.89 7.17 1.75 2.16 1.23 5.15
15 Spitfire Mk XVI
As you can see, the only faster fighters that even have a claim to being more maneuverable are the F4Us, and that is debatable, while there are many slower fighters that are indisputably less maneuverable.
A search for top speed, "high alt", yields the following result:
1 Bf 109K-4 Gustav German Fighter M/H 6.02 7.14 9.22 8.19 7.04 7.40 3.60 6.84 8.46 5.34 5.31 5.19 7.02 3.57 2.55 --- 7.14
2 Fw 190D-9 Shrike,Dora German Fighter/Attacker M/H 6.05 6.88 7.87 7.36 8.47 6.65 4.35 6.84 6.08 4.47 3.65 3.71 10.00 2.68 4.29 1.59 6.88
3 P-47N Thunderbolt, Jug American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.72 6.80 5.46 5.49 8.44 4.50 6.50 6.05 3.42 8.88 4.70 1.79 8.30 2.76 6.02 3.52 6.80
4 P-51B Mustang, Pony American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.64 6.74 6.44 6.35 10.00 6.00 5.00 6.27 5.98 7.91 4.17 2.31 7.24 1.85 2.77 2.07 6.74
5 P-51D Mustang, Pony American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.87 6.73 6.62 5.91 9.08 6.25 4.75 6.49 6.08 7.69 3.54 2.40 7.52 2.31 3.71 2.78 6.73
6 F4U-1 Corsair, Hog American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.53 6.57 5.47 5.05 7.55 5.00 6.00 5.83 4.27 6.61 7.24 5.02 7.87 2.31 4.42 1.52 6.57
7 Ta 152H German Fighter M/H 5.62 6.50 6.70 6.08 8.86 5.00 6.00 5.83 6.30 6.92 4.25 4.41 7.34 4.59 3.83 --- 6.50
8 Yak-9U Russian Fighter L/M 5.53 6.46 6.87 5.71 7.75 7.00 4.00 5.61 7.15 3.56 5.56 5.02 7.73 2.07 1.36 --- 6.46
9 Bf 109G-14 Gustav German Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.60 6.39 9.25 7.94 7.04 7.00 4.00 6.05 7.83 4.96 6.10 5.37 7.02 3.57 2.55 1.49 6.39
10 La-7 LaLa Russian Fighter L/M 6.08 6.35 8.53 5.71 7.55 6.00 5.00 6.49 5.81 2.65 6.75 6.42 7.63 2.97 2.88 1.16 6.35
11 F4U-1D Corsair, Hog, D Hog American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.30 6.32 6.06 5.22 8.81 5.00 6.00 5.83 4.15 6.70 7.20 5.11 8.16 2.31 4.50 2.99 6.32
12 P-47D-11 Thunderbolt, Jug American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.12 6.25 5.57 5.41 8.09 4.75 6.25 5.83 3.75 4.41 5.82 3.53 7.73 2.76 6.02 1.20 6.25
13 P-47D-40 Thunderbolt, Jug American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.06 6.23 6.27 5.99 8.47 4.75 6.25 5.83 3.61 7.75 4.96 2.40 7.73 2.76 6.02 3.52 6.23
14 Typhoon Mk I Typhy British Fighter/Attacker L/M 5.76 6.19 5.93 4.62 7.23 8.00 3.00 6.49 4.97 4.44 5.06 4.32 3.00 4.08 3.78 2.17 6.19
15 Spitfire Mk XVI
So while some low-alt speed demons loose their place, the Spit16 retains its #15 slot. Once again, only the F4U is even arguably more maneuverable than the Spit16.
Doing a sort that gives equal weight to top speed at both high and low alt, once again the Spit16 makes 15th place out of 51 fighters.
Bf 109K-4 Gustav German Fighter M/H 6.02 7.14 9.22 8.19 7.04 7.40 3.60 6.84 8.46 5.34 5.31 5.19 7.02 3.57 2.55 --- 13.16
2 Fw 190D-9 Shrike,Dora German Fighter/Attacker M/H 6.05 6.88 7.87 7.36 8.47 6.65 4.35 6.84 6.08 4.47 3.65 3.71 10.00 2.68 4.29 1.59 12.93
3 P-51D Mustang, Pony American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.87 6.73 6.62 5.91 9.08 6.25 4.75 6.49 6.08 7.69 3.54 2.40 7.52 2.31 3.71 2.78 12.60
4 P-47N Thunderbolt, Jug American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.72 6.80 5.46 5.49 8.44 4.50 6.50 6.05 3.42 8.88 4.70 1.79 8.30 2.76 6.02 3.52 12.52
5 La-7 LaLa Russian Fighter L/M 6.08 6.35 8.53 5.71 7.55 6.00 5.00 6.49 5.81 2.65 6.75 6.42 7.63 2.97 2.88 1.16 12.43
6 P-51B Mustang, Pony American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.64 6.74 6.44 6.35 10.00 6.00 5.00 6.27 5.98 7.91 4.17 2.31 7.24 1.85 2.77 2.07 12.38
7 Ta 152H German Fighter M/H 5.62 6.50 6.70 6.08 8.86 5.00 6.00 5.83 6.30 6.92 4.25 4.41 7.34 4.59 3.83 --- 12.12
8 F4U-1 Corsair, Hog American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.53 6.57 5.47 5.05 7.55 5.00 6.00 5.83 4.27 6.61 7.24 5.02 7.87 2.31 4.42 1.52 12.10
9 Bf 109G-14 Gustav German Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.60 6.39 9.25 7.94 7.04 7.00 4.00 6.05 7.83 4.96 6.10 5.37 7.02 3.57 2.55 1.49 11.99
10 Yak-9U Russian Fighter L/M 5.53 6.46 6.87 5.71 7.75 7.00 4.00 5.61 7.15 3.56 5.56 5.02 7.73 2.07 1.36 --- 11.99
11 Typhoon Mk I Typhy British Fighter/Attacker L/M 5.76 6.19 5.93 4.62 7.23 8.00 3.00 6.49 4.97 4.44 5.06 4.32 3.00 4.08 3.78 2.17 11.95
12 F4U-1D Corsair, Hog, D Hog American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.30 6.32 6.06 5.22 8.81 5.00 6.00 5.83 4.15 6.70 7.20 5.11 8.16 2.31 4.50 2.99 11.62
13 P-47D-11 Thunderbolt, Jug American Fighter/Attacker M/H 5.12 6.25 5.57 5.41 8.09 4.75 6.25 5.83 3.75 4.41 5.82 3.53 7.73 2.76 6.02 1.20 11.37
14 La-5FN Russian Fighter L/M 5.45 5.90 7.77 6.21 7.99 6.50 4.50 6.49 5.64 2.58 6.59 6.07 7.45 2.29 2.65 1.16 11.35
15 Spitfire Mk XVI
So, in conclusion. 1. The machine is faster than 70% of the unperked plane set. To say it is relatively slow is simply a lie. I would appreciate this lie not being repeated in the future. 2. No unperked plane that is faster is more maneuverable, except arguably the F4Us, and that is *highly* debatable. (Slightly smaller sustained turn radius, greatly inferior sustained turn rate) 3. Of the 36 planes, or, 70% of the unperked set that is slower than the Spit16, many are inferior in turn, and nearly all are inferior in climb, acceleration, and roll.
Wuuuuuutttttttt!
-
if its easy to do, i dont have anything to prove, just interested :)
Well, I just did a weighted sort set to 1 for both "low alt" and "high alt" top speed. Then I took the whole list and cut everything except the planes that can only be had in LW out of it. Since you insist I should remove early and mid war planes *slower* than the SpitXVI, it is only fair to also remove the mid-war planes that are *faster*, such as the F4U-1 and P-51B. If I had made any gross errors in my list whittling, please let me know.
After that, the list looks like this
(The F4U 1-A will fit in there somewhere above the SpitXVI*)
1. 109K4
2. Fw190D9
3. P-51D
4. P-47N
5. La7
6. Ta 152H
7. 109 G-14
8. Yak 9-U
9. SpitXVI
10.P-47D-40
11.P-47D-25
12.P-38
13.Fw-190 A-8
14.Fw-190 F-8
15.Ki-84
16.N1K2-J
17.*
So, out of 17 unperked LW planes, the SpitXVI is faster than 7, or 41% of them. That is still fair-to-middlin', not "slow", unless one also considers the P-47D-40, 190 A-8, P-38, and Ki-84 as "slow". Which no one does. Note that of the LW planes faster than the SpitXVI, the only one that can be considered equally/more maneuverable is the F4U-1A. Note that of the LW planes slower than the SpitXVI, most are decidedly less maneuverable. Whether the SpitXVI is more maneuverable than the Ki or N1K is debatable, we'll call it equal.
-
Unperk the Spit 14 and F4U-1C. :D
haha... :rofl
-
Spit 16 is too good we got it :aok :salute
-
Ranking speed with 1, 2, 3, 4... is way too simplistic to give an accurate picture of how the aircraft stacks up against the competition.
If you compare mine and your chart you will see that both curves are basically the same. The picture is the same.
Also in actual combat, the absolute speed numbers are important and much more meaningful to a player. Zscore values don't tell much. Is a difference of "0.5" much? Not much? what does it say?
Seeing that there is a 20mph or just a mere 1mph difference between any two planes gives a much better picture.
-
Ranking speed with 1, 2, 3, 4... is way too simplistic to give an accurate picture of how the aircraft stacks up against the competition.
Here are the Zscores for speed on the deck. Zscore = (speed - average speed) / standard deviation
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3611/3515874114_b51a98366a_o.png)
Why? I don't really understand how doing all of that really has any bearing on the aircraft's actual relative performance.
-
Lusche, insult is the last refuge out the out-argued. I would have expected this out of the typical trash who for some reason want to continue arguing after their arguments are proven to have come from a position of ignorance. But out of you? Shameful.
There is not a single insult in my comment.
You seem to be on a mission to get the 16 perked as your ever increasing number of threads and posts about that topic do show. And it's you that is still completely ignoring HTC's own definition of "perk status" and the reality of LW MA combat.
As far as this topic is concerned, I'm outta here. :)
-
Who has ever claimed the Mk XVI is slow? I have never seen such a claim.
-
One thing it allows me to say is that the A6M2 is slower than the Tempest is fast. ;) Here is a good quote from 442w30, a trained statistician and the originator of Zscores for AH:
The Z-Score curve is a bell curve. -2.00 = a score that is just over 2% better than all the rest of the POSSIBLE scores. Possible not necessarily meaning exisiting. -1 = better than just under 16%, 0.00 = right at 50%, 1.00 = better than just over 84%, 2.00 = better than just over 97%. So you see (or maybe not) that the better or worse a score is, the further up the curve it is and in reality the more impressive it is.
Because of the nature of Z-Scores and the bell curve, a 2.00 in one category is the SAME as a 2.00 in another, or any other like number. Z-Scores turn apples and oranges comparisons into Apples to apples. That is true of the raw z-scores of course.
-
Why not just play and have fun instead of trying to create a soap opera out of it.
-
A few "fanatical" (in the worst sense of the word) spit fans have been yelling and screaming since the spit16 came out that "it's just a 1942 bird! It's too slow! How can we compete with anything in the late war planeset?!?!? WAAAAH!!!"
And repeating these cries (lies) ad nauseum for well over a year now.
When confronted with cold, hard, facts, these lies/cries become self-evident.
BnZs and I disagree on a LOT of things, but for once, he was spotting a sudden (and frequent) resurgence of these "spit16 is too slow!" lies as of late that I was also taking note of! He took the time to post about it and set things straight.
EDIT: Usually such threads include comments about adding +25 boosted spit14s or +28 boosted spit16s or whatever plane that would more than double the climb rate of a 109K, fly faster than a P51, and still turn as tightly as a spitV with 2 (or 4, depending on the request) single-hit-killer hispanos on the wings to boot. They justify adding these planes by saying the spit16 can't compete, being so "early" a model.
-
So what? Let em have their late war monsters.
-
The Ki-61 will turn with a Spixteen with EASE. Spixteens are for kids.
-
I flew a 16 today for the first time in weeks. I took another spit and then a Mossie, then ran home.
Afterwards I felt suitably guilty. :huh Hair and warts even started growing on my hand.
-
A few "fanatical" (in the worst sense of the word) spit fans have been yelling and screaming since the spit16 came out that "it's just a 1942 bird! It's too slow! How can we compete with anything in the late war planeset?!?!? WAAAAH!!!"
Find one such post. I dare you.
You acused me of such just the other day because you are too stupid to be able to read, not because I posted that.
And I never even used the effing thing. It isn't my bird.
You and BnZ are bleeping irrational when it comes your your mindless hatred of Spitfires.
-
A few "fanatical" (in the worst sense of the word) spit fans have been yelling and screaming since the spit16 came out that "it's just a 1942 bird! It's too slow! How can we compete with anything in the late war planeset?!?!? WAAAAH!!!"
And repeating these cries (lies) ad nauseum for well over a year now.
When confronted with cold, hard, facts, these lies/cries become self-evident.
BnZs and I disagree on a LOT of things, but for once, he was spotting a sudden (and frequent) resurgence of these "spit16 is too slow!" lies as of late that I was also taking note of! He took the time to post about it and set things straight.
EDIT: Usually such threads include comments about adding +25 boosted spit14s or +28 boosted spit16s or whatever plane that would more than double the climb rate of a 109K, fly faster than a P51, and still turn as tightly as a spitV with 2 (or 4, depending on the request) single-hit-killer hispanos on the wings to boot. They justify adding these planes by saying the spit16 can't compete, being so "early" a model.
Just out of curiousity. Can you quote me one of these fanatical Spit fans, and point me to a thread where they've claimed that?
Seriously. I don't recall ever seeing that.
The more I think about your reply Krusty the more it bothers me. Nothing you even said in there makes sense. No one has ever claimed the Spit 16 was a 42 bird. What it is, is the same thing as a 1943 LFIX with a clipped E wing of 44. It's engine isn't rated to the late 44-45 boost.
What is more distressing is how so many folks get their shorts in a bunch over Spitfires in general. Who the heck cares. Shoot em if you don't like em. They're not any more real then the 190 that you spend so much time complaining about not being 'accurate'. Turn your own silly comment back on yourself when you discuss your bird of choice.
I take my trusty cartoon 1943 P38G out and fly lower then the Spits and hope they come down and fight. Instead of whining about how much of a helicoptor they are or spouting all the BS about what's wrong with them, I just fight em. You might want to try it.
No one is really dying, and the cartoon planes are free.
And that goes for the rest of you poor, "The Spit 16' is ruining my fun crowd. It's just a game for heaven's sake. What a bunch of whiners.
-
EDIT: Usually such threads include comments about adding +25 boosted spit14s or +28 boosted spit16s or whatever plane that would more than double the climb rate of a 109K, fly faster than a P51, and still turn as tightly as a spitV with 2 (or 4, depending on the request) single-hit-killer hispanos on the wings to boot. They justify adding these planes by saying the spit16 can't compete, being so "early" a model.
You are such a frickin' idiot. You don't know, nor do you want to know, anything about the history of the aircraft. You just want to mock, lie and spread bullnoodles. Instead of actually paying attention to what people such as Guppy and myself have said, you choose to remain ignorant and make up your own ridiculous strawmen to declare victory over.
-
Who the heck cares. Shoot em if you don't like em.
Instead of whining about how much of a helicoptor they are or spouting all the BS about what's wrong with them, I just fight em. You might want to try it.
No one is really dying, and the cartoon planes are free.
QFT. And that's coming from me :D
-
I really don't get these spit16 whine threads either.
Generally they are easy to kill and if I run into an average pilot who gives me a challenge, so what? Isn't that a good thing?
Now, if a huge percentage of vets were flying them all the time and throwing off the balance of the arena, that would be another thing, but that is so far from the truth of the matter that it's laughable this is a weekly topic.
-
I really don't get these spit16 whine threads either.
How does that saying go? If you can't beat 'em, PERK THEM!
ack-ack
-
A few "fanatical" (in the worst sense of the word) spit fans have been yelling and screaming since the spit16 came out that "it's just a 1942 bird! It's too slow! How can we compete with anything in the late war planeset?!?!? WAAAAH!!!"
Actually NO.
What has been said is that it is the equivalent (barring the .50cals) of a 1943 LF IX, no idea where you got the 1942 from.
Usually in response to the perk the XVI whines.
The request for either a fully boosted XVI or XIV is usually based on giving the RAF a 1945 ride, as we haven't got the F.21.
No one has ever asked for XVI with 4x20mm, never flew in that config, although I HAVE seen requests for the V or IX with quad hispanos.
[edit] Personally - Leave the XVI and XIV (but unperk it), add the F.21 Perked.
-
Actually NO.
What has been said is that it is the equivalent (barring the .50cals) of a 1943 LF IX, no idea where you got the 1942 from.
Usually in response to the perk the XVI whines.
The request for either a fully boosted XVI or XIV is usually based on giving the RAF a 1945 ride, as we haven't got the F.21.
No one has ever asked for XVI with 4x20mm, never flew in that config, although I HAVE seen requests for the V or IX with quad hispanos.
Also never seen a request for a 25lbs Spit XIV OR 28lbs XVI. No idea where you are getting your figures from, correct would be 25lbs XVI, 21lbs XIV.
[edit] Personally - Leave the XVI and XIV (but unperk it), add the F.21 Perked.
-
Once again, Krusty states his case in words I would rather not use...but he's not wrong...
Karnak: Is the best argument you can come up with that I have some sort of irrational hatred for a fighter airplane that went out of service decades before I was born? That is just sad. For the record, no, I don't have a German grandfather who was killed by a Spitfire in the BoB, (family came to America from Britain in the 1700s), nor have me and mine ever had some sort of dark and running feud with R.J. Mitchell...IOW, your "irrational hatred remark" is farting through your mouth, nothing more.
Here it is in a nutshell...
BnZ: "Gee, Anaxagoras whacked me over the head with the numbers. Turns out the Spit16 is not just another relatively slow t'n'b plane like I thought it was, in my ignorance. Turns out the SpitXVI is faster than 70% of unperked fighters while out-turning, out-climbing, out-accelerating, and out-rolling many, many of those. Maybe we could increase the viability and fun of flying a wider variety of fighters in the MA by lightly perking the SpitXVI"
--Now tell me what is irrational about that?
Karnak, et. al. "Being able to out-climb, out-turn and retain energy under Gs better other planes in a SpitIX/SpitVIII while sporting Hispanos is not enough advantage for Spitfire fans! They also should be able to run down many planes vastly inferior in wing-loading and thrust/weight AND out-roll them at 400mph!"
--This sounds like what you are saying to me. You've expressed concern about fighters "strolling away" from Spitfires. Myself, I think it is perfectly fair gameplay for the planes that are at a turn and climb advantage to at least be able to extend.
BnZ: "Okay, say you're a Corsair fan. But there is a big problem, too many LW monsters with their speed and acceleration can just "stroll away" from any F4U-1 variant. Therefore, unperk the F4U-4."
People on this thread who think I'm crazy to say the SpitXVI should be lightly perked: "You're crazy as hell, F4U-4 is the best plane in the game, it is double-superior to most the plane set....."
--Huh, hypocritical much? :devil
Find one such post. I dare you.
You acused me of such just the other day because you are too stupid to be able to read, not because I posted that.
And I never even used the effing thing. It isn't my bird.
You and BnZ are bleeping irrational when it comes your your mindless hatred of Spitfires.
-
1. I take being called an "obsessed mind" an insult when I have perfectly rational reasons for what I ask for.
2. I don't see why it is a "futile quest". Perk status has changed before. HTC listened to reason regarding the perk status of the Ta-152...what, it doesn't work both ways?
3. What is HTC's definition of "perk status"? No one has ever put forth a good definition of this, nor of "unbalancing". The 20% usage benchmark has been thrown out there, but no one is willing to stand by it, probably because they realize you could unperk *anything* currently perked and it would probably not claim 20% of MA sorties consistently.
There is not a single insult in my comment.
You seem to be on a mission to get the 16 perked as your ever increasing number of threads and posts about that topic do show. And it's you that is still completely ignoring HTC's own definition of "perk status" and the reality of LW MA combat.
As far as this topic is concerned, I'm outta here. :)
-
The spit16 coming out was a boon for me, as many Lgay drivers switched to the better all-round plane, but one which is a bit slower than the Lgay, a plane for which that I find no solutions. (in a P47 down low, which is where a disturbingly large number of my missions come to a painful end)--The spit I can mebbe do a couple things with, including 'extending' ;)
The ONLY rides a 16 is slower than are b&z rides which it would chew up once their speed was knocked down a bit, I can't see the cause for any complaints among it devotees
-
Spixteen is probably the best overall of the unperked planeset. The thing is, some plane has to be the best. What are we going to perk next?
-
The spit16 coming out was a boon for me, as many Lgay drivers switched to the better all-round plane, but one which is a bit slower than the Lgay, a plane for which that I find no solutions. (in a P47 down low, which is where a disturbingly large number of my missions come to a painful end)--The spit I can mebbe do a couple things with, including 'extending' ;)
The ONLY rides a 16 is slower than are b&z rides which it would chew up once their speed was knocked down a bit, I can't see the cause for any complaints among it devotees
The Spit16 is as fast or faster than all P-47Ds at typical MA altitudes. It is more lethal than the La7 in guns, rolls better, turns far far better than the La7. The La7 is technically a superior turner to the Jug as well, but in reality, its handling is far below that of a Spitfire as flown by most. I easily destroy or put to flight La7s who engage my Jug more often than they get me. So your post is illogical...you are essentially saying you prefer a plane which can run you down and which ridiculously out-classes you as a knife-fighter as well vs. a plane that can run you down also, but is a much more difficult handling plane which can often be made to loose the knife-fight through basic ACM? This does not make sense to me.
For the record, I think the La7 technically deserves a light perk price as well, but comparing what it can do in average hands vs. the whole plane set compared to what the Spit16 can do, it is not as needful of a perk price.
-
What are we going to perk next?
The other planes that keep shooting BnZ down probably.
ack-ack
-
Spixteen is probably the best overall of the unperked planeset. The thing is, some plane has to be the best. What are we going to perk next?
In fact, one unperked plane does *not* have to be the out-and-out best to the degree the SpitXVI is. Just about every other plane you can name has some great strength as a fighter, but some serious flaws to go with it. P-51? Fast, zooms well. But out-climbed by a huge portion of the plane set and out-turned by nearly all of it. F4U-1A? Fast, rolls well, turns well. Climbs and accelerates poorly though and the guns are mediocre. 109 K-4? Brilliant in performance. Not a great turner, hard to hit with gun, rotten visibility, looses control authority in dives. D9? Brilliant plane except for the fact it is almost the worst turner of the entire set. N1K? Wonderful firepower, wonderful turn, but it is well and truly slow and rolls like a pig. HurriIIC? Absolutely wonderful in every way, except it is too slow to catch a cold. Ki-84? Nearly as good as the SpitXVI turn/performance, but not as lethal, does not roll as well, and loose parts in high-speed dives. I could go on, but you get the point.
It is not that the SpitXVI is a "jack of all trades" plane, a little good at everything. This would be more true of planes like the F6F, SpitIX, or P-38. No, the Spit16 is top-of-the-line at everything as a fighter, except for top speed where it is merely good.
-
The other planes that keep shooting BnZ down probably.
ack-ack
You are quite plainly incapable of coming up a logical rebuttal or of adding anything useful to the discussion. But instead of keeping your foul and useless little thoughts to yourself, to result to the safest of all yellow-bellied ploys, insult and lies on the internet. I weep for you.
-
Having the option for 150 octane fuel would really spice things up the LWM arenas. The Spitfire wouldn’t be the only plane to benefit either.
Quote from http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mustang/mustangtest.html
“RAF Mustang units tasked with defending against the V-1 were modified to operated at +25 lbs./sq.in. - the equivalent of 80" Hg. 21 22 On 24 August 1944, by which time the V-1 threat had subsided, the Ministry of Aircraft Production directed Rolls Royce: "all Packard Merlin V.1650-7 engines to be modified to operate at 25 lbs. boost". 23 Raising the WER rating from 67" Hg to 80" Hg increased Sea Level speed by 30 mph. 24 On 18 September 1944 ADGB noted, that with respect to the Mustang III/Packard Merlin 1650-7, "A total of over 7,000 hours have been flown at a maximum boost pressure of + 25 lbs./sq. in.". 25 The RAF's Mustang Pilot's Notes gives the Combat Engine Limitation as "81 ins. boost for 5 minutes when using 150 grade fuel". 26 Combat Reports show +25 lbs was used operationally over the continent by UK based Mustangs of ADGB. 27”
I’m sure our history buffs could continue the list…
-
BnZ,
You are wrong to claim 70% because most of those aircraft are irrelevent relects in the LW environment. You are playing a politicians game with statistics to make them look like they say what you want them to. It is irrelevant that the Spit XVI is faster than a Hurri I, Bf109F-4 or P-40E as none of those should be, skill being equal, true contenders in a late war environment.
The Spitfire Mk XVI is not slow, and certainly in the mid range of speeds accelerates very, very well, but it is not faster than 70% of the relevant fighters.
Ultimately all of your talk is meaningless due to the single most important factor, and that is the impact on the actual game and in that place it is clearly, self evidently and beyond any reasonable argument, not imbalancing.
I will give you credit that you do not go into hysterics like Krusty, with claims of Spitfire XVI's pulling hard 180 degree turns and then accelerating to catch his boom and zoomer of choice down when he made no manuevers, but is magically never on film.
EDIT:
The thing Krusty ticked me off with in this thread was claiming I'd said other fighters walked away from the Mk XVI. That is clearly not true, except for possibly some outliers like the Tempest. What I had said is that if the two of you succeed in getting the Spitfires XVI and VIII perked (removed) the RAF or Spitfire fan would be limited to the Spitfire Mk IX, a mid 1942 fighter with a top deck speed of 321mph at WEP and a much poorer aceleration performance. It is the Mk IX that I said most adversaries in the MA will walk away from.
Krusty also has a demonstratable anti-RAF bias.
-
...and the guns are mediocre.
roadkill.
I'll take the Browning .50cal 6-pack over almost any gun package in the game except maybe the quad Hispanos.
-
BnZ,
You are wrong to claim 70% because most of those aircraft are irrelevent relects in the LW environment. You are playing a politicians game with statistics to make them look like they say what you want them to. It is irrelevant that the Spit XVI is faster than a Hurri I, Bf109F-4 or P-40E as none of those should be, skill being equal, true contenders in a late war environment.
The Spitfire Mk XVI is not slow, and certainly in the mid range of speeds accelerates very, very well, but it is not faster than 70% of the relevant fighters.
+1, I noticed that also.
-
BnZ,
You are wrong to claim 70% because most of those aircraft are irrelevent relects in the LW environment. You are playing a politicians game with statistics to make them look like they say what you want them to. It is irrelevant that the Spit XVI is faster than a Hurri I, Bf109F-4 or P-40E as none of those should be, skill being equal, true contenders in a late war environment. The Spitfire Mk XVI is not slow, and certainly in the mid range of speeds accelerates very, very well, but it is not faster than 70% of the relevant fighters.
It is not in fact irrelevant, because the LW MA is not the "Late War Fighters Only MA". You cannot label a plane irrelevant in the LW MA simply because it is also available in EW or MW. Are the HurriIIC or P-38J irrelevant in LW? My point is that there are EW, many MW, and yes, even quite a few LW fighters that would be much more viable and useful in the MA *except for the near certainty of encountering SpitXVIs that dramatically out-class them in every way.* Therefore, you could potentially increase plane variety and fun for all by lightly perking this particular brand of Spitfire.
In fact, what is "politico-like" is you deciding what fighters are "relevant" in a manner convenient to your own argument.
And when I compared the Spit16 to fighters that are available in LW only, interestingly, the point still stood.
Ultimately all of your talk is meaningless due to the single most important factor, and that is the impact on the actual game and in that place it is clearly, self evidently and beyond any reasonable argument, not imbalancing.
No, the undefined term "unbalancing" is what is meaningless. My contention is that the large numbers of SpitXVIs *do* have an impact on gameplay by reducing the viability of the very large number of fighters which can out-turn the really speedy b'n'zers and out-run the dedicated turners, but which are simply out-everythinged by the SpitXVI. No one has produced any answer to that that carries weight.
-
You are quite plainly incapable of coming up a logical rebuttal or of adding anything useful to the discussion. But instead of keeping your foul and useless little thoughts to yourself, to result to the safest of all yellow-bellied ploys, insult and lies on the internet. I weep for you.
Just callin' it like I see it. You've utterly failed time and time again in your quest to get the Spitfire Mk XVI perked or show how it unbalances the game play at any level. To me it just sounds like someone that has been beaten too many times by said plane and wants it perked. No different than the myriad of threads about perking the LA-7. Same whine, different plane.
ack-ack
-
I think the most relevant comparison could be made if you order the aircraft by % usage and cut it off at 50% or 75%.
-
Bullnoodles.
I'll take the Browning .50cal 6-pack over almost any gun package in the game except maybe the quad Hispanos.
Sax:
According to DokGonzo's, the Hispano cannon in AHII is approximately 3 times as lethal as the .50 cal. This is not a problem, as it conforms to what WWII tests seem to show. The Hispano 20mm is also the equal of the .50 in trajectory.
This means that the two Hispanos alone are as lethal as 6 .50s. Two Hispanos+2 .50s are equivalent in lethality to 8 .50 cal MGs, the dreaded "buzzsaws" of the P-47!!!.
6 .50s are indeed "middle of the road" as gun packages go in the game.
-
People grabbing a Hurricane Mk I, A6M2 or Bf109E-4 in the LWA are taking an intentional handicap. The Spit XVI is not relevant to that. They are also a tiny minority of the aircraft encountered, so giving them an equal weight to the P-51D, La-7 (faster than the Mk XVI) and N1K2-J (slower than the Mk XVI) is false and done only to inflate your "number of fighters the Spit XVI is faster than" statistic.
The term "unbalancing" is anything but meaningless. You only say it is meaningless because it doesn't match up with your request.
-
What I had said is that if the two of you succeed in getting the Spitfires XVI and VIII perked (removed) the RAF or Spitfire fan would be limited to the Spitfire Mk IX, a mid 1942 fighter with a top deck speed of 321mph at WEP and a much poorer aceleration performance.
Karnak, I’m not sure if the term “limited” is the right word to use here, if the XVI and VIII was lightly perked (1-5), then it’s still a viable ride for the mediocre player, however it's a different story for your average Joe. For a vet like myself, I wouldn't be affected at all.
-
Just callin' it like I see it. You've utterly failed time and time again in your quest to get the Spitfire Mk XVI perked or show how it unbalances the game play at any level. To me it just sounds like someone that has been beaten too many times by said plane and wants it perked. No different than the myriad of threads about perking the LA-7. Same whine, different plane.
ack-ack
Flipping through my past tours, I found a K/D ratio against the SpitXVI varying anywhere from 1:1 to 15:1. So much for that little theory. Not that my personal record against the SpitXVI is relevant when discussing aircraft performance in the first place.
-
The term "unbalancing" is anything but meaningless. You only say it is meaningless because it doesn't match up with your request.
Define it in a logical and consistently applicable manner then!
-
Define it in a logical and consistently applicable manner then!
The fighter is responsible for more than 15% of the kills in the MA in a given month.
-
Karnak, I’m not sure if the term “limited” is the right word to use here, if the XVI and VIII was lightly perked (1-5), then it’s still a viable ride for the mediocre player, however it's a different story for your average Joe. For a vet like myself, I wouldn't be affected at all.
I disagree. Flying a perk plane is nothing like flying a free plane. In the perk plane you are gangbanged just because it is perked. A free plane, barring the rare ones, does not attract that kind of response and the player is free to have a much more agressive fighting style.
-
Sax:
According to DokGonzo's, the Hispano cannon in AHII is approximately 3 times lethal as the .50 cal. This is not a problem, as it conforms to what WWII seem to show. The Hispano 20mm is also the equal of the .50 in trajectory.
This means that the two Hispanos alone are as lethal as 6 .50s. Two Hispanos+2 .50s are equivalent in lethality to 8 .50 cal MGs, the dreaded "buzzsaws" of the P-47!!!.
6 .50s are indeed "middle of the road" as gun packages go in the game.
Remove the Hispano from the equation and you need to completely re-examine your road map. The only guns that really come close to equalling the Browning's combination or range, accuracy, ballistics and hitting power is the Russian 12.7mm. The advantage the Russian guns have is they do it with lighter weight, but they also experience a lot more scattering and and bullet drop, IIRC.
So yeah, saying it's "middle of the road" compared to the Hispano may be technically accurate. But that's a BIG gap with nothing in between them.
-
The fighter is responsible for more than 15% of the kills in the MA in a given month.
Nifty! First time I've ever heard it though. I've heard 20% of sorties before, so it apparently varies person to person.
Two questions.
1. Is this an official HTC policy, or a ballpark figure you've just thrown out?
2. Will any of the planes that have *always* been perked or were perked a long time ago ever be temporarily unperked in the MA for several tours so we can see if they can really consistently get 15% of kills in today's MA?
-
Remove the Hispano from the equation and you need to completely re-examine your road map. The only guns that really come close to equalling the Browning's combination or range, accuracy, ballistics and hitting power is the Russian 12.7mm. The advantage the Russian guns have is they do it with lighter weight, but they also experience a lot more scattering and and bullet drop, IIRC.
So yeah, saying it's "middle of the road" compared to the Hispano may be technically accurate. But that's a BIG gap with nothing in between them.
Actually I remember reading, a long time ago that the 6 .50's were considered average and the toughnesss of the 51 is consdiered average.. or mid point.
-
Nifty! First time I've ever heard it though. I've heard 20% of sorties before, so it apparently varies person to person.
Two questions.
1. Is this an official HTC policy, or a ballpark figure you've just thrown out?
2. Will any of the planes that have *always* been perked or were perked a long time ago ever be temporarily unperked in the MA for several tours so we can see if they can really consistently get 15% of kills in today's MA?
I gave you my personal definition. I have no idea what HTC's is.
-
Remove the Hispano from the equation and you need to completely re-examine your road map. The only guns that really come close to equalling the Browning's combination or range, accuracy, ballistics and hitting power is the Russian 12.7mm. The advantage the Russian guns have is they do it with lighter weight, but they also experience a lot more scattering and and bullet drop, IIRC.
So yeah, saying it's "middle of the road" compared to the Hispano may be technically accurate. But that's a BIG gap with nothing in between them.
Any 20mm cannon, other than the Type 99 Model 1 or MG/FF, is superior to the Browning .50 cal as a fighter weapon in AH.
-
In fact, one unperked plane does *not* have to be the out-and-out best to the degree the SpitXVI is. Just about every other plane you can name has some great strength as a fighter, but some serious flaws to go with it. P-51? Fast, zooms well. But out-climbed by a huge portion of the plane set and out-turned by nearly all of it. F4U-1A? Fast, rolls well, turns well. Climbs and accelerates poorly though and the guns are mediocre. 109 K-4? Brilliant in performance. Not a great turner, hard to hit with gun, rotten visibility, looses control authority in dives. D9? Brilliant plane except for the fact it is almost the worst turner of the entire set. N1K? Wonderful firepower, wonderful turn, but it is well and truly slow and rolls like a pig. HurriIIC? Absolutely wonderful in every way, except it is too slow to catch a cold. Ki-84? Nearly as good as the SpitXVI turn/performance, but not as lethal, does not roll as well, and loose parts in high-speed dives. I could go on, but you get the point.
It is not that the SpitXVI is a "jack of all trades" plane, a little good at everything. This would be more true of planes like the F6F, SpitIX, or P-38. No, the Spit16 is top-of-the-line at everything as a fighter, except for top speed where it is merely good.
You haven't really countered my point but carry on. Here's another thing go consider: the fine overall performance of the spixteen, combined with its ease of use, allows for noobs to get in a plane and quickly be competitive. Perking it would remove this plane as an option for noobs.
-
You haven't really countered my point but carry on. Here's another thing go consider: the fine overall performance of the spixteen, combined with its ease of use, allows for noobs to get in a plane and quickly be competitive. Perking it would remove this plane as an option for noobs.
Your point was that one plane has to be the "best"...well, that 'taint nessecarily so. A set of different planes with differing strengths and weaknesses over all balancing is imaginable. This is in fact true for most planes in the set vs. most others, the XVI being the one that sticks out like a sore thumb when you start doing plane-to-plane comparisons.
