Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: alpini13 on October 22, 2014, 11:56:09 AM

Title: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: alpini13 on October 22, 2014, 11:56:09 AM
   GREETING FELLOW BIRDMEN,AND ALL THOSE WHO LIKE TO ROLL AROUND IN THE MUD IN A TANK.   THERE SEEMS TO BE GAPS IN THE PLANE AND VEHICLE SET.  THERE WERE MANY AIRCRAFT THAT HAD A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE WAR THAT ARE NOT IN GAME......ON THE OTHER HAND THERE ARE MANY THAT HAD VERY LOW PRODUCTION NUMBERS AND/OR SAW LITTLE ACTION.  EXAMPLE THAT COME TO MIND ARE THE P-47M(130 PRODUCED) THE TA-152(70-80 PRODUCED) THE F4U-C(200 PRODUCED),THE F4U-4(INTRODUCED TO SQUADRON IN LAST 4 MONTH OF THE WAR),THE WIRBLEWIND(ABOUT 100 MADE),THE OSTWIND(ABOUT 44 MADE) THE BREWSTER(44 MADE FOR FINLAND)THE BREWSTER MADE A SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTION TO THE FINNS AGAINST THE RUSSIANS,HOWEVER,WE SHOULD HAVE THE OTHER VARIANTS(CARRIER BASED).  I THINK HAVING THESE RIDES WITHOUT A PERK COST MAKES THE GAME TOO GAMEY.  THE WIRBLEWIND,THE TA-152,AND P-47M ARE THE MOST USED AND ABUSED RIDES INGAME.  I THOUGHT THE REASON FOR PERKING A RIDE WAS TO LIMIT ITS USE AS MOST PLAYERS MIGHT JUST USE AN ALTERNATE RIDE WITH LOWER OR NO PERK POINTS REQUIRED.  WHY DOES THIS NOT APPLY TO RIDES THAT SAW VERY LIMITED USE AND HAD VERY LIMITED PRODUCTION AS WELL?  IT SHOULD.
   THERE ARE MANY OTHER RIDES THAT DESERVE A PLACE IN GAME...WHILE WE STILL HAVE A GAME. UNLESS THAT IS UNLESS THERE IS SOMETHING IN THE WORKS TO BRING PEOLE IN GAME.  I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT GRAPHICS.  MY SUGGESTION IS TO HAVE AN OFFLINE FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR TUTTORIAL FOR ALL VEHICLES AND AIRCRAFT. A SORT OF RIDE A LONG AI VOICE THAT GIVES YOU POINTERS ON HOW TO FLY AND LAND AND WHEN PROMPTED THE HIGHLIGHTED CONTROL OR TEXT LIGHTS UP,SHOWING YOU WHAT TO DO.  EXAMPLE ON LANDING "USE YOUR FLAPS"(VOICE) AND A HIGHLIGHTED TEXT OSCREEN TO SHOW YOU HOW , AND SO ON.     THIS POST HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO YOU BY  CHEEZE! THE OTHER OTHER WHITE MEAT.
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: tunnelrat on October 22, 2014, 12:09:20 PM
(http://www.computertutorflorida.com/blog/uploaded_images/capslock2-749433.jpg)
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Lusche on October 22, 2014, 12:17:11 PM
Perking a plane or GG has never been about real production numbers. The perk mechanism is a gameplay balance.
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Zoney on October 22, 2014, 12:32:30 PM
-1 for caps

-1 on your suggestion, because the planes you picked out, the P47M and the TA152 aren't even close to being game changers.

-1 because I highly doubt the reasons you give are the real reasons you want to limit access to these aircraft.

If you don't want to fly them then don't, but don't deny me access to the TA152 or attempt to perk it because you don't like fighting them.
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: pembquist on October 22, 2014, 12:33:38 PM
I think in game use of the 152 might actually correlate reasonably to production numbers. I don't see it to often. As to your central point regarding gameyness, well, it's in the eye of the beholder. At least there are no real fantasy birds "Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe" etc. the uber, almost postwar, planes seem still within the envelope of good game play. Gamey aspects are things like HQ BOMBING WITH ONE SET OF LANCS DISRUPTING ALL RADAR AND MAKING US CHOOSE BETWEEN FLYING ENDLESS GOON RUNS OR LOOKING AT BLINKING TOWNS TO TRY TO FIND COMBAT. ahem.
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: xPoisonx on October 22, 2014, 12:43:20 PM
The 152 has the potential to be better then most planes, but it is very difficult to fly well, and shouldn't be perked because it 'can be'. The LA-7 performance wise is better in almost every catagory.  :neener:
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: alpini13 on October 22, 2014, 12:49:25 PM
lol  I LOVE CAPS LOCK.    MY REASONS FOR THE POST ARE TO MAKE GAME PLAY  MORE LEGITIMATE.   NO AIRCRAFT IS A GAME CHANGER IN GAME WHEN RELATED TO A POST THAT WAS TALKING ABOUT THEM IN REAL WORLD VS IN GAME. I ENJOY FIGHTING AGAINST ALL RIDES IN ACES HIGH.  I LIKE TO FLY THE TA-152 MYSELF.....BUT SOMETIMES IT IS TOO EASY.   RELATING THIS TO THE WAY FSO PLAYS FOR INSTANCE.   IN THE CURRENT SETUP THEY HAVE MINIMUMS AND MAXIMUMS BASED ON USAGE. AS THE FRAMES PROGRESS THERE ARE LESS OF A PARTICULAR PLANE DUE TO ATTRITION BEING FACTORED IN.    IN GAME. ALL PLANES AND RIDES WOULD STILL BE AVAILABE TO EVERYONE,THE SAME AS THE B-29,T-34/85,MOSSIE 16 AND OTHER ARE. IF ANYBODY IS WHINING ABOUT THE COST OF A FEW PERK POINTS,THEN I HAVE TO WONDER WHAT KIND OF A PERSON THAT REALLY IS,AFTER ALL, PERKS ARE EASY TO GET,AND EASY TO USE. :rofl
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: palef on October 22, 2014, 12:56:03 PM
I think you've missed the point and your caps lock fetish destroys any real or imagined legitimacy you feel your argument has. You need to learn to Internet better.
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Skyyr on October 22, 2014, 01:01:52 PM
So how many times were you shot down by a Ta-152 and/or P-47M?
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: GhostCDB on October 22, 2014, 01:03:25 PM
Alpini actually doesn't get shot down much or I don't see him get shot down that much  :lol

He does have a CAPS Lock problem.
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: xPoisonx on October 22, 2014, 01:03:41 PM
lol  I LOVE CAPS LOCK.    MY REASONS FOR THE POST ARE TO MAKE GAME PLAY  MORE LEGITIMATE.   NO AIRCRAFT IS A GAME CHANGER IN GAME WHEN RELATED TO A POST THAT WAS TALKING ABOUT THEM IN REAL WORLD VS IN GAME. I ENJOY FIGHTING AGAINST ALL RIDES IN ACES HIGH.  I LIKE TO FLY THE TA-152 MYSELF.....BUT SOMETIMES IT IS TOO EASY.   RELATING THIS TO THE WAY FSO PLAYS FOR INSTANCE.   IN THE CURRENT SETUP THEY HAVE MINIMUMS AND MAXIMUMS BASED ON USAGE. AS THE FRAMES PROGRESS THERE ARE LESS OF A PARTICULAR PLANE DUE TO ATTRITION BEING FACTORED IN.    IN GAME. ALL PLANES AND RIDES WOULD STILL BE AVAILABE TO EVERYONE,THE SAME AS THE B-29,T-34/85,MOSSIE 16 AND OTHER ARE. IF ANYBODY IS WHINING ABOUT THE COST OF A FEW PERK POINTS,THEN I HAVE TO WONDER WHAT KIND OF A PERSON THAT REALLY IS,AFTER ALL, PERKS ARE EASY TO GET,AND EASY TO USE. :rofl

So now you are saying perk the 152 because it's too easy? Are you aware of the La7, P51, Spit 16, Nik2 or any other plane in the game?!?  :neener:

 :noid
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: GhostCDB on October 22, 2014, 01:08:18 PM
So now you are saying perk the 152 because it's too easy? Are you aware of the La7, P51, Spit 16, Nik2 or any other plane in the game?!?

Spit 16's aren't all that easy to fly, specially if someone doesn't know what they are doing.
LA7's are easy mode, but so is Yak3. If La7 is perked then Yak3 should be perked regardless of ammo load.
P51 pilots are almost always garbage when they lose speed, its just getting them to lose speed.
N1K's should be perked lol I don't care what anyone says. It is a Japanese CHOG, like its crazy how uber it is.