An F4U-4 would help noobs even more...as I've said before, the noob thing isn't a good argument, since there is no way you can limit a plane to "noobs" only. There are many planes which are easy to fly, without absolutely out-classing everything
-
I disagree. Flying a perk plane is nothing like flying a free plane. In the perk plane you are gangbanged just because it is perked. A free plane, barring the rare ones, does not attract that kind of response and the player is free to have a much more agressive fighting style.
Non the less, with a light perk, the XVI/VIII would still be viable as a main ride for most players, most of the time. It’s up for each individual player to fly their style of choosing.
Putting a light perk on XVI and VIII would just rule them out for the very, very newest/poorest of players. I guess BnZ is just tired of being killed by n00bs in a “n00b ride”
Edit: I would agree that perk planes can attract a little more attention, God knows how many times I’ve lead the conga line in my 262, with 20 people following. But perk planes do have the ability to brush of this extra attention, well if flown correctly. The factor that allows them to do so is speed, something which the XVI just doesn’t have. I’ve said before, speed is the biggest defining attribute factored into deciding a planes perk worthiness.
-
I gave you my personal definition. I have no idea what HTC's is.
Ah...so it is abit irrelevant then.
I wish there was some way to get statistics for the furball lake in the DA. Is this possible? That is only available laboratory for seeing which, if any, perked planes garner either 20% of sorties or 15% of kills. Just from my own observation, it doesn't seem like even the Tempest constitutes 1/5 of all planes you encounter in there. If in a non-perk environment like the currently perked planes don't even make the 15%/20% benchmarks, that IMO would present a serious problem with using those benchmarks.
-
Putting a light perk on XVI and VIII would just rule it out for the very, very newest of players. I guess BnZ is just tired of being killed by n00bs in a “n00b ride”
*Yawn*......weak. Argument through insult again. Typical net-trash.
5 points on the Sherman makes a difference, why not the SpitXVI? Everytime my GV perks get close to 1,000, I think to myself "Man, I'm spending too much, I gotta drive some panzers for awhile."
-
Any 20mm cannon, other than the Type 99 Model 1 or MG/FF, is superior to the Browning .50 cal as a fighter weapon in AH.
When the only thing you go by is hitting power, maybe. But the quality of a gun isn't DECIDED solely by hitting power. Otherwise the German 30mm (or hell, maybe even the B-25H's 75mm) would be the "best" air-mounted guns in the game. However that is most decidedly NOT the case because of the poor muzzle velocity, low rate of fire and poor ballistics.
I don't think ANYONE seriously considers the A6M2 out-guns the F4F. Yeah, the Zero's 20mm are more powerful than the Wildcat's Brownings. But I guarantee you that ask around and almost universally the F4F is considered better-armed than the cannon-equipped Zeke.
-
*Yawn*......weak. Argument through insult again. Typical net-trash.
I'm sorry, no legit response?
5 points on the Sherman makes a difference, why not the SpitXVI? Everytime my GV perks get close to 1,000, I think to myself "Man, I'm spending too much, I gotta drive some panzers for awhile."
It’s impossible to compare tanking to flying, they are two completely different cups of tea.… especially with AH2 dire G.V set.
-
I have stated my reason for saying the XVI should be perked...to increase the viability of a wide variety of fighters in the MA. I think when X fighter completely outclasses enough other fighters, it should be considered for perkage. That is what makes sense to me. You say I want it perked because it effects my personal k/d ratio or the like. That is false. Further, it is a malicious lie with no relevancy to the discussion at hand.
I'm sorry, no legit response?
It’s impossible to compare tanking to flying, they are two completely different cups of tea.… especially with AH2 dire G.V set.
-
Your point was that one plane has to be the "best"...well, that 'taint nessecarily so. A set of different planes with differing strengths and weaknesses over all balancing is imaginable. This is in fact true for most planes in the set vs. most others, the XVI being the one that sticks out like a sore thumb when you start doing plane-to-plane comparisons.
An F4U-4 would help noobs even more...as I've said before, the noob thing isn't a good argument, since there is no way you can limit a plane to "noobs" only. There are many planes which are easy to fly, without absolutely out-classing everything
The noob "thing" is a good arguement, you just down't like it.
Tell me, do you have trouble killing spixteens?
-
The noob "thing" is a good arguement, you just down't like it.
No, it is in fact a poor argument. Or, to put it another way, saying something should remain unperked because it "helps noobs compete" is a good argument for unperking anything. The perked planes *are* perked because they have a competitive advantage over other planes. (With the possible exception of the Spit14:D) The truly fatal flaw in your argument is that there is no way to disallow non-"noobs" from flying the SpitXVI.
Tell me, do you have trouble killing spixteens?
Completely irrelevant. Yet another childish attempt to argue through insult/annoyance. It shouldn't surprise me, you also think 200 is worth reading and commenting on.
-
I have stated my reason for saying the XVI should be perked...to increase the viability of a wide variety of fighters in the MA. I think when X fighter completely outclasses enough other fighters, it should be considered for perkage. That is what makes sense to me. You say I want it perked because it effects my personal k/d ratio or the like. That is false. Further, it is a malicious lie with no relevancy to the discussion at hand.
Perking the P-51D would have a larger effect on the variety of fighters, yet you don't argue for perking that.
If you wanted more variety, the single biggest thing, in my opinion, to create more variety would be to remove 1000lb bombs as an option for fighters.
-
Another thing I must point out: If everyone posting to this thread worshiped top-end speed to the extent they preach, then they would be flying La7s, D9s, K4s, P-51Ds, or P-47Ns 90% of the time, and they would consider them the best 5 planes in the game. But, apparently things *other* than top level speed DO hold some importance, judging by plane distribution in the MA, and if I had started a post claiming these 5 were the "best" of the non-perk rides, I can only imagine the numbers of responses I would have gotten telling me I was wrong.
-
i posted this in another thread a while back and i think it still holds true.
whiner - perk the spit 16 its ubber - skuzzy - ok its perked
whiner - perk the spit 9 its ubber - skuzzy - ok its perked
whiner - perk the spit 8 its ubber - skuzzy - ok its perked
whiner - perk the spit 5 its ubber - skuzzy - ok its perked
whiner - perk the spit 1 its ubber - skuzzy - ok its perked
whiner - perk the hmmm. damn nothing left to perk - skuzzy - well you whinged about every thing now live with it!!!!!!!!!
whiner - skuzzy can we have the sopworth camel please??? pretty please. promise we wont wine that its to ubber if you do.
if any thing id like to see the eny values changed so that the all perked plans get a 1eny spit 16 2eny and so forth.
-
Perking the P-51D would have a larger effect on the variety of fighters, yet you don't argue for perking that.
How so Karnak? The P-51D is inferior in maneuverability to nearly everything slower. It is inferior in wingloading and thrust/weight to a whole lot. It is inferior in speed AND turn AND climb to a number of unperked fighters! Almost everything in the set has a viable chance against it by forcing an angles fight, including light bombers like the A-20. The P-51D effects the viability of other fighters in the set very little, if at all.
If you wanted more variety, the single biggest thing, in my opinion, to create more variety would be to remove 1000lb bombs as an option for fighters.
What? How so? It would remove the one factor that actually gets some people into a P-plane instead of a more dedicated dogfighter. Myself, I have very little interest in using a fighter as a bomb-truck for toolshedding and landrabbery, and do not factor
-
No, it is in fact a poor argument. Or, to put it another way, saying something should remain unperked because it "helps noobs compete" is a good argument for unperking anything. The perked planes *are* perked because they have a competitive advantage over other planes. (With the possible exception of the SpitXIV! :D) The truly fatal flaw in your argument is that there is no way to disallow anyone but "noobs" from flying it.
Completely irrelevant. Yet another childish attempt to argue through insult/annoyance. It shouldn't surprise me, you also think 200 is worth reading and commenting on.
OK then a question for you -
HT perks the XVI, what should be done to allow/compensate for the fact that the LATEST free RAF fighter would then be a 1943 Mk VIII?
Bearing in mind the now all important holy grail of making things fair for EVERYBODY, guess we start perking anything that outperforms an VIII next, leaving similar performing free?
Sound fair?
As the overwhelming main attriubute in the MA is top speed, perking the XVI would essentially make it a hanger queen, much as the XIV already is.
-
i posted this in another thread a while back and i think it still holds true.
if any thing id like to see the eny values changed so that the all perked plans get a 1eny spit 16 2eny and so forth.
Two things greatly amuse me about your post Hyster. First, you are apparently ignorant of the fact that the SpitVIII is more, um, "uber" than the SpitIX. Second, I never mentioned perking the SpitVIII. While the SpitVIII is only slightly inferior in engine performance to the SpitXVI, it has enough small inferiorities, particularly roll rate, to justify leaving it unperked.
-
Two things greatly amuse me about your post Hyster. First, you are apparently ignorant of the fact that the SpitVIII is more, um, "uber" than the SpitIX. Second, I never mentioned perking the SpitVIII. While the SpitVIII is only slightly inferior in engine performance to the SpitXVI, it has enough small inferiorities, particularly roll rate, to justify leaving it unperked.
Eh?
Apart from the fact the VIII engine was built in the UK and the XVI engine was built in the US they are the same!
The 2 in Merlin 266 designates a Merlin 66 built abroad.
The difference is the clipped wings on a XVI allows a very slightly higher speed than a non clipped. Take an VIII and clip it you have a XVI with extra range.
-
OK then a question for you -
HT perks the XVI, what should be done to allow/compensate for the fact that the LATEST free RAF fighter would then be a 1943 Mk VIII?
Who cares about the date on the thing? It is irrelevant to performance. The Mk. VIII is a highly competitive fighter, I've probably flown in more than the XVI. It just isn't excellent-to-good in every single category of fighter performance like the XVI is. Hell, the Mk. IX is even quite competitive in the LW MA. Or was Soda lying when he said this of the SpitIX?
Overview
Consistently the most common and popular aircraft in the game, the Spitfire Mk IX has a wonderful combination of characteristics that have earned it that spot. It simply does almost everything well and has few obvious weaknesses , making it an obvious choice for newer players. That is not to say that it is a newbie aircraft though, it offers great growth potential and even some veteran pilots fly the Spit IX quite extensively. The Spitfire can actually be quite a creative aircraft to fly and adopts well to many styles with great success....
...Most aircraft require that they be flown in a "Style" in order to be the most successful but the Spit can be flown almost recklessly and still do alright. Typically it is used as TnB fighter though it is at least as equally impressive when used in a BnZ role. Being un the receiving end of a BnZ Spit IX is a simply scary situation that needs to be avoided....
...The Spit IX is probably the most dangerous plane to encounter as it can put up a fight in so many ways and win. At high altitudes it's the best maneuvering and among some of the fastest planes. Down low it is a great turner with good climb and acceleration if not for a bit of a lack of top end speed. You are also bound to see lots of Spitfires, both above and below you so you need to know how to identify them quickly and build a plan on how to deal with them...
...A veteran Spit pilot though can simply be impossible to shake and will let you flail around avoiding him until you run out of options. Then he will pounce and put you in your parachute.
Keep in mind that the P-51D, D9, La7, and many other "speed demons" were already present when Soda wrote his assessment. The SpitXVI is better than the IX in every way...forgive me if I chuckle a bit when you claim RAF fans need the absolute *best* Spit in the hangar to compete in the MA.
As the overwhelming main attriubute in the MA is top speed, perking the XVI would essentially make it a hanger queen, much as the XIV already is.
The overwhelming MA attribute is NOT top speed. If that were the case, then the 109K4, 190D9, La7, and Typhoon would be more popular than the P-51D AND the SpitXVI. The F4U-1C is *slower* than the Spixteen at most typical MA alts, yet it is a very popular perk plane. The XIV's problem is that it is perked too high in relation to what it can do vs. the other perk planes.
-
Eh?
Apart from the fact the VIII engine was built in the UK and the XVI engine was built in the US they are the same!
The 2 in Merlin 266 designates a Merlin 66 built abroad.
The difference is the clipped wings on a XVI allows a very slightly higher speed than a non clipped. Take an VIII and clip it you have a XVI with extra range.
+1 :aok, I loled irl.
-
Eh?
Apart from the fact the VIII engine was built in the UK and the XVI engine was built in the US they are the same!
The 2 in Merlin 266 designates a Merlin 66 built abroad.
The difference is the clipped wings on a XVI allows a very slightly higher speed than a non clipped. Take an VIII and clip it you have a XVI with extra range.
In Hyster's "order of perkage", the IX would be perked before the VIII. That is what I was referring to.
The VIII is listed as being slightly inferior to the XVI in climb rate as well as top speed.
-
Soda also said the following, when referring to the XVI:
"Don’t use flaps, they are really only for landing and the drag they produce is a real disadvantage." :rofl
I'm telling you now, I work the XVI's flaps all the time in fights.
http://members.shaw.ca/soda_p/Spitfire16.htm
-
In Hyster's "order of perkage", the IX would be perked before the VIII. That is what I was referring to.
Really
You said-
"Two things greatly amuse me about your post Hyster. First, you are apparently ignorant of the fact that the SpitVIII is more, um, "uber" than the SpitIX. Second, I never mentioned perking the SpitVIII. While the SpitVIII is only slightly inferior in engine performance to the SpitXVI, it has enough small inferiorities, particularly roll rate, to justify leaving it unperked."
Seems quite clear you say the VIII engine performance is slightly inferior to the XVI?
I assume Hyster either -
Was putting them in descending order of Mk (most likely), or didn't know the VIII came after the IX.
-
Most of us in this thread don't use the Spit XVI either. Guppy uses the P-38G and I use the Mosquito. We obviously have non-powergamer reasons for our choices. What is your point?
How so Karnak? The P-51D is inferior in maneuverability to nearly everything slower. It is inferior in wingloading and thrust/weight to a whole lot. It is inferior in speed AND turn AND climb to a number of unperked fighters! Almost everything in the set has a viable chance against it by forcing an angles fight, including light bombers like the A-20. The P-51D effects the viability of other fighters in the set very little, if at all.
Perking the most common aircraft forces at least a percentage of the players who use it into new aircraft (or out of the game), therefore perking the most used aircraft creates the largest pool of players to be forced into new aircraft.
What? How so? It would remove the one factor that actually gets some people into a P-plane instead of a more dedicated dogfighter. Myself, I have very little interest in using a fighter as a bomb-truck for toolshedding and landrabbery, and do not factor
It differentiates fighters from attack aircraft. Currently the late American fighters do it all so nobody bothers with things like the Ju87 or SBD-5. Even the A-20G and Mosquito VI are sidelined a bit by it.
-
Really
You said-
"Two things greatly amuse me about your post Hyster. First, you are apparently ignorant of the fact that the SpitVIII is more, um, "uber" than the SpitIX. Second, I never mentioned perking the SpitVIII. While the SpitVIII is only slightly inferior in engine performance to the SpitXVI, it has enough small inferiorities, particularly roll rate, to justify leaving it unperked."
In game, the climb performance and top speed are slightly inferior. These attributes are generally referred to "engine performance" even though the differences can be caused by attaching more/less airplane to the same basic engine (P-47 vs. F4U at low alts) as well as an actual horsepower difference.
IOW, the SpitXVI does slightly outperform the VIII, and you are delving into another irrelevancy as a distraction.
-
The Spit16 is as fast or faster than all P-47Ds at typical MA altitudes. It is more lethal than the La7 in guns, rolls better, turns far far better than the La7. The La7 is technically a superior turner to the Jug as well, but in reality, its handling is far below that of a Spitfire as flown by most. I easily destroy or put to flight La7s who engage my Jug more often than they get me. So your post is illogical...you are essentially saying you prefer a plane which can run you down and which ridiculously out-classes you as a knife-fighter as well vs. a plane that can run you down also, but is a much more difficult handling plane which can often be made to loose the knife-fight through basic ACM? This does not make sense to me.
For the record, I think the La7 technically deserves a light perk price as well, but comparing what it can do in average hands vs. the whole plane set compared to what the Spit16 can do, it is not as needful of a perk price.
N is faster than a 16 as long as wep remains...a bit less nimble than D40/25 obviously, but I'll take the 25 knots (what IS a typical MA alt?) Aside from that, 16 compresses trying to follow it through dive, Lgay does not, and Lgay takes abSURD amount of damage, as opposed to spit, which usually pops with 1 good burst. At any rate, I usually fare better against the 16 than the Lgay
-
In game, the climb performance and top speed are slightly inferior. These attributes are generally referred to "engine performance" even though the differences can be caused by attaching more/less airplane to the same basic engine (P-47 vs. F4U at low alts) as well as an actual horsepower difference.
IOW, the SpitXVI does slightly outperform the VIII, and you are delving into another irrelevancy as a distraction.
OK how bout this. We perk the 16 and HTC introduces a clipped wing LFIXe into the game so the MA guys can fly that instead? Work for you? :)
-
In game, the climb performance and top speed are slightly inferior. These attributes are generally referred to "engine performance" even though the differences can be caused by attaching more/less airplane to the same basic engine (P-47 vs. F4U at low alts) as well as an actual horsepower difference.
IOW, the SpitXVI does slightly outperform the VIII, and you are delving into another irrelevancy as a distraction.
No, I am correcting an inaccurate statement, and you are wriggling. Shown by the "I was reffering to the IX", when you clearly weren't.
Fine, perk the XVI and clip the VIII, I'll go for it.
Dan - Better make a non 'e' wing clipped LF IX, less whines then.
-
The SpitXVI is better than the IX in every way...forgive me if I chuckle a bit when you claim RAF fans need the absolute *best* Spit in the hangar to compete in the MA.
Another unsupported, random comment....
Did you happen to forget about this? Below is my best three tours in the XVI and IX. (K/D ratio wise)
Spitfire Mk. XVI.
Tour 90: K/D =13
Tour 102: K/D = 12.11
Tour 111: K/D = 11.87
Spitfire Mk. IX.
Tour 82: K/D=13
Tour 105: K/D=13
Tour 96: K/D= 12
-
Non the less, with a light perk, the XVI/VIII would still be viable as a main ride for most players, most of the time. It’s up for each individual player to fly their style choosing.
Putting a light perk on XVI and VIII would just rule them out for the very, very newest/poorest of players.
Very true.
Maybe the spit16 does deserve to be perked 1 or 2 points but who cares? You would be handicapping only the noobs who can't afford to fly it every mission. The experienced pilots flying the spit16, 'unbalancing' ( :rolleyes: ) game play, which generally is the core argument of the anti spit campaign, would not be affected AT ALL by a light perk.
So why handicap the noobs? They need all the help they can get.
As if clubbing baby seals needs to be any easier. :lol
-
Can't seem to get the expanded stats page to work.
Unless it has changed, HT doesn't track plane usage, but from a call to him many years ago "Deaths" give a good indication of plane usage.
Could someone (if they can get it to work) post the Deaths of the top 5 planes in the MA over the last 4-5 tours.
Willing to bet the XVI is there, also willing to bet the other 4 are the so called speed demons of the MA. Just want to put BnZ's claim of he would expect the speed demons to be used more than they are if speed is everything in the MA.
Make a prediction - 1 of them will be the Pony, another the La7. Other 3, I'll wait and see.
[edit] oh k/d would be helpful also. After all deaths plus k/d should give a very good indication of plane usage. Thanks.
-
BNZ i was not directly pointing my post at you but trying to make the point that if you start to perk 1 plane then people will want the next ubber plane perked untill every planes is perked,i only choose they spit as an example and simply listed them by mk not date
-
Can't seem to get the expanded stats page to work.
Unless it has changed, HT doesn't track plane usage, but from a call to him many years ago "Deaths" give a good indication of plane usage.
Could someone (if they can get it to work) post the Deaths of the top 5 planes in the MA over the last 4-5 tours.
The expanded stats had been removed. They had been replaced by the new stats under "individual statistics". Click on "plane" to see arena stats of a specific tour.
These are the complete numbers from 2008:
(http://img55.imageshack.us/img55/8071/planeusagedf8.jpg)
(http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/5112/clipboard01f.jpg)
(the % in that table is the plane's share of all kills+deaths during that year)
-
N is faster than a 16 as long as wep remains...a bit less nimble than D40/25 obviously, but I'll take the 25 knots (what IS a typical MA alt?) Aside from that, 16 compresses trying to follow it through dive, Lgay does not, and Lgay takes abSURD amount of damage, as opposed to spit, which usually pops with 1 good burst. At any rate, I usually fare better against the 16 than the Lgay
Hrmmm? When I was dive testing them, the La has elevator stiffness somewhere in the 400s. The spit16 does not. That much I remember. I will check what TAS they compress at.
-
Thanks Lusche, much appreciated.
As I expected.
Putting aside the CV planes as I would always expect them to be high.
Pony
XVI
Nik
La7
Tiffy
So 3 out of the top 5 are the MA speed demons, guess they get used a lot after all. ?????
After reading about the marauding hoards of XVIs in posts, seems to me like you are more then likely going to run into a Pony than a XVI.
-
Your personal K/D is irrelevant. Okay, here is the skinny about the SpitXVI vs. the IX: The SpitXVI is faster, climbs better, rolls better, is more lethal, and sustains a better turn rate. The SpitIX has an advantage in sustained turn radius w/o flaps, but not in sustained turn radius with flaps. Happy now?
Another unsupported, random comment....
Did you happen to forget about this? Below is my best three tours in the XVI and IX. (K/D ratio wise)
Spitfire Mk. XVI.
Tour 90: K/D =13
Tour 102: K/D = 12.11
Tour 111: K/D = 11.87
Spitfire Mk. IX.
Tour 82: K/D=13
Tour 105: K/D=13
Tour 96: K/D= 12
-
.
-
Wow, this thread is on fire. I'm over it. Unperk the F4U-1C and Spit XIV and let's call it a day.
-
No, I am correcting an inaccurate statement, and you are wriggling. Shown by the "I was reffering to the IX", when you clearly weren't.
I was referring to the 9 as regards Hyster hypothetical perk progression. The next logical plane to perk after perking the Spit16 would be the 8, not the 9. Which I would not be in favor of, for reasons I have clearly stated.
Fine, perk the XVI and clip the VIII, I'll go for it.
So excellent turn rate, excellent turn radius, excellent climb and acceleration, good speed, and lethal firepower are not enough advantages for you? You must *also* have an excellent roll rate at high speeds? If I were someone who felt I needed all these advantages, I would not be making smarmy insinuations about the skills of others.
-
I was referring to the 9 as regards Hyster hypothetical perk progression. The next logical plane to perk after perking the Spit16 would be the 8, not the 9. Which I would not be in favor of, for reasons I have clearly stated.
So excellent turn rate, excellent turn radius, excellent climb and acceleration, good speed, and lethal firepower are not enough advantages for you? You must *also* have an excellent roll rate at high speeds? If I were someone who felt I needed all these advantages, I would not be making smarmy insinuations about the skills of others.
Check back through the thread, you will see I have made no insinuations smarmy or otherwise, about anyones skill levels.
Merely pointed out an inacurracy in your post about the VIII v XVI engine.
Also that contrary to your lack of belief in the "speed is everything in the MA", you may be wrong about that also. Just seems the XVI and Nik buck the trend.
[edit] If you check my stats before July 07 (not played since then, tho back end of May when I get broadband) you will find I flew the Tiffy almost exclusively. So having "all the advantages" has nothing to do with it.
-
.... saying something should remain unperked because it "helps noobs compete" is a good argument ...
I know. It helps noobs compete. Why does this bother you?? What do you care if people want to fly it? I believe I can answer this for you, since you won't answer it honestly: you are having trouble beating them with your chosen ride... maybe in any ride. I thought you flew the 51 some. I will only speak for this plane since I can't remember specific spixteen encounters I've had in other planes.
I log in, then I up on the team with the fewest numbers and head for the biggest enemy darbar I can find. When I get there I am somewhere between 8 and 10k AGL. In that pile of bad guys will be several spixteens, some higher, some lower. I don't count them as any more dangerous than most other planes with comparable E states. In other words, they do nothing to unbalance the fight. I do OK against spixteens even under these circumstances. So why perk them? No unbalance= no need for a perk.
Completely irrelevant. Yet another childish attempt to argue through insult/annoyance. It shouldn't surprise me, you also think 200 is worth reading and commenting on.
I don't know who put a bottle in your rectum then kicked you in the butt so hard that it broke but you are a real unpleasant person to have a discussion with. I asked a question so I could try to understand your perspective. Maybe you are just one of those people who isn't happy unless they are arguing or insulting.
-
He's unpleasant because he is logical.
Most people are emotional.
BnZ, you are absolutely right in saying the Spixteen renders the vast majority of the planeset irrelevant. You are absolutely wrong in thinking anyone else gives a hoot, or that you will ever be able to convince them otherwise.
Having the Spixteen as the dominant fighter is actually preferable to having the La-7 as the dominate fighter - while the Spixteen renders most other planes irrelevant, whereas the La-7 is double superior to just about everything other than the Spits.
-
:lol :cry :lol Everyone has to read my post.
The SpitXVI is better than the IX in every way...forgive me if I chuckle a bit when you claim RAF fans need the absolute *best* Spit in the hangar to compete in the MA.
Another unsupported, random comment....
Did you happen to forget about this? Below is my best three tours in the XVI and IX. (K/D ratio wise)
Spitfire Mk. XVI.
Tour 90: K/D =13
Tour 102: K/D = 12.11
Tour 111: K/D = 11.87
Spitfire Mk. IX.
Tour 82: K/D=13
Tour 105: K/D=13
Tour 96: K/D= 12
Your personal K/D is irrelevant.
Earth to BnZs, I’m showing you that I’m able to get the same exact amount of kills in an IX then I can in the XVI. :cool: It’s quite relevant to this thread.
-
Having the Spixteen as the dominant fighter is actually preferable to having the La-7 as the dominate fighter - while the Spixteen renders most other planes irrelevant, whereas the La-7 is double superior to just about everything other than the Spits.
Then why not perk them both. :D
-
Wow 9 pages of whine that even beats my I got bombed tirades! Spit16 isn't that scary unless someone from The Few is flying it.
Perk the Jeep! :eek:
-
He's unpleasant because he is logical.
Ahh bullnoodles. He's unpleasant because he's a turd.
-
BnZ, you are absolutely right in saying the Spixteen renders the vast majority of the planeset irrelevant.
How exactly? You mention nice textbook phrases like double superior. If it is so superior, why isn't it dominating the arena buy a decisive edge?
-
How exactly? You mention nice textbook phrases like double superior. If it is so superior, why isn't it dominating the arena buy a decisive edge?
I think its reputation as a dweeb plane (and that many people simply like to fly things taht are more challenging) probably pushes the usage down.
-
Find a good spot and let the boys come to you.
So thats your dirty little secret. :lol
-
I have stated my reason for saying the XVI should be perked...to increase the viability of a wide variety of fighters in the MA. I think when X fighter completely outclasses enough other fighters, it should be considered for perkage. That is what makes sense to me. You say I want it perked because it effects my personal k/d ratio or the like. That is false. Further, it is a malicious lie with no relevancy to the discussion at hand.
WTH does "increase the viability of a wide variety of fighters" mean? The Spixteen is not the most used aircraft now. It's K/D ratio is good but not even at the top of non-perked fighters. That would seem to show that there is already a wide variety of aircraft that are perfectly viable in the MAs.
I think Lusche had it correct on page 1.
-
Okay Steve, you are a nice enough guy under most circumstances. I can give you the benefit of the doubt. Maybe you weren't trying to say "You just want the Spit16 perked because you suck!" or some such ultra melontery. I'm afraid I'm not a good enough person much of the time to suppress my tendency to throw a nuke back when some idiot in the peanut gallery lobs a spitball...
First, I've tried to tell you, saying a plane "helps noobs compete" is irrelevant. The F4U-4 would help noobs compete, boy would it ever, since it can run down practically anything and turn as well or better than practically anything. And hey,hardcore F4U fans need the -4 because too many LW birds can just use their superior acceleration to "stroll away" from the F4U-1 series...see why this argument doesn't work now? You can say the F4U is superior to a greater portion of the plane set than the SpitXVI, which is fair, but that makes it only a difference of degree.
To answer your question, I think I can say that I could go into a duel against 85% of the MA using most any plane type and win. I think I am decent enough in skills and knowledgeable enough in what makes an airplane work well as a fighter to make the judgement about what has the edge in a maneuvering fight, and it only takes reading a chart to know which is fast enough to force that maneuvering fight on other planes. Basically, in my own observation, there are planes which are just as bad/worse to have on your close six, but none of them have nearly the performance and other advantages of the Spit16. Way I see it, if you are in P-47D for example and screw up, loose too much E and get a HurriIIC, Zeke, or even a N1K on your six close enough for the kill, that is your fault. You could clearly have avoided the situation with the correct decision making. But what is the clear solution when the plane that climbs better, turns better, and rolls better is ALSO faster? Answer, there isn't one except to hope the pilot in it absolutely sucks enough to fall for a trick and has no friends to help him. And any pilot who *thinks* realizes that the slower, double-inferior plane's only hope is a trick, so he prepares for it.
Your P-51D is an example of the type of plane that should *not* be presented any insurmountable problems by the Spit16, since the P-51D 20+mph faster. Your P-51D is not something I am talking about when I say the SpitXVI presents viability problems for many planes in the LW MA. I think if the P-51D was 10mph slower, even the History Channel couldn't make it as popular as it is now in the LW MA...not with SpitXVIs around. If the SpitXVI was 10mph slower, I wouldn't think it needed perking. I have the feeling that if it were 10mph faster though, the same people would still be saying to me: "What? Its not all that fast! It's the only competitive Spit we got! You just hate Spits!". When in reality, if the SpitfireXVI was the P-62, or the Bf-209, or the Mitsubishi A9M, etc., I'd still say the perk the thing, because my opinion is based on relative performance in-game, not irrelevancies like nationality or personal preference.
I know. It helps noobs compete. Why does this bother you?? What do you care if people want to fly it? I believe I can answer this for you, since you won't answer it honestly: you are having trouble beating them with your chosen ride... maybe in any ride. I thought you flew the 51 some. I will only speak for this plane since I can't remember specific spixteen encounters I've had in other planes.
I log in, then I up on the team with the fewest numbers and head for the biggest enemy darbar I can find. When I get there I am somewhere between 8 and 10k AGL. In that pile of bad guys will be several spixteens, some higher, some lower. I don't count them as any more dangerous than most other planes with comparable E states. In other words, they do nothing to unbalance the fight. I do OK against spixteens even under these circumstances. So why perk them? No unbalance= no need for a perk.
I don't know who put a bottle in your rectum then kicked you in the butt so hard that it broke but you are a real unpleasant person to have a discussion with. I asked a question so I could try to understand your perspective. Maybe you are just one of those people who isn't happy unless they are arguing or insulting.
-
Hrmmm? When I was dive testing them, the La has elevator stiffness somewhere in the 400s. The spit16 does not. That much I remember. I will check what TAS they compress at.
Can't quote charts or anything, but it's been my only ride for some 2 years
-
. The F4U-4 would help noobs compete,
Yes it would, but we already have a plane to fill that role, the spixteen. :)
-
Can you please reply to my post on page 8? I'm curious to get your thoughts.
-
WTH does "increase the viability of a wide variety of fighters" mean? The Spixteen is not the most used aircraft now. It's K/D ratio is good but not even at the top of non-perked fighters. That would seem to show that there is already a wide variety of aircraft that are perfectly viable in the MAs.
I think Lusche had it correct on page 1.
E25290:
Tell you what. Do your own research this time. Look at the list of planes that are basically as slow or slower than the SpitXVI. Out of the "slower-than" list, figure out the ones that are clearly out-turned by the SpitXVI. Don't bother with figuring out the ones that are out-climbed and out-accelerated, IIRC it will be all of them or very near it. Don't bother trying to figure out which ones are out-rolled either, it will be all of them that are not members of the Fw-190 series. And there the roll advantage is not great. No, just figure out exactly how many are both too slow to avoid the SpitXVI and have a serious disadvantage against it in a knife fight. If, after you do this, you don't understand what I mean by "effects the viability of many fighters in the MA", then I can't help you.
BTW, since you brought up the fact that the SpitXVI is only the 2nd most popular fighter, behind the P-51D, you should do similar research on the Pony. Wait, I can save you the trouble. IIRC, out of the planes slower than the P-51D, only the Fw-190As and F are clearly out-performed in all aspects of the turn. Before anyone mentions it, the Ta-152 retains energy better under Gs and sustains a superior rate of turn vs. the P-51D. And the P-51 is not superior in climb, acceleration, or *greatly* superior in turn compared to the 190 A-5 at typical MA alts. Further, the P-51 is out-rolled by and is less lethal in firepower than the 190As and F. Once again, if you can't see the difference between this and the situation with many planes vs. the SpitXVI, I can't help you.
-
Earth to BnZs, I’m showing you that I’m able to get the same exact amount of kills in an IX then I can in the XVI. :cool: It’s quite relevant to this thread.
Not, it is not relevant at all. What it shows is that at some point in the past some individual got the same numbers in a IX as he got in an XVI, numbers which involve many unknown and unknowable factors. It says nothing about the relative performance of the machines. If you want to get real crazy, look at the way the P-38J k/d has been some tours...it has been at the top of non-perks, or very close. Going by your "logic", that would mean the P-38J is in fact superior to all non-perked planes. Including the almost identical but slightly better (boosted ailerons and dive flaps!) P-38L!!! Clearly this is not a logically sound argument, although it is an excellent use of any available excuse to strut about one's score. :rolleyes:
-
Can you please reply to my post on page 8? I'm curious to get your thoughts.
All I can say is that your conviction that a light perk price (3-5 is what I was thinking of) will do nothing to reduce SpitXVI numbers is incorrect IMO.
-
Yes it would, but we already have a plane to fill that role, the spixteen. :)
Before the SpitXVI was added, the SpitIX was considered quite competitive and the "noob plane of choice". I don't think anyone will deny this. And the P-51D, 109G10 or K4, Dora9, Typhoon, and Lala were also there, so one can't say "But the set was slower back then." Now though, I am told that even the SpitVIII is not competitive enough in the LW MA, that RAF fans and noobs will be left out in the cold without free SpitXVIs, without a plane that does almost *everything* extremely well and whose only "weakness" is in reality simply a less hyper-developed strength. Sorry, I don't buy that, not one bit.
-
All I can say is that your conviction that a light perk price (3-5 is what I was thinking of) will do nothing to reduce SpitXVI numbers is incorrect IMO.
It will reduce them, but it will only weed out the weakest spit16 pilots in the game who can't afford such small potato perk prices. I'm saying they don't need anymore handicaps.
Point being, if average to above average players want to fly spit16s, then no small perk price is going to stop them.
Can you imagine? "Sorry, can't fly the spit16, don't have 3 perks" :lol
-
It will reduce them, but it will only weed out the weakest spit16 pilots in the game who can't afford such small potato perk prices. I'm saying they don't need anymore handicaps.
This is what I'm saying.
I'm not disputing that it's uber, considering it's abilites as a whole, I agree w/ BnZ that it is. I just think it isn't unbalancing the arena.
-
This is what I'm saying.
I'm not disputing that it's uber, considering it's abilites as a whole, I agree w/ BnZ that it is. I just think it isn't unbalancing the arena.
Here we come back to the problem with that word unbalancing.
The HTC team has never officially defined what is meant by unbalancing. The benchmarks players give as a personal opinion vary widely. Some are specific enough to be applicable, some are laughably vague. Two of the most common useful definitions I've heard are 20% of usage or 15% of kills. This is specific enough, but has also never been tested in any real way with the possible exception of the C-Hog, since the other perk planes started out perked IIRC. I personally doubt that each and every perk ride, if unperked, would make the 20%/15% mentioned consistently over time in today's MA. Perhaps not even the Tempest. This makes the whole idea of using these numbers as the standard rather dubious. In any case, as I say, it has never been tested. It is clear in fact, that most of the currently perked planes started out as perked planes because the HTC team looked at their relative performance and said "Yep, that needs to be perked". It is also clear that perk status is not set in stone forevermore because apparently someone along the line decided the Ta-152's relative performance did not justify perking and made it a free plane.
-
Before the SpitXVI was added, the SpitIX was considered quite competitive and the "noob plane of choice". I don't think anyone will deny this. And the P-51D, 109G10 or K4, Dora9, Typhoon, and Lala were also there, so one can't say "But the set was slower back then." Now though, I am told that even the SpitVIII is not competitive enough in the LW MA, that RAF fans and noobs will be left out in the cold without free SpitXVIs, without a plane that does almost *everything* extremely well and whose only "weakness" is in reality simply a less hyper-developed strength. Sorry, I don't buy that, not one bit.
So a Spitfire LFIXc would be fine, just not a Spitfire LFXVIe?