152 and 47M should be perked, along with 190Dora. Just so I get more perks for killing run turds.  :old:
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: hcrana on October 22, 2014, 01:12:37 PM
Who reads posts in all-caps?  Pfft.  Get a grip, man.
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Skyyr on October 22, 2014, 01:17:25 PM
Spit 16's aren't all that easy to fly, specially if someone doesn't know what they are doing.

A pilot who doesn't know what they're doing simply doesn't know what they're doing in any plane. That doesn't change that a Spit is exponentially easier to fly than almost any other aircraft, specifically because of it's e-retention. Even the LA-7, as uber as it is, will bleed E and torque out if handled incorrectly. The Spit retains it at all flight envelopes.
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: DmonSlyr on October 22, 2014, 01:20:06 PM
The 152 was already perked at one time. It was proven that it should not be.

The p47m isn't that great. It is a decent plane to say the least but unless you are in a group of p47s it really doesn't stand out among the crowd.

The Chog and 4hog are perked.

Perks are not about the production of the plane. It's about what would happen if everyone in the MA flew temps, it obviously would not be that fun.
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: JimmyC on October 22, 2014, 01:21:27 PM
I think you've missed the point and your caps lock fetish destroys any real or imagined legitimacy you feel your argument has. You need to learn to Internet better.

Wot E said innit
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Arlo on October 22, 2014, 01:37:28 PM
BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH YABBA DOO  :D
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Vraciu on October 22, 2014, 01:39:19 PM
Who reads posts in all-caps?  Pfft.  Get a grip, man.

This.

I made it three words.

/Thread
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Zerstorer on October 22, 2014, 01:49:52 PM
Spit 16's aren't all that easy to fly, specially if someone doesn't know what they are doing.

 :O

I missed the sarcasm tag.  You meant to use the sarcasm tag, right?
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: GhostCDB on October 22, 2014, 01:57:09 PM
The 152 was already perked at one time. It was proven that it should not be.

The p47m isn't that great. It is a decent plane to say the least but unless you are in a group of p47s it really doesn't stand out among the crowd.

The Chog and 4hog are perked.

Perks are not about the production of the plane. It's about what would happen if everyone in the MA flew temps, it obviously would not be that fun.

So if everyone in the arena flew N1K's and Spit16's and LA7's . . . that would be fun?
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Someguy63 on October 22, 2014, 02:05:10 PM
Can we all stfu about the caps-lock and just read the god dang post at least it's still in freakin English.



And I agree with the OP to a degree.
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: pembquist on October 22, 2014, 02:07:18 PM
Can we all stfu about the caps-lock and just read the god dang post at least it's still in freakin English.

Thats right, lets stop talking about caps lock.
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Someguy63 on October 22, 2014, 02:10:38 PM
Thats right, lets stop talking about caps lock.

Yes it's like a 3 year-old complaining that his PB & J was cut in triangles and not halfs.
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: GhostCDB on October 22, 2014, 02:15:36 PM
Yes it's like a 3 year-old complaining that his PB & J was cut in triangles and not halfs.

Just to clarify, I was that 3 year old. . .like all I ask is for halfs and I can't get that?
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Someguy63 on October 22, 2014, 02:17:03 PM
Just to clarify, I was that 3 year old. . .like all I ask is for halfs and I can't get that?

But the people here are not three, they're supposed to be adults...least most of em are.
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Arlo on October 22, 2014, 02:21:38 PM
BECAUSE TALKING ABOUT STOPPING TALKING ABOUT CAPS LOCK FOR A DOZEN MORE POSTS IS SUPPORTING THE OP.  :D :cheers:
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Karnak on October 22, 2014, 02:23:32 PM
Perking based on historical production numbers gets you stupid results such as perked C.205s and free La-7s, perked easy kill aircraft like the Brewster and free highly capable aircraft like the Spitfire Mk XVI.  It simply doesn't work in the context of the game.
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Someguy63 on October 22, 2014, 02:30:48 PM
BECAUSE TALKING ABOUT STOPPING TALKING ABOUT CAPS LOCK FOR A DOZEN MORE POSTS IS SUPPORTING THE OP.  :D :cheers:

  :old:
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Vraciu on October 22, 2014, 02:34:34 PM
Thats right, lets stop talking about caps lock.

IAGREE.LET'SALLTALKINCAPSANDWHILEWEAREAT ITSTOPUSINGSPACES,TOO.THENPEOPLECANREADEVENFASTERBECAUSESPACESSLOWTHINGSDOWN.YOUKNOWWHATIMEAN?
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: pembquist on October 22, 2014, 03:09:06 PM
Perking based on historical production numbers gets you stupid results such as perked C.205s and free La-7s, perked easy kill aircraft like the Brewster and free highly capable aircraft like the Spitfire Mk XVI.  It simply doesn't work in the context of the game.

I vote this to be the best response. Clear, concise, coherent and some other c words. Extra points for no caps.
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: tunnelrat on October 22, 2014, 03:15:50 PM
If you take away peoples laming rides, they whine and piss and moan and quit and go play something else.

People say "Go to the DA!" or "Go to the AVA!"  the problem is, the DA is a cesspool half the time... it's like if the Lord of the Flies community was left to its own devices for 40 years and you then happen upon it.

The AVA is a ghost town.

Then you have Early War and Mid-War... Early war is for 2 kinds of people:

1.  People trying to game and/or pad scores
2.  Weirdos

Mid-War is for 3 kinds of people:

1.  People trying to game and/or pad scores
2.  Weirdos
3.  People who want to fly in the MA but the MA is down

So in the end, everyone comes back to the MA because that's where all the people are.  

And everyone can be all like:

(http://images.dailystar-uk.co.uk/dynamic/1/281x351/224254_1.jpg)

About the Bronie hordes, and the Hair-dryers, and the mudwraslin GV drivers with the Electrolarynx 18-pack-a-day drunkin ranged spam, and the spam on 200 that simultaneously saps both the soul and ones overall cognitive reasoning abilities...

But in the end, nothing major is going to change... your only options are:

Denial

- Just up from another base, try the aforementioned weirdo arenas, maybe switch squads or countries... try shading for awhile

Anger

- Start a goat rodeo on General (go ahead and check that box in this case) in an attempt to fire up your base in a grass roots movement to get things changed.  

Bargaining

- Come up with a well-reasoned treatise and present it on the wishlist where it will be violently savaged.  If you can get HiTech to comment, you get extra points.  (If you can get HiTech to send you a cease and desist PM, it's like a hidden achievement)

Depression

(This one is kind of a fork, but they each lead to the same place)

Option A: Become an absolute trainwreck... embarrass yourself, destroy your reputation, get chatbanned in game.  A forum PNG is the "boss-level fight" for this option.

Option B: Become sullen and withdrawn.  Continue to squeak about things, but only passive-aggressively.  Become absurdly good at Aces, especially in one specific ride.  Be so good in that ride that even though everyone knows you're a butt-hole, they only actualy say "Man, he's an awesome 38 driver!" (or whatever plane... as long as it's a 38 or something German... MAYBE a P-47, but only if you're especially butt-holish)

Option C: Go play something else.  Once you start having retarded dreams about dropping torpedos on a task force and surviving, that's your cue that it's time to come back.

Acceptance

- Stop caring, play the game, and violently savage posts by those in the Anger/Bargaining phases.

- Make big plans to create a map for the MA.  Download all the stuff for it.  Realize exactly what you've gotten yourself into.  Stop.

-  Possibly consider becoming a CM.  Read a few PMs that CMs are treated to.  Reconsider.

-  Drink more, fly early/midwar rides in the MA.

Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: DmonSlyr on October 22, 2014, 03:22:58 PM
So if everyone in the arena flew N1K's and Spit16's and LA7's . . . that would be fun?

Personally, I'd rather fight against these planes than running temps, 190Ds, and p51s, but that is just me.
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: rvflyer on October 22, 2014, 04:26:30 PM
So tunnelrat what is YOUR definition of weirdo's? I have found that MW has some really great nice and friendly people playing there regardless of what chess piece they support.  :furious

If you take away peoples laming rides, they whine and piss and moan and quit and go play something else.

People say "Go to the DA!" or "Go to the AVA!"  the problem is, the DA is a cesspool half the time... it's like if the Lord of the Flies community was left to its own devices for 40 years and you then happen upon it.

The AVA is a ghost town.

Then you have Early War and Mid-War... Early war is for 2 kinds of people:

1.  People trying to game and/or pad scores
2.  Weirdos

Mid-War is for 3 kinds of people:

1.  People trying to game and/or pad scores
2.  Weirdos
3.  People who want to fly in the MA but the MA is down

So in the end, everyone comes back to the MA because that's where all the people are.  