You are basically saying that any RAF birds beyond 43 should be perked at this point. Tiffie is 42, Spit IX is 42 version. Spit VIII is 43. The 44 Spitfire XVI should be perked to go along with the Spitfire 14 of 1944 and the Tempest of 1944.
I guess in the end I question why do you care so much? Do you get beaten down by Spit 16s in the MA?
More folks are flying 109K4s these days. I think we should perk em. I see way too many guys flying them now. They've got other 109G variants they can fly right? How dumb would that be? But it's the same argument. I could add that the 109K4 drivers tend to be better sticks too so it's even more unfair to the rest of us! Force em into another bird! They're unbalancing the arena! Get rid of the 51D, I see to many! Perk it! Make them fly 51Bs instead. 6 50s is unfair!
Quit whining, and start shooting the 16s down. You aren't going to make folks fly birds you want them to fly.
Why not just go into the arena, take the challenge of fighting them and do it?
There is no point in even discussing it with you. You've claimed some sort of high ground on this one, and there is nothing anyone could say because you've decided and that's it.
And do answer the question. Would an LFIXc be ok with you instead of an LFXVIe?
-
Here we come back to the problem with that word unbalancing.
. You are implying that the definition varies widely. Well sure it does. I'm not trying to foist my view of "unbalanced" on you.
No doubt a guy who was in a plane that didn't turn as well and was slower than a spixteen would have a tough time against one. In my 51, I have to compete with the k4 which is as fast(at the alts I fly) , turns, climbs, accelerates, rolls better than my plane. K4's are fairly common. It's a pony killer. I'm not campaigning they should be perked though. :)
My view that it shouldn't be perked is because it's a nice crutch for noobs. I will not be swayed from that.
Your view is that my view is invalid, because you say so. You will not be swayed from that.
OTOH, I don't feel as strongly about it as you do. If it gets perked, I'll make sure I'm around to give you an 'attaboy".
-
I guess in the end I question why do you care so much? Do you get beaten down by Spit 16s in the MA?
Sort of what I'm wondering. Sure I see a lot of Spit16's but they are easy to kill and easy to outrun. I don't see the problem unless you are a P39 pilot. :)
-
Nothing you mentioned has anything to with my reasoning. Simply put, I think the SpitXVI has too many advantages over too high a % of the rest of the plane set to justify a non-perk status. That is all. How can something so simple elude so many?
There is no point in even discussing it with you. You've claimed some sort of high ground on this one, and there is nothing anyone could say because you've decided and that's it.
Huh...that is exactly what I think about people on the other side of the debate. I myself was on the other side of this debate once. You can probably dig up a post of me telling Krusty or someone "Perk the XVI? What are you nuts, that thing is SLOW!", or something to that effect. But I was ignorant of the fact that the SpitXVI is faster than 70% of all fighters and 41% Late War fighters. I am able to change my mind when presented with new information. I see more conformity and status quoism in people's resistance to the idea of perking the SpitXVI and willingness to take the discussion to the "low road" than I see reason.
-
K4's are fairly common.
The K-4 is a special case. Its strengths would make it a great candidate for perkage if it didn't boast so many weaknesses to off-set them. Your Pony can escape or at least gain a lot of separation from a K-4 anytime it has the alt for a dive beyond the K-4's compressability limit. Relative roll-rate is heavily dependent on speed, at 350mph IAS I believe the Pony will hold the edge. I've been flying and shooting awhile, but between the ballistics and limited view, I might have a great deal of trouble nailing a Pony pilot who scissors or jinks about well without using most or all of my taters. And that is considering a hermetically sealed environment where one can saddle up on the Pony and take all the time one needs, not an environment where the P-51 pilot could dive, call for help, and have a darn good chance of getting it.
-
E25290:
Tell you what. Do your own research this time. Look at the list of planes that are basically as slow or slower than the SpitXVI. Out of the "slower-than" list, figure out the ones that are clearly out-turned by the SpitXVI. Don't bother with figuring out the ones that are out-climbed and out-accelerated, IIRC it will be all of them or very near it. Don't bother trying to figure out which ones are out-rolled either, it will be all of them that are not members of the Fw-190 series. And there the roll advantage is not great. No, just figure out exactly how many are both too slow to avoid the SpitXVI and have a serious disadvantage against it in a knife fight. If, after you do this, you don't understand what I mean by "effects the viability of many fighters in the MA", then I can't help you.
BTW, since you brought up the fact that the SpitXVI is only the 2nd most popular fighter, behind the P-51D, you should do similar research on the Pony. Wait, I can save you the trouble. IIRC, out of the planes slower than the P-51D, only the Fw-190As and F are clearly out-performed in all aspects of the turn. Before anyone mentions it, the Ta-152 retains energy better under Gs and sustains a superior rate of turn vs. the P-51D. And the P-51 is not superior in climb, acceleration, or *greatly* superior in turn compared to the 190 A-5 at typical MA alts. Further, the P-51 is out-rolled by and is less lethal in firepower than the 190As and F. Once again, if you can't see the difference between this and the situation with many planes vs. the SpitXVI, I can't help you.
So many words, and you still miss the point . . .
The Spixteen is killed by all other planes almost as often as it kills all other planes. Meaning, whatever advantages it has A) can be overcome B) are not so large as to make pilot skill irrelevant and/or C) has offsetting disadvantages that you are not accounting for.
If it was so clearly and absolutely superior to all the other non-perked aircraft in the game, we would see them to a larger degree than we do.
-
You miss the point. Out of all non-perked planes, the P-38J has the highest K/D, or at least near the top, over many tours, correct? The Ta-152 is also a strong contender in K/D over many tours. This of course means the P-38J is superior to most/all of the unperked LW planes (including the P-38L), as is the Ta-152. Or does it? :huh Now do you see why this argument fails?
So many words, and you still miss the point . . .
The Spixteen is killed by all other planes almost as often as it kills all other planes. Meaning, whatever advantages it has A) can be overcome B) are not so large as to make pilot skill irrelevant and/or C) has offsetting disadvantages that you are not accounting for.
If it was so clearly and absolutely superior to all the other non-perked aircraft in the game, we would see them to a larger degree than we do.
-
Nothing you mentioned has anything to with my reasoning. Simply put, I think the SpitXVI has too many advantages over too high a % of the rest of the plane set to justify a non-perk status. That is all. How can something so simple elude so many?
Huh...that is exactly what I think about people on the other side of the debate. I myself was on the other side of this debate once. You can probably dig up a post of me telling Krusty or someone "Perk the XVI? What are you nuts, that thing is SLOW!", or something to that effect. But I was ignorant of the fact that the SpitXVI is faster than 70% of all fighters and 41% Late War fighters. I am able to change my mind when presented with new information. I see more conformity and status quoism in people's resistance to the idea of perking the SpitXVI and willingness to take the discussion to the "low road" than I see reason.
If you can find a post anywhere from me saying the Spitfire XVI is too low, I'll take your side. You won't find it. If you can find a post anywhere when it comes to Spitfires from me that hasn't been reasonable in regards to what AH has, I'll also take your side. The guys trying to talk to you were there when the discussion was going on regarding what Spits to add. It was folks like myself, Kev and others who suggested the Spitfire Vb of 41 instead of the Vc that the game had that everyone griped about. We went at the discussion with the idea of covering the Spitfire line up as fairly as possible so that it covered as much of the historical time frame accurately.
What gets tiresome is folks since the beginning of time thinking the Spit in one form or another is somehow unfair to the rest of the cartoon airplane world.
So Spitfire LFIXc ok with you?
You still haven't answered my question to you. Would you tolerate a Spitfire LFIXc instead of a Spitfire LFXVIe?
-
You still haven't answered my question to you. Would you tolerate a Spitfire LFIXc instead of a Spitfire LFXVIe?
Gupp, you know I don't know the minutiae of the various Spit designations as well as you do. Did you think this fact would bother me ? I *could* easily look up all I need to know, but there is no reason to do so. Because I can simply tell you that if its performance is basically identical to that of the SpitVIII in game, then I would not be in favor of perking it. If its performance is basically identical to that of the SpitXVI, then I would favor perking it. The single weakness of high-speed roll rate alone is enough to merit a different status than that of the SpitXVI IMO. I believe I have said enough times that my opinion is based on relative performance, not the *name* of the plane that asking me this is rather pointless.
-
If HTC perks it, they perk it (they won't, it isn't imbalancing anything), but I am done talking about it to you. You are convinced you are correct and nothing anybody else, nor any evidence, will change your mind.
-
So basically the clipped wing is the issue. The better roll rate and the limited speed increase from it makes it too much. There goes my Spit XII right out the window then.
One other fundamental AH truth you might want to factor in to your crusade to perk the 16. Remember what the AH world was before the 16. It was LA7s.
And the greatest gift the 16 gave to the game was the Air Quake crowd got a bird they figure they can beat anyone with, and they started to stay in and fight instead of going light speed, shooting running 3 sectors and repeating it going the other way.
I'd take a crowd of 16s that think they can out fly my 38G then a crowd of LA7s that wouldn't even consider sticking around to fight. You won't drive the horde into lesser birds, just the one they think is the latest and greatest. Remember 16 is a bigger number then 9 so it must be a better plane.
That in itself makes the 16 a bird that should never be perked. The Air Quake crowd won't move back to Spit 8s or 9s. They'll be back in LA7s.
-
So a Spitfire LFIXc would be fine, just not a Spitfire LFXVIe?
You are basically saying that any RAF birds beyond 43 should be perked at this point. Tiffie is 42, Spit IX is 42 version. Spit VIII is 43. The 44 Spitfire XVI should be perked to go along with the Spitfire 14 of 1944 and the Tempest of 1944.
I guess in the end I question why do you care so much? Do you get beaten down by Spit 16s in the MA?
More folks are flying 109K4s these days. I think we should perk em. I see way too many guys flying them now. They've got other 109G variants they can fly right? How dumb would that be? But it's the same argument. I could add that the 109K4 drivers tend to be better sticks too so it's even more unfair to the rest of us! Force em into another bird! They're unbalancing the arena! Get rid of the 51D, I see to many! Perk it! Make them fly 51Bs instead. 6 50s is unfair!
Quit whining, and start shooting the 16s down. You aren't going to make folks fly birds you want them to fly.
Why not just go into the arena, take the challenge of fighting them and do it?
There is no point in even discussing it with you. You've claimed some sort of high ground on this one, and there is nothing anyone could say because you've decided and that's it.
And do answer the question. Would an LFIXc be ok with you instead of an LFXVIe?
wow, let me not get into a verbal confrontation with you. And well said . :aok
-
So basically the clipped wing is the issue. The better roll rate and the limited speed increase from it makes it too much. There goes my Spit XII right out the window then.
One other fundamental AH truth you might want to factor in to your crusade to perk the 16. Remember what the AH world was before the 16. It was LA7s.
And the greatest gift the 16 gave to the game was the Air Quake crowd got a bird they figure they can beat anyone with, and they started to stay in and fight instead of going light speed, shooting running 3 sectors and repeating it going the other way.
I'd take a crowd of 16s that think they can out fly my 38G then a crowd of LA7s that wouldn't even consider sticking around to fight. You won't drive the horde into lesser birds, just the one they think is the latest and greatest. Remember 16 is a bigger number then 9 so it must be a better plane.
That in itself makes the 16 a bird that should never be perked. The Air Quake crowd won't move back to Spit 8s or 9s. They'll be back in LA7s.
Score 1 to the Gupster.
Many of us remember pre XVI times when you did nothing but chase La7's all over the map.
Perk the XVI, and all you do is go back to hoards of running LaLa's.
BnZ - Also if you want to perk the XVI to help increase plane variety, then better look at perking the Pony also, I believe it has been the most used plane for many tours now.
-
Please no, I don't want to start chasing La7s again! :cry :cry :cry :cry
-
Perk the XVI, and all you do is go back to hoards of running LaLa's.
Wait, how is this any different from now?
-
i looked at some numbers :noid
tour 108: Spit 16 k/d 1.05
tour 109: Spit 16 k/d 1.06
tour 110: Spit 16 k/d 1.08
tour 111: Spit 16 k/d 1.10
tour 112: Spit 16 k/d 1.07
in those tours P-51D had 48%, 40%, 27%, 18% and 22% more kills than spit 16, successively. Also pony had better k/d ratio.
so ... yea .... spit 16 is unbalancing plane in LW arena and should get perked
-
So basically the clipped wing is the issue. The better roll rate and the limited speed increase from it makes it too much. There goes my Spit XII right out the window then.
Without a clipped wing, all Spitfires have at least one weakness...poor roll at high speed. Again, you act like it is simply awful and a death sentence to fly a Spitfire that actually has a major weakness. As I pointed out before, the SpitIX was one of the most popular and effective MA planes before the VIII and XVI were added. Yet you will sit here and tell me that even the VIII is not effective enough to compete in the LW MA with a straight face.
That in itself makes the 16 a bird that should never be perked. The Air Quake crowd won't move back to Spit 8s or 9s. They'll be back in LA7s.
First of all, the La7 also deserves a light perk price. Second, I highly doubt your logic. The La7 is inferior to the Spit16 in every way except top speed. The Spit8 would be the next logical plane of choice for someone who prefers the Spit16. The La7 is simply nowhere near the fighter any Spit is in average hands. If I'm destroying an La7 OR forcing it to run, either option is fine by me. If I wanted to be snide about it, I'd say something along the lines of, what's a matter Gupp, don't have the skillz to sucker a fast plane in, force him to overshoot, and snap-shoot him? But we are both too good to use the tactics of feces-throwing monkeys, something which unfortunately is not universally true of the entire BBS.
-
And if you look at P-38J numbers, it has a higher k/d than both of them. Thus the irrelevancy of k/d numbers is demonstrated.
i looked at some numbers :noid
tour 108: Spit 16 k/d 1.05
tour 109: Spit 16 k/d 1.06
tour 110: Spit 16 k/d 1.08
tour 111: Spit 16 k/d 1.10
tour 112: Spit 16 k/d 1.07
in those tours P-51D had 48%, 40%, 27%, 18% and 22% more kills than spit 16, successively. Also pony had better k/d ratio.
so ... yea .... spit 16 is unbalancing plane in LW arena and should get perked
-
Didn't the La-7 have its wings clipped (pun intended) when it was updated? I know it was only supposed to be changes in handling that occurred, but whatever they did drove the masses away from it.
If the Spit XVI were perked you'd see most of those pilots go the VIII. I'm sure some would go to the La-7, N1K and others, but more than 50% would stick with the Spitfire series.
Don't go after me for this please. I'm enjoying the peanut gallery. :)
-
If HTC perks it, they perk it (they won't, it isn't imbalancing anything), but I am done talking about it to you. You are convinced you are correct and nothing anybody else, nor any evidence, will change your mind.
By God sir, between the two of I am the one who has bothered to get evidence. You are the one who has irrelevancies such as "But this Spitfire Mk is actually equivalent to one from 1943!", which does not change the relative performance of the bird one bit, and who consistently ignores the fact that usage and k/d can be warped by a great many factors other than actual effectiveness. You are unable to distinguish between a mediocre performing plane whose popularity does not effect the viability of practically anything else in the MA vs. a superbly performing machine whose popularity darn well does effect the viability of many otherwise potentially useful rides in the MA. If I were to take up a position equivalent to yours as regards USN planes, I would be lobbying to get the F4U-4 unperked as we speak.
-
Didn't the La-7 have its wings clipped (pun intended) when it was updated? I know it was only supposed to be changes in handling that occurred, but whatever they did drove the masses away from it.
I find it quite a fine bird yet, in fact it is easier to see out of now with changes to the framing. I think there is certain amount of "urban legend" about the Lala being rendered horrible. It reminds me of how Soda's reviews of the P-51 and Ta-152 probably lead to a great deal of their use/disuse respectively...
-
And if you look at P-38J numbers, it has a higher k/d than both of them. Thus the irrelevancy of k/d numbers is demonstrated.
The problem with these threads is that you have to refute the same tired arguments every time before real discussion begins. It's a task of Sisyphus.
Join my camp and tell them that they're wimps if they don't agree that the XIV and C-Hog should be unperked.
-
The problem with these threads is that you have to refute the same tired arguments every time before real discussion begins. It's a task of Sisyphus.
Join my camp and tell them that they're wimps if they don't agree that the XIV and C-Hog should be unperked.
The ONLY defensible reason for keeping the C-Hog perked is to keep the other 1-Hogs in use instead of this historically rare variant. There are other free quad-cannon birds in the game.
This is a reason I accept. It also means that reasons for perking an airplane can be diverse and not entirely consistent. Which is also fine. But because the reasons behind perking are diverse and inconsistent, don't hit me with the phrase "It's not unbalancing!!!" and expect that alone to stand as a valid argument.
-
Unperked Charlie wouldn't change my usage at all. Just like now, I'd still use her primarily for air to ground work when the 1D doesn't quite have the firepower I want, and the 1A for air-to-air.
-
Unperked Charlie wouldn't change my usage at all. Just like now, I'd still use her primarily for air to ground work when the 1D doesn't quite have the firepower I want, and the 1A for air-to-air.
And I fly a bloody A5 around quite abit when I could just as easily fly a Dora, but what is your point? Unperk the C-Hog and it will be majority of Corsairs. Mind you, its formidable gun package is *not* enough to justify perking it when other rides sport quad cannons, so the *only* reason left is to force people into other varieties of Hog.
-
Mind you, its formidable gun package is *not* enough to justify perking it when other rides sport quad cannons, so the *only* reason left is to force people into other varieties of Hog.
I concur.
-
Mind you, its formidable gun package is *not* enough to justify perking it when other rides sport quad cannons, so the *only* reason left is to force people into other varieties of Hog.
That is an narrow assumption at best ... unless of course you are privy to HTC company discussions, which I don't think you are.
-
By God sir, between the two of I am the one who has bothered to get evidence. You are the one who has irrelevancies such as "But this Spitfire Mk is actually equivalent to one from 1943!", which does not change the relative performance of the bird one bit, and who consistently ignores the fact that usage and k/d can be warped by a great many factors other than actual effectiveness. You are unable to distinguish between a mediocre performing plane whose popularity does not effect the viability of practically anything else in the MA vs. a superbly performing machine whose popularity darn well does effect the viability of many otherwise potentially useful rides in the MA. If I were to take up a position equivalent to yours as regards USN planes, I would be lobbying to get the F4U-4 unperked as we speak.
It is your insistance on lying that makes it impossible to talk to you about it. You are so convinced that only you have supplied data, but you reject all data that doesn't support your conclusion as invalid, thus permitting you to lie and claim nobody else has submitted data.
Also, I haven't used the "It is a 1943 fighter" as an argument for many years, so you are lying about that too.
Also I note that you have already revealed your next crusade should you get the Spitfire XVI perked, and that is the La-7. I imagine the Spitfire VIII would follow that.
-
And I fly a bloody A5 around quite abit when I could just as easily fly a Dora, but what is your point? Unperk the C-Hog and it will be majority of Corsairs. Mind you, its formidable gun package is *not* enough to justify perking it when other rides sport quad cannons, so the *only* reason left is to force people into other varieties of Hog.
You have no idea what you are talking about. You simply cannot isolate data that way and take it out of context. The F4U-1C and Typhoon Mk Ib both have four Hispanos, but that hardly tells the whole story and there are valid reasons the F4U-1C was getting ~20% of the kills in a tour while the Tiffie got a fraction of that, despite having the same gun package.
You are wrong about the F4U-1C.
-
Isn't it true that the planeset was much smaller when the C-Hog was unperked? And there was no Spit XVI? These two planes balance each other out nicely.
-
Isn't it true that the planeset was much smaller when the C-Hog was unperked? And there was no Spit XVI? These two planes balance each other out nicely.
True
True
True
-
Unperked Charlie wouldn't change my usage at all. Just like now, I'd still use her primarily for air to ground work when the 1D doesn't quite have the firepower I want, and the 1A for air-to-air.
Same here ...
C-Hog for CV defense to smack down bombers/JABO quickly
D-Hog for attack (ords)
1A-Hog for dogfighting
-
The La7 is inferior to the Spit16 in every way except top speed.
La7 is faster under 20k.
The Spit 16 does roll better.
The Spit 16 outclimbs the La7 with wep but w/o wep both have a near identical climb under 8k.
La7 out accelerates the spit 16.
With no flaps the Spit 16 does out turn the La7 but it is somewhat close "ish". Similar to a Spit 16 vs. a Niki.
Full flaps their turn rates are pretty much identical.
Looks to me like a very close match up with a huge edge to the La7 because of speed. Because of that speed the La7 gets to dictate the fight. So the La7 pilot not only can engage and disengage at will but if they so choose the La7 can drop flaps and stall fight 'em.
How exactly is that inferior in every way? Sounds to me like the La7 has a pretty big edge.
And I agree that I would rather see a Spit 16's than La7's. The typical dweeb 16 pilot tends to fight it out. I also agree that the La7 should have a light perk (2-3 perks) for the 3 gun package.
-
(double post)
Does HTC know that the BBS freezes up all the time?
Not just me apparently as the same thing happened to Karnak. (and to Trax1 in the O'Club just now)
It is not odd at all every couple days that the BBS won't load. I can get to any other web page but this one. I tend to wait 5-10 min. and it clears up but i'm curious if HTC knows this is even happening.
Like Karnak says below I even closed Firefox and logged back in. I could view posts but it would freez when I tried to reply.
-
It would be interesting to see the F4U-1C unperked again just to see what would happen.
I do note its usage is pretty decent even perked and it has a very healthy K/D ratio, more than some other perked units.
-
Forum hicup. Even backed out, refreshed and checked to see if it had posted before I tried again.
-
The ONLY defensible reason for keeping the C-Hog perked is to keep the other 1-Hogs in use instead of this historically rare variant. There are other free quad-cannon birds in the game.
This is a reason I accept. It also means that reasons for perking an airplane can be diverse and not entirely consistent. Which is also fine. But because the reasons behind perking are diverse and inconsistent, don't hit me with the phrase "It's not unbalancing!!!" and expect that alone to stand as a valid argument.
to quote HTC:
"The perk system is a way for HTC to introduce some interesting but otherwise unbalancing planes on a limited basis but the benefits go deeper than that. Perk planes (and vehicles) would be things like Me 262s, Ta 152s, Tempests, B-29s, Ar 234s, Tiger IIs, etc. These are interesting rides but would be very unbalancing if they were available on an unlimited basis."
The only argument for perking the planes and vehicles is do they unbalance the gameplay.
Maybe k/d ratio isnt all that is important but since spit16 has lower k/d ratio than P-51D and some 20-40% less kills than P-51D (last 5 tours) is IMO enough to say that spit16 isn't unbalancing.
-
Define unbalancing in a way that makes it impossible that the P-40B should ever be perked. :)
-
It would be interesting to see the F4U-1C unperked again just to see what would happen.
I do note its usage is pretty decent even perked and it has a very healthy K/D ratio, more than some other perked units.
At the time the Chog was perked, we had alot of water maps. CV usuage was alot more than it is now.
So the plane of choice was the Chog to cap the field, and plane set was smaller.
-
Define unbalancing in a way that makes it impossible that the P-40B should ever be perked. :)
Why does it need a better definition than for HiTech and Pyro to say "I know it when I see it?" Not everything needs to fit in a nice little, perfectly defined, box.
-
Why does it need a better definition than for HiTech and Pyro to say "I know it when I see it?" Not everything needs to fit in a nice little, perfectly defined, box.
So that we can stop debating and gnashing teeth over it? :lol Truly, no one is convinced when an artificial term like "unbalancing" is left purposely ambiguous. We're not talking about "love" or "good" or other terms that are part of the natural history of our species.
Moreover, in regards to artificial terms, if I can't interpret a consistent meaning from their use, then the speaker doesn't know what they mean, either.
-
So that we can stop debating and gnashing teeth over it? :lol Truly, no one is convinced when an artificial term like "unbalancing" is left purposely ambiguous. We're not talking about "love" or "good" or other terms that are part of the natural history of our species.
Moreover, in regards to artificial terms, if I can't interpret a consistent meaning from their use, then the speaker doesn't know what they mean, either.
Usage stats are a pretty good way to tell if something is seriously imbalanced and needs to be controled. As has been pointed out repeatedly, the Spit XVI doesn't have those stats. It is obviously a very, very good fighter and nobody has ever argued otherwise, but it is not dominating the MA.
-
But we're going in circles again. By this definition, if any plane were close to being unbalancing, even if we admit that none are unbalancing right now, then it would be the P-51D, which is absurd.
-
Usage stats are a pretty good way to tell if something is seriously imbalanced and needs to be controled. As has been pointed out repeatedly, the Spit XVI doesn't have those stats. It is obviously a very, very good fighter and nobody has ever argued otherwise, but it is not dominating the MA.
Exactly.
Karnak, BnZ, here is where the gap lies between your argument. BnZ says the potential of the Spit16 COULD allow it to dominate the MA. Which is true potentially. Karnak says it is NOT dominating the MA so no change is needed. You guys are actually really close to being in agreeance.
-
Where have I lied? I have not, unless you count the occasional gaff as a lie. I have absolutely no responsibility to be civil to someone who accuses me of being a liar out of the blue.
You are so convinced that only you have supplied data, but you reject all data that doesn't support your conclusion as invalid, thus permitting you to lie and claim nobody else has submitted data.
I have supplied data about relative performance. You have supplied data about usage and k/d stats. I have not denied that you supplied the data, I have merely pointed out that this data is irrelevant. The P-38J conundrum, need I remind you?
Also, I haven't used the "It is a 1943 fighter" as an argument for many years, so you are lying about that too.
Others have been using that very argument in this very thread. If I somewhere mistakenly attributed it to you, then it was just that, a mistake.
Also I note that you have already revealed your next crusade should you get the Spitfire XVI perked, and that is the La-7. I imagine the Spitfire VIII would follow that.
I have thought that the La7 needs a light perk price on the basis of performance for longer than the I have said the SpitXVI needs a perk price. As I say, I used to be ignorant of the XVI's relative performance against the plane set as a whole. Looking at the big picture, I'd say the XVI has more impact on the viability various fighters in the MA than the La7, so I think it actually needs a perk price worse. I have already clearly outlined why the SpitVIII, although very, very, very good, has enough shortcomings relative the SpitXVI to justify its unperked status. You may remember I argued at length with Krusty regarding this very fact. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume this statement was the product of momentary confusion and not a black and deliberate lie.
-
And I fly a bloody A5 around quite abit when I could just as easily fly a Dora, but what is your point? Unperk the C-Hog and it will be majority of Corsairs. Mind you, its formidable gun package is *not* enough to justify perking it when other rides sport quad cannons, so the *only* reason left is to force people into other varieties of Hog.
Ahh, so thats it :) The clipped wing Spit roll rate negates one of the advantages of the 190 series. This of course was why they clipped the wing in the first place, to help it roll with the 190.
Why don't you throw your entire list of perk birds here too so we can see it all in the context of your larger plan. Might as well see what planes guys could fly without perks first. Looks like your list includes more then the Spit 16
As for the Spit VIII. When I fly a Spit, that's the one I prefer. I think it's a better bird then the 16. I also believe given pilots of equal ability the VIII will beat the 16 90 percent of the time.
-
As for the Spit VIII. When I fly a Spit, that's the one I prefer. I think it's a better bird then the 16. I also believe given pilots of equal ability the VIII will beat the 16 90 percent of the time.
Same goes for
P-51B vs P-51D
190A-5 vs 190A-8
F4U-1A vs F4U-1D
109G-2 vs 109G-6
P-47D-11 vs P-47D-25
-
La7 is faster under 20k.
The Spit 16 does roll better.
The Spit 16 outclimbs the La7 with wep but w/o wep both have a near identical climb under 8k.
La7 out accelerates the spit 16.
From 100-250mph their accelerations are practically identical.
With no flaps the Spit 16 does out turn the La7 but it is somewhat close "ish". Similar to a Spit 16 vs. a Niki.
Mosq's Data
No flaps radius
Spit16 590.2
La7 616
No flaps turn rate
Spit16 22.4 dps
La7 20.8 dps
2dps per is a pretty decent lead in rate.
Full flaps their turn rates are pretty much identical.
With a slight edge still going to the Spit. According to Mosq's data the Spit will still complete a full turn
~3 seconds before the La7 will, sustained. That is not an entirely insignificant edge. Getting into subjective handling is dangerous, but I'd say the Spit16 is easier and more stable "riding the edge" wouldn't you? Slots are problematic.
Looks to me like a very close match up with a huge edge to the La7 because of speed. Because of that speed the La7 gets to dictate the fight. So the La7 pilot not only can engage and disengage at will but if they so choose the La7 can drop flaps and stall fight 'em.
How exactly is that inferior in every way? Sounds to me like the La7 has a pretty big edge.
I said inferior in every way except top speed. It turns that the La7 is also identical in low end, and superior in top end acceleration. Mea culpa. I think it is rather dangerous to discount roll rate, climb rate, Hispanos, and yes, the Spit's slight edge in turning, which IMO is not as slight in reality as it appears on paper.
And I agree that I would rather see a Spit 16's than La7's. The typical dweeb 16 pilot tends to fight it out. I also agree that the La7 should have a light perk (2-3 perks) for the 3 gun package.
Actually, you've made quite the good argument for assigning the La7 a perk price also. Very nice. :salute
-
Ahh, so thats it :) The clipped wing Spit roll rate negates one of the advantages of the 190 series. This of course was why they clipped the wing in the first place, to help it roll with the 190.
Once again, I must ask you, in an airplane blessed with top of the line turn, top of the line climb, top of the line acceleration, why must you also demand the blessing of top-of-the-line roll rate? Seems a bit greedy to me. No, more than a bit.
-
Exactly.
Karnak, BnZ, here is where the gap lies between your argument. BnZ says the potential of the Spit16 COULD allow it to dominate the MA. Which is true potentially. Karnak says it is NOT dominating the MA so no change is needed. You guys are actually really close to being in agreeance.
I don't think any plane could "dominate" the MA to the extent some are requiring as a prerequisite for perkage, even many of the currently perked rides, if any at all. There are too many different kinds of fighters now, and every one of them has some loyal following that will fly them, hell or high water.
-
I don't think any plane could "dominate" the MA to the extent some are requiring as a prerequisite for perkage, even many of the currently perked rides, if any at all. There are too many different kinds of fighters now, and every one of them has some loyal following that will fly them, hell or high water.
Yeah, "dominate" is a subjective word when referring to MA performance. Do you see a Spit16 problem in the MA though? Or do you just think its general performance warrants a small perk tag?
Personally I see no spit16 problem and while I could see it having a light perk tag based on its performance characteristics, I don't think it's necessary nor would it change much. It's right on the borderline, could go either way, I just don't think it matters enough since it by no means is a problem in the MA.
-
Yeah, "dominate" is a subjective word when referring to MA performance. Do you see a Spit16 problem in the MA though? Or do you just think its general performance warrants a small perk tag?
Personally I see no spit16 problem and while I could see it having a light perk tag based on its performance characteristics, I don't think it's necessary nor would it change much. It's right on the borderline, could go either way, I just don't think it matters enough since it by no means is a problem in the MA.
It looks to me like every fighter plane in the set has a tiny slice of the pie, as I'd expect with there being what, 60 different kinds of fighter to choose from? I think if perkage is based on the prospect of one fighter claiming 1/5th of the pie or so, then might as well unperk 'em all, it ain't gonna happen, not with the number of models we have. Not even the Me-262 or Tempest, IMHO.
EDIT: I realize that I didn't answer your question. Yes, I think a certain level of relative performance merits a perk tag, even if was only 1% of sorties.
-
Truly, no one is convinced when an artificial term like "unbalancing" is left purposely ambiguous.
It is more than likely left ambiguous so that HTC can implement ENY as they see fit without painting themselves into a corner and not giving "twits with a cause" any foothold to argue with what HTC deems necessary and not necessary.
All this gnashing of teeth on the BBS about perk this and perk that means doodily squat. One can argue all they want on this BBS, but if one has not taken the time to personally present valid and convincing data to HT and Pyro, and in a manner that does not reflect the stamping of feet by a child who demands something ... you might get somewhere.
I don't know HT or Pyro on a personal level, but I have been to enough cons and spoken to/challenged them at length on a few things ... and the one thing that I have learned, the "squeaky wheel" does not get the grease ... the louder the squeak, the less they hear ... it's the "smart wheel" that will get the grease, or a chance to get greased ... and all these perk the Spit 16 threads seem to come across as a very large squeak.
-
BnZ - I seem to remember that toward the end the old Spit Vc usage actually out-stripped the IX usage. Once the masses realised that down low the uber-boost Vc was every bit as good as a IX, but with the Vc having a superior turn.
Kinda wish we had kept it now.
CHog - could it be it remains perked for one reason? Unperk it and thats about all you would see off CVs? Just a thought.
-
BnZ - I seem to remember that toward the end the old Spit Vc usage actually out-stripped the IX usage. Once the masses realised that down low the uber-boost Vc was every bit as good as a IX, but with the Vc having a superior turn.
Kinda wish we had kept it now.
CHog - could it be it remains perked for one reason? Unperk it and thats about all you would see off CVs? Just a thought.
Kev post less FLY MORE :P good too see u .
whels
-
Once again, I must ask you, in an airplane blessed with top of the line turn, top of the line climb, top of the line acceleration, why must you also demand the blessing of top-of-the-line roll rate? Seems a bit greedy to me. No, more than a bit.
So we're back to the clipped wing bit. So in essence what you are really asking for is HTC to redo the Spit LF16E as a full span wing Spitfire LFIXE. Same exact bird but the wings aren't clipped.
If that's what this is really all about, then go for it.
And remember I fly the 38G in latewar and enjoy fighting Spit 16s. I'm not demanding anything for my bird of choice. I just don't see any issue with the Spit 16. In essence you are demanding that they give you back more of an edge to your A5 by not having a Spit that can roll with it as well. So how bout a clipped LFVb instead? They started clipping the wings on Spits in 42, again to counter the roll rate of the 190 so why not :)
-
So we're back to the clipped wing bit. So in essence what you are really asking for is HTC to redo the Spit LF16E as a full span wing Spitfire LFIXE. Same exact bird but the wings aren't clipped.
If that's what this is really all about, then go for it.
And remember I fly the 38G in latewar and enjoy fighting Spit 16s. I'm not demanding anything for my bird of choice. I just don't see any issue with the Spit 16. In essence you are demanding that they give you back more of an edge to your A5 by not having a Spit that can roll with it as well. So how bout a clipped LFVb instead? They started clipping the wings on Spits in 42, again to counter the roll rate of the 190 so why not :)
What do you mean by "more of an edge"? The 190A5 has no sort of edge at all over the Spixteen. Hell, it doesn't even have an edge over the IX.
That is the POINT. You still have people that will voluntarily tie their hands behind their back and fly the planes that they "like" (for me it was the 190 as well) - but the game gets much older much faster when your chosen ride is double inferior to every plane you run into in addition to the perpetual gangs. Before the La7 got popular the 190 series was actually a viable choice (well, before the La7 and before HTC nerfed the hell out of the 190 and the P51) - the Spit IX did everything better, but it was a bit slower on the deck so you could at least drag one away from the pack to fight.
You are apparently immune to burnout, bully for you. BnZ is apparently going down the same path as me - I was more than good enough to kill 98% of the arena in a 190a5 1v1, but not quite good enough to take on 3 La7s and 4 random other planes at the same time in it. I could roll a Spit and kill 4 or 5 of them if I could get quick kills... but I didn't want to fly a Spit. At some point you just get tired of handicapping yourself, so you fly planes you don't enjoy flying, until you get sick of the hamster wheel and quit. That is where I'm at now. Since I don't see the gameplay ever changing, I imagine I'll keep coming back when HTC releases an update with a cool plane, play for a weekend and realize I still don't like it, and cancel again.
-
So we're back to the clipped wing bit. So in essence what you are really asking for is HTC to redo the Spit LF16E as a full span wing Spitfire LFIXE. Same exact bird but the wings aren't clipped.
If that's what this is really all about, then go for it.
And remember I fly the 38G in latewar and enjoy fighting Spit 16s. I'm not demanding anything for my bird of choice. I just don't see any issue with the Spit 16. In essence you are demanding that they give you back more of an edge to your A5 by not having a Spit that can roll with it as well. So how bout a clipped LFVb instead? They started clipping the wings on Spits in 42, again to counter the roll rate of the 190 so why not :)
This is hardly about the 190 A-5 alone. The 190 series is the only one that even matches/exceeds the Spit16 in roll-rate. But most planes can out-roll an unclipped Spit at high speed. Maybe its not much, but its something.
You finally caught on to the fact that all I am asking for is that the best unperked Spit be the owner of one weakness? Thank you very much.
And yes, a clipped Vb would also be fine. It is also has a weakness, given that it would well and truly be slow.
-
Hell, it doesn't even have an edge over the IX.
Hmmph...at least the 190 can extend. I state that my idea of "fair" is the bricks having ability to extend from the superior-dogfighting kites, and you'd think I'd run over someone's dog.
EDIT: Urchin...I ain't you...not even a little bit. Know that shot where they overshoot you, turn back but still cross right in front of your 'cause you're slower? I miss it. Miss it every %@W$^%#% single time. I could never claim to be able to beat 95% anything in a 190 A-5 or Jug, although I can give a good fight to a 51, 47, Typh, Kurt or other theoretically "superior" airplane a lot of times. Just not an INSANELY superior aircraft. :devil
-
So we're back to the clipped wing bit. So in essence what you are really asking for is HTC to redo the Spit LF16E as a full span wing Spitfire LFIXE. Same exact bird but the wings aren't clipped.
If that's what this is really all about, then go for it.
So we turn our XVI into a second VIII? :rolleyes:
-
So we turn our XVI into a second VIII? :rolleyes:
Or, and I'm must floating an idea bubble here, we perk the XVI and leave the VIII free...not...that..hard.
-
Or, and I'm must floating an idea bubble here, we perk the XVI and leave the VIII free...not...that..hard.
Yes...it...is.
All jokes aside, how many points would you perk the XVI?
-
HTC should have introduce the XII (344MPH SL) as a lightly perked Spitfire, which is about 9MPH faster then our current XVI. :aok
-
HTC should have introduce the XII (344MPH SL) as a lightly perked Spitfire, which is about 9MPH faster then our current XVI. :aok
LOL yep, a February 43 bird perked in Latewar. Makes perfect sense :)
Darn thing wasn't even around in 45 as it was retired from front line service in September 44. Darn those Brits for having such uber birds too soon!
-
What do you mean by "more of an edge"? The 190A5 has no sort of edge at all over the Spixteen. Hell, it doesn't even have an edge over the IX.
That is the POINT. You still have people that will voluntarily tie their hands behind their back and fly the planes that they "like" (for me it was the 190 as well) - but the game gets much older much faster when your chosen ride is double inferior to every plane you run into in addition to the perpetual gangs. Before the La7 got popular the 190 series was actually a viable choice (well, before the La7 and before HTC nerfed the hell out of the 190 and the P51) - the Spit IX did everything better, but it was a bit slower on the deck so you could at least drag one away from the pack to fight.
You are apparently immune to burnout, bully for you. BnZ is apparently going down the same path as me - I was more than good enough to kill 98% of the arena in a 190a5 1v1, but not quite good enough to take on 3 La7s and 4 random other planes at the same time in it. I could roll a Spit and kill 4 or 5 of them if I could get quick kills... but I didn't want to fly a Spit. At some point you just get tired of handicapping yourself, so you fly planes you don't enjoy flying, until you get sick of the hamster wheel and quit. That is where I'm at now. Since I don't see the gameplay ever changing, I imagine I'll keep coming back when HTC releases an update with a cool plane, play for a weekend and realize I still don't like it, and cancel again.
So it comes down to limiting gameplay for many to please a few?
Never in the field of cartoon flight sims have so many had to give up so much for so few!
When it's burnout time you step away from the keyboard. There is no fixing the game when that happens, and we've all been there. You get your perspective back, and enjoy it for what it is.
-
So it comes down to limiting gameplay for many to please a few?
Never in the field of cartoon flight sims have so many had to give up so much for so few!
Plane choice is already limited. Perk planes are a fact of life. If you are against limiting player choice at all through the perk system, please come right out and say you are against the perk system. If you are not saying that, then it seems like my proposed limit is far from onerous...like I say, why do you feel it would be so onerous to not have a free a plane that turns great AND climbs great AND rolls great..and as far as speed goes outruns 41% of LW planes and 70% of the entire set?
-
IMHO burnout happens when you are no longer challenged. Pick a non-uber bird and show them what cartoon pilot skill is all about. Keep the challenge and you'll keep the fun.
-
LOL yep, a February 43 bird perked in Latewar. Makes perfect sense :)
Darn thing wasn't even around in 45 as it was retired from front line service in September 44. Darn those Brits for having such uber birds too soon!
Spitfires are just so imba! I'm just trying to entertain him Guppy. :D
-
LOL yep, a February 43 bird perked in Latewar. Makes perfect sense :)
Darn thing wasn't even around in 45 as it was retired from front line service in September 44. Darn those Brits for having such uber birds too soon!
What does not make sense is this obsession with dates and constantly bringing them up to obscure the matter of performance.
-
All jokes aside, how many points would you perk the XVI?
5 seems good.
Just enough to drives its stats up there.
-
The XVI isn't worth 5 perks. 2 at most. I'd put it at 1 to start with.
So it comes down to limiting gameplay for many to please a few?
Why limit it when you can equalize. Give each fighter family non or cheap perk late war variant for some parity. They won't be exactly equal, but it'll be better than what we have now. That's the point of the game isn't it? Letting the players decide the gameplay, not the game's parameters ?
The P47M, 51H or late 150 octane 51D, Spit XII and 21lbs-XVI and 24lbs-XIV (prolly wrong but you get the idea) and XXI, a 190A-9 and the D9 at 2+ ata that did 400 on the deck, an uncorked Mossie, etc.
-
What does not make sense is this obsession with dates and constantly bringing them up to obscure the matter of performance.
Seems to me the arenas are set up as early-war, mid-war and late-war. You are suggesting that a plane that is a mid-war bird, be perked in late war.
Some of us do have a bit of a history interest in these cartoon birds. The time frame in which they were built and what AH models them on, does make a difference to me.
Why the obsession with the Spit XVI since we're talking obsessions. Why can't you just shoot em down like the rest of us? Would you even be talking about this if HTC had labeled it a clipped wing Spitfire IX?
-
It's not about date, it's about performance. "unbalancing" - HTC. BnZ's wrong, but if you're going to prove it you have to argue the point he's actually making, not just debasing it or discrediting him.
-
The P47M,
I'd like it, saw service. Really wouldn't be tremendously better than a P-47N though...not stacked up against the low-alt uber rides anyway.
51H or late 150 octane 51D,
Uh...no? The 51H simply doesn't make the cut for inclusion. 150 octane...none of our birds have that. I'd rather the P-51's turn performance be looked at, rather than simply giving it more horsepower so it can run better.
a 190A-9 and the D9 at 2+ ata that did 400 on the deck, an uncorked Mossie, etc.
An A-9...sounds good...how about just an A-5 that isn't 12mph two slow or an A-6 to start though? Do not need the uber-Dora. Do need an up-to-snuff Mossie.
Simply perking the Spixteen and La7(if anyone still flies it anymore...talk about a great plane that has been hurt by bad press!!!) would do about as much as adding all these new-fangled models though, and be much easier.
-
Would you even be talking about this if HTC had labeled it a clipped wing Spitfire IX?
This implication that I am swayed by the label and not relative performance is beginning to annoy me Gupp (mind you, it was performance numbers and no other reason that changed my mind on the subject). I don't like the implication, because a person concerned with a combat flight game would have to be very, very stupid to be more concerned with what a plane is called vs. what it can do relative the other planes in the set.
Yet you keep repeating this question I have already answered, repeating it ad nauseum. I am beginning to think it is your take on Herr Shickegruber's methods of swaying the hoi polloi audience: "loud enough and often enough". Do not bring it up with me again.
-
Seems to me the arenas are set up as early-war, mid-war and late-war. You are suggesting that a plane that is a mid-war bird, be perked in late war.
Some of us do have a bit of a history interest in these cartoon birds. The time frame in which they were built and what AH models them on, does make a difference to me.
Hmmm...does the fact that the Me-262 shot down its first plane in July '44 and was considered operational by August effect its perk status in any way in your mind? I mean, it may or may not make HTC's cut-off date for "Mid-War" (which of course you realize is entirely arbitrary), I'm not sure But it saw service in greater numbers than some UN-perked planes (Ta-152, 3 Gun La7s, etc.) Or is this one case where you ARE willing to fall back on the dread notion of using standards of...say it with me now...performance as the perk test?
-
Why isn't the XVI available in the mid-war arena?0
-
Hmmm...does the fact that the Me-262 shot down its first plane in July '44 and was considered operational by August effect its perk status in any way in your mind? I mean, it may or may not make HTC's cut-off date for "Mid-War" (which of course you realize is entirely arbitrary), I'm not sure But it saw service in greater numbers than some UN-perked planes (Ta-152, 3 Gun La7s, etc.) Or is this one case where you ARE willing to fall back on the dread notion of using standards of...say it with me now...performance as the perk test?
What it seems to come down to is perception here. And from all I can tell it's really about the roll rate of the 16. It's the same engine as the VIII. Both LF Spits. Performance comparable except roll rate.
As for the 262 there is no comparison to the Spit 16. You are talking about the standard RAF day fighter in the ETO from 43 to the end of the war. Spitfire LFIX/XVI being an identical airframe and the engine being the only difference, one being produced by Packard in the US and one by Rolls Royce in England. Put a Packard Merlin in a Spit IX and it becomes an XVI or vice versa. They came off the production line at the same time. The IX/XVI was the most produced variant of Spitfire and the LF production covered all the XVIs and 80+ percent of the IXs produced. I don't think you limit that type of bird from the MA if for no other reason then the historical significance to the Brits.
Bottom line is you aren't ever going to convince me that the 16 is unbalancing or so good it should be perked. And to that end I'll bow out and leave you to your crusade. I'll go back to shooting 16s
-
If perk worthiness is inversely proportional to production numbers, then must literally *give* approximately 3.2 perks per sortie to people for even taking off in 109 G-6s... :noid
What it seems to come down to is perception here. And from all I can tell it's really about the roll rate of the 16. It's the same engine as the VIII. Both LF Spits. Performance comparable except roll rate.
As for the 262 there is no comparison to the Spit 16. You are talking about the standard RAF day fighter in the ETO from 43 to the end of the war. Spitfire LFIX/XVI being an identical airframe and the engine being the only difference, one being produced by Packard in the US and one by Rolls Royce in England. Put a Packard Merlin in a Spit IX and it becomes an XVI or vice versa. They came off the production line at the same time. The IX/XVI was the most produced variant of Spitfire and the LF production covered all the XVIs and 80+ percent of the IXs produced. I don't think you limit that type of bird from the MA if for no other reason then the historical significance to the Brits.
Bottom line is you aren't ever going to convince me that the 16 is unbalancing or so good it should be perked. And to that end I'll bow out and leave you to your crusade. I'll go back to shooting 16s
-
I keep reading, and even BNZ has stated on numerous occasions, that the faster plane is superior as it can disengage at will.
So, based on the evidence that he's presented in isolation of other performance data, along with his own summation of superiority, all he's proved is that the 109G-14, 109K-4, 190D-9, F4U-1, La7, P-47N, P-51B, P-51D, Ta-152, Typhoon and Yak9-U and possibly a few others should be perked if the Spit XVI were to be perked.
Now, BNZ, if you no longer believe that a faster plane can control a fight by being able to disengage at will then I'd appreciate if you'de quit stating so.
I do find it interesting that when comparing the Spit against only LW rides BNZ charachterizes it as "fair-to-middlin'".
A few "fanatical" (in the worst sense of the word) spit fans have been yelling and screaming since the spit16 came out that "it's just a 1942 bird! It's too slow! How can we compete with anything in the late war planeset?!?!? WAAAAH!!!"
And repeating these cries (lies) ad nauseum for well over a year now.
I have never seen such a post. Please provide links to these.
-
Well, I couldn't get through more than six pages of this but here's my final thought on the matter.
The Spit XVI is a fine plane in the AH inventory. I fly it all the time and it's good but not great at everything. It's got at least one or more advantages that can be exploited against any other plane in the plane set.
Likewise, I fly all the other planes in the plane set as well (some better than others) and virtually every one of them has an advantage that can be exploited against the Spit XVI with few exceptions but those same planes with exceptions have similar difficulty against any of what I consider the mid-range fighters (i.e. Spits, P-38's, La's, etc... those with "jack of all trades" charachteristics). I don't mind fighting a Spit XVI in almost any other plane because I know exactly what the XVI can and can't do.
Speed is an exploitable advantage like any other but it's only one measure of performance. BNZ has spent a lot of effort to measure this single performance measure against the rest of the plane set, then used anecdotal evidence and his own opinions to support his argument of clear superiority for the Spit XVI. This is short sighted and not supported by clear statistical evidence on his part.
I could argue that turn rate is the most important measure of performance and then say that the Zeke, Hurri, F4F/FM2 and others are the best planes in the game. I could support this by saying that they can dive with almost any other plane and therefore top speed isn't an issue as long as they have a little alt. I could also argue that speed is the primary advantage via the ability to disengage argument.
Furthermore, in BNZ's argument, he totally ignores the realities of what types of pilots use the Spit XVI, and in what types of situations it's typically used in the MA's. He also omits arena-wide K/D ratios in his argument. Performance is only one part of the equation in determining perkability of a particular aircraft. He has not made a case that the Spit XVI unbalances the arena in it's environment.
Really BNZ. I'd expect much more from you. I'm dissapointed.
-
Really BNZ. I'd expect much more from you. I'm dissapointed.
Speaking of expecting more from people,
I could argue that turn rate is the most important measure of performance and then say that the Zeke, Hurri, F4F/FM2 and others are the best planes in the game. I could support this by saying that they can dive with almost any other plane and therefore top speed isn't an issue as long as they have a little alt.
Really, the Zeke can dive with almost any other plane? Which one have you been flying?
The Hurri too?
Dive ability isnt about converting altitude into speed. That is gravity and acceleration of mass; given enough altitude, all falling items will eventually reach terminal velocity, but for a functioning airframe the effective operational velocity is the point at which their structures rip off. So, what you are saying is that, with altitude, you can get the "turners" up to their maximum operational velocity, if you point in one direction. Way too simplistic for an ACM environment.
Instead, dive ability in the combat sense is truly differentiated through control surface responsiveness at high speed. If you don't understand this, you are missing out on a large part of ACM. And the Hurri and Zeke are NOT competitive in this regard.
This is all not to mention even that the Potential E to E conversion for the "turners", as you outlined, is not done in an isolated environment. In a multiplane engagement, your current kill should always be leaving you in a good position to either
a) Get your next kill
b) Egress the fight successfully
Are you really claiming that Speed as an advantage is neutralized in a multiplane engagement because, when you are in a Hurricane, you can dive out and chase down a bandit of your choosing? Sure, you have an OK chance of catching that bandit, but what will your situation be after that kill? Comparing your situation to a hypothetical plane with a better climb rate, acceleration, or top speed who made the same dive and attack as you did, you will be worse off.
Come on, you've been around long enough to know this. I see that you were trying to outline a potential argument about subjectivity of relative performance characteristics, but it's a pretty weak argument.
-
Speaking of expecting more from people,
Really, the Zeke can dive with almost any other plane? Which one have you been flying?
The Hurri too?
The Hurricane is an excellent diver.
Zeke holds it's Energy after the dive (too durn much imho) BUT it does suffer from horrible handling when fast like that. If you dive away from a zeke and it follows you, don't just extend straight as they will stay with you for a long time. Get the zeke fast, do a maneuver or two and either kill 'em, or reset the fight now that you have killed all their alt/e.
-
HTC should have introduce the XII (344MPH SL) as a lightly perked Spitfire, which is about 9MPH faster then our current XVI. :aok
Here! Here! :aok
-
Now, BNZ, if you no longer believe that a faster plane can control a fight by being able to disengage at will then I'd appreciate if you'de quit stating so.
I lean more towards saying, that when faced with an airplane that is utterly superior in every other way, the faster plane can at least run away. Not too inspiring, but better than nothing. But once again, you ignoring the fact that there are a large number of double-inferior rides that don't have the speed to disengage from SpitXVIs either.
Edit: Another mistake we make is equating what is desirable in the MA to what is desirable for r/l pilots. If you are a r/l pilot, job number one is to not get killed, even once, which obviously places speed at the top of the heap :D This is NOT the case with the MA. Interesting how people act like k/d is the only measurement worth caring about (even though the game itself scores players on other measurements) when it is convenient to them, then make fun of the people who fly fast planes in a boring style that leads to very large k/d's. For playing a *game* other attributes can take on as much importance as speed.
So, you want to compare SpitXVI k/d against Fw-190 D-9 k/d? Myself, I'd be interested to compare kills/*time* between the two models.
I do find it interesting that when comparing the Spit against only LW rides BNZ charachterizes it as "fair-to-middlin'".
When I compared SpitXVI against LW only rides, it was faster than 41% of them, including the P-47Ds and P-38s which it also out-climbs and out-turns rather badly at typical MA alts. People complained that it wasn't "fair" to compare it to early and mid war rides. Of course, comparing it to LW-only rides removed some Mid-War rides faster than the Spit. Ultimately, it *does* make more sense to compare it to the entire set, since the entire set is available in the LWMA, and for all intents and purposes the LW *is* the main arena.
-
Bald:
You mischaracterize my argument badly. I have never argued the Spit16 does everything or even one thing better than *every* plane. I have argued that it does *everything* better than a large enough number of planes that it effects the viability of many models in the LW MA and thus perhaps deserves a light perk price. Speed demons can simply run away from the Spixteen, and uber-turners can try to exploit that advantage, but that leaves a very large number of more middle of the road planes that are simply out-classed.
The Spit XVI is a fine plane in the AH inventory. I fly it all the time and it's good but not great at everything. It's got at least one or more advantages that can be exploited against any other plane in the plane set.
This is an understatement. The SpitXVI is great at everything, except top-speed where it is merely good.
-
Zscore for dive acceleration = (time - average time) / standard deviation
150-400mph
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3348/3525666884_935faf01a9_o.png)
-
Zscore for energy retention, 400-150mph:
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3642/3524877471_de6e5b3f1a_o.png)
-
Zscore for energy retention, 400-150mph:
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3642/3524877471_de6e5b3f1a_o.png)
Would this be with the engine switched off Anax?
-
The XVI isn't worth 5 perks. 2 at most. I'd put it at 1 to start with.Why limit it when you can equalize. Give each fighter family non or cheap perk late war variant for some parity. They won't be exactly equal, but it'll be better than what we have now. That's the point of the game isn't it? Letting the players decide the gameplay, not the game's parameters ?
The P47M, 51H or late 150 octane 51D, Spit XII and 21lbs-XVI and 24lbs-XIV (prolly wrong but you get the idea) and XXI, a 190A-9 and the D9 at 2+ ata that did 400 on the deck, an uncorked Mossie, etc.
150 grade fuel would really spice things up in the LWM arenas, better then another LWM hanger queen imo. :aok
-
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3366/3525706948_b9e5cfe87d_o.png)
-
Yes BnZs. To isolate energy retention from thrust I timed a power off glide, prop feathered on all aircraft (twin engine aircraft feather automatically). I know you're not in love with this method, but aircraft that score poorly in Eg Retention but which still seem to hold energy well are well represented in categories like level acceleration and climb rate.
The point is the Hurricane and A6M are some of the worst diving aircraft in the game, but the Hurricane rolls ok at speed so that makes it seem to dive better than it really does. People complain about Hurri IIC's that catch them in a dive, and I just shake my head, because if a Hurri IIC catches you in a dive it simply means you really screwed up.
-
Yes BnZs. To isolate energy retention from thrust I timed a power off glide, prop feathered on all aircraft (twin engine aircraft feather automatically). I know you're not in love with this method, but aircraft that score poorly in Eg Retention but which still seem to hold energy well are well represented in categories like level acceleration and climb rate.
Well, then its rather meaningless then isn't it? Even if one combatant was seized by madness and switched his engine off, it is unlikely the same thing would happen to his antagonist at the same time.
I realize the problem is that different aircraft have different top-end speeds, perhaps measuring deceleration *only* in a range faster than any of them can sustain would be the way to get an apples to apples comparison I.E, from 500mph IAS to 400mph IAS at sea level.
-
No, it is not meaningless at all. Just because the method used to test something is not practical for combat does not make what is tested impractical.
None of our prop aircraft can sustain 400mph ias.
----------------
Edit: Another thing to pay attention to is turn radius vs turn rate. The Spitfire series in general has a great turn rate, but with a radius that is larger than others we consider less agile. In other words, the Spitfire does not have to slow down in order to achieve a turn rate that others can only equal by decelerating an extra 20-40mph. If it seems like Spits never slow down through hard maneuvering, your eyes do not deceive you. ;)
-
Roll rate at 300 or 350mph IAS would be more interesting, it is a bit more of a realistic engaging speed overall. 400mph is more the territory of a well-established power-dive, 300-350 is more along the lines of a realistic maximum combat cruise speed when you get bounced.
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3366/3525706948_b9e5cfe87d_o.png)
-
None of our prop aircraft can sustain 400mph ias.
Correct, which is why the test will be valid if power-on deceleration is tested from a 500mph IAS dive down to 400mph IAS.
-
Correct, which is why the test will work if power-on deceleration is tested from a 500mph IAS dive down to 400mph IAS.
Sorry, I missed that. That would be an interesting test. The trouble is that the Ki-84 and some other aircraft will break apart long before I get them to 500mph ias.
-
Not, it is not relevant at all. What it shows is that at some point in the past some individual got the same numbers in a IX as he got in an XVI, numbers which involve many unknown and unknowable factors. It says nothing about the relative performance of the machines. If you want to get real crazy, look at the way the P-38J k/d has been some tours...it has been at the top of non-perks, or very close. Going by your "logic", that would mean the P-38J is in fact superior to all non-perked planes. Including the almost identical but slightly better (boosted ailerons and dive flaps!) P-38L!!! Clearly this is not a logically sound argument, although it is an excellent use of any available excuse to strut about one's score. :rolleyes:
Wow, sorry for this super late response. I missed it as I was too busy flexing in the mirror.
I’m just showing you cold hard facts that a Spitfire fanboi, like myself doesn’t need the “best Spit in the hanger to compete in the MA”. Try to reply without an insult next time.
-
Not, it is not relevant at all. What it shows is that at some point in the past some individual got the same numbers in a IX as he got in an XVI, numbers which involve many unknown and unknowable factors. It says nothing about the relative performance of the machines. If you want to get real crazy, look at the way the P-38J k/d has been some tours...it has been at the top of non-perks, or very close. Going by your "logic", that would mean the P-38J is in fact superior to all non-perked planes. Including the almost identical but slightly better (boosted ailerons and dive flaps!) P-38L!!! Clearly this is not a logically sound argument, although it is an excellent use of any available excuse to strut about one's score. :rolleyes:
Wow, sorry for this super late response. I missed it as I was too busy flexing in the mirror.
I’m just showing you cold hard facts that a Spitfire fanboi, like myself doesn’t need the “best Spit in the hanger to compete in the MA”.
-
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3641/3524941243_ee0a7ffc3d_o.png)
-
.
-
Not, it is not relevant at all. What it shows is that at some point in the past some individual got the same numbers in a IX as he got in an XVI, numbers which involve many unknown and unknowable factors. It says nothing about the relative performance of the machines. If you want to get real crazy, look at the way the P-38J k/d has been some tours...it has been at the top of non-perks, or very close. Going by your "logic", that would mean the P-38J is in fact superior to all non-perked planes. Including the almost identical but slightly better (boosted ailerons and dive flaps!) P-38L!!! Clearly this is not a logically sound argument, although it is an excellent use of any available excuse to strut about one's score. :rolleyes:
Wow, sorry for this super late response. I missed it as I was too busy flexing in the mirror.
I’m just showing you cold hard facts that a Spitfire fanboi, like myself doesn’t need the “best Spit in the hanger to compete in the MA”.
-
.
-
.
-
I have to show fencer that you quadruple posted. He made fun of me for my triple post yesterday, and when I saw the forum seize up, I knew there'd be a bunch of extra posts. :rofl
-
Multipost! </Leeloo from 5th Element accent>
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eV_eGm1qgGs
"Leeloo Dallas multipass."
This thread needed a change of subject anyway.
-
An individual's k/d stats are almost useless when discussing a plane's performance. Even the stats for that plane model are almost useless, as I have demonstrated at length. Or do you really believe the P-38J is so inherently superior to other models, including the P-38L, as k/d stats would seem to suggest?
I’m just showing you cold hard facts that a Spitfire fanboi, like myself doesn’t need the “best Spit in the hanger to compete in the MA”. Try to reply without an insult next time.
Well, which is true? Because it seems like my detractors have been arguing out of both sides of their mouth...one the one hand I have been told that perking the SpitXVI would be a tremendous handicap for Spit aficionados, that the VIII is not enough...now you seem to be telling that even our version IX is pretty darn competitive in the LW MA. Which is it? You can't have it both ways.
-
:rofl That's alot of flexing!
-
lol wtf. :noid :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
Zscore for energy retention, 400-150mph:
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3642/3524877471_de6e5b3f1a_o.png)
I'm a bit surprised to see the 1A has superior E retention in the engine-off state over ALL the Hogs. I can sort of see the -4, 1D and C because all three have fixed pylons which add drag, but there's not much difference in the airframe between the -1, other than the canopy (which arguably, the raised bubble of the 1A would have MORE drag over the -1.
-
I'm a bit surprised to see the 1A has superior E retention in the engine-off state over ALL the Hogs. I can sort of see the -4, 1D and C because all three have fixed pylons which add drag, but there's not much difference in the airframe between the -1, other than the canopy (which arguably, the raised bubble of the 1A would have MORE drag over the -1.
Yes, it surprised me too. I actually tested the 1A twice because its Eg retention was significantly better than the rest of the Hogs, but I got the same results.
Still, they are all so close that for the purposes of a Zscore the difference between the 1A and 1 is negligible.
-
Well, which is true? Because it seems like my detractors have been arguing out of both sides of their mouth...one the one hand I have been told that perking the SpitXVI would be a tremendous handicap for Spit aficionados, that the VIII is not enough...now you seem to be telling that even our version IX is pretty darn competitive in the LW MA. Which is it? You can't have it both ways.
The IX can be a great counter to the XVI. :aok
Also the XVI can't be that good if my stats in it are exatly the same as the IX.
-
If bnz is going to go toe to toe with Guppy on spits he needs to spend a few years educating himself first. Dan has a long history of experience on real spits He has met and interviewed many of the actual spit pilots in his quest for knowlege on its history and use.
-
Speaking of expecting more from people,
I see that you were trying to outline a potential argument about subjectivity of relative performance characteristics, but it's a pretty weak argument.
Yes, that was the purpose and I didn't really think it through. I was specifically thinking about the F4F varients as I typed that and, after reading 6 pages of this I was trying to get my response in quickly before going to bed. I didn't mean to open a debate regarding the dive charachteristics of any plane although with a little thought I'm sure I could come up with a specific single performance measurement and use anecdotal evidence and opinion to support my case.
-
Well, which is true? Because it seems like my detractors have been arguing out of both sides of their mouth...one the one hand I have been told that perking the SpitXVI would be a tremendous handicap for Spit aficionados, that the VIII is not enough...now you seem to be telling that even our version IX is pretty darn competitive in the LW MA. Which is it? You can't have it both ways.
Awesome wrist BnZ! Man, I wish I could throw spin like that. :rock
asw
-
Awesome wrist BnZ! Man, I wish I could throw spin like that. :rock
asw
BnZs is a master debater.
-
BnZs is a master debater.
:rofl Ain't he though. I am awestruck by his complete resistance to anything that even smacks of disagreement with his position. Really amazing :aok
-
:rofl Ain't he though. I am awestruck by his complete resistance to anything that even smacks of disagreement with his position. Really amazing :aok
Too true. It is only equaled by his most vocal detractors. ;)
-
The IX can be a great counter to the XVI. :aok
Also the XVI can't be that good if my stats in it are exatly the same as the IX.
Okay...and the P-38J is clearly better than both. As evidenced by its overall average k/d relative other fighters. Agreed?
-
:rofl Ain't he though. I am awestruck by his complete resistance to anything that even smacks of disagreement with his position. Really amazing :aok
I am awestruck by the addiction to irrelevancies shown by people who can't actually answer one's arguments. Threads like these always manage to knock the "average joe" down a few more notches in my eyes.
-
Since this thread is not about the history of Spitfires, or the experiences of their actual pilots, or the wartime performance of actual Spitfires, or indeed anything other than the performance of our cartoon Spitfires relative other cartoon airplanes as *modeled in this game*, Guppy's considerable expertise on the history of the type has little or no bearing.
IOW, yet another irrelevancy introduced to confuse the issue and slight me. Nice try though!
If bnz is going to go toe to toe with Guppy on spits he needs to spend a few years educating himself first. Dan has a long history of experience on real spits He has met and interviewed many of the actual spit pilots in his quest for knowlege on its history and use.
-
Okay...and the P-38J is clearly better than both. As evidenced by the fact by its overall average k/d relative other fighters. Agreed?
Can you show data?
-
Can you show data?
I could, but why should I do the work when you can just look up the recent General Discussion thread where these numbers and their implications were discussed at length? :devil
-
Because your the person who's arguing to get the XVI perked. You should put all relevant information forward.
-
Okay, I just looked up the Late-War tour 111 stats. And I have pasted it, unwieldy though it looks. You can look at it yourself easily on the scores page if you want, where it will be more tidy.
As you can see, the P-38J's k/d stats were better than that of the P-51D, La7, ANY Spitfire, and much higher than that of the nearly identical P-38L. And the thing had over 5,000 kills, so its not like the sample size is tiny, either. The Ta-152's were even higher, at 1.66, and it had over 2,000 kills. So, unless I've missed a non-perk plane with an even higher K/D on this list, it looks like the P-38J and Ta-152 are the "best" non-perked planes. Or are they? :noid
Late War Tour 111 Statistics for all planes
Plane Name Kills Deaths Kill/Death Ratio
A-20G 4922 3468 1.42
A6M2 887 1992 0.45
A6M5b 11711 13558 0.86
Ar 234 415 664 0.62
B-17G 3948 10190 0.39
B-24J 6555 17131 0.38
B-25C 321 2851 0.11
B-25H 3819 7886 0.48
B-26B 2045 6629 0.31
B5N2 232 859 0.27
Bf 109E-4 208 536 0.39
Bf 109F-4 1935 1873 1.03
Bf 109G-14 3832 3726 1.03
Bf 109G-2 2699 2458 1.10
Bf 109G-6 2918 2686 1.09
Bf 109K-4 9054 7355 1.23
Bf 110C-4b 223 638 0.35
Bf 110G-2 9145 14617 0.63
Boston III 138 1116 0.12
C-47A 272 5869 0.05
C.202 328 617 0.53
C.205 3849 3556 1.08
D3A1 127 614 0.21
F4F-4 671 944 0.71
F4U-1 2621 2663 0.98
F4U-1A 11386 9183 1.24
F4U-1C 9548 3871 2.47
F4U-1D 14979 20836 0.72
F4U-4 3299 1349 2.45
F6F-5 10589 14675 0.72
FM2 3795 3976 0.95
Fw 190A-5 4986 3795 1.31
Fw 190A-8 11449 10296 1.11
Fw 190D-9 10242 7627 1.34
Fw 190F-8 1164 1786 0.65
Hurricane Mk I 465 1174 0.40
Hurricane Mk IIC 9338 6552 1.43
Hurricane Mk IID 597 1321 0.45
Il-2 14844 12669 1.17
Jeep 276 2850 0.10
Ju 87D-3 359 1056 0.34
Ju 88 776 6845 0.11
Ki-61 1769 1416 1.25
Ki-67 550 1877 0.29
Ki-84-Ia 8366 6890 1.21
La-5FN 1556 1808 0.86
La-7 14035 13198 1.06
Lancaster III 4465 18884 0.24
LVTA2 2185 6933 0.32
LVTA4 2738 7697 0.36
M-16 946 2025 0.47
M-3 2245 12706 0.18
M-8 3532 6140 0.58
Me 163B 562 90 6.24
Me 262 3745 586 6.39
Mosquito Mk VI 3923 4485 0.87
N1K2 18026 16537 1.09
Ostwind 5183 4852 1.07
P-38G 808 935 0.86
P-38J 5283 3383 1.56
P-38L 8396 11455 0.73
P-39D 343 644 0.53
P-39Q 846 1449 0.58
P-40B 230 860 0.27
P-40E 1205 1730 0.70
P-47-D11 1564 1350 1.16
P-47-D25 1331 1384 0.96
P-47-D40 5666 6587 0.86
P-47N 3060 4350 0.70
P-51B 3031 3353 0.90
P-51D 36636 33415 1.10
Panzer IV H 55646 70076 0.79
PT Boat 5086 15634 0.33
SBD-5 330 1264 0.26
SdKfz 251 133 645 0.21
SeaFire 14540 16937 0.86
Sherman VC 44199 18197 2.43
Spitfire Mk I 362 1512 0.24
Spitfire Mk IX 9886 9046 1.09
Spitfire Mk V 1893 2963 0.64
Spitfire Mk VIII 12990 12606 1.03
Spitfire Mk XIV 1400 919 1.52
Spitfire Mk XVI 31019 28182 1.10
T-34/76 6347 10848 0.59
T-34/85 15742 10586 1.49
Ta 152H 2823 1705 1.66
TBM-3 597 4029 0.15
Tempest 5688 889 6.40
Tiger I 11793 3238 3.64
Typhoon IB 18230 12256 1.49
Wirbelwind 43488 25013 1.74
Yak-9T 1758 1923 0.91
Yak-9U 6346 5871 1.08
Totals 613488 655715 0.94
-
Since this thread is not about the history of Spitfires, or the experiences of their actual pilots, or the wartime performance of actual Spitfires, or indeed anything other than the performance of our cartoon Spitfires relative other cartoon airplanes as *modeled in this game*, Guppy's considerable expertise on the history of the type has little or no bearing.
IOW, yet another irrelevancy introduced to confuse the issue and slight me. Nice try though!
Of course when I point out game data and effects that don't support your claim, you say they are irrelevant. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
-
Of course when I point out game data and effects that don't support your claim, you say they are irrelevant. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
One bit of game data you point out is the SpitXVI's K/D. Yes I say it is irrelevant, and I have demonstrated over and over why it is irrelevant...k/d of a given airplane involves too many factors that have nothing to do with performance.
Another bit of game data you point out is popularity. The popularity of a plane if anything has even less to do with in-game performance than k/d. The best example of this is the P-51D's continually great popularity, despite the availability of many planes that could fill its niche in the MA as well or better from a performance standpoint.
Edit: I should point out that my premise is that perkage should relate to relative *performance*, even if said plane constituted 1% of sorties and had a k/d of .17. Obviously this is unlikely to actually happen in the MA if the airplane well and truly does possess excellent relative performance, but as a matter of principle I would stand by my premise in this case.
-
I am awestruck by the addiction to irrelevancies shown by people who can't actually answer one's arguments. Threads like these always manage to knock the "average joe" down a few more notches in my eyes.
And it's threads like these that manage to show that your are even more pompous and condescending than previously exhibited.
I'll bet those "average joes" will have a hard time sleeping tonight because they don't measure up to your standards.
-
And it's threads like these that manage to show that your are even more pompous and condescending than previously exhibited.
I'll bet those "average joes" will have a hard time sleeping tonight because they don't measure up to your standards.
*shrug* I try to play things fairly straight. When I get snide and irrelevant remarks, I respond in kind. Pay every man in his own coin.
-
*shrug* I try to play things fairly straight. When I get snide and irrelevant remarks, I respond in kind. Pay every man in his own coin.
I could possibly believe that but it appears that those who don't agree with whatever topic you choose to debate, there seems to be an underlying/implied message in your responses that they really aren't as "smart" as you.
You continue to beat this Spit 16 horse into the ground across multiple threads and I don't think that God himself could enter this debate and prove you wrong and you admitting such ... why the other keep "feeding" you is beyond me.
I have a feeling that you can't walk by a mirror without stopping to check yourself out ... you really are quite enamored with yourself.
-
One bit of game data you point out is the SpitXVI's K/D. Yes I say it is irrelevant, and I have demonstrated over and over why it is irrelevant...k/d of a given airplane involves too many factors that have nothing to do with performance.
I have never referenced its K/D ratio, though they do have some bearing but not the most bearing.
Its usage numbers, no matter how much you huff and puff and declare it irrelevant, is the single most relevant data there is. You have never given a real explanation as to why it should be discared other than "it disproves my conclusion so it must not be valid."
Usage numbers, more than any other stat, includes all the factors that your blunt numbers cannot account for. The intangibles such as fame, fragility, cockpit "ergonomics" and so forth.