And everyone can be all like:

(http://images.dailystar-uk.co.uk/dynamic/1/281x351/224254_1.jpg)

About the Bronie hordes, and the Hair-dryers, and the mudwraslin GV drivers with the Electrolarynx 18-pack-a-day drunkin ranged spam, and the spam on 200 that simultaneously saps both the soul and ones overall cognitive reasoning abilities...

But in the end, nothing major is going to change... your only options are:

Denial

- Just up from another base, try the aforementioned weirdo arenas, maybe switch squads or countries... try shading for awhile

Anger

- Start a goat rodeo on General (go ahead and check that box in this case) in an attempt to fire up your base in a grass roots movement to get things changed.  

Bargaining

- Come up with a well-reasoned treatise and present it on the wishlist where it will be violently savaged.  If you can get HiTech to comment, you get extra points.  (If you can get HiTech to send you a cease and desist PM, it's like a hidden achievement)

Depression

(This one is kind of a fork, but they each lead to the same place)

Option A: Become an absolute trainwreck... embarrass yourself, destroy your reputation, get chatbanned in game.  A forum PNG is the "boss-level fight" for this option.

Option B: Become sullen and withdrawn.  Continue to squeak about things, but only passive-aggressively.  Become absurdly good at Aces, especially in one specific ride.  Be so good in that ride that even though everyone knows you're a butt-hole, they only actualy say "Man, he's an awesome 38 driver!" (or whatever plane... as long as it's a 38 or something German... MAYBE a P-47, but only if you're especially butt-holish)

Option C: Go play something else.  Once you start having retarded dreams about dropping torpedos on a task force and surviving, that's your cue that it's time to come back.

Acceptance

- Stop caring, play the game, and violently savage posts by those in the Anger/Bargaining phases.

- Make big plans to create a map for the MA.  Download all the stuff for it.  Realize exactly what you've gotten yourself into.  Stop.

-  Possibly consider becoming a CM.  Read a few PMs that CMs are treated to.  Reconsider.

-  Drink more, fly early/midwar rides in the MA.


Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Zoney on October 22, 2014, 04:48:52 PM
Tunnelrat, (which is really just a Mole), that's oneof the finest posts I have ever read.  thank you sir, made my day, and from hence forward I will feel guilty when I gleefully blow you out of the sky.  :salute
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Arlo on October 22, 2014, 05:40:19 PM
Hey, TR .....

(http://i1197.photobucket.com/albums/aa433/arloguh03/YoHoHoHoAPLFM_zps03d05383.png~original)

Squad night is ... well,well .... Hump Daaaaaay! Currently Rook but that may be subject to change with numbers. We fly FSO (Friday Squad Ops) religiously with an average of 17 planes a frame (we fly all sorts or aircraft there but it's extra special if blue planes are features - extra extra special if they have bent wings).

(http://i1197.photobucket.com/albums/aa433/arloguh03/021_zpsd6541051.png~original)
But we've even flown the I-16 in the FSO.

We play scenarios (especially the ones that feature Corsairs). We like the Corsair. A Lot. We like carrier ops. We've been known to booze it up a bit when we're together.

(http://i1197.photobucket.com/albums/aa433/arloguh03/poster005_zps373d564d.png~original)

(http://i1197.photobucket.com/albums/aa433/arloguh03/F4U1A_port_gear_down002_zps1a5697a6.png~original)
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: tunnelrat on October 22, 2014, 06:04:08 PM
So tunnelrat what is YOUR definition of weirdo's? I have found that MW has some really great nice and friendly people playing there regardless of what chess piece they support.  :furious


I mean weirdo in the best way possible.

I just flew ENY 35 and 40 birds off the CV against the waves of latewar apex predators... so many players in this game that have been around forever, you'd think they would branch out some.... but whatever floats your boat I guess...
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Tumor on October 22, 2014, 07:05:26 PM
Want balance?.... too many perks = hangar queens only
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: RotBaron on October 22, 2014, 07:36:51 PM
Tunnelrat, (which is really just a Mole), that's oneof the finest posts I have ever read.  thank you sir, made my day, and from hence forward I will feel guilty when I gleefully blow you out of the sky.  :salute

+1  :rofl

 :aok
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: bustr on October 22, 2014, 07:37:22 PM
Arlo, your Doxy's are like Aces High.