You also try to use numbers against eachother in isolation of other factors, and that doesn't really work as it misses how things work together or against eachother in complex ways.
-
This isn't directed at you BnZ.
What I find extremely bizarre about all of this -
The main bone of contention for perking is its roll rate because of its clipped wings. (compared to the VIII)
I distinctly remember Kurfurst (especially) plus numerous others stating categorically that clipping wings made LITTLE TO NO DIFFERENCE to a Spits roll rate.
Ironic huh?
-
I have never referenced its K/D ratio, though they do have some bearing but not the most bearing.
Its usage numbers, no matter how much you huff and puff and declare it irrelevant, is the single most relevant data there is. You have never given a real explanation as to why it should be discared other than "it disproves my conclusion so it must not be valid."
No, it does not. My premise is that plane perk status or lack thereof should be based on relative performance,not popularity or lack thereof. Usage is thus irrelevant to my premise.
Usage numbers, more than any other stat, includes all the factors that your blunt numbers cannot account for. The intangibles such as fame, fragility, cockpit "ergonomics" and so forth.
Karnak, karnak...I have already explained to you that "fame" does not matter to me. That a great many noobs think the P-51D is the "best plane of WWII" and fly it is of no import to me, for instance.
As for the rest,the P-51D's popularity is also great example of usage being at best only imperfectly relatable to actual performance. For a good example of the opposite phenomenon, we need only look at the Ta-152, a relatively unpopular LW MA ride. Yet a good case can be made that is at least the equal of the P-51D. As can be said for the less popular Fw-190D9, P-47N, and Typhoon.
-
Why would you perk something with unbalancing potential that never actually happens? e.g. a model that only 5% of the players can fly to its full (and unbalancing) potential? 5% imbalance isn't perk worthy.
-
Why would you perk something with unbalancing potential that never actually happens? e.g. a model that only 5% of the players can fly to its full (and unbalancing) potential? 5% imbalance isn't perk worthy.
May as well unperk the 262, then.
-
?
-
Why would you perk something with unbalancing potential that never actually happens? e.g. a model that only 5% of the players can fly to its full (and unbalancing) potential? 5% imbalance isn't perk worthy.
Hmmph? By definition the top 5% fly *anything* better than the 95% below them. Everything, including the currently perked rides, are rarely flown to their "full potential". That does not keep them from being perked.
Moot, you had a good argument when you said "the SpitXVI isn't good enough to deserve a perk". I assume you were talking relative performance when you said "good enough". If so, yours is the only good argument I have seen. At some point after you look at relative performance data, what is "good enough" to warrant a perk becomes a matter of opinion. I disagree with your opinion of course, but at least you didn't try to use smears and irrelevancies to support it. :aok
-
The point I'm making is that it's no use perking something for an unbalancing potential that's never realized. I think the XVI is marginaly enough so that it won't get perked. So yes, if I understand you, 'good enough' was relative.. It's taken in the context of the plane set and the players.
-
No, it does not. My premise is that plane perk status or lack thereof should be based on relative performance,not popularity or lack thereof. Usage is thus irrelevant to my premise.
Then your premise is useless and invalid in the context of this game.
HTC's stated purpose of the perk system is to allow units to be added that would be imbalancing if uncontrolled. The Spitfire Mk XVI is not (that is a fact, not a debatable point) imbalancing to AH, therefor under HTC's definition it does not warrant perking.
Your request isn't about the Spitfire Mk XVI, it is about redefining the perk system itself.
-
Then your premise is useless and invalid in the context of this game.
HTC's stated purpose of the perk system is to allow units to be added that would be imbalancing if uncontrolled. The Spitfire Mk XVI is not (that is a fact, not a debatable point) imbalancing to AH, therefor under HTC's definition it does not warrant perking.
Your request isn't about the Spitfire Mk XVI, it is about redefining the perk system itself.
Again, HTC has never defined the word "imbalancing". You are defining it for them.
Again, it is debatable whether all, or indeed any of the currently perked planes would be perked under the commonly thrown-about definitions of "imbalancing", if they were all released as free planes into the MA and their usage tracked. This is why I would be very interested to see what the usage stats for the DA/Furball lake, if any were available, since it is the only heavily used arena with all the prop planes free that we have.
Are you willing to say that perkage is not *directly* related to performance in any way, only to relative "bite" of the usage "pie"? That being the case, it would be difficult to say why the P-51D is *not* perked.
-
You continue to beat this Spit 16 horse into the ground across multiple threads and I don't think that God himself could enter this debate and prove you wrong and you admitting such ...
Likey because he believes that if he repeats it enough it will come true.
Now for my part,
There's no place like home
There's no place like home
There's no place like ho...
-
Then your premise is useless and invalid in the context of this game.
HTC's stated purpose of the perk system is to allow units to be added that would be imbalancing if uncontrolled. The Spitfire Mk XVI is not (that is a fact, not a debatable point) imbalancing to AH, therefor under HTC's definition it does not warrant perking.
Your request isn't about the Spitfire Mk XVI, it is about redefining the perk system itself.
BnZs is correct that HTC has not provided a definition for the crucial term "unbalancing." It has been left ambiguous, so it's better not to use the word until there's an accepted definition. Ask the question, what should be perked? The best aircraft and vehicles is an intuitive and obvious answer. BnZs is not arguing for a new definition of "unbalancing," rather he is arguing that the best aircraft and vehicles should have an objective definition, namely performance data. Once you grant him that, by the principle of consistency/fairness, you either have to unperk the F4U-1C and Spit XIV, or perk the XVI. I've gone for the former option personally because it would satisfy me and seems more acceptable to the rest of you.
-
If I'm the one who is wrong, why are you the one who has to resort to crap like this? :devil
Likey because he believes that if he repeats it enough it will come true.
Now for my part,
There's no place like home
There's no place like home
There's no place like ho...
-
. BnZs is not arguing for a new definition of "unbalancing," rather he is arguing that the best aircraft and vehicles should have an objective definition, namely performance data.
Anax, I am actually more concerned with SpitXVI performance data relative the whole plane set than its performance relative the F4U-1C. Namely, the fact that it is as fast or faster than so much while being much superior in thrust/weight AND turn performance to so much, while simultaneously possessing excellent lethality and roll-rate. Plainly the fact that the F4U-1C has quad cannon alone does not justify its perk status, not in an arena that has free Typhoons, HurriIICs, N1Ks, Fw-190 A-8s, Mossies...eh, I'm not going to list everything that rivals the C-Hog for lethality. You get the idea. The only justification for perking the C-Hog, and one I agree with, is to encourage the use of the more common .50 packing Hogs. I think multiple justifications for perkage ARE acceptable, and are evidently in use.
If we imagine an arena set with three planes in it, say the P-51D, SpitXVI, and a HurriIIC (thought I'd throw in an "irrelevant" EW/MW plane), which one would I consider perk-worthy? Answer: NONE. All of these planes have at least on clear advantage over the others in relative performance. If we were to introduce the La7 to this set, I would say perk it, because at typical MA altitudes it would enjoy almost complete superiority to, and strongly effect the viability of, a very large chunk of this set, namely the 25% of this set that is composed by the P-51D.
-
The Spit XVI is not imbalancing as is clear due to the fact that it is not A) the most used aircraft and B) not remotely close to the most used aircraft ever.
Until it meets at least the first of those criteria, it cannot even be argued that it is imbalancing.
-
The Spit XVI is not imbalancing as is clear due to the fact that it is not A) the most used aircraft and B) not remotely close to the most used aircraft ever.
Until it meets at least the first of those criteria, it cannot even be argued that it is imbalancing.
Unperk the Spit XIV and it would not meet either of these criteria, yet it is perked nonetheless.
-
Spits are for kids :uhoh :noid
-
The Spit XVI is not imbalancing as is clear due to the fact that it is not A) the most used aircraft and B) not remotely close to the most used aircraft ever.
Uh...wasn't it the *second* most used aircraft? That is "not even remotely close" to being the most used aircraft? :huh
Until it meets at least the first of those criteria, it cannot even be argued that it is imbalancing.
Hmmm...so if the C-Hog should be unperked and its usage does not exceed that of the P-51D, it should remain unperked?
Myself, I say the "usage" standard has never been really tested for most perked planes anyway. If it were to be tested and failed, say even the Tempest failed to capture 20% of all sorties, would you be content with leaving it unperked?
-
Found some stats I was looking for, for the whole of 2008. Thanks to Lusche for compiling them.
The P-51D was more used than the SpitXVI. But only 10% or so more.
(http://img55.imageshack.us/img55/8071/planeusagedf8.jpg)
The SpitXVI actually enjoyed a slightly higher k/d than the P-51D, which is *highly* surprising even to me. An aircraft that is 20mph slower possessing a higher k/d ratio might mean something. Of course, looking at the types of aircraft that enjoyed higher k/ds than either aircraft again casts great doubt upon the usefulness of k/d numbers.
(http://img61.imageshack.us/img61/2650/fighterkdet4.jpg)
This one is interesting....It would seem that if the SpitXVI was not competed with by some other fairly effective and popular members of the Spitfire family, it might indeed become the most popular type, by a wide margin
(http://img61.imageshack.us/img61/2904/fighterframefamiliesec5.jpg)
-
Again, HTC has never defined the word "imbalancing". You are defining it for them.
No, actually he's not, he's taking the logical step. We know two things for sure about the perking system: first, HTC has already perked an airplane because of its unbalancing affect on game play - the F4U1-C; second, we know that HTC does have a definition of what does and what does not consitute an unbalancing affect on game play, even though the details of that definition have not been made public. From what we know of the perking system and the spixteen's current perk status, the inference that it does not meet the requirements of HTC's definition is a fairly safe one to make. As I understand it, when the F4U1-C was introduced it became the dominant choice of ride in the arena by a large enough factor for it to affect the game. Hence the perk.
The Spit MkXVI isn't perked so the only information we can take from that is that HTC does not (yet) consider the MkXVI sufficiently unbalancing to perk it, performance-wise, useage-wise or otherwise.
The fact of the matter is that it is you who is trying to force a redefinition of what does and does not constitute grounds for perking an airplane in the game. And, doing so with the tricks of bush-league demagoguery. Twist or spin that any way you want and you'll still be pissing into wind. One would hope you have the sense to close your mouth before you drown in it.
asw
-
we know that HTC does have a definition of what does and what does not constitute an unbalancing affect on game play
How do we know this? This is crucial to your argument.
That they're shooting from the hip and making perk decisions ad-hoc is consistent with the game we have today.
-
The standard for perkage cannot be TOO deeply carved in stone, because the Ta-152 apparently once was considered perkable, but now is an unperked ride.
And, doing so with the tricks of bush-league demagoguery. Twist or spin that any way you want and you'll still be pissing into wind. One would hope you have the sense to close your mouth before you drown in it.
Heh, once again someone resorts to vitriol...why do you find it necessary, if you are as clearly "right" as you think you are? Shut my mouth? If I am clearly wrong, then silencing me is surely unnecessary, correct?
-
Uh...wasn't it the *second* most used aircraft? That is "not even remotely close" to being the most used aircraft? :huh
How about you try to learn how to read? Hmm? Does that sound like a useful plan?
-
The SpitXVI actually enjoyed a slightly higher k/d than the P-51D, which is *highly* surprising even to me.
I think one contributing factor to this could be that the 51 is used much more in attack role than the spixteen. Ord carrying sorties....
-
N/M, misread the chart.
-
How about you try to learn how to read? Hmm? Does that sound like a useful plan?
Huh
The Spit XVI is not imbalancing as is clear due to the fact that it is not A) the most used aircraft and B) not remotely close to the most used aircraft ever.
By "most used aircraft ever" are you referring to the C-Hog? Because your sentence could also be interpreted to mean you were claiming the SpitXVI has never been close to being the #1 aircraft in usage.
I don't blame you for being unclear. I will blame you for opening yet another vial of vitriol because of you were unclear...WTF?
-
I obviously meant the F4U-1C. If I hadn't, the word "ever" wouldn't have been there, nor the "not remotely close" line.
The idea that the Spitfire Mk XVI and F4U-1C are on par with eachother in terms of effect on the game is obviously wrong. You keep equating the two, yet the fact that the P-51D is used more than the Spitfire Mk XVI and yet the F4U-1C was used far, far more than either the much more famous P-51D or Spitfire Mk IX should give you some idea that you are either not factoring something into your calculations or you are not weighting the criteria correctly.
-
I get it now... BNZ is trying to catch up to Karnak's post count. :D
-
The idea that the Spitfire Mk XVI and F4U-1C are on par with eachother in terms of effect on the game is obviously wrong. You keep equating the two, yet the fact that the P-51D is used more than the Spitfire Mk XVI and yet the F4U-1C was used far, far more than either the much more famous P-51D or Spitfire Mk IX should give you some idea that you are either not factoring something into your calculations or you are not weighting the criteria correctly.
You are not factoring in that it has been a long time since the F4U-1C was introduced. Looking at the performance objectively, the F4U-1C is not clearly superior to the SpitXVI. In fact, it is not clearly superior to the much faster Typhoon, or the better-turning, better accelerating N1K. The logic of protecting an MA already awash in free quad cannon birds from what amounts to a very well-armed F4U-1D simply does not work. The only logic that really does work for perking the C-Hog is to prevent it from comprising a majority of F4Us in the main arena.
If it were unperked now, after the initial spike settled down it *might* claim the #1 spot in total usage, although the popularity of the P-51D remains a big hill to climb. It almost certainly would not comprise 20% of sorties or even 15%. That is an unrealistic standard in a plane set that contains nearly 60 fighter models. It is a standard that has never been tested on the other perk planes and has not been tested on the C-Hog in years. It is a standard you might hesitate to use if it ever was tested and the planes you consider perk-worthy failed to make the benchmark.
-
I get it now... BNZ is trying to catch up to Karnak's post count. :D
Someone making a post this devoid of information is accusing ME of padding my post count? :rofl
-
Hey again guys, this is how the unperked XVI will look in the next patch. Fingers cross HTC see fit to give it 25lbs boost. :lol
(http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n268/Luke_831/NEWTEXTUREPHOTO2.png)
-
And the story behind that silver Spit 16 skin is such a good one too :)
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/silver-spit.jpg)
-
And the story behind that silver Spit 16 skin is such a good one too :)
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/silver-spit.jpg)
Do tell. :aok
-
Do tell. :aok
Well it's a long story but it goes something like the following. A Dutch Squadron, 322, had it first, and after about two days of Ops, one of the pilots had to force land at an American Airfield. A former Spitfire XII squadron commander who'd moved up the line, was a liason with said Americans and spotted the Spit on the field. No one knew what to do with it. He decided to make it his own, without official approval. He flew it for some time, and to help disguise 'his' Spitfire he had it stripped of the camo paint. This worked while he was on the Continent but he was sent back to England, and when he arrived with a Spit that really wasn't his, he had to find a way to 'lose' it. He had a girlfriend who was a WAAF still on the continent and she was stationed where the Poles where operating and she suggested giving it to them. He then flew it over and handed off the Spit where it was used by one of the higher ranking Polish pilots as his 'personal' Spitfire. It turns out the initials were not his like a Wing Commander would use on their Spit, but those of his wife. When the war ended he continued to use it, but then he too had to get rid of it, and he 'sold' it to an American Colonel for 300 cigarettes. The American pilot promptly broke it, and no one knows quite what became of it after that.
A buddy of mine in Airwarrior had a photo of the Silver Spit, that his Dad, who was from Poland had when he spent time with the Polish Wing. Some detective work with the help of a Polish author and Spitfire expert helped nail down the story. Kev367th was looking for a silver Spit 16 to do, and this fit the profile :)
Based on the photos and the detective work, I did up this profile and Kev made a great skin. And it's really a Spitfire LFIXe, but since the LFIXe and LFXVIe are identical except for the maker of their Merlin engine, it was ok'd to skin it on the 16 in AH.
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/SilverPolishSpit.jpg)
-
lol cheeky bugger, I would have done the same. :aok
-
Unbalancing - Based on what happened with the CHog I think we have a good idea what HT may consider as unbalancing.
Still say the main reason it hasn't (F4U-C) been unperked is the more than likely major impact it would have in aircraft types flying off CV's. Why take anything else?
Seafire - CHog has quad cannons.
F4UD/A - CHog carries ord.
Talking from the inexperienced newbies point of view, all other types become pretty much redundant.
You would see very little of anything but Chogs coming off CV's, we all know it.
-
You would see very little of anything but Chogs coming off CV's, we all know it.
Reminds me of how you see little of anything but Spit XVIs defending against a CV attack. :P
Perhaps enabling the F4U-1C unperked at airfields but not off of CV's would be reasonable?
-
Reminds me of how you see little of anything but Spit XVIs defending against a CV attack. :P
I see a lot of other planes too...
mmmm... any way to get exact numbers?
(http://smileys.on-my-web.com/repository/Thinking/bad-idea-014.gif)
Not really. But....
I think we can say that the F4U-D is a plane that is comparatively rarely used from land bases. Unfortunately impossible to get exact information about that... But in my subjective opinion, it's at least 10-1. The majority of F4U's I spot outside CV battles are -4, , -C and -1a.
It's also the most killed CV capable plane in the arena by a huge margin.
With that premise I just looked up which fighters had been responsible for the F4U-D's deaths in tour 111:
(http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/9194/clipboard01ukv.jpg)
(Note: Percentage given is based on total kills of the F4U-D by fighters. BTW, had I included GV's, the PT boat would have a nice #13 spot in that chart)
Yes I know, probably not a very strong analysis ;)
-
You even excluded the ground-to-air kills from the %'s! Nice work. :aok
From what I can see, all of the more or less dedicated CV planes suffer most of their air-to-air deaths by the XVI, e.g. F6F, Seafire, etc.
Edit: Just looked, the XVI is also the biggest killer of the F4U-1A and F4U-1C.
-
Edit: Just looked, the XVI is also the biggest killer of the F4U-1A.
Yup, also the A6M's
But of course that not surprising. Actually I would have thought the 16's share being much higher, maybe near 20%.
It's defenitely one of the best planes for that task, getting in the air quickly and being able to fight from the moments the wheels leave the ground. Also The fight is mostly low&slow, so most enemy planes lack the ernergy/speed to negate the Spit's acceleration.
BTW, this reminds me why players perception about nthe frequency of the Spit XVI can differ so much: If you are fighting mainly offensive battles and attack enemy airbases all the time, you will see much more 16's (and La-7s) than someone like me who is primarily defending.
-
You even excluded the ground-to-air kills from the %'s! Nice work. :aok
From what I can see, all of the more or less dedicated CV planes suffer most of their air-to-air deaths by the XVI, e.g. F6F, Seafire, etc.
Edit: Just looked, the XVI is also the biggest killer of the F4U-1A and F4U-1C.
So it shines as an interceptor when one of those CV raids starts on a coastal airfield? Doing it's job I'd imagine. As one who takes off in a 38G into those mobs, it's not always the easiest thing to do. The 16 would get up and into the fight in a hurry under the circumstances.
-
BTW, this reminds me why players perception about nthe frequency of the Spit XVI can differ so much: If you are fighting mainly offensive battles and attack enemy airbases all the time, you will see much more 16's (and La-7s) than someone like me who is primarily defending.
Oh, nice backhand there. I'll give you a 9 for subtlety.
You're missing out on some fun fights if you don't participate in CV action. ;)
So it shines as an interceptor when one of those CV raids starts on a coastal airfield? Doing it's job I'd imagine. As one who takes off in a 38G into those mobs, it's not always the easiest thing to do. The 16 would get up and into the fight in a hurry under the circumstances.
No doubt... but remember, I'm not the one asking for the XVI to be perked, not anymore at least. All I care about is consistency, and so I'm in favor of unperking the XIV and F4U-1C instead of perking the XVI. :aok
-
F4UD/A - CHog carries ord.
Talking from the inexperienced newbies point of view, all other types become pretty much redundant.
The F4UD carries 8 rockets and 2 bombs. The C-Hog can only take 4 rockets and 2 bombs.
The idea of perking the C-Hog to encourage players to take something off a carrier is not much different from the idea of perking it to encourage players to take up another, more common variant of Hog.
-
Oh, nice backhand there. I'll give you a 9 for subtlety.
I must have been very subtle... I didn't even notice any backhand :confused:
You're missing out on some fun fights if you don't participate in CV action. ;)
Oh I do. But if it's a friendly CV, you will find me mostly at 15k flying anti-buff patrols :)
-
The F4UD carries 8 rockets and 2 bombs. The C-Hog can only take 4 rockets and 2 bombs.
The idea of perking the C-Hog to encourage players to take something off a carrier is not much different from the idea of perking it to encourage players to take up another, more common variant of Hog.
But so long as we have the 3 cannon La-7, we're arguing for a double standard if we say the C-Hog should be perked just so that people fly its more common cousins.
-
So it shines as an interceptor when one of those CV raids starts on a coastal airfield? Doing it's job I'd imagine. As one who takes off in a 38G into those mobs, it's not always the easiest thing to do. The 16 would get up and into the fight in a hurry under the circumstances.
Logically speaking, saying that a given plane works well even against poor odds is the same as saying it is really effective and has good performance. Logically speaking, the same argument-"Its the kind of plane you'd want when ya need to whoop a crowd" :D-could be used for unperking anything. Especially the F4U-4.
-
(http://blogs.theage.com.au/schembri/tuvok1.jpg)
Logically speaking, you are boring me. :D
-
Well you are much more apt to get my support to unperk the -4 then you ever will be to perk the 16 :)
-
I AM beginning to think we should unperk everything for a few tours to see if any of the benchmarks for perkage people mention are actually workable. I wish there was data on the DA/Furblake. My perception is that Tempests and C-Hogs are common there, but not at the 20% of sorties level. That, IMO, casts doubt upon the usefulness of these benchmarks.
BTW, correct me if I'm wrong, aren't you pretty much against perking planes in general?
Well you are much more apt to get my support to unperk the -4 then you ever will be to perk the 16 :)
-
We, don't you mean HTC?
-
I AM beginning to think we should unperk everything for a few tours to see if any of the benchmarks for perkage people mention are actually workable. I wish there was data on the DA/Furblake. My perception is that Tempests and C-Hogs are common there, but not at the 20% of sorties level. That, IMO, casts doubt upon the usefulness of these benchmarks.
BTW, correct me if I'm wrong, aren't you pretty much against perking planes in general?
To get an idea of what would happen if everything were unperked just spend a night in the DA dodging the waves of Tempests and 4-Hogs....
-
Pyro on perking the C-Hog, January 6th, 2001:
Perks are a way to balance the arena, not so much a means of classifying planes. How many were produced or what its combat record was is not relevant. Some planes intended to be perks may not need to be while others that weren't intended to be may end up getting perked. Right now, the F4U-1C is accounting for about 20% of all kills in the arena. I don't want to push the score values any further so perking it is about the only option left. I don't really like the idea of making a carrier plane unavailable from the carrier.
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,12401.0.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,12401.0.html)
I'm kind of suprised this quote had not found it's way here yet.
-
Lusche's usage pie chart is interesting. The most capable unperked fighters from the USAAF, RAF, IJN and VVS have roughly similar usage and take the 4 top slots, very nicely balanced I would say :aok
The one thing that stands out for me is how far down the list the most popular Luftwaffe fighter appears - 190A8 in 16th place (its safe to assume that the #12 110-G is mostly being used as airbourne artillery rather than as a fighter). Were the 109s and 190s really so hopelessly outclassed in the late war, or is it just reluctance for AH players to fly Lw aircraft? Despite their (artificially?) high ENY values.
btw unperk everything and you will pretty much only see Tempests imo
-
Lusche's usage pie chart is interesting. The most capable unperked fighters from the USAAF, RAF, IJN and VVS have roughly similar usage and take the 4 top slots, very nicely balanced I would say :aok
The one thing that stands out for me is how far down the list the most popular Luftwaffe fighter appears - 190A8 in 16th place (its safe to assume that the #12 110-G is mostly being used as airbourne artillery rather than as a fighter). Were the 109s and 190s really so hopelessly outclassed in the late war, or is it just reluctance for AH players to fly Lw aircraft? Despite their (artificially?) high ENY values.
btw unperk everything and you will pretty much only see Tempests imo
I think what it comes down to is most players aren't willing to take the time to get good in a bird that isn't the latest and greatest in their eyes. It takes time to master some of the other birds. I don't think you can force players to do so however.
Think about what some of the K-4 drivers can do with that thing. And there are more of them lately. Seems like I ran into Dano in a G-14 and he was doing just fine in it.
Sadly it comes down to immediate success as opposed to more of a challenge for many players. What you hope is that over time they leave the training wheels and push their limits. But again, trying to force players to do so ends up being counter productive I believe.
-
The one thing that stands out for me is how far down the list the most popular Luftwaffe fighter appears - 190A8 in 16th place (its safe to assume that the #12 110-G is mostly being used as airbourne artillery rather than as a fighter). Were the 109s and 190s really so hopelessly outclassed in the late war, or is it just reluctance for AH players to fly Lw aircraft? Despite their (artificially?) high ENY values.
One additional reason Luftwaffe fighters appear somewhat lower on that list is the fact that the "usage" within the 109 and 190 family is spread a bit more evenly. If 56% of all 190's kills & death's had been made in A8's (instead of 35%), it would have been placed higher in that chart.
(http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/8406/208withinfam.jpg)
-
The A8 having that share of the kills.. As many as the D9, and more than the A5 (twice as many!)... Now that is strange.
-
4x20mm with almost unlimited ammo = easy 1-pass kills on buffs. nuff said :)
-
So it shines as an interceptor when one of those CV raids starts on a coastal airfield? Doing it's job I'd imagine. As one who takes off in a 38G into those mobs, it's not always the easiest thing to do. The 16 would get up and into the fight in a hurry under the circumstances.
Geez man...do you ever get off the runway? :lol
I like 38s, but taking one up for mob defense is some kind of masochism...
-
I like 38s, but taking one up for mob defense is some kind of masochism...
Not at all, a good way to rack up a lot of kills in a short time. It's amazing how easy it is to get others to overshoot a P-38 on the deck.
ack-ack
-
The A8 having that share of the kills.. As many as the D9, and more than the A5 (twice as many!)... Now that is strange.
An ENY 31 perk-generating HOing machine... need more reasons? ;)
-
Yeah.. those don't change the fact that it's a whale.
-
Yeah.. those don't change the fact that it's a whale.
The majority of AH players aren't really able to maneuver anyway. So taking a whale with heavy firepower is a logical choice. The A8 has better chances in the AH standard "joust" merge. And you get 2 perks where a D9 gives you only 1...
ooops.. I think we're getting away from this threads original topic ;)
-
To get an idea of what would happen if everything were unperked just spend a night in the DA dodging the waves of Tempests and 4-Hogs....
I have. There are alot of the planes you mention, but it doesn't seem like even the Tempest is 20%. HurrIICs and Zekes seem about as common.
-
Not at all, a good way to rack up a lot of kills in a short time. It's amazing how easy it is to get others to overshoot a P-38 on the deck.
ack-ack
There is great truth in that statement :)
-
I have. There are alot of the planes you mention, but it doesn't seem like even the Tempest is 20%. HurrIICs and Zekes seem about as common.
XVI is the most common DA pond aircraft.
-
you cant compare DA 1v1, DA furball lake, and MA usage because the criteria for success, and the aircraft characteristics required for success are so completely different in each.
-
You are not factoring in that it has been a long time since the F4U-1C was introduced. Looking at the performance objectively, the F4U-1C is not clearly superior to the SpitXVI. In fact, it is not clearly superior to the much faster Typhoon, or the better-turning, better accelerating N1K. The logic of protecting an MA already awash in free quad cannon birds from what amounts to a very well-armed F4U-1D simply does not work. The only logic that really does work for perking the C-Hog is to prevent it from comprising a majority of F4Us in the main arena.
The Spitfire Mk IX, P-51D and N1K2-J were all in the v1.00 version of AH. The Typhoon was added in v1.03 as I recall. The F4U-1C utterly destroyed all four of them in terms of use. So yes, it is clear that the F4U-1C was seen as very superior to both the more famous P-51D and Spitfire Mk IX and less famous Typhoon Mk Ib and N1K2-J. You excuse the P-51D's higher usage numbers compared to the Spitfire Mk XVI by refering to the P-51Ds undoubted fame in HTC's primary market, yet you dismiss the fact that the F4U-1C didn't just edge the P-51D in use, it absolutely dominated it.
As to the performance, you greatly undervalue firepower at the very least. Durability and being CV capable possibly as well.
If it were unperked now, after the initial spike settled down it *might* claim the #1 spot in total usage, although the popularity of the P-51D remains a big hill to climb. It almost certainly would not comprise 20% of sorties or even 15%. That is an unrealistic standard in a plane set that contains nearly 60 fighter models. It is a standard that has never been tested on the other perk planes and has not been tested on the C-Hog in years. It is a standard you might hesitate to use if it ever was tested and the planes you consider perk-worthy failed to make the benchmark.
We've been there before and the P-51D doesn't hold a candle to it in usage. You keep acting like these fighters were not previously competing for use. The P-51D, Typhoon Mk Ib and N1K2-J are not new factors when it comes to the F4U-1C.
New factors that I would consider are:
- Maps that are less CV friendly.
- The addition of the La-7
- The addition of the Spitfire Mk XVI
I suspect that only the first one of those would have a really significant effect on the F4U-1C's desirability as the other two primarily fill different roles. In some ways the Spitfire Mk VIII might intrude on the F4U-1C's territory as much as the Mk XVI due to greater fuel range enabling it to be a more offensive fighter.
-
Lusche's usage pie chart is interesting. The most capable unperked fighters from the USAAF, RAF, IJN and VVS have roughly similar usage and take the 4 top slots, very nicely balanced I would say :aok
The one thing that stands out for me is how far down the list the most popular Luftwaffe fighter appears - 190A8 in 16th place (its safe to assume that the #12 110-G is mostly being used as airbourne artillery rather than as a fighter). Were the 109s and 190s really so hopelessly outclassed in the late war, or is it just reluctance for AH players to fly Lw aircraft? Despite their (artificially?) high ENY values.
btw unperk everything and you will pretty much only see Tempests imo
Don't know if they were hopelessly outclassed in the real war, but in AH's cartoon war a combination of crappy guns, (generally) crappy performance, and crappy views of out the cockpit means they aren't going to get much use out of non-masochists.
-
The 109K4 is the only good German LW plane, but it really does rock! :rock
-
109 F-4 and G-2 are superb Spit 16 killers :)
-
Not if there is someone with a half a clue in the Spixteen.
-
Not if there is someone with a half a clue in the Spixteen.
Fortunately that's extremely rare. :)
-
The one thing that stands out for me is how far down the list the most popular Luftwaffe fighter appears - 190A8 in 16th place (its safe to assume that the #12 110-G is mostly being used as airbourne artillery rather than as a fighter). Were the 109s and 190s really so hopelessly outcla
My reluctance to fly them for a while was my inability to aim in them. I was used to a good view between my gun sight and the nose allowing me to lead better in the 50 cal american planes. Once I learned how to create crossing shots instead of relying on the aiming methods in the 50 caliber rides, aiming became easy and very deadly.
-
Saying "the game has changed" since AHI does not refer to the plane set alone. There have been changes in the demographics of the player base and culture, changes in gameplay style, and possibly changes in gunnery modeling/flight modeling that will effect things. (Try getting a 1K kill now, even with a C-Hog. Not very easy)
I think gameplay, hordes and all, now favors a fighter that scores exceptionally well for out-and-out speed, OR is an exceptional turner. I disagree with your assessment, I *do* think the SpitXVI has had a tremendous effect on gameplay, its domination of most other planes in the "middle" of the speed continuum greatly blunts their effectiveness. The two most common aircraft in the arena are the P-51D and the SpitXVI. It makes sense to compare to these two first and foremostly when considering the feasibility of flying a given aircraft in the LW MA. But there is a significant difference between the two; Nearly everything slower than the P-51D can claim out-and-out superiority, or at least rough parity in maneuverability, and often enough superiority in thrust/weight, to say nothing a host of other factors where the P-51D also tends to be mediocre. The same cannot be said for the SpitXVI!
The C-Hog is at the upper end of this speed continuum, and not near enough the top of the maneuverability continuum to truly out-class the SpitXVI as a turn fighter either.
Also, did the C-Hog go unperked enough tours for its usage to "settle down?" I go to the DA frequently and C-Hogs simply do not seem to be 1 out of 5 fighters you run into.
As to the performance, you greatly undervalue firepower at the very least. Durability and being CV capable possibly as well.
On the contrary...I realize the value of firepower. I also realize that many planes in the MA pack a punch comparable to that of the C-Hog, while possessing enough inherent advantages over the C-Hog that one cannot truly say the C-Hog is clearly superior. The most telling comparison is the Typhoon...both are 4 cannon birds. The C-Hog's k/d stats are obviously much, much higher. Yet the Typhoon is clearly superior in low-level speed...a trait that for obvious reason greatly increases an aircraft's potential to maintain high k/d rates in the MA. The only reasonable conclusion for the C-Hogs much higher k/d rate is who it is being flown by and how it is being flown...and these are factors which might *come* from it being a perk plane as much as they are reasons for it to be a perk plane!
In the end, the F4U-1C simply does not seem to enjoy the sort of performance advantage over the vast bulk of the plane set that the Me-262, Tempest, or even SpitXIV (to a much lesser degree) possess. It is in fact, not quite as good as it's stablemate the F4U-1A except for the Hispanos. Which leaves us with popularity...I find the notion of perking something that does not clearly give the player one, or better yet, many clear advantages over most of the planeset arbitrary and unfair, even if 75% of the people flew it. There is to my mind a difference between balancing the plane set through making the largest number of choices viable in the MA by perking those few planes who plainly outclass most of the rest vs. "forcing" variety when the players show a strong preference amongst equally viable choices.
There is a mitigating factor in the C-Hogs case though, it was a historically rare variant, and an aesthetic preference for keeping more common variants flying in the MA, and a similar preference for seeing something *besides* C-Hogs off of a CV, is more acceptable.
-
Also, did the C-Hog go unperked enough tours for its usage to "settle down?" I go to the DA frequently and C-Hogs simply do not seem to be 1 out of 5 fighters you run into.
Yes. It was added well before the perk system (v1.01 or v1.02 as I recall) and it wasn't perked until some time after the perk system was added in v1.08.
The F4U-1C's firepower is noticably better than the Typhoon Mk Ib's. You can't simply look at the guns and say, "They both have four Hispano Mk IIs, so they are the same." The F4U-1C's are tighter grouped and it has 90 more rounds per guns than the Typhoon Mk Ib, allowing more liberal use of low probabilty shots. It also has an easier time bringing them to bear due to the very much higher roll rate and superior turn rate and radius. The Typhoon is not a post F4U-1C perking aircraft. They were used side by side for free for many, many months and the F4U-1C's usage was very much higher. The P-51D, Spitfire Mk IX and N1K2-J were also always higher than the Typhoon in usage terms.
-
Yes. It was added well before the perk system (v1.01 or v1.02 as I recall) and it wasn't perked until some time after the perk system was added in v1.08.
The F4U-1C's firepower is noticably better than the Typhoon Mk Ib's. You can't simply look at the guns and say, "They both have four Hispano Mk IIs, so they are the same." The F4U-1C's are tighter grouped and it has 90 more rounds per guns than the Typhoon Mk Ib, allowing more liberal use of low probabilty shots. It also has an easier time bringing them to bear due to the very much higher roll rate and superior turn rate and radius. The Typhoon is not a post F4U-1C perking aircraft. They were used side by side for free for many, many months and the F4U-1C's usage was very much higher. The P-51D, Spitfire Mk IX and N1K2-J were also always higher than the Typhoon in usage terms.
Roll rate and turn rate? I was given to understand "top speed uber alles" when you were telling me why the SpitXVI is really not so very good and that the SpitVIII's roll rate disadvantage is really not so significant... ;)
It is even harder to make a case for the P-51D's outright superiority over the Typhoons. Conclusion: The player base likes planes with white stars painted on the wing. But this has nothing to do with making the airplanes harder to deal with, so it is not a concern of mine.
-
Don't you know that roll rate, turn rate, and speed matter to different degrees depending on what kind of results you're trying to achieve?
-
Roll rate and turn rate? I was given to understand "top speed uber alles" when you were telling me why the SpitXVI is really not so very good and that the SpitVIII's roll rate disadvantage is really not so significant... ;)
It is even harder to make a case for the P-51D's outright superiority over the Typhoons. Conclusion: The player base likes planes with white stars painted on the wing. But this has nothing to do with making the airplanes harder to deal with, so it is not a concern of mine.
I have never said the Spit XVI isn't very good. It obviously is, it just isn't perk worthy.
-
Don't you know that roll rate, turn rate, and speed matter to different degrees depending on what kind of results you're trying to achieve?
Roll rate, turning potential, and lethality are vitally important for increasing the "kill" side of the equation.
Speed is vitally important for decreasing the "death" side of the equation in a multi-bandit environment.
In the real world, it is not acceptable for me to die even once, so yes, top speed uber alles.
In the game...IMO speed must be weighed equally with other factors. One of the reason I don't go in for the 262 is that being bored out of your mind while occasionally killing something that isn't paying attention to six o'clock isn't worth hundreds of perks. I find the Tempest to be the same situation to a lesser degree, and don't like it much either. Although obviously the Tempest is much more capable for typical MA "dogfighting" than the 262.
Discounting my own aesthetic/personal preferences and going strictly by asking myself the question I consider most pertinent "how does it stack up for actually *fighting* anything and everything in the set under typical MA conditions?", I would consider the three most desirable planes in the set to be the F4U-4, SpitXVI, and La7, in that order.
-
Your sarcasm detector failed.
-
This dead horse has been beaten so much, the bones are now in powder form.
-
No need to perk a plane that isn't unbalancing the arena. Obviously it's a borderline plane performance wise but the decision has already been made by HTC to leave it unperked. An unbalancing issue is the only thing that would allow them to reconsider their decision. Since there is no unbalancing issues in the MA though, it remains unperked until something changes. I don't understand why that's so difficult to accept.
Take the Ta152 for example for the other side of the coin. They decided it needed to be perked. For it to become unperked from that point on, it would take a lot of stats to show that it had no business being perked in the first place. The stats showed it wasn't getting much use or garnering the results when it was used therefore its perk price wasn't warranted and was lifted.
In order to get the Spit16 perked BnZ, you'll have to prove it is unbalancing the arena and I think enough evidence has already been put forth in this thread to show it is not. You have already side stepped the question of 'balance' because you yourself know it does not unbalance the MA. Going down this road that its performance justifies a perk isn't going to fly because HTC has already decided that its performance does not justify it.
-
Just one relevant bit on the 152, it was more capable when it was introduced.
-
No need to perk a plane that isn't unbalancing the arena. Obviously it's a borderline plane performance wise but the decision has already been made by HTC to leave it unperked. An unbalancing issue is the only thing that would allow them to reconsider their decision. Since there is no unbalancing issues in the MA though, it remains unperked until something changes. I don't understand why that's so difficult to accept.
If the benchmark for unbalancing well and truly is 20% of sorties, then obviously it does not. I remain doubtful that any plane can ever take up 20% of sorties again...we'll see when we get the Meteor. :devil
But the fact remains that the F4U-1C and SpitXIV are not clearly superior to the SpitXVI, nor do they have any truly unique advantages over the rest of the set. (The 262s firepower and speed beyond the reach of all prop fighters, the Tempest's clear superiority in both speed AND acceleration to everything prop driven, the F4U's combination of near-the-top speed with near-the-top maneuverability.)
Take the Ta152 for example for the other side of the coin. They decided it needed to be perked. For it to become unperked from that point on, it would take a lot of stats to show that it had no business being perked in the first place.
Huh...a glance at the Ta-152 performance stats would've told anyone that it is not clearly superior to the P-51D, 109 K, D9, or other rides at reasonable MA alts, so I don't really understand why it was perked in the first place.
The stats showed it wasn't getting much use or garnering the results when it was used therefore its perk price wasn't warranted and was lifted.
And yet, now it seems to have the highest k/d of all non-perked planes...are we going to perk it again because of that? Or, are we going to instead look at its lack of popularity and raise its ENY to 35? Or are we going to do something *reasonable* and look at its performance? :rofl
-
Huh...a glance at the Ta-152 performance stats would've told anyone that it is not clearly superior to the P-51D, 109 K, D9, or other rides at reasonable MA alts, so I don't really understand why it was perked in the first place.
Performace stats do not tell the whole story. Theres more to a FM than a few numbers like turn radius, speed & climb rate.
That's why despite all it's superb performance on paper the Spit XIV struggles to live up it's reputation. It's hard to quantify handling.
-
If the benchmark for unbalancing well and truly is 20% of sorties, then obviously it does not.
Forget about the 20% thing.
By what benchmark of 'balance' would you say the Spit16 is unbalanced? Look at the stats and tell me how the Spit16 is unbalancing the arena.
But the fact remains that the F4U-1C and SpitXIV are not clearly superior to the SpitXVI, nor do they have any truly unique advantages over the rest of the set. (The 262s firepower and speed beyond the reach of all prop fighters, the Tempest's clear superiority in both speed AND acceleration to everything prop driven, the F4U's combination of near-the-top speed with near-the-top maneuverability.)
I wouldn't call that fact, far from it in fact. The F4UC has qualities such as speed, guns, ammo quantity, turn radius with full flaps, and endurance that would make it superior to the Spit16. You do realize the F4UC out turns the Spit16 with full flaps engaged, turn fight on the deck? As for the Spit14, don't know enough about it to comment.
Huh...a glance at the Ta-152 performance stats would've told anyone that it is not clearly superior to the P-51D, 109 K, D9, or other rides at reasonable MA alts, so I don't really understand why it was perked in the first place.
HTC looked at the whole picture, including its performance stats in the strato, and made a decision to perk it. Arena stats have shown it didn't need to be perked so they unperked it. Show us arena stats that show the Spit16 needs to be perked!
And yet, now it seems to have the highest k/d of all non-perked planes...are we going to perk it again because of that? Or, are we going to instead look at its lack of popularity and raise its ENY to 35? Or are we going to do something *reasonable* and look at its performance? :rofl
You are are trying to separate two different important factors in determining perk status. K/D & Popularity. You have to look at the two together, not separately. If only m00t and I flew the 152 and no one else was allowed for the entire tour, it would have some inflated stats. But its popularity would be astronomically low. You have to take the two together. If a plane has an incredibly solid K/D to go along with high popularity, then you can make a case for perkage. The spit16 has high popularity, but not the K/D ratios that I would call unbalancing by any stretch of the imagination.
-
I fell off a cliff once while rock climbing. It hurt.
But Hitech you should jump off this cliff again, becaue today the sun is shining.
I think Ill pass I am fairly sure that the sun will not effect the pain of feet slapping ground after 30 foot fall.
I have seen some reaching for straws before, but BNZ is far above what I have ever seen before, every time someone showes him what he claimed is falls, he just reachas for more claims and ignors the real facts just to try justify what he wishes, and not what is true.
HiTech
-
Game, Set, Match.
-
The mob wins. :rofl
-
Okay, that is uncalled for.
I have said the SpitXVI is faster than 70% of the plane set and 41% the LW plane set. That is true.
I have said that it out-turns, out-climbs, out-accelerates, and out-rolls a great deal of what it also runs down. This is true.
I have said that this perhaps greatly effects the viability of a very wide range of models in the MA. This should be self evident.
None of these are falsehoods. They constitute reason enough IMO to say that it perhaps warrants a light perk.
But if perking the Spixteen would cost too many noob's subscriptions, understood. :salute You don't slaughter the milk cow in tough times. ;)
I fell off a cliff once while rock climbing. It hurt.
But Hitech you should jump off this cliff again, becaue today the sun is shining.
I think Ill pass I am fairly sure that the sun will not effect the pain of feet slapping ground after 30 foot fall.
I have seen some reaching for straws before, but BNZ is far above what I have ever seen before, every time someone showes him what he claimed is falls, he just reachas for more claims and ignors the real facts just to try justify what he wishes, and not what is true.
HiTech
-
Forget about the 20% thing.
By what benchmark of 'balance' would you say the Spit16 is unbalanced? Look at the stats and tell me how the Spit16 is unbalancing the arena.
Do you actually want me to put together the list of planes in the set over which the SpitXVI enjoys greater speed,turning potential, and thrust/weight at typical MA altitudes? Or is that a rhetorical question?
I wouldn't call that fact, far from it in fact. The F4UC has qualities such as speed, guns, ammo quantity, turn radius with full flaps, and endurance that would make it superior to the Spit16. You do realize the F4UC out turns the Spit16 with full flaps engaged, turn fight on the deck? As for the Spit14, don't know enough about it to comment.
Yet the SpitXVI climbs and accelerates far better, is mostly faster below 10K, rolls better at most speeds, and has a better sustained rate of turn. And the full flaps radius of the F4U-1C is only a few feet smaller than that of the SpitXVI IIRC.
If a plane has an incredibly solid K/D to go along with high popularity, then you can make a case for perkage. The spit16 has high popularity, but not the K/D ratios that I would call unbalancing by any stretch of the imagination.
Well...you told me to forget about 20% usage. I am glad to see you adding k/d numbers to the bargain, which makes the P-40B that much less likely to be perked if 20% of the playerbase decides to fly it one month. :D
So what popularity numbers in combination with what k/d numbers constitute a perk justification?
-
kills per death? since when?
Chog was perked for over-use, total kills. Not kills/death.
No kills/death is accurate, because death can be skewed by milk runners, perk farmers, 2 week newbies using crutches, timid cowardly pilots, attacking ground targets, NOT attacking ground targets, meanwhile the kills could all remain very high, while deaths fluctuate wildly.
Kills/death is mostly useless. Total % of kills (IMO) gives more indication of use or over-use. Consider that Spit16 just about equals P-51D, and spit16 added to spit8 (almost the same ride) MORE than surpasses the P-51D.
-
I think Hitech's message was clear. Let it go. it's not going to happen.
-
Okay, that is uncalled for.
I have said the SpitXVI is faster than 70% of the plane set and 41% the LW plane set. That is true.
I have said that it out-turns, out-climbs, out-accelerates, and out-rolls a great deal of what it also runs down. This is true.
I have said that this perhaps greatly effects the viability of a very wide range of models in the MA. This should be self evident.
None of these are falsehoods. They constitute reason enough IMO to say that it perhaps warrants a light perk.
But if perking the Spixteen would cost too many noob's subscriptions, understood. :salute You don't slaughter the milk cow in tough times. ;)
And I and others have explained and explained and explained why your simplistic numbers don't tell the truth only to be told each and everytime by you that we don't have eny evidence or are flat out wrong. Of course we don't have any "evidence" when you are the gate keeper of what evidence is acceptable and you disallow any evidence that doesn't support your predetermined position.
-
Karnak, I don't think you HAVE proven him wrong. The spit16 is superior in at least 2 ways to most of the planes it will ever come up against.
You're all trying to convince him it's not worthy of perks, and you all keep repeating yourselves, but from my reading of this thread you forget to make a credible argument WHILE repeating yourselves.
As for Hitech, I'm not sure what he means. I'm re-reading his words, and wondering if he is cautioning against unperking planes (misunderstanding the problem?), or if he is saying he's not going to get into perking anything (needed or not).
Maybe I'm just dense right now, I don't know what he was getting at.
-
I have said the SpitXVI is faster than 70% of the plane set and 41% the LW plane set. That is true.
And the vast majority of vets in AH don't fly it routinely. If they did, the numbers would change dramatically and I'm sure HTC would get involved. Until it does, this thread and all the other threads about the Spit16 is simply beating a dead horse ad nauseaum.
I think Hitech's message was clear. Let it go. it's not going to happen.
Yep, if it was going to happen it would of happened a long time ago. I look at the Spit16 as an opponent that makes me work a little harder and AH isn't about getting kills or taking bases; it is about improving ones self within the game.
-
disallow any evidence that doesn't support your predetermined position.
My "predetermined position"? :lol I used to tell people they were *crazy* for wanting to perk the SpitXVI, after all, the poor slow little dear won't catch much of anything that can't turn with it if the pilots use their heads and keep their speed, will it? Turns out I was *wrong* with that assumption.
-
Just give it up already. Sheesh.
-
Someone pinch me...I actually agree with Baldeagl.....scary :uhoh
-
No kills/death is accurate, because death can be skewed by milk runners, perk farmers, 2 week newbies using crutches, timid cowardly pilots, attacking ground targets, NOT attacking ground targets, meanwhile the kills could all remain very high, while deaths fluctuate wildly.
Wrong again Krusty. Total Kills tells almost the exact same information as the stat of Plane Popularity does. K/D shows to what degree that plane in particular is dominating. As popularity increases, game play variation that you described above goes to the norm of the MA. The reasons you listed above are why you can't only look at K/D when popularity might be low. (Less than say, 5% of total kills) So I guess I'd agree with you k/d is a worthless stat if there isn't a high sample size...just like any other stat. :rolleyes:
So what popularity numbers in combination with what k/d numbers constitute a perk justification?
Good question. It would vary to some degree but there probably are some minimum values that need to be achieved first. Both would have to be quite high compared to the other unperked aircraft and the greater standard deviations one is further from the norm, the less the other would have to be.
If I had to throw some random stats out there for you, I'd say plane popularity would have to be in >15% range of total sorties. K/D would have to be maybe in the range >1.4? And depending on exactly where each number falls in, the other wouldn't have to be quite as high to justify perk.
If the Ta152 could quadruple its following and still maintain a dominating K/D, I think you could almost justify perking it again. I don't think that's possible though because it shouldn't be a perk worthy plane performance wise, and I have a hard time believing it could quadruple its following and have all those new 152 pilots dominate with it like the few that do currently. If however it could somehow acquire a massive following that learn how to use it to its strengths and crush the MA, it would be affecting the balance of the MA. Perk would be necessary.
On the same token, if the Spit16 could raise its average K/D of say.. 1.1 to 1.6, then you can talk perk. This is where the whole balance thing comes into play.
-
Turns out I was *wrong*
yup :aok
-
So you agree with him when he says he was wrong to say the spit16 can be outrun by most planes in the game?
You agree it can NOT be escaped from when you're in most other planes in the game?
-
Karnak, I don't think you HAVE proven him wrong. The spit16 is superior in at least 2 ways to most of the planes it will ever come up against.
That can be said of many other aircraft as well.
The Spit XVI is very, very good. It is not worth perks though.
Maybe I'm just dense right now, I don't know what he was getting at.
You're being dense. HiTech said that people have explained it to BnZ and that he refuses to understand that.
For what it is worth, I do understand his point of view and I agree that the Spitfire Mk XVI is on the short list of fighters on the cusp of being good enough to be perked, but it isn't over that cusp as is readily aparent by the fact that it does not dominate the MA.
-
Appeal to authority + appeal to ridicule = non-logical persuasion.
-
Appeal to authority + appeal to ridicule = non-logical persuasion.
Do you really think thats "logical persuation" would ever work ?
-
I don't know, but it's the least I expect, even if it's attempted poorly.
-
So you agree with him when he says he was wrong to say the spit16 can be outrun by most planes in the game?
You agree it can NOT be escaped from when you're in most other planes in the game?
No. Unless it's a really good stick, losing a 16, even in a 38G just isn't that tough. If you mean outrunning it? Why would you want to? Use the Spit 16 pilot's speed against him :)
-
Whoever said there has to be one plane thats arguably the best non perked has a point. I would say from the point of view of the less skilled we have Spit 16, LA 7 and Nikki all pretty close.
Then:
KI84
sPIT 8,9 Seafire
Yak
etc
Perk the 16 and you will see more LA7's is for sure.
Is that what people really want :uhoh :lol :D
-
Admin pwnt ftw! :aok
-
Use the Tempest's or F4U-4's speed against them. They have more speed so it should be easier, right? :devil
No. Unless it's a really good stick, losing a 16, even in a 38G just isn't that tough. If you mean outrunning it? Why would you want to? Use the Spit 16 pilot's speed against him :)
-
Appeal to authority + appeal to ridicule = non-logical persuasion.
You do not seem to know what an "appeal to authority" is. Go read up on it, then come back.
-
Actually, the less-skilled apparently consider the P-51D of all things the best plane, if we are going by numbers. Perhaps we should dismiss the POV of the less-skilled if we want to consider the planes rationally.
Whoever said there has to be one plane thats arguably the best non perked has a point. I would say from the point of view of the less skilled we have Spit 16, LA 7 and Nikki all pretty close.
Then:
KI84
sPIT 8,9 Seafire
Yak
etc
Perk the 16 and you will see more LA7's is for sure.
Is that what people really want :uhoh :lol :D
It is doubtful that most SpitXVI pilots will prefer the Lala. The difficulties with the guns and handling are that much greater.
IIRC, The N1K's top speed OTD is 325mph to the SpitXVI's 344. They are reasonably equivalent in maneuverability. When you start making comparisons to the rest of the plane set, there is a huge difference between a highly maneuverable plane that can go 344 mph on the deck and one that is 19mph slower. Namely, that many planes stand a chance of NOT being caught and eaten by the N1K.
-
The roll-rate of the XVI makes its maneuverability edge over the N1K unquestionable. Even the lowly Spit VIII out rolls the N1K at 300mph ias, and at low speeds it crushes it in the roll axis.
I would rather unperk the XIV and C-Hog than perk the XVI, but if it were perked, there's no way in heck that the masses would go to the Yak, and the Ki-84 breaks apart in shallow dives, so it's also a no-go.
The Spit VIII would see a huge bump in use, the La-7 a moderate bump.
-
So, have we all agreed on giving the XVI 25lbs of boost yet? :t
-
Use the Tempest's or F4U-4's speed against them. They have more speed so it should be easier, right? :devil
If the guy has no clue, absolutely. The guys who tend to fly -4s and Temps are often vets however who know how to use them. they are not 'noob' planes.
-
So, have we all agreed on giving the XVI 25lbs of boost yet? :t
That would need to be perked.
-
So, have we all agreed on giving the XVI 25lbs of boost yet? :t
Isn't that a 150 octane fuel thing? If it flew in the war in squadron strength, then I'm for it, as soon as we get a 109G-6/AS. ;)
-
Isn't that a 150 octane fuel thing? If it flew in the war in squadron strength.
Yes mate.
-
Actually, the less-skilled apparently consider the P-51D of all things the best plane, if we are going by numbers. Perhaps we should dismiss the POV of the less-skilled if we want to consider the planes rationally.
It is doubtful that most SpitXVI pilots will prefer the Lala. The difficulties with the guns and handling are that much greater.
IIRC, The N1K's top speed OTD is 325mph to the SpitXVI's 344. They are reasonably equivalent in maneuverability. When you start making comparisons to the rest of the plane set, there is a huge difference between a highly maneuverable plane that can go 344 mph on the deck and one that is 19mph slower. Namely, that many planes stand a chance of NOT being caught and eaten by the N1K.
Hey how about this logic, it is the exact same argument.If we only consider the A65m and the C47, it is obvious the ZERO would dominate.
So it should absolutly be perked in the current plane set as I have just proved that it is compleltly dominent.
It is truly amazing the staws and conclsions to prove something that is OBVIOUS not true. Simple fact the spit 16 is not even the most flown plane. Does not have the most kills.
HiTech
-
Hey how about this logic, it is the exact same argument.If we only consider the A65m and the C47, it is obvious the ZERO would dominate.
Not against a "skilled" pilot who really knew how to fly the C-47. It is after all, the pilot not the plane. ;)
-
(http://glennhager.files.wordpress.com/2007/07/straw-man.jpg)
-
Simple fact the spit 16 is not even the most flown plane. Does not have the most kills.
You look at last tour's stats and it just barely has a few kills less than P-51D. However, if you add Spit16 and Spit8 kills (essentially the same plane, folks shouldn't separate them when considering their fate) the total is 30% more than the P-51D.
-
You look at last tour's stats and it just barely has a few kills less than P-51D. However, if you add Spit16 and Spit8 kills (essentially the same plane, folks shouldn't separate them when considering their fate) the total is 30% more than the P-51D.
You are really reaching now. May as well include the Spit IX, V, I and Seafire while you are at it.
-
Nice deflection... but you know the answer is "no"
Spit16 and spit8 only a couple of MPH off of each other across the entire envelope, both trade off very minor climb rate advantages, both have almost identical turn radii.
Comparing a 320mph spit9 to a 350mph spit16? NOW who's throwing out bad arguments?
EDIT: Corrected spit9 deck speed, was thinking spitV, at 309MPH
-
Okay...can't really see the point of your Zeke-Goon comparison. I did not state as a problem that the SpitXVI enjoys a top-speed+turning+HP/weight advantage over a cargo plane of all things, or that it holds ever advantage over a single fighter. I stated as a problem that it is faster than many, many fighter planes which it also out-classes in turn, HP/weight, and usually roll. IOW, to quote a player who has been around the block a time or two..
BnZ, you are absolutely right in saying the Spixteen renders the vast majority of the planeset irrelevant.
These fighters are immediately below the SpitXVI when a weighted sort is done for low-alt speed, deck speed being probably what counts the most for survivability under MA conditions.
15.SpitXVI
16.P-47D-11
17.Fw-190 A8
18.Fw-190 F8
19.P-47D-40
20.Ki-84-Ia
21.P-38L
22.Fw-190 A-5
23.P-47D-25
All of these planes, with one exception, the Ki-84 (which has its own debilitating weaknesses, such as loosing parts at high speeds), not only suffer from a speed disadvantage, but also a very large turning and HP/weight disadvantage against the Spitfire at typical MA alts. To top it all off, everything but the Fw series has a roll disadvantage at most speeds and the Fw's edge is slim at best.
It cannot be said that these are "irrelevant EW planes", since all but two of them are *only* available in LW! Only the Fw-190 A-5 is even available in the EW, and as a perk plane. (Which is kind of bizarre in a game with unperked SpitXVIs and unperked La7s in the LW...the 190 may out-run everything in the LW but it out-turns *nothing*...but I digress.)
I am skeptical that having one LW fighter (well, actually two, what with the La7) so completely superior to so many planes, even LW ones, constitutes any sort of desirable "balance" in the LW MA.
It is truly amazing the staws and conclsions to prove something that is OBVIOUS not true. Simple fact the spit 16 is not even the most flown plane. Does not have the most kills.
HiTech
Another thing the SpitXVI does not have is a publicity machine in the form of the History Channel and etc. telling everybody that it was the "best plane of WWII". The fact that the XVI comes in a very close second to the single most famous American plane of WWII is itself telling. The largest single percentage of the LW MA prefers a plane which is somewhat mediocre for LW MA conditions, the P-51...I am well aware of this, but what of it? I am not concerned with whether or not a fickle public likes a particular plane, rather what it can do relative the rest of the set. It is also clear looking at the 2008 stats that SpitXVI usage would probably outstrip P-51D usage if it were not for competition from other members of the Spit family, or if the P-51 family was divided into more separate models itself.
-
BnZs,
You may be a gungho American who dislikes hearing about the rest of the world but, and I hate the break it to you, the Spitfire is the most famous aircraft of WWII and many people here, Americans too, are at least mild history buffs. In addition, I have seen plenty of fawning over the Spitfire on channels like the History Channel.
There were tours in AH1 where the Spitfire F.Mk IX topped the P-51D in total kills. Spitfires are not weird, foreign aircraft.
-
BnZs,
You may be a gungho American who dislikes hearing about the rest of the world but, and I hate the break it to you, the Spitfire is the most famous aircraft of WWII and many people here, Americans too, are at least mild history buffs. In addition, I have seen plenty of fawning over the Spitfire on channels like the History Channel.
You make so many false assumptions about my motivations Karnak...next I half-expect you to dig out the old "well you just HATE Spitfires" saw...
The average person who comes into this game will have heard the American planes hyped to the heavens. There is no "Spitfire" episode of Dogfights, they don't re-show "Spitfire" or even "Battle of Britain" on TCM very often that I've seen, instead "Flying Tigers" "Flying Leathernecks" even "Fighter Squadron" and etc. ad infinitum...for goodness sakes man, I'm not bragging about this fact, I come closer to lamenting it. The fact so many MA planes are as good/possibly better in the P-51D's niche as a boom-and-zoom fighter yet do not garner anywhere near the usage highlights the uselessness of using popularity as a criteria in AHII.
Edit: Would you be arguing so strongly against me if the SpitXVI was a "weird foreign aircraft"? I began to suspect not. I don't begrudge you loving an aircraft series, but that shouldn't blind you to reason regarding relative performance. By comparison, I also GV quite abit. The U.S. has *one* tank in the game. It is a perked tank. Do you see me saying it should not be perked? No, because the Firefly's perk price in this game is entirely justified. It should quite possibly be perked higher...but again I digress.
-
There were tours in AH1 where the Spitfire F.Mk IX topped the P-51D in total kills.
Now it is too slow for LW MA play though? ;)
-
Not much chance you are gonna let this go is there, even knowing it's not going anywhere?
-
Not much chance you are gonna let this go is there, even knowing it's not going anywhere?
Well, I'm not wrong about it...so no. And we seem to have mostly gotten past the calling each other names point, that is something. Maybe Karnak will also realize that I don't harbor some deep, dark, inexplicable hatred of Spitfires too... :D
-
<edit - I'll take it to email>
-
I suppose if everyone could fly all of our virtual planes to their full potential then you may have a valid argument. As it stands, we don't.
Ren(http://i587.photobucket.com/albums/ss316/ren1795/avatar_19002.gif)
-
I suppose if everyone could fly all of our virtual planes to their full potential then you may have a valid argument. As it stands, we don't.
Ren(http://i587.photobucket.com/albums/ss316/ren1795/avatar_19002.gif)
Ren, in an environment where Tempests are unperked, most of them are horribly flown and amount to easy kills. Your point doesn't stand, *no airplane* is going to be flown to its full potential most of the time, simply because most players are far from perfect as pilots.
The Tempest in average hands is good for little besides a pick-n-run racer with somewhat difficult handling and mediocre maneuverability...it doesn't cover flaws in piloting to near the extent the SpitXVI does.
-
Nice deflection... but you know the answer is "no"
Spit16 and spit8 only a couple of MPH off of each other across the entire envelope, both trade off very minor climb rate advantages, both have almost identical turn radii.
Comparing a 320mph spit9 to a 350mph spit16? NOW who's throwing out bad arguments?
EDIT: Corrected spit9 deck speed, was thinking spitV, at 309MPH
I like how you conveniently omit listing the VIII's two biggest disadvantages to the XVI to make your point; roll rate, particularly at higher speeds, and gun package. I guess I shouldn't be surprised as there's a lot of that going on in this thread.
Those two performance measures alone place them in different envelopes forgetting about the extra fuel load/weight that the VIII can carry.
-
Correct. Krusty, the 5mph difference in OTD speed between the SpitXVI and the SpitVIII is enough to make the difference between being slowly caught and slowly extending the distance for many planes. And the roll rate difference is huge for both offensive and defensive considerations.
EDIT: Krusty *is* right to consider the SpitVIII AND the SpitIX as competitive airplanes that take away from the SpitXVI's usage...more so than the P-51B takes away from the P-51D. Seafires should not be included because that comes of CV usage.
I like how you conveniently omit listing the VIII's two biggest disadvantages to the XVI to make your point; roll rate, particularly at higher speeds, and gun package. I guess I shouldn't be surprised as there's a lot of that going on in this thread.
Those two performance measures alone place them in different envelopes forgetting about the extra fuel load/weight that the VIII can carry.
-
. . . but that shouldn't blind you to reason regarding relative performance.
IMO it is you who is acting blind in this thread.
So many words, and you still miss the point . . .
The Spixteen is killed by all other planes almost as often as it kills all other planes. Meaning, whatever advantages it has A) can be overcome B) are not so large as to make pilot skill irrelevant and/or C) has offsetting disadvantages that you are not accounting for.
If it was so clearly and absolutely superior to all the other non-perked aircraft in the game, we would see them to a larger degree than we do.
-
Yep. Tempests are easy kills in the DA pond. So are F4U-4s. Since most pilots can't fly them to their full potential, they shouldn't be perked. QED.
-
Yep. Tempests are easy kills in the DA pond. So are F4U-4s. Since most pilots can't fly them to their full potential, they shouldn't be perked. QED.
And guess what? They are not perked. In the DA pond. :)
-
I've also killed plenty of Tempests with lesser planes in the main arena. F4U-4s, Chogs and Spit XIVs too.
Lusche, think about it... The DA was the used example because that's where those aircraft are free.
The point is, and this has been well established in many threads, pilot ability is distinct from perk worthiness.
-
The DA pond is a completely different combat environment than the MA. Different player base, different tactics, different strategies. No war to be won. No goon hunt. No intercepting NOE's or cutting through the escorts to get the Buffs that are about to flatten your base or sink your CV. No score on the main page. Or, as you like to say: Apples & Oranges. ,)
You can't transfer what's happenign there 1:1 to the MA, just like you can't take LWMA gameplay experience as a yardstick to measure / perk /setup the AvA arena.
And when BnZ is saying:
The Tempest in average hands is good for little besides a pick-n-run racer with somewhat difficult handling and mediocre maneuverability...it doesn't cover flaws in piloting to near the extent the SpitXVI does.
he wrong. The Tempest does cover flaws on piloting MUCH more than a Spit XVI could ever do. Insane acceleration and top speed means he can simply get away where the 16 pilot is forced to fight his way out. And on top of that, maybe the best armament the game has to offer...
Actually "ood for little besides a pick-n-run racer with somewhat difficult handling and mediocre maneuverability" I would have accepted for the Typhoon maybe , but never for the Tempest.
-
Running away counts as covering up flaws? We really do speak a different language.
-
Running away counts as covering up flaws? We really do speak a different language.
Yes we are. I'm talking about the MA, how people do actually fly and actually use planes there.
-
The DA pond is a completely different combat environment than the MA. Different player base, different tactics, different strategies. No war to be won. No goon hunt. No intercepting NOE's or cutting through the escorts to get the Buffs that are about to flatten your base or sink your CV. No score on the main page. Or, as you like to say: Apples & Oranges. ,)
You can't transfer what's happenign there 1:1 to the MA, just like you can't take LWMA gameplay experience as a yardstick to measure / perk /setup the AvA arena.
And when BnZ is saying:
he wrong. The Tempest does cover flaws on piloting MUCH more than a Spit XVI could ever do. Insane acceleration and top speed means he can simply get away where the 16 pilot is forced to fight his way out. And on top of that, maybe the best armament the game has to offer...
Actually "ood for little besides a pick-n-run racer with somewhat difficult handling and mediocre maneuverability" I would have accepted for the Typhoon maybe , but never for the Tempest.
'
??? The Tempest has torque issues similar to the K-4, only in the direction opposite of "normal". It's roll rate is not that good, particularly against torque, and it is middle-of-the-road in turn radius. It is dominating when used well as an E-fighter, which puts the average pilot out of the race right there. Awesome performance, awesome firepower, difficult handling.
Someone running away from you in a Tempest is clearly superior to someone shooting you in a SpitXVI. :devil
-
Yes we are. I'm talking about the MA, how people do actually fly and actually use planes there.
Okay, how about this: In the MA, average players in Tempests or any other b'n'z planes making 450mph passes aren't actually very dangerous to anyone who keeps their heads on a swivel. :devil
-
Eagle, bnzs, the spit16 and spit8 are the exact same flight model... The engine is the same, the performance charts almost identical. As mentioned the ONLY difference being one has clipped wings (however the wing tanks on the 8 offset the extra lift from the wingtips, so the end result is a wash). The 303s vs 50cals is NOT a major factor in the plane. If the spit16 had 4x303s it would still have as much use as it does today. The main killer remains and will always be 240 rounds of 20mm Hispano rounds.
The only real difference being rate of roll between the two models. That said, the 8 is no slouch. It's not like it's a BAD roller. It's still more manuverable than 85% of the planeset.
And no, 5 mph is not enough of a difference to warrant a perk discussion. The overall performance package is.
-
Now it is too slow for LW MA play though? ;)
A lot of really fast aircraft have been added since then. Back then "fast" meant Bf109G-10 (Bf109K-4 in disguise), P-51D or the unresponsive Typhoon Mk Ib. Long range gunnery was also much more effective due to the way AH1 calculated hits vs how AH2 does it, which allowed the Spit IX a much better chance at popping boom and zoomers as the egressed.
-
BnZs,
Krusty is well known for his loathing of British aircraft. Nothing he says is honest about them and he always has an ulterior motive in regards to them.
-
Doesn't Krusty fly for the 71st RAF? :rolleyes:
-
Eagle, bnzs, the spit16 and spit8 are the exact same flight model... The engine is the same, the performance charts almost identical. As mentioned the ONLY difference being one has clipped wings (however the wing tanks on the 8 offset the extra lift from the wingtips, so the end result is a wash). The 303s vs 50cals is NOT a major factor in the plane. If the spit16 had 4x303s it would still have as much use as it does today. The main killer remains and will always be 240 rounds of 20mm Hispano rounds.
The only real difference being rate of roll between the two models. That said, the 8 is no slouch. It's not like it's a BAD roller. It's still more manuverable than 85% of the planeset.
And no, 5 mph is not enough of a difference to warrant a perk discussion. The overall performance package is.
So the roll rate is what this is about. The 190 drivers aren't happy one of their advantages isn't as pronouced vs a Spit 16. All the rest of the talk is just smoke. Same performance as the 8 except roll rate and the mph difference from clipped wings.
Well there goes my Spit XII right out the window :)
-
Well there goes my Spit XII right out the window :)
NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!
-
The DA pond is a completely different combat environment than the MA. Different player base, different tactics, different strategies. No war to be won. No goon hunt. No intercepting NOE's or cutting through the escorts to get the Buffs that are about to flatten your base or sink your CV. No score on the main page. Or, as you like to say: Apples & Oranges. ,)
You can't transfer what's happenign there 1:1 to the MA, just like you can't take LWMA gameplay experience as a yardstick to measure / perk /setup the AvA arena.
And when BnZ is saying:
he wrong. The Tempest does cover flaws on piloting MUCH more than a Spit XVI could ever do. Insane acceleration and top speed means he can simply get away where the 16 pilot is forced to fight his way out. And on top of that, maybe the best armament the game has to offer...
Actually "ood for little besides a pick-n-run racer with somewhat difficult handling and mediocre maneuverability" I would have accepted for the Typhoon maybe , but never for the Tempest.
:aok Spit's or kill or be killed, no running away in a spitfire you stay and fight like it or not. And every spitfire pile_it knows that when there taking off and heading to a fight.
-
the spit16 still makes most of the planeset obsolete as it got no weak point.
Now when you get a plane rolling there's always that question coming back : "what will I do if a 16 gets on my six ?" The answer is simple, if under 250mph you are so DEAD. I can't blame the pony pilots that wait to be outside icon range to get some altitude back.
-
BnZs,
Krusty is well known for his loathing of British aircraft. Nothing he says is honest about them and he always has an ulterior motive in regards to them.
My what (another) bald-faced lie from Karnak..
Don't you ever get tired of spewing your falsehoods, Karnak?
-
Krusty, Karnak doesn't have a reputation for repeatedly going half-cocked with falsehoods. But you do.
-
So the roll rate is what this is about. The 190 drivers aren't happy one of their advantages isn't as pronouced vs a Spit 16. All the rest of the talk is just smoke. Same performance as the 8 except roll rate and the mph difference from clipped wings.
Well there goes my Spit XII right out the window :)
:rolleyes:
Gup, I thought better of you than this....bilge you just poured on the screen. It has nothing to do 190s. The point of bringing up roll-rate is that it is a disadvantage the VIII has relative the XVI. Indeed, the VIII has a severe disadvantage in high speed roll rate against quite abit. That gives it a real, substantive weakness to go with its many strengths. Which is not too much to ask IMO.
-
:aok Spit's or kill or be killed, no running away in a spitfire you stay and fight like it or not. And every spitfire pile_it knows that when there taking off and heading to a fight.
Nope, I fly aircraft that have similar top speed range as the Spit, and you can avoid being cornered with discipline and patience. If your usual plane is a P-51D, Typh, Kurt, Dora, N-Jug, then you might feel a lack of speed in the SpitXVI, otherwise, probably not. Furthermore, the SpitXVI has top of the line climb and energy retention through maneuvers. Used as a proper energy fighter, it can "dance on the heads" of many lower bandits.
-
It's absolutely amazing just how many Spits (all models) get shot down in the MA. Probably as many as other planes.
They are my favorite plane to attack. Wait, the 38's are. No...i think I like La7's, hmmmm...NIk's are my favorite. No, wait, that's not right...FW's and ME's are my favorite shoot downs. Or was it F4's and Yaks? (scratches head)....
What plane to I fly to get kills? Spits, F4's, FW and ME's, 38's, Yak's. Hmmm I guess they're all the same when it comes to the number of kills.
Does that tell you anything? Does it really matter if someone is flying a Spit XVI, Lafffie or Niki? BTW, anyone who thinks you can't land spit kills is drinking something I want.
Why do these discussion threads lead one to believe someone just got frustrated once again because they just haven't figured out how to shoot someone down in a particular plane type. They then take their frustration out in a never ending argument on the Forums. Then when someone brings up it's just another whine that dude gets attacked for attempting to bring a little sanity to the forum by calling the guy on his whine.
If you want a real discussion on the Forums. Why not host a subject, "which plane are you frustrated by either fighting or flying"
and let everyone discuss how to overcome their personal shortfalls and limitations. As in "well, I tried this and it worked". I'd bet more people would get more out of that than this one about Spit XVI's.
How many Spit XVI is uber threads are there out there? Wait1 If ya really want it...here ya go....
(http://i587.photobucket.com/albums/ss316/ren1795/VIOLIN-vi.gif)
Ren
-
I HATE 190D9s, I WANT TO PUNCH A WALL EVERY TIME I SEE ONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :furious IT'S THE MOST POINTLESS RIDE IN GAME! :furious
-
Why do these discussion threads lead one to believe someone just got frustrated once again because they just haven't figured out how to shoot someone down in a particular plane type.
Ren: That is clearly an incorrect theory. It is also clearly yet another attempt to argue through invective. The fact that this has been a favorite tactic of people who disagree with me so far does *not* lend a great deal of credibility to their "side."
What I have to say is based on comparison of relative plane performance, and nothing else.
-
Thank you for emoting in our general direction. :huh
May I suggest that the next time you see a D9, instead of punching a wall, you attempt to force an angles fight, where the D9 is at a disadvantage vs. virtually everything? You see, unlike some other airplanes :devil, the Dora has a big, fat weakness (turn capacity) to go with its well known strengths of stellar speed, stellar roll, and good climb rate.
I HATE 190D9s, I WANT TO PUNCH A WALL EVERY TIME I SEE ONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :furious IT'S THE MOST POINTLESS RIDE IN GAME! :furious
-
(http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j199/fergy61/brokenrecord.jpg)
:noid
-
They’ll look for a cheap shot or ho then run away if they can’t go vertical, I’ll pull off almost instantly because I know they will not come back otherwise. Then the torture starts all over again. :furious
Seriously, I’m banging my head into the wall just thinking about it. :furious
-
Thank you for emoting in our general direction. :huh
May I suggest that the next time you see a D9, instead of punching a wall, you attempt to force an angles fight, where the D9 is at a disadvantage vs. virtually everything? You see, unlike some other airplanes :devil, the Dora has a big, fat weakness (turn capacity) to go with its well known strengths of stellar speed, stellar roll, and good climb rate.
Most Dora pilots won't slow down unless desperately defensive(too late), and are easy kills. :aok
-
:rolleyes:
Gup, I thought better of you than this....bilge you just poured on the screen. It has nothing to do 190s. The point of bringing up roll-rate is that it is a disadvantage the VIII has relative the XVI. Indeed, the VIII has a severe disadvantage in high speed roll rate against quite abit. That gives it a real, substantive weakness to go with its many strengths. Which is not too much to ask IMO.
I was responding to Krusty comparing the 8 to the 16. I surrendered in regards to the rest of the thread :)
-
Ren: That is clearly an incorrect theory. It is also clearly yet another attempt to argue through invective. The fact that this has been a favorite tactic of people who disagree with me so far does *not* lend a great deal of credibility to their "side."
What I have to say is based on comparison of relative plane performance, and nothing else.
The issue is relative plane performance and nothing else. If we already know what the relative differences are between planes and know how to fly them then it then becomes pilot performance. Hence my theory.
Here's a thought....
Every single plane in AH2 has both strengths and weaknesses. The object of a fighter pilot is to fight his fight meaning fly his planes strengths to the other dudes planes weaknesses and thereby defeat him.
In proof I fought a Spit16 this evening. It was only him and me. He lost the fight and tried stick stirring, when that didn't work, all of a sudden he started warping any time I got within 200 yds of him. I let him wiggle out to 400 and shot him down. His call sign means nothing bur I suggested he relog due warping. He actually tried to fight me. Much to his credit. The warping,if self induced,was not.
So tell me again where this is not another argument detailing someones frustration? Shooting down spitzteen is no big deal nor any other different than and other plane. As I said above, try a different subject based on a "how to" rather than why it should be this or that including perked or not perked. There are enough of those whines already.
Ren
-
My what (another) bald-faced lie from Karnak..
Don't you ever get tired of spewing your falsehoods, Karnak?
Well do I recall you saying that the Mossie being 10-15mph too slow didn't make any difference and didn't need to be addressed and yet I think I have seen you ask for the Fw190A-5 to be brought up to the proper speed, which it should be, as should the Mossie. You are also fond of claiming manuevers by Spit VIII and XVIs that are literally impossible, insisting that it happened and magically never having film for it, e.g. you have claimed that the XVI can climb up to your Bf109, pull a hard 180, accelerating past 400mph and running you down all the while you did no hard manuevers. Anybody can take a Mk XVI offline and try that, proving that it cannot do it, yet you would not retract your claim nor admit you misread the enemy's E state and exagerated your own. You also claim the Lancaster is grossly overdurable, something I have never noticed and the testing I did on its tail did not indicate.
You have a persistant double standard when it comes to British aircraft.
-
Every single plane in AH2 has both strengths and weaknesses. The object of a fighter pilot is to fight his fight meaning fly his planes strengths to the other dudes planes weaknesses and thereby defeat him.
The interplay of dissimilar airplane types is fun when type A has a strength or two and a weakness or two in-play against type B's own strength's and weaknesses. Technically speaking, having top speed/ability to run away as A's sole strength against B isn't too darn fun, but at least those flying Bs have to deal with As running away to deny them kills and set up drags. But when B has it *all* over A, C, D, E, F, G, etc, I must ask where is the fun in that? For EITHER side?
-
Perhaps you might try to learn how to shoot them down some more?
Or maybe why is it many dudes have a lot of fun?
But, you're not?
It's not the planes, you don't fly fighters enough. So what is it?
Shades account?
Ren
-
They’ll look for a cheap shot or ho then run away if they can’t go vertical, I’ll pull off almost instantly because I know they will not come back otherwise. Then the torture starts all over again. :furious
Seriously, I’m banging my head into the wall just thinking about it. :furious
Try flying something different then 16s, La7s and stuff like that for the majority of your sorties. Try planes like the P-39, P-40 and...well, you get the idea. You will be amazed how many Doras (or any other fast plane for that matter) will keep the fight "thight". And I'm sure you will get them anyway. Maybe you wont get 10-1 K/D ratios anymore, but it's a about the fun, isn't it?
-
Perhaps you might try to learn how to shoot them down some more?
Or maybe why is it many dudes have a lot of fun?
But, you're not?
It's not the planes, you don't fly fighters enough. So what is it?
Shades account?
Ren
Ren
The game is plenty of fun for me. Even in an environment where *nothing* is perked. Why can you not accept that what I have to say on this issue is based on an intelligent comparison of performance and a sense of fairness/sport?
And WTF? I fly fighters plenty. Make every FSO too.
Oh, wait a minute...I get it. You just checked "fighter ranks" in an attempt to pigeonhole me and discovered I didn't have one. How very irrelevant, how very sad. You didn't investigate very deeply did you? Here is a clue for you: I fly most every fighter sortie with it clicked over to "attack". It is a bit of a psychological trick on myself, that helps keep my mind on flying for fun and not for irrelevancies.
All these attempts to make everything personal...I think it is because you can not refute my basic point about the Spixteen's performance relative much of the rest of the set. And no, the fact that it is possible for a well-trained pilot to shoot down a Spixteen noob in a lesser ride does *not* refute my point, anymore than the fact that it is possible for trained martial artist to take down drunken belligerent with a knife means that "knife vs. bare hands"=fair fight.
EDIT: I just did a quick walk memory lane on the AHII player statistics page. Almost every tour shows me as having a positive K/D against the SpitXVI. Sometimes it is close to 1:1, some tours it is something stupid like 14:1. My *first AHII tour* (tour 83, callsign "BnZ") my k/d against SpitXVI was 3:3! By my *second* tour it had become positive (7:4). So much for the laughable theory that I hold my position because SpitXVIs give me some sort of special trouble....
-
Try flying something different then 16s, La7s and stuff like that for the majority of your sorties. Try planes like the P-39, P-40 and...well, you get the idea. You will be amazed how many Doras (or any other fast plane for that matter) will keep the fight "thight". And I'm sure you will get them anyway. Maybe you wont get 10-1 K/D ratios anymore, but it's a about the fun, isn't it?
Screw that, I started flying perk rides this tour just so I could take out my frustration on every 190 I come across.
My K/D ratio is 10 this tour, wow I never noticed. I might have to start playing seriously and not just for fun!
-
Off-Topic, but:
You know, it makes me grin a little when people complain that "Arrggh! (insert standard boom and zoom type plane here) makes one pass at me and runs away!" Huh...if it comes close enough to actually fire on you, then after you force the overshoot there *is* going to be an envelope for a snapshot for *some* period of time. It may be brief and difficult shot, but it will be possible. Yet no one makes it a "skillz" issues with those who complain about runners and says "Haha, the only reason you posted this is because you aren't l33t enough to hit a snapshot at D400 before he gets out of range..." I wonder why? :huh
-
I'm more than capable of forcing the over shoot and trying my luck on the snap shot, I’ll get a few pings here and there; sometime I’ll get lucky and blow the stab off. ;)
But it's a bloody hard thing to take the other player out when he's mashing his stick doing 400Mph +.
-
Why can you not accept that what I have to say on this issue is based on an intelligent comparison of performance and a sense of fairness/sport?
Because I read what your wrote. And intelligent comparison is not a phrase I would ever use in your evaluations, where it is obvious you wish to only try to pick facts that support your position ,and wish to ignore any that do not.
Intelegent comparison would imply an analysis of ALL the pertinent information, not just conveniently ignoring things that do not support your position.
Then statements like this.
But if perking the Spixteen would cost too many noob's subscriptions, understood. salute You don't slaughter the milk cow in tough times. Wink
Exactly where is the fairness or intelligence in a post like this? Do you really believe we are so naive that we think perking 1 plane would change how many new people play, it is YOU who assigns that attribute. Most new players would have no idea about different spit variants.
You ignore basic facts that the Spit 16 does not dominate the arena. Yet you grasp at straws to try prove it does. This is why people start assigning other motives to your desires. Because the one you state of fairness is not supported by you invalid arguments.
You ignore facts that the top 4 most popular planes are fairly close in there usage numbers and K/d's.
You ignore basic facts, that one plane will always be the most popular, all that can be done is change what plane that is.
You ignore past facts , like the F4U-C domination, and then try play word games to define unbalancing.
I have no idea what your motivation is, but I do know it has nothing to do with wanting to improve game balance or the fun of arena play, but my guess is that it is something that would let you kill more and live more.
HiTEch
-
Fly a mid eny plane a few times.Then fly your spixteen, gezz cry me a river. :cry
-
I have no idea what your motivation is, but I do know it has nothing to do with wanting to improve game balance or the fun of arena play, but my guess is that it is something that would let you kill more and live more.
Nah hitech, he rejects your premise that perking/eny should be based on usage numbers or extreme popularity. I can understand that much even if I don't agree with everything he says.
-
/thread imo
-
Because I read what your wrote. And intelligent comparison is not a phrase I would ever use in your evaluations, where it is obvious you wish to only try to pick facts that support your position ,and wish to ignore any that do not.
So...having a popular plane that is faster than 70% of the fighter set while being double-superior to a great lot of them under typical MA conditions, including important LW fighters (not "irrelevant EW relics"), does nothing to make other choices less viable? I was actually being exceedingly fair, not mentioning all the airplanes to which the SpitXVI is quite double-superior, IF these same planes possess a marginal top speed advantage that would allow them to conceivably disengage from Spixteens.
Exactly where is the fairness or intelligence in a post like this? Do you really believe we are so naive that we think perking 1 plane would change how many new people play, it is YOU who assigns that attribute. Most new players would have no idea about different spit variants.
Perking one or two planes would perhaps increase the types of planes new players could fly successfully, instead of eventually saying "screw it, I'm taking a Spixteen" OR one of the top speed demons that can simply run away from it.
You ignore basic facts that the Spit 16 does not dominate the arena. Yet you grasp at straws to try prove it does. This is why people start assigning other motives to your desires. Because the one you state of fairness is not supported by you invalid arguments.
I ignore vague phrases like "dominate the arena" and tend to go in for something more objective, like side-by-side performance stats.
You ignore facts that the top 4 most popular planes are fairly close in there usage numbers and K/d's.
You ignore the fact that popularity and even k/d are not shaped by the actual performance values of the aircraft.
You ignore basic facts, that one plane will always be the most popular, all that can be done is change what plane that is.
Yes, and that plane will always be the P-51D, mediocre though it may be in comparison to much of the rest of the set. But since the P-51D is not even the fastest unperked airplane,not a brilliant climber or exceedingly well armed, and since conservatively 90% of the fighter set has at least one performance advantage over the P-51D, its popularity does not concern me.
You ignore past facts , like the F4U-C domination, and then try play word games to define unbalancing.
I realize that while there are many fast and/or maneuverable birds with quad cannons or equally lethal firepower, none of them can up off a CV, and that makes a difference, as does the fact that the C-Hog was relatively rare. Still doesn't keep it from being ironic that the C-Hog is perked when airplanes that are at least its equal are not.
I have no idea what your motivation is, but I do know it has nothing to do with wanting to improve game balance or the fun of arena play, but my guess is that it is something that would let you kill more and live more.
And you would be very wrong in that guess. I kill and live enough, thank you.
Lighten up. I have expressed my opinion that this is the best WWII flight sim (and explained WHY it is better than the closest competition) on numerous occasions on this very forum. Questioning one aspect of the MA does not equal an attack upon your masterpiece. Everyone who asks questions is not your enemy, and the sycophantic are not necessarily your friends.
-
blah blah blah I don't know when to quit blah blah blah.
-
No kidding Steve. Jeez BnZs, let it go will ya. The powers that be have spoken.
-
You ignore the fact that popularity and even k/d are not shaped by the actual performance values of the aircraft.
BnZ, geez man, talk about ignoring facts to cling on to straws, I already explained this to you. When popularity is HIGH, say >10,000 kills/tour, the K/D is an accurate representation of the actual performance values of the aircraft in the MA environment. Since the Spit16 does not have a high K/D, yet has HIGH popularity, the plane is not dominating. Maybe it's just not as good of an MA plane as YOU think it is. These numbers don't lie.
So...having a popular plane that is faster than 70% of the fighter set
You also say this with such vigor as if 70% is even a high number. It really isn't considering the 30% that are faster are some of the most popular rides in the game. P51D, La7, 190D9, K4, Typhoon, F4UD, F4U1A, Fw190D9. All faster, incredibly popular. The only planes that are popular that aren't faster are the Zero and the N1K2. So for all intensive purposes, the Spit16 is a slow plane compared to the bulk rides being flown in the MA.
Concede defeat at any time.
-
I have no idea what your motivation is, but I do know it has nothing to do with wanting to improve game balance or the fun of arena play, but my guess is that it is something that would let you kill more and live more.
HiTEch
Dale ... It might have started about the Spit 16 but it went beyond that ... it's not about the Spit 16 anymore.
He is so deeply invested in this argument and if he were to admit defeat ... his self-proclaimed super intelligence would called into question (after pointing out that other reputable sources aren't quite up to his standards - even HTC's) and that is something that his character will not allow.
-
Nah hitech, he rejects your premise that perking/eny should be based on usage numbers or extreme popularity. I can understand that much even if I don't agree with everything he says.
You might want to read this again ...
and then try play word games to define unbalancing.
HiTEch
-
BnZ, geez man, talk about ignoring facts to cling on to straws, I already explained this to you. When popularity is HIGH, say >10,000 kills/tour, the K/D is an accurate representation of the actual performance values of the aircraft in the MA environment. Since the Spit16 does not have a high K/D, yet has HIGH popularity, the plane is not dominating. Maybe it's just not as good of an MA plane as YOU think it is. These numbers don't lie.
Like the other popular planes, its stats are watered-down by the number of inexperienced pilots flying them. Or do you now think the P-38J/Ta-152's K/D superiority means they are better? Thousands of kills per tour there for each, not exactly a rare "fluke" result.
The only planes that are popular that aren't faster are the Zero and the N1K2. So for all intensive purposes, the Spit16 is a slow plane compared to the bulk rides being flown in the MA.
P-38? P-47D? Fw-190A? Ki-84? F6F?
Do you ever consider the possibility that people in the LW MA seem to always take speed-demons OR uber-turners because the SpitXVI so out-classes most everything in the middle of the speed/maneuverability continuum?
Now the 325mph N1K, that is "slow" for an LW MA plane. That which cannot turn with it can extend for the most part.
Then there is the HurriIIc, although it doesn't really count for my purposes, having a good turn radius advantage over the XVI. It *is* interesting to point out that it is fairly popular in the MA (so much "irrelevant EW relics") *and* has one of the higher K/Ds (so much for the validity of K/D...by that measurement, it is better than both the P-51D and SpitXVI...and considering it is slower than an iron toad, so much for "speed is everything").
-
that is something that his character will not allow.
People who argue through invective, and then react like I've run over their puppy when I return the favor should not be lecturing anyone on character.
-
People who argue through invective, and then react like I've run over their puppy when I return the favor should not be lecturing anyone on character.
Invective ? ... too funny ... when someone pulls the covers on you, your excuse for self-promotion and pomposity is because your "returning the favor" ... nice try.
-
You might want to read this again ...
Quote from: hitech on Yesterday at 06:10:03 PM
and then try play word games to define unbalancing.
HiTEch
Nature abhors a vacuum. I'd love to hear HTC's definition of unbalancing. So far, it seems like it has something to do with popularity, but I've never seen it written explicitly: "unbalancing means such and such..." and it would be presumptuous of me to put words in HT's mouth. ;)
The F4U-1C is the example story we tell, but that's only one case of perking because of popularity. There might be other reasons for perking, too. (I'm not requiring that "unbalancing" be only one thing)
-
the planes I fly eat spit16's for lunch and use splinters from dead la7 fuselages to pick its teeth afterwards. :aok
-
Invective ? ... too funny ... when someone pulls the covers on you, your excuse for self-promotion and pomposity is because your "returning the favor" ... nice try.
Yeah, go re-read your first reply in this thread...then tell me about who flung the first bucket of mud.
-
Yeah, go re-read your first reply in this thread...then tell me about who flung the first bucket of mud.
Here is my first post ...
<yawn>
That's a "bucket of mud" ? :rofl
-
Here is my first post ...
That's a "bucket of mud" ? :rofl
Yes, it is a disrespectful comment. I went to the trouble to look some numbers up and post them, you could at least say "I was unaware of those numbers..." or "I was aware of those numbers but..." or, probably best of all, keep your teeth together.
-
That's pretty minor as far as shows of disrespect go here at the bbs.
When someone argues for an unpopular opinion here at the bbs, up to 50% of the replies are "disrespectful" to outright insults.
-
Yes, it is a disrespectful comment. I went to the trouble to look some numbers up and post them, you could at least say "I was unaware of those numbers..." or "I was aware of those numbers but..." or, probably best of all, keep your teeth together.
It wasn't a comment ... it was a reaction ... and if that sparks your ire then that explains a lot too.
-
Hey what's that sound?
-
Hey what's that sound?
Sounds like this thread is fix'en to get locked!
-
And you would be very wrong in that guess. I kill and live enough, thank you.
Lighten up. I have expressed my opinion that this is the best WWII flight sim (and explained WHY it is better than the closest competition) on numerous occasions on this very forum. Questioning one aspect of the MA does not equal an attack upon your masterpiece. Everyone who asks questions is not your enemy, and the sycophantic are not necessarily your friends.
Nice attempt at a straw man argument. You have twice now tried to attribute my motivations to something that has not been written or implied by me. I have stated nothing about friends not friends, I have only stated that so far your arguments has been invalid. (invalid definition is that your premises do not support your conclusions).
So drop the spit 16 argument for a moment, and state only what is your goal in doing any change to the current perk values with out naming any plane type. Once you have clearly stated your goal, with out referencing any plane, people can then use real facts to see if changing the spit 16 current state will or will not achieve your goal.
2nd I can then state if your goal is worth trying to achieve or not. Obviously if I do not agree with your goal, then any argument in trying to achieve it is moot.
Because in this thread to date, your goal has been to perk the spit 16, and you have been choosing facts to achieve this goal.
HiTech
-
So drop the spit 16 argument for a moment, and state only what is your goal in doing any change to the current perk values with out naming any plane type. Once you have clearly stated your goal, with out referencing any plane, people can then use real facts to see if changing the spit 16 current state will or will not achieve your goal.
He has in many other threads. BnZs believes that perking/eny should depend on the performance/abilities of an aircraft relative to the rest of the planeset, i.e. even if the P-40B made up 40% of kills + deaths, it should not be perked.
I'd say his point of view doesn't really have a goal, it's more a principle of deliberation where you let the chips fall where they may.
-
The XVI is too slow to be perked.
-
The XVI is too slow to be perked.
Then explain the F4U-1C? :confused: From 2k-11k ft the XVI is faster than the 1C, that's the sweet spot of main arena altitudes.
-
The XVI is too slow to be perked.
yuppers.... :aok
-
Then explain the F4U-1C? :confused: From 2k-11k ft the XVI is faster than the 1C, that's the sweet spot of main arena altitudes.
the c was perked because it had an unbalancing effect on the gameplay. The spixteen does not....matter of fact..I see many using the 9's, 8's and even the 5's these days because they handle better. :aok
-
The XVI is too slow to be perked.
You are a very bad man.
-
We're going in circles again. :lol
-
Do you ever consider the possibility that people in the LW MA seem to always take speed-demons OR uber-turners because the SpitXVI so out-classes most everything in the middle of the speed/maneuverability continuum?
I considered it, and dismissed it.
Why?
Prior to the XVI they were hoards of La7's, the MA's ultimate 'free' speed demon.
La7 usage has dropped markedly, not increased, since the XVI introduction.
Of course you will argue they are flying the XVI now, to me thats a good thing.
-
Then explain the F4U-1C? :confused: From 2k-11k ft the XVI is faster than the 1C, that's the sweet spot of main arena altitudes.
at the time the c hog was perked it was the A10,F16 and B52 of the MA :)
-
the majority of planes the 16 faces everyday either, out runs it (51,d9,Tiff/temp,la7,F4Us),
out guns it( all i mentioned, and A8, 110g, P47s, P38s,F6), or can out turn it (some F4Us, Zekes,
hurricane IIC, and other spits). 16s are used alot in point field defence. Once in a fight the 16 can
not get out of the fight without either killing the other or dieing, because its not faster
than majority it faces.
and 1 major factory u havent mention as to why its good, because we in MA fight at the alts it was designed
to fight in. low alt TnB
-
You are a very bad man.
he's french ya know :p
as a side note for the noobs not knowing ,I'm too :D
-
Whels, the 16 is probably the safest plane to be in if your objective is to indefinitely dodge everything. In the crucible of a furball, pretty much everyone of those planes is restricted to their strengths if they want to survive.
Then explain the F4U-1C? :confused: From 2k-11k ft the XVI is faster than the 1C, that's the sweet spot of main arena altitudes.
It's an F4U with gobs of hispano ammo on one of the most stable platforms, with the best flaps and excellent rudder authority, good visibility, and flies off CVs. Carries slightly above average ordnance. That's why it was over-used and consequently perked.
-
So drop the spit 16 argument for a moment, and state only what is your goal in doing any change to the current perk values with out naming any plane type. Once you have clearly stated your goal, with out referencing any plane, people can then use real facts to see if changing the spit 16 current state will or will not achieve your goal.
2nd I can then state if your goal is worth trying to achieve or not. Obviously if I do not agree with your goal, then any argument in trying to achieve it is moot.
HiTech
Thanks for the question. I made a post in this very thread that neatly sums up what I think in regards to what constitutes a fair "balance" in regards to different plane types:
If we imagine an arena set with three planes in it, say the P-51D, SpitXVI, and a HurriIIC (thought I'd throw in an "irrelevant" EW/MW plane), which one would I consider perk-worthy? Answer: NONE. All of these planes have at least on clear advantage over the others in relative performance. If we were to introduce the La7 to this set, I would say perk it, because at typical MA altitudes it would enjoy almost complete superiority to, and strongly effect the viability of, a very large chunk of this set, namely the 25% of this set that is composed by the P-51D.
-
Fair to who? I'm fine with it the way it is right now.
Ren
-
Fair to who? I'm fine with it the way it is right now.
Ren
Yep, seems fine to me as well.
-
If we imagine an arena set with three planes in it, say the P-51D, SpitXVI, and a HurriIIC (thought I'd throw in an "irrelevant" EW/MW plane), which one would I consider perk-worthy? Answer: NONE. All of these planes have at least on clear advantage over the others in relative performance. If we were to introduce the La7 to this set, I would say perk it, because at typical MA altitudes it would enjoy almost complete superiority to, and strongly effect the viability of, a very large chunk of this set, namely the 25% of this set that is composed by the P-51D.
This statement does not define a goal,I am not giving you a hard time, what is your goal in the above statement.
Is your goal to have a plane set that every plane has one "clear" advantage in one area of combat over every other plane?
HiTech
-
Like the other popular planes, its stats are watered-down by the number of inexperienced pilots flying them. Or do you now think the P-38J/Ta-152's K/D superiority means they are better? Thousands of kills per tour there for each, not exactly a rare "fluke" result.
P-38? P-47D? Fw-190A? Ki-84? F6F?
Do you ever consider the possibility that people in the LW MA seem to always take speed-demons OR uber-turners because the SpitXVI so out-classes most everything in the middle of the speed/maneuverability continuum?
Now the 325mph N1K, that is "slow" for an LW MA plane. That which cannot turn with it can extend for the most part.
Then there is the HurriIIc, although it doesn't really count for my purposes, having a good turn radius advantage over the XVI. It *is* interesting to point out that it is fairly popular in the MA (so much "irrelevant EW relics") *and* has one of the higher K/Ds (so much for the validity of K/D...by that measurement, it is better than both the P-51D and SpitXVI...and considering it is slower than an iron toad, so much for "speed is everything").
The Ta152 and 38J? I already told you, these two planes don't have a strong enough following in the MA to have a 'fair' K/D objective stat. If each of the planes recorded three times as many sorties per tour, they would not have inflated stats that are caused their vet following. I already explained this twice now, yet you still ignore it.
I listed 8 of the most popular rides in the game faster than the Spit16. You counter argued by naming some second class planes that are slower or the same speed.
-
Do you ever consider the possibility that people in the LW MA seem to always take speed-demons OR uber-turners because the SpitXVI so out-classes most everything in the middle of the speed/maneuverability continuum?
Now the 325mph N1K, that is "slow" for an LW MA plane. That which cannot turn with it can extend for the most part.
Hmm, I digest spit16s and nikis regularly in my 38G I think the "G" stands for Giant Gonads :D
Or maybe Goofball :huh
-
Hmm, I digest spit16s and nikis regularly in my 38G I think the "G" stands for Giant Gonads :D
Or maybe Goofball :huh
Goofball, without a doubt. Wouldn't have it any other way :aok
-
Is your goal to have a plane set that every plane has one "clear" advantage in one area of combat over every other plane?
HiTech
Or as close to it as practical. I'm not entirely rigid on the matter. You might have a situation where one plane was faster and double-superior to maybe one or two aircraft at typical MA alts, but only marginally so, and I would feel it was acceptable to leave that case alone. You might have something like the 109 K-4, which perhaps looks perkable from an energy and turn performance standpoint, but which possesses a good number of pronounced weaknesses offsetting it's strengths.
I can honestly say that if the SpitXVI was 10mph slower, or had terrible visibility problems, or was badly dive-limited, had a poor gun package, or had a thrust/weight that was near the bottom of the pack, or perhaps a combination of such disadvantages, I would not be in favor of perking it.
By way of contrast, the N1K enjoys quite a bit of popularity and draws quite a few "perk it threads". However, upon examination it seems to be significantly slower than most if not all of that which it greatly out-turns, it has a poor roll rate, and the climb rate isn't breaking any records. Therefore, its usage could quadruple for all I care and I still would not favor perking it.
-
My dear Grizz, my entire point with contrasting these statistics has been to show that k/d hinges largely upon the unpredictable variable of "who's flying it" and may not accurately reflect the relative capability of the aircraft, and that is why I consider k/d basically useless in determining whether or not a give plane performs well enough to warrant perkage.
The Ta152 and 38J? I already told you, these two planes don't have a strong enough following in the MA to have a 'fair' K/D objective stat. If each of the planes recorded three times as many sorties per tour, they would not have inflated stats that are caused their vet following. I already explained this twice now, yet you still ignore it.
I listed 8 of the most popular rides in the game faster than the Spit16. You counter argued by naming some second class planes that are slower or the same speed.
Grizz, who is the one being non-objective by arbitrarily declaring some rides "second-class"? My point has been that IMHO the SpitXVI enjoys near total a2a superiority relative too many rides at typical LW alts to remain free. I named some of them. The P-47Ds, P-38J/L, Fw-190As, and F6F are "second class" or "irrelevant relics"? I don't think so. They were widely produced historically important planes that would be vastly more viable for the average player to fly (as something *besides* a bomb truck) if they weren't practically guaranteed to run into large numbers of Spixteens who do just about everything better a2a. The Ki-84, arguably the best plane in the Japanese set, would also see a large increase in usefulness/viability if it weren't for ubiquitous Spixteens doing nearly everything just a little better in a2a combat.
-
By way of contrast, the N1K enjoys quite a bit of popularity and draws quite a few "perk it threads".
Simply because it has 4 cannon and it is fought as a Joust fighter.
What I get out of this thread is flying a Spit 9 is stupid and I should be flying a Super Duper Spit 16. Because it is simply fabulous. Just like the Perk the LA-7 threads before it. Perk the 16 and the LA-7 becomes the perk it whipping boy once again because it has 3 cannon and is fast. Leap ahead into the past.
-
I'm unbiased. I shoot at all red planes. :D
-
Simply because it has 4 cannon and it is fought as a Joust fighter.
What I get out of this thread is flying a Spit 9 is stupid and I should be flying a Super Duper Spit 16. Because it is simply fabulous. Just like the Perk the LA-7 threads before it. Perk the 16 and the LA-7 becomes the perk it whipping boy once again because it has 3 cannon and is fast. Leap ahead into the past.
You misunderstand. We do not need to perk the La7 because it is "fast and has cannon". If it was the fastest unperked plane but turned worse than a Fw or something, I'd not call for perkage. I call for perkage of the La-7 because it is extremely fast AND enjoys a decided advantage in turn performance and hp/weight vs. a great chunk of the plane set that it runs down. Your SpitIX, by contrast, is slower than nearly everything over which it has a large turn and/or climb advantage, and thus its strengths and weaknesses roughly balance out vs. the rest of the set in a2a. I hate having to keep repeating this particular point, it really is a very simple concept to "grok". Nothing personal towards you specifically when I say this mind you.
-
The Spit IX has a climb advantage over almost nothing that is common in the MA.
All the Spit IX has going for it is the Hispanos and a relatively good turning ability.
-
Wow... more lies.
Spit9 as-modeled (in-game) outclimbs a P-51 across all alts, is pretty close to Ki84 and C205 up to 9k then blows them away, and where most of the planeset makes around 3000fpm climb rate on average, it's doing 3800fpm up til almost 10k.
For somebody that pretends to love spits, you sure don't know them much in this game. Either that, or you do but you pretend they're inferior so folks don't fly them as much?
Let's compare some more:
Blows away the F6F, F4u1, Yak9U in climb rates at ALL alts.
Almost 2x better climb rate than N1k2 above 6k, can't quite match 109s below 6k (but the 109 is pretty much considered the best climbing family of planes in the entire game, not a fair comparison, right? But wait there's more!) but still matches or surpasses the 109G2 and G6 above 9k in climb rate.
Let's try some more:
P38J, Typhoon, P47D40, blows them all away in climb rate.
Yeah, so clearly the spit9 can't outclimb anything in this game, as Karaya states... :rolleyes:
-
The Spit IX has a climb advantage over almost nothing that is common in the MA.
All the Spit IX has going for it is the Hispanos and a relatively good turning ability.
Huh...according to DokGonzo's charts the SpitIX outclimbs the P-51D, F4U-1D, P-47D-40, P-47N, P-38L, and F6F. Those are all LW planes, with the exception of the F6F, and none of them can be called "uncommon". But, do not take this observation as reason for major disagreement between us Karnak, since I have clearly articulated my opinion that the SpitVIII should be left a free plane. :)
-
Invective ? ... too funny ... when someone pulls the covers on you, your excuse for self-promotion and pomposity is because your "returning the favor" ... nice try.
It's his modus operandi. The emporer doesn't like it when you point out he's not wearing any clothes.
As I said in the past and I'll say it again. The only reason why BnZ wants the Spitfire Mk XVI perked is that he feels that others should fly other planes, preferably ones that he can have a fighting chance again. It's the same whine we used to hear about the LA 7, same whine just a different plane.
Not one single bit of evidence he's supplied comes close to proving the Spitfire Mk XVI needs to be perked, sure he throws a lot of numbers out there but like his entire argument, those numbers are meaningless.
ack-ack
-
My dear Grizz, my entire point with contrasting these statistics has been to show that k/d hinges largely upon the unpredictable variable of "who's flying it" and may not accurately reflect the relative capability of the aircraft, and that is why I consider k/d basically useless in determining whether or not a give plane performs well enough to warrant perkage.
Grizz, who is the one being non-objective by arbitrarily declaring some rides "second-class"? My point has been that IMHO the SpitXVI enjoys near total a2a superiority relative too many rides at typical LW alts to remain free. I named some of them. The P-47Ds, P-38J/L, Fw-190As, and F6F are "second class" or "irrelevant relics"? I don't think so. They were widely produced historically important planes that would be vastly more viable for the average player to fly (as something *besides* a bomb truck) if they weren't practically guaranteed to run into large numbers of Spixteens who do just about everything better a2a. The Ki-84, arguably the best plane in the Japanese set, would also see a large increase in usefulness/viability if it weren't for ubiquitous Spixteens doing nearly everything just a little better in a2a combat.
I'm bowing out.
-
Never mind, Ack-Ack's remarks don't even merit a response.
-
My dear Grizz, my entire point with contrasting these statistics has been to show that k/d hinges largely upon the unpredictable variable of "who's flying it" and may not accurately reflect the relative capability of the aircraft, and that is why I consider k/d basically useless in determining whether or not a give plane performs well enough to warrant perkage.
Grizz, who is the one being non-objective by arbitrarily declaring some rides "second-class"? My point has been that IMHO the SpitXVI enjoys near total a2a superiority relative too many rides at typical LW alts to remain free. I named some of them. The P-47Ds, P-38J/L, Fw-190As, and F6F are "second class" or "irrelevant relics"? I don't think so. They were widely produced historically important planes that would be vastly more viable for the average player to fly (as something *besides* a bomb truck) if they weren't practically guaranteed to run into large numbers of Spixteens who do just about everything better a2a. The Ki-84, arguably the best plane in the Japanese set, would also see a large increase in usefulness/viability if it weren't for ubiquitous Spixteens doing nearly everything just a little better in a2a combat.
The key phrase here, finally, is that in your opinion, the Spit 16...etc etc. Opinion being the important word.
Clearly many of us don't share the same opinion, including the designer of the game. Just shoot em and quit worrying about trying to make other folks fly the plane you want them to for your/their own good.
As on of those P38 drivers out there, I look for Spit 16s to shoot, and I don't carry bombs or rockets on a perfectly good 38. And I'm average at best. The good thing is the 16 drivers are average at best too, so it's a fair fight.
-
Minor point Gup:
The utter a2a superiority of the SpitXVI over many other rides is not an opinion, it is fact backed up with numbers.
What conclusions you draw from this fact, that of course depends strongly from one's own ideas of what constitutes fair play and sportsmanship. I will say having a given plane or two enjoy such utter a2a superiority over so much of the rest of the set is fair in the same way that steroid use in baseball is "fair" as long as everyone has equal access to the same juice...and if you're okay with everyone who does not use being at a decided disadvantage against those who do. This is in spite of the fact that you and I might still hit a good number of homers on just "beer and hotdogs", if I may stretch the metaphor well out of proportion. ;)
To put it another way, I think deciding what to fly ought to be a tough choice.
The key phrase here, finally, is that in your opinion, the Spit 16...etc etc. Opinion being the important word.
Clearly many of us don't share the same opinion, including the designer of the game. Just shoot em and quit worrying about trying to make other folks fly the plane you want them to for your/their own good.
As on of those P38 drivers out there, I look for Spit 16s to shoot, and I don't carry bombs or rockets on a perfectly good 38. And I'm average at best. The good thing is the 16 drivers are average at best too, so it's a fair fight.
-
Hmm, I digest spit16s and nikis regularly in my 38G I think the "G" stands for Giant Gonads :D
Or maybe Goofball :huh
Not sure if I've ever witnessed a more prolific whiner than you, so in this case it might actually stand for Girl. :P
-
Minor point Gup:
The utter a2a superiority of the SpitXVI over many other rides is not an opinion, it is fact backed up with numbers.
What conclusions you draw from this fact, that of course depends strongly from one's own ideas of what constitutes fair play and sportsmanship. I will say having a given plane or two enjoy such utter a2a superiority over so much of the rest of the set is fair in the same way that steroid use in baseball as long as everyone has equal access to the same juice...and if you're okay with everyone who does not use being at a decided disadvantage against those who do. This is in spite of the fact that you and I might still hit a good number of homers on just "beer and hotdogs", if I may stretch the metaphor well out of proportion. ;)
I reached the opinion a while ago, that trying to force folks into other airplanes, just doesn't work. I'd suggest it's a small part of the community that really has an interest in the history and the actual air combat aspect and challenge that is available within the game. The majority are interested in 'winning' the easiest way possible.
I believe that had the Spit 16 been called the Spit IXe that you'd see less of them and about an equal amount of 8s and FIXs along with them. The Spit is what it is, an easy bird to fly. It was in reality. I've talked about it before, but real Spit pilots will say that it was, and one current Spit driver told me that they should probably have started him in Spits before he went to fly T-6s. When they took a Hurricane and Spitfire to Malta for an airshow and anniverary there, the pilots both wanted to fly the Hurricane as it was more of a challenge to fly and would keep them on their toes on the long flight. Not that they disliked the Spitfire, but it was the easier bird to fly.
What I believe about the Spits in AH is that they get folks to do more then go fast from on high and shoot as they blow through. Spit drivers for the most part tend to try and turn them thinking they can take on anything. This isn't always true, but I'd rather have them believe it and stick around and fight, then not. So trying to take that away from the newbie AH guys and those who don't really want to work on it, just makes for worse game play....or less targets for the rest of us who like to shoot planes in an air combat sim.
-
BnZ, there is a reason the spit16 is a double superior to the 190A, it was a direct response to the 190 series. So the LW adjusted and developed later 190 variants. The RAF then evolved as well. That's how war works. If you want a LW ride that does not have a "double inferior" to the spit16, fly the 190d or TA-152. But then you will be complaining about the Spit14 yes? Fact of the matter is you choose to fly an earlier war 190 in a late war arena. One of the spits is always going to be one of the top most popular rides. When I started it was the Spit5, now the 16.
-
BnZ, there is a reason the spit16 is a double superior to the 190A, it was a direct response to the 190 series. So the LW adjusted and developed later 190 variants. The RAF then evolved as well. That's how war works. If you want a LW ride that does not have a "double inferior" to the spit16, fly the 190d or TA-152. But then you will be complaining about the Spit14 yes? Fact of the matter is you choose to fly an earlier war 190 in a late war arena. One of the spits is always going to be one of the top most popular rides. When I started it was the Spit5, now the 16.
Yeah, I think I listed alot more rides than the Fw-190 A5. Which would *not* be on the list anyway if it wasn't 10-12mph to slow OTD btw...but that is another topic.
You notice that many of the rides I'm talking about are *only available* in LW? Can't very well say "but you're only comparing irrelevant EW rides" when much of what I'm comparing is not even available except in LW.
Yeah, and the upwards and onwards to ever rarer and more uber LW rides...not so sure its a good thing. Moot was asking for a 190D variant that went *400 mph* on the deck and a Runstang with 150 octane fuel so as to run better...uh...no thank you. I'd rather stick with common planes and ask for things to be "evened out" through a little intelligent use of the perk than ask for dubious uber-planes that were built in tiny numbers during the last 5 minutes of the war.
I tell you, when I hear a guy say "I'm only an average player, I have to have a Spixteen to be competitive", it makes me wonder. I wonder if he'd think that if it he wasn't competing against other spixteens so much. I think, shouldn't an average player be averagely competitive in damn near any ride he picks out? At least LW ride? Some other combination of ride for him and his opposition, he might learn the joys of fighting something he out-turns but does not out-climb or out-roll, or vis versa.
SpitV, SpitIX, I know they've always had a great reputation but the fact is these two models had to deal with being slower than the vast bulk of planes they could easily outmaneuver. The SpiXVI changes things in that regard.
Don't know why people are so afraid of using the perk system either. Hell, I enjoy GVing, and 3 out of 5 tanks are perked, and that makes perfect sense to me, the perked tanks have real advantage over their unperked mates, fair enough.
-
I didnt ask for those to run better. Give me a 152 without the GM1 ballast, and I won't be using the extra spare thrust to run.
-
Just to make sure I understand your wishes, you want all planes that are not perked to have 1 clear advantage of the big 4 over all the others?
I.E. 1 Climb
2 Fire Power
3 Speed
4 Turn Rate?
-
I'd rather stick with common planes and ask for things to be "evened out" through a little intelligent use of the perk than ask for dubious uber-planes that were built in tiny numbers during the last 5 minutes of the war.
And there you have it ... once again, your the only "intelligent" one ... you really are a piece of work.
-
spixteens are .50 cal fodder for me 1-hog...nuff said. :aok
-
Just to make sure I understand your wishes, you want all planes that are not perked to have 1 clear advantage of the big 4 over all the others?
I.E. 1 Climb
2 Fire Power
3 Speed
4 Turn Rate?
That would be impossible.
A charitable interpretation would be that he thinks it's best if most aircraft can either out-turn or out-run their opponent. Some exceptions are ok, but when an airplane can out-run and out-turn as many as the XVI, it should be perked. (Acceleration has to be given some weight too, or the argument won't work)
This is not my view, just my best guess as to what BnZs should be saying to motivate his position.
BnZs, why aren't you sticking to the basics? As for the rest of ya, stop being so insipid (uh-oh, mudslinging). There is absolutely room for debate on this issue.
Edit:
Lastly, I dare say that if you grant BnZs the premise that ENY/Perks should be based on performance and not use % or k/d, then it would be extremely difficult to prevent the conclusion that there's a lot of ENY/Perk values that need adjustment. Preferring performance to popularity and circumstance for ENY/Perks seems like a reasonable idea to me. So far, the argument I see against it is that it's not how things are done now.
-
I actually find the spitVIII a bit more of a problem against my 38G than the XVI, just my opinion though :aok
-
Huh...according to DokGonzo's charts the SpitIX outclimbs the P-51D, F4U-1D, P-47D-40, P-47N, P-38L, and F6F. Those are all LW planes, with the exception of the F6F, and none of them can be called "uncommon". But, do not take this observation as reason for major disagreement between us Karnak, since I have clearly articulated my opinion that the SpitVIII should be left a free plane. :)
Try taking less than 100% fuel in the P-51D, it brings it up to dang close to the Spit IX. The La-7 and N1K2 are both superior at MA alts. The P-38J and L are superior. Ki-84 is superior. Bf109G-14 and K-4 are vastly superior. Fw190D-9 is superior.
One of the things that pushed me out of the Spit IX was the fact that 7/10 aircraft I encountered could disengage from me at will because I was in a mid-1942 fighter and they were in 1944/45 monsters.
I'd rather stick with common planes and ask for things to be "evened out" through a little intelligent use of the perk than ask for dubious uber-planes that were built in tiny numbers during the last 5 minutes of the war.
Now you're calling an aircraft with production of over 5,000 starting in mid 1943 a "dubious uber-plane that was built in tiny numbers during the last 5 minutes of the war"? Ok. I think the Ta-152, Me163, F4U-1C, C.205, 3 cannon La-7 and N1K2-J come far, far closer to that than anything in the RAF set.
-
A charitable interpretation would be that he thinks it's best if most aircraft can either out-turn or out-run their opponent. Some exceptions are ok, but when an airplane can out-run and out-turn as many as the XVI, it should be perked. (Acceleration has to be given some weight too, or the argument won't work)
I still don't get the "out-run" argument. Whenever I am fighting anything that can outrun me (which is pretty much 98% of the planes), when the point comes that they really need to "run" ... if they are within 600 yrds to right off my nose ... they find out quickly that they cannot, no matter how hard they try, out accelerate or out run my .50 cals within that zone.
Point being ... most don't use, or try to use, their speed/acceleration benefit until its too late ... hence the reason why the Spit 16, despite it's usage numbers and it's double-uber abilities, does not dominate the skies of AH and enjoys a mediocre K/D.
-
A charitable interpretation would be that he thinks it's best if most aircraft can either out-turn or out-run their opponent. Some exceptions are ok, but when an airplane can out-run and out-turn as many as the XVI, it should be perked. (Acceleration has to be given some weight too, or the argument won't work)
Yep, that is pretty much what I am saying Anax, with some wiggle room for planes that would seem dominating from an energy/angles standpoint but suffer some fairly debilitating weakness(s). For instance, the Ki-84, somewhat similar in basic performance to the Spixteen, but nearly everything can disengage from the Ki by diving.
Or take the unperked Hogs, a very good aircraft family in speed and maneuver, but they do suffer from rather low HP/weight relatively speaking.
-
Try taking less than 100% fuel in the P-51D, it brings it up to dang close to the Spit IX. The La-7 and N1K2 are both superior at MA alts. The P-38J and L are superior. Ki-84 is superior. Bf109G-14 and K-4 are vastly superior. Fw190D-9 is superior.
Karnak, I thought all of DokGonzo's measurments used less than 100% fuel.
Edit: Factually, according to Gonzo's chart the 38L is similar to 3K, where the SpitIX begins to out-climb it.
Now you're calling an aircraft with production of over 5,000 starting in mid 1943 a "dubious uber-plane that was built in tiny numbers during the last 5 minutes of the war"? Ok. I think the Ta-152, Me163, F4U-1C, C.205, 3 cannon La-7 and N1K2-J come far, far closer to that than anything in the RAF set.
No Karnak, I was not talking about the SpitXVI, I was talking about aircraft people have proposed adding to counter the La7 and SpitXVI. I can only imagine what would happen if they added a Dora that went 400mph at SL and had more cannon...sheesh.
-
spixteens are .50 cal fodder for me 1-hog...nuff said. :aok
Skyrock, the F4U-1 is not one of those planes that falls into my argument, being as maneuverable as a Spixteen. And faster. Most Spixteen pilots will have no idea how to use the advantage of their plane against yours, the E side of things being somewhat counter-intuitive, while you are one of the more experienced fighter pilots in Aces High. So your comparison really doesn't mean anything, other than "Skyrock owns", and we already knew that.
-
Skyrock, the F4U-1 is not one of those planes that falls into my argument, being as maneuverable as a Spixteen. And faster. Most Spixteen pilots will have no idea how to use the advantage of their plane against yours, the E side of things being somewhat counter-intuitive, while you are one of the more experienced fighter pilots in Aces High. So your comparison really doesn't mean anything, other than "Skyrock owns", and we already knew that.
it really doesn't matter what plane, it's the pilot and his ability to judge E, convert angles, and smoothly perform air combat manuvers to attain a gun solution that is important. :aok
-
BnZ why didn't you answer HT's question?
-
BnZ why didn't you answer HT's question?
Because the Emperor has no clothes.
ack-ack
-
BnZ why didn't you answer HT's question?
Anax answered it for me. Pretty much when one fighter type has just about every advantage relevant to a2a over many of the other types under typical MA conditions, I think a closer look should be taken at perking it.
-
Bnz: I would like an answer to my question from you.
HiTech
-
it really doesn't matter what plane, it's the pilot and his ability to judge E, convert angles, and smoothly perform air combat manuvers to attain a gun solution that is important. :aok
Once the level of basic competence is reached, a condition of double-superiority will make a huge difference in the likely outcome. I don't think Shaw was making things up when he said "Double-superiority is a condition for which a fighter pilot would gladly trade several semi-essential parts of his anatomy". AHII player's views on the matter are probably skewed by the fact that much of the player base is more poorly trained in fighter tactics than the greenest imaginable fighter pilot sent into combat.
-
Bnz: I would like an answer to my question from you.
HiTech
Hitech, I think it is fairly clear what I'm saying. When you have an aircraft like the SpitXVI or La7, able to run down so many other fighters while simultaneously out-turning, out-climbing, and, in the case of the SpitXVI, even out-rolling them, and when it lacks any severe weaknesses that mitigate its a2a abilities like a dive limitation or a weak gun package, I think there is a good chance it should be perked. I can not see why that concept is so hard to understand or why it is considered unreasonable.
EDIT: Just to illustrate the opposite side of the coin, if you had a fighter that was insanely popular but was not superior to many types in speed, E-building, AND turn performance, I'd say it does not need perking. The P-51D actually comes close to being just that. And I can understand certain special cases, like perking the C-Hog so that *something else* will actually be seen coming off carriers.
-
I'm not talking for anyone else here, but given the context (the plane set and players) it's unreasonable to perk the 16 when it's so slow. That's too much of an achilles' heel. The same way the La7 has the speed but falls just a bit short almost everywhere else. The F4U4 is the nearest analog to the 16. It has the speed that the XVI would need to be perk-worthy, and the only factor to mitigate that crucial difference is that it takes a (slightly more than) minimum amount of know-how to exploit its abilities. That amount of know-how is small enough that a large enough portion of the players can master it, and would cause too much unbalancing (one more arbitrary) in the MA if the U4 wasn't perked.
All these qualitatives and quantitatives are really vague, but they're my frank assessment and I'm fairly sure I'm spot on.
-
I'm not talking for anyone else here, but given the context (the plane set and players) it's unreasonable to perk the 16 when it's so slow.
Ah, now we come to an impasse Moot. It is difficult to call an airplane slow when it is faster than 2/3rds of the plane set.
If we want to limit our discussion to LW non-perked planes only, that is reasonable I suppose. But the SpitXVI is as fast or faster than about 1/3rd of them too.
If we want to arbitrarily dismiss nearly everything slower than the XVI from the LW non-perked set so as to argue that the SpitXVI is too "slow", that is NOT reasonable.
-
It's not about being slower than 2/3ds of the plane set. The XVI is too slow to be perk worthy. That criteria implies that 1/3 of the plane set should be perked.
-
I actually find the spitVIII a bit more of a problem against my 38G than the XVI, just my opinion though :aok
that's cause the Spit VIII will hold off stalling and dropping a wing longer then the XVI due to the full span wing. If I get in a turn fight with a 16, more often then not he'll drop a wing first, have to level out and nose down and he's dead.
-
It's not about being slower than 2/3ds of the plane set. The XVI is too slow to be perk worthy. That criteria implies that 1/3 of the plane set should be perked.
Uh, no Moot. It only implies that if you are thinking of perking things on the basis of speed alone. Which clearly I am not. To put it simplistically, what I'm looking at/concerned with is the ability to out-run *and* out-maneuver numerous other types.
By way of contrast, look at the D9. Leaving aside the La7, it is the fastest unperked plane down low. It has a very competitive climb rate, good gun package, and stellar roll capacity. However, it is for all intents and purposes out-performed in turn by almost every other fighter in the game. This is what leaves it out of perk contention IMO.
-
that's cause the Spit VIII will hold off stalling and dropping a wing longer then the XVI due to the full span wing. If I get in a turn fight with a 16, more often then not he'll drop a wing first, have to level out and nose down and he's dead.
Yes he is, isn't he! :aok
-
Furballs are easily the most prevalent regime in the arenas. A spit16 in a furball can't run away. Not when (e.g.) said D9s aren't turning (since that's fatal) and readily available to nab spit16s (which, given the "players" context, aren't managing their E well enough to really stay fast) if they tried to run. The 16 is just too slow.
-
Spit16 is a MONSTER, no doubt! Although I would say very very few folks can convert its potential into success! It is NOT a killer for all who choose it, just more airplane debris to be scattered to the online winds. I say this cause I never fly spits, "on the very rare occasion maybe the spit14", Last friday during FSO I got to fly spit8, I was very much a "fish out of water" and couldn't make it work for me! Its uberness is kinda like the corsairs, probably the best set of planes in the game, though it takes some know how to exploit it!
Now once you have the "know how" or "das skills" your a tard for using it :rofl :rofl :uhoh
-
Furballs are easily the most prevalent regime in the arenas. A spit16 in a furball can't run away. Not when (e.g.) said D9s aren't turning (since that's fatal) and readily available to nab spit16s (which, given the "players" context, aren't managing their E well enough to really stay fast) if they tried to run. The 16 is just too slow.
Moot, players may make poor choices and get into corners that make them fight or die in any aircraft. This really doesn't have anything to do with my point about relative plane performance. If you are going to argue that "x" airplane should not be considered for perkage on the basis that many unskilled pilots fly it, does that conversely mean that the P-38J/Ta-152 should be considered for perkage because they are flown by exceedingly skilled pilots?
Also, if you will note, one of our perk planes (the F4U-1C) is largely slower than the SpitXVI, and many other unperked rides. The SpitXIV (361mph OTD) is caught by several non-perkers, and even the mighty Tempest is vulnerable to a good diver converting alt to speed and forcing it to turn and fight. If the definition of a perk plane is that it makes one invulnerable to bad choices/bad situations, then nothing is worthy of perking.
No, the SpitXVI is not a speed demon, that is why I wouldn't make the perk price for it any more than 5 points or so.
-
BnZs, were you on the debait team by any chance?
-
BnZs, where you on the debait team by any chance?
Yes and when he lost, he told the judges how stupid they were. :aok
-
BnZs, where you on the debait team by any chance?
He won when all the opposition said "screw it" and went home. :lol
-
Debait :lol
BNZ - The bottom line is that the XVI is too slow in practice. Theory doesn't matter if it never materializes. The 152 and 38J ought to be perked if enough skilled pilots flew it to unbalance gameplay enough, yes. That's not the case though. Just like the XVI isn't used and abused enough to unbalance gameplay. And this is coming from someone with not much more than distaste for em.
I don't know about the chog. I think the firepower on that platform (best flaps in the game, etc, we've covered this already) is enough. Borderline, but enough. I personally don't really care except that it would most likely really skew useage off CVs (at least).
That the Temp (or 262 - viz 38s, 47s, 51s, etc) is vulnerable to many of the other planes doesn't change the rest of the picture. It still is the punchiest accelerator all the way to arguably the fastest top prop-driven speed bar-none, has 4 high ROF cannons with excellent ballistics, excellent visibility, can carry 2klbs, isn't restricted to a narrow altitude range for these abilities, etc. You aren't taking things in the full context. In the full practical context the XVI is just too slow to be perk worthy. There's no way to spin this one. It's a holistic assessment.
Or not worth more than 1-2 perks anyway. Definitely not 3 perks.
-
Yes and when he lost, he told the judges how stupid they were. :aok
Indeed Steve, adopting an M.O. similar to that of those monkeys who sit in trees and fling feces at passers-by can cause others to make assumptions about said "monkey's" capacity to do anything else.
-
BNZ - The bottom line is that the XVI is too slow in practice. Theory doesn't matter if it never materializes. The 152 and 38J ought to be perked if enough skilled pilots flew it to unbalance gameplay enough, yes.
I find this a very odd and unreasonable notion...you would perk the 152 and 38J under certain circumstances, even though their inherent advantages over the rest of the set is less than that of many other planes?
That the Temp (or 262 - viz 38s, 47s, 51s, etc) is vulnerable to many of the other planes doesn't change the rest of the picture. It still is the punchiest accelerator all the way to arguably the fastest top prop-driven speed bar-none, has 4 high ROF cannons with excellent ballistics, excellent visibility, can carry 2klbs, isn't restricted to a narrow altitude range for these abilities, etc. You aren't taking things in the full context. In the full practical context the XVI is just too slow to be perk worthy. There's no way to spin this one. It's a holistic assessment.
That sounds like the difference between an airplane that needs to be perked at 60 or so and one that needs to be perked at most 5 Moot. I must point out that a perk price like the Tempest is carrying almost guarantees that most people will not fly it into ack as an ord truck...not with its vulnerable radiator.
-
Hitech, I think it is fairly clear what I'm saying. When you have an aircraft like the SpitXVI or La7, able to run down so many other fighters while simultaneously out-turning, out-climbing, and, in the case of the SpitXVI, even out-rolling them, and when it lacks any severe weaknesses that mitigate its a2a abilities like a dive limitation or a weak gun package, I think there is a good chance it should be perked. I can not see why that concept is so hard to understand or why it is considered unreasonable.
EDIT: Just to illustrate the opposite side of the coin, if you had a fighter that was insanely popular but was not superior to many types in speed, E-building, AND turn performance, I'd say it does not need perking. The P-51D actually comes close to being just that. And I can understand certain special cases, like perking the C-Hog so that *something else* will actually be seen coming off carriers.
I am out of here, you can not even state the goal of what you are trying to accomplish. (other than to get rid of the spit 16) Have fun talking to yourself, because if you can not even state what your real goal is, I can not begin to discuss the pro's and cons with you.
-
I find this a very odd and unreasonable notion...you would perk the 152 and 38J under certain circumstances, even though their inherent advantages over the rest of the set is less than that of many other planes?
They would unbalance gameplay. Which is what the perk system is about. Pragmatic over principle.
That sounds like the difference between an airplane that needs to be perked at 60 or so and one that needs to be perked at most 5 Moot. I must point out that a perk price like the Tempest is carrying almost guarantees that most people will not fly it into ack as an ord truck...not with its vulnerable radiator.
Ord truck isn't really relevant. That's not why it's perked.
You do admit that the spitXVI isn't worth more than 5 perks though. So really, here, the difference between you and others is no more than how much the spitXVI is worth. I think it's worth no more than 2 perks, and even that's a lot. 1 perk would be what I'd give it, if not for the fact that I think the XVI is better off unperked. You think it's worth 5, not 10 or 20. Everyone else concurs that it's as near to perk worthy as any other plane, but, all things considered, thinks it's worth zero.
So maybe you ought to try and change your approach. Demonstrate how the arena would be better off with a spit16 perked at 1, 2, or 5 points.
And/or answer HT's question.
-
that's cause the Spit VIII will hold off stalling and dropping a wing longer then the XVI due to the full span wing. If I get in a turn fight with a 16, more often then not he'll drop a wing first, have to level out and nose down and he's dead.
Yep, those clipped wings come at a price and that's a not so stellar low to stall speed performance. One of the tactics I like to use is to drag a Spitfire Mk XVI to the deck and get the fight into the low/stall speed range and use the Cloverleaf, 9 out of 10 times, the XVI has to bug out and try to extend for energy after the 3rd "leaf".
ack-ack
-
I am out of here, you can not even state the goal of what you are trying to accomplish. (other than to get rid of the spit 16) Have fun talking to yourself, because if you can not even state what your real goal is, I can not begin to discuss the pro's and cons with you.
He wants the Spit16 to have a perk price of 3-5 HiTech.
-
If the spit16 had an ord load similar to the f4u or p51, it would deserve a perk because it would then be used even more which would cause an unbalance. Does that answer your question as to why it is not perked?
-
He wants the Spit16 to have a perk price of 3-5 HiTech.
But he can't explain why other than saying it is too good as demonstrated by his cherry picked evidence.
-
He wants the Spit16 to have a perk price of 3-5 HiTech.
I think he means, what's his end game. It's obvious that he wants it perked 5 points or whatever, but what does he hope to achieve by perking it.
-
I am out of here, you can not even state the goal of what you are trying to accomplish. (other than to get rid of the spit 16) Have fun talking to yourself, because if you can not even state what your real goal is, I can not begin to discuss the pro's and cons with you.
Goal? I think MA gameplay would be better and fundamentally more fair if no fighter enjoyed virtually every a2a advantage over numerous other fighter types under typical MA conditions. I think the SpitXVI deserves a perk price because of its combination of speed, turn, and E-building advantages over numerous types, and its lack of a serious weakness to mitigate these factors. Conversely, I do not believe in a perking principle that could be applied to fighters that are exceedingly popular when said airplanes are not inherently advantaged compared to rest of the set. I can not make it any clearer than this.
It is not a "SpitXVI" or an "La7" specific issue...if a machine with the same attributes had a White star, Black cross, or Rising sun painted on the wing, it would not change my mind. Clearly, if I was acting from some sort of bizarre jingoism about obsolete fighters from a war that ended over 60 years ago, I would want what is generally considered the best aircraft, the U.S.A's own F4U-4, to be unperked.
-
lol, even HiTech said screw it! :lol
-
They would unbalance gameplay. Which is what the perk system is about. Pragmatic over principle.
Okay, where is the problem here Moot? Let us say lots of experienced sticks are flying "X" ride and getting tons of kills in it. But "X" isn't inherently more effective than many other rides. So, you would see value in perking "X" for no other reason than to force some of these skilled sticks out into equally effective rides (or perhaps even some more effective rides)? I can not see what this achieves, nor does a large number of vets concentrated in "X" moderately effective ride effect the viability of other ride choices compared to the situation that would exist if they were spread out into a number of different but equally effective fighter types.
-
BnZ you would make a great politician.
-
BnZ you would make a great politician.
No, I would not, because I do not adopt or reject ideas based upon their popularity.
-
No, I would not, because I do not adopt or reject ideas based upon their popularity.
But you ignore facts like the point I made that a plane has to be Popular AND Dominate (High K/D over the norm)
You simply ignore facts and don't address the points being counter argued. I expect a response that doesn't even take into account this point.
-
Okay, where is the problem here Moot? Let us say lots of experienced sticks are flying "X" ride and getting tons of kills in it. But "X" isn't inherently more effective than many other rides. So, you would see value in perking "X" for no other reason than to force some of these skilled sticks out into equally effective rides (or perhaps even some more effective rides)? I can not see what this achieves, nor does a large number of vets concentrated in "X" moderately effective ride effect the viability of other ride choices compared to the situation that would exist if they were spread out into a number of different but equally effective fighter types.
Perking is just a way to throttle excessively unbalancing models. The goal is to have a fair and varied enough variant population. So yes, if say 50% of the players were clones of our present top 5%, whacking the other 50% who were todays bottom 5%, in one or two planes very capable but difficult to fly at 9/10ths, those planes would get perked.
-
Perking is just a way to throttle excessively unbalancing models. The goal is to have a fair and varied enough variant population.
It would seem the goal is to have a balanced population in raw numbers, "fairness" in terms of balanced performance does not seem to be goal. Which, if you like it that way, bully for you.
-
I do understand BnZ's point and I do understand his position on the spit 16, I fly the 16 quite a bit and I'm just an average virtual pilot. But if I would fly something like the P-51 it would take me almost a month to get the kills I get in a 16 in say 1 or 2 weeks. I think the numbers don't show the potential of the plane because most of the players flying it or probably from Average and down. If you had the players from average and up (which most won't ) flying it 80% of the time you would see a whole lot of whining on the BBS about the spit 16. And then I think you would see the true numbers start to show......
But I really hope those top guys stay out of it, because I would just bail every time I would see one coming :D...
-
But you ignore facts like the point I made that a plane has to be Popular AND Dominate (High K/D over the norm)
Unless that plane is the SpitXIV... :devil
Honestly, my problems with this standard are 1. It hasn't really been tested for any of the perked planes except for the F4U-1C several years ago. 2. I think that if everything were unperked, and every noob was given equal access to them, several perk planes might not make the kind of k/d "benchmarks" people are setting for perkage. 3. It *STILL* leaves open a possibility that a player-favored type could be perked while a type of approximately equal capability would not be, which seems terribly arbitrary.
-
Unless that plane is the SpitXIV... :devil
I pounded my head against that wall for a long time and at this point have given up getting it unperked. Instead I advocate it being improved to +21lbs boost on 150 octane fuel to justify it being a perk plane. The price could be adjusted as needed.
-
the spixteen is too easily beaten to be perked....seriously....now, if you went to a furball and saw 85% of all the players there were in a spixteen....then.... but you dont see that, because the spixteen is too slow for some people....I will take one up for base defense, but dont want to be in one when doras and ponies are around because you cant catch them....not hard to understand if you've flown them enough....they just arent worth a perk....I garuntee if you put a perk of 5 on them.....they would have cobwebs on them in the hangar within a month....and you'd rarely...and I mean rarely... ever see one. :aok
-
BNZ - the 16 doesn't upset the balance at all.
-
the spixteen is too easily beaten to be perked....seriously....now, if you went to a furball and saw 85% of all the players there were in a spixteen....
Actually, if I went to a furballs and 85% of planes there were SpitXVIs, I would consider that fact in and of itself to be irrelevant to question of perkage.
-
This thread has provided me qith quite a bit of entertainment...but now I think I'll speak up
I don't need to crunch a bunch of numbers...Spit 16 should not be perked because:
There are many people who play the game, that fly Spits because it's what their country had flown in WW2. What other plane do people that want to represent the RAF, (or outher countres that flew the spit) have that's all around a capable fighter for the MAs?
The Hurricane is WAY too slow to really compete
Typhoon isn't a good turner at all
Mosquito is tricky for someone who hasn't flown it, and is also a horde magnet
After the Spits, in the situation the Spit 16...what do they have? Yeah, they can fly numerous other planes with RAF markings, but that isn't the same IMO. Telling a Brit he can't fly a Spit 16 without paying up would be like saying us Americans couldn't fly P-51s without paying up for them...it's all the same.
Another reason why it shouldn't be perked...
There are many people in the game that play once or twice a week if lucky. Many people say "Oh, people need to jump out of the Spit and learn a 'real' plane". Well, that isn't a possibility for alot of guys. The Spit 16 is convenient in the fact that someone can jump in it, and still compete with the regulars. I imagine getting knocked down every sortie isn't fun...it gives this type of person a chance.
If the Spit were perked, the poor fellows would have to use perhaps a few months worth of built - up perk points to buy one because of their limited playing time.
You "perk the spit fanatics" need to mellow out a bit. If you're getting wacked by them that bad, send me a PM and I'll let you join my plane while I'm fighting one, you might learn something ;)
-
If it's killing you that much maybe you should be flying it to live longer. Or play in the AvA last I knew they only allow the lower performance planes in there.
-
If it's killing you that much maybe you should be flying it to live longer. Or play in the AvA last I knew they only allow the lower performance planes in there.
That is a very untrue statement.
-
Unless that plane is the SpitXIV... :devil
Honestly, my problems with this standard are 1. It hasn't really been tested for any of the perked planes except for the F4U-1C several years ago. 2. I think that if everything were unperked, and every noob was given equal access to them, several perk planes might not make the kind of k/d "benchmarks" people are setting for perkage. 3. It *STILL* leaves open a possibility that a player-favored type could be perked while a type of approximately equal capability would not be, which seems terribly arbitrary.
At least you didn't completely sidestep my point. Only half a side step. A step in the right direction though.
-
At least you didn't completely sidestep my point. Only half a side step. A step in the right direction though.
What is there to sidestep? You believe usage and k/d are important. I believe they are arbitrary and unreliable indicators because they are too dependent on factors that have nothing to do with relative aircraft performance. You presumably disagree.
Using them could at least conceivably lead to a situation where one aircraft has a perk price/low ENY and another aircraft basically equal in capacity is unperked/high ENY. I believe this possibility alone makes usage and k/d untenable for use as a standard. Presumably you disagree.
I believe that if an aircraft enjoys what amounts to near complete a2a superiority over a large number of other fighters in the set it should probably be perked, you apparently do not.
As I told Skyrock, I believe that even if a given airplane accounted for 85% of usage, that alone would *not* be a reason for perking. I'm presuming you disagree with me here as well.
We are at an impasse on the matter because we begin from completely different premises about what the perk system should and should not do.
-
A I believe that even if a given airplane accounted for 85% of usage, that alone would *not* be a reason for perking.
Well this is counterindicative to your own argument. You want the spixteen perked because it renders many planes irrelevant.
Planes not flown are irrelevant. If a plane was using 85% of all sorties, there would be many planes in the set that would be unflown, and thereby irrelevant. This is the very crux of your argument.
Now go ahead and tell me how I'm wrong because you are the only person who ever makes valid points. Tell me how wrong I am even though I'm merely echoing a point you made. This should be interesting.
-
I believe that if an aircraft enjoys what amounts to near complete a2a superiority over a large number of other fighters in the set it should probably be perked, you apparently do not.
This assertion is your fundamental flaw. You pretend as if your data shows a "near complete superiority" when there is data that is just as relevant that says it does not enjoy such a large advantage in the typical MA environment. But you are too blinded by your own crusade to even consider anything outside your hand-picked "supporting" data.
I said this all the way back on page 10, and I think it bears repeating.
So many words, and you still miss the point . . .
The Spixteen is killed by all other planes almost as often as it kills all other planes. Meaning, whatever advantages it has A) can be overcome B) are not so large as to make pilot skill irrelevant and/or C) has offsetting disadvantages that you are not accounting for.
If it was so clearly and absolutely superior to all the other non-perked aircraft in the game, we would see them to a larger degree than we do.
But good luck chasing your windmills.
-
Okay Steve.
Plane "X" is being flown for 85% of all sorties. Let us say that one of the planes *not* being flown much at all is plane "Y". But plane "X" is not in fact more capable than plane "Y"...they are about equal. That means that "X" being present even in very large numbers does not really effect the viability of "Y" for anyone who chooses to fly "Y". I would not see the justice of a situation where "X" pilots were punished with a perk price or lower ENY while "Y" pilots were rewarded with a more perks/higher ENY for flying something basically equal in capability.
An interesting real world example is the HurriIIC in the EW arena. Some people, noting that the HurriIIc has some very large usage and k/d numbers in there have called for it to be perked in the EW arena. But, because almost the entire fighter set in there would seem to have a speed advantage (including the P-40B, 109E, and Spit MkI) or a turn advantage (A6M2, Hurri MkI), I do not think perking the HurrIIc in EW would be justified.
Well this is counterindicative to your own argument. You want the spixteen perked because it renders many planes irrelevant.
Planes not flown are irrelevant. If a plane was using 85% of all sorties, there would be many planes in the set that would be unflown, and thereby irrelevant. This is the very crux of your argument.
Now go ahead and tell me how I'm wrong because you are the only person who ever makes valid points. Tell me how wrong I am even though I'm merely echoing a point you made. This should be interesting.
-
E, I am aware of the k/d numbers for the SpitXVI.
One of the interesting things you'll see in the k/d stats from 2008 is that the Fw-190 A5 has a slightly higher k/d in the LW MA than the SpitXVI. Putting them side by side the Spit is faster, turns much better, climbs and accelerates much better, rolls about as well, and its Hispanos+.50s are likely a better gun package than even the 4 cannon option on the 190.
Now, at this point, I must ask you...do you honestly think the A-5 is inherently more capable as a LW MA fighter than the SpitXVI? Or could it be that the kind of pilots who fly SpitXVIs vs. those who tend to fly 190 A-5s and the situations into which they are flown are what makes the difference in k/d?
If we agree that it is the latter, (and I think we all agree that the SpitXVI's stats are hurt badly by all the new pilots flying them) then those human factors are separate from the machine's actual capabilities and thus I reject using them as criteria for perk/ENY purposes as regards that machine.
-
Putting them side by side the Spit is faster, turns much better, climbs and accelerates much better, rolls about as well, and its Hispanos+.50s are likely a better gun package than even the 4 cannon option on the 190.
You can't be serious.
-
Bald, take a look at Gav's roll rate scores.
The SpitXVI rolls a little better than all 190s at 200mph, the 190s roll a little better at 300mph, especially the A5, and a little better at 400mph, although at that speed the difference actually appears to be more narrow than it was at 300mph. Yep, "rolls about as well" is a fair way to describe it. Don't remember whether these numbers come from the 2 cannon or 4 cannon package on the A-5.
Edit: I realize you may also have been questioning my reference to the "4 cannon option on the 190". I was talking about the 190 A-5's 4 cannon package. According to Dokgonzo's, a 4 cannon 190 A-5 is somewhat more lethal than a SpitXVI, however, the MG/FFs have inferior ballistics and short duration. So even calling lethality between the 190 A-5 and the SpitXVI a "wash" would be exceedingly generous to the 190.
You can't be serious.
-
Paleeeeeeeeeeeaase let it die already.
-
lol, even HiTech said screw it! :lol
I wonder, why this thread didnt die yet. At least, after hitech reply.
http://kippentuin.nl/ramblings/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/somebody_wrong.png
-
So we're all agreed that the Spit XIV should be unperked, right?
-
noooo! with the mild perk and the hard to fly/quirky handling myths it has somewhat of a cult appeal, lets keep it that way ;)