Everyone wants one, and keeps trying in the face of logic or reality, without wanting to invest any time into changing themselves to be attractive to them. And all cheer on queue for the few who regularly win their attentions but, secretly hope a bus hits them while on the way to their next date.

Aces High, either you are one of the few getting some, or the many dreaming about buses.

Personally I prefer short buses. They are more maneuverable.
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: xPoisonx on October 22, 2014, 10:17:07 PM
 :noid
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Rich46yo on October 22, 2014, 11:28:47 PM
The P47M is a Beast! Unfortunately for it the game is mostly played at altitudes where it doesnt shine "as much". Its still a Beast!

I understand and respect the purists who always want niche and early aircraft, I really do. As a History Buff I understand the importance many of these airframes had. I even enjoy flying many of them.

But I think the game would have lost far fewer players had it a more relaxed criteria of inclusion.
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Arlo on October 23, 2014, 06:54:00 AM
Arlo, your Doxy's are like Aces High.

Everyone wants one, and keeps trying in the face of logic or reality, without wanting to invest any time into changing themselves to be attractive to them. And all cheer on queue for the few who regularly win their attentions but, secretly hope a bus hits them while on the way to their next date.

Aces High, either you are one of the few getting some, or the many dreaming about buses.

Personally I prefer short buses. They are more maneuverable.

 :lol
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Randy1 on October 23, 2014, 07:02:18 AM
I have thought adding production numbers to a plane balance system would help.  Its a shame the OP choose all caps to bring up a good discussion.

It would be interesting to have a historical production numbers plane balance system but perking isn't it in my opinion.  Any player should have access to a 262 as an example but say you get only one 262 per tour.  Crash it, damage it, or get killed and it is gone.  Same thing on the P47M, 152 and so on.  You might get say 150 P51s and 200 P38ls per tour.  I made these numbers up as a WAG example only.

Missions might offer an exception by not counting against your personal hanger but still have a balance restriction like having only one P47M per mission.
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Scca on October 23, 2014, 07:19:58 AM
The P47M is a Beast!
I agree...

The only reason I fly it is so I can run down timid Pee-51's and Run-90's....  Once I scare them to the deck or back to their base, I am free to hunt the bombers :)

I don't agree with the OP's idea... 
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Zerstorer on October 23, 2014, 08:14:56 AM
P47M is a beast...but not a perkable one IMO.  Fine plane and in the hands of an experienced cartoon pilot quite deadly but not a potential game changer when it shows up to a fight.
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Scca on October 23, 2014, 08:28:32 AM
P47M is a beast...but not a perkable one IMO.  Fine plane and in the hands of an experienced cartoon pilot quite deadly but not a potential game changer when it shows up to a fight.
Something is wrong in the space time continuum when you and I agree on something...  Are the end times here?  :noid
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Zerstorer on October 23, 2014, 08:43:45 AM
Something is wrong in the space time continuum when you and I agree on something...  Are the end times here?  :noid

(http://i427.photobucket.com/albums/pp355/boomslang/meteorstrikerelaxitwillallbeoversoo.jpg)
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Karnak on October 23, 2014, 09:48:58 AM
I have thought adding production numbers to a plane balance system would help.  Its a shame the OP choose all caps to bring up a good discussion.

It would be interesting to have a historical production numbers plane balance system but perking isn't it in my opinion.  Any player should have access to a 262 as an example but say you get only one 262 per tour.  Crash it, damage it, or get killed and it is gone.  Same thing on the P47M, 152 and so on.  You might get say 150 P51s and 200 P38ls per tour.  I made these numbers up as a WAG example only.

Missions might offer an exception by not counting against your personal hanger but still have a balance restriction like having only one P47M per mission.
The problem is that you made them up.  Your numbers aren't based on historical production, but on what you think should be available to the player.  Lets say you get 1 of a type per tour for every 250 built, but not less than 1, otherwise rounded to the nearest whole number.  Ok, a single Ta152, Ostwind, Wirbelwind, F4U-1C, but also a single Brewster, C.205, Spitfire F.Mk IX (system will actually allow more Mk XVI's than any other kind of Spitfire) and so on.  It gives six Me262s, four Spitfire Mk XIVs, three Fw190D-9s, two N1K2-Js. Twelve to fourteen Ki-84s and a whopping thirty-three P-51Ds.  As you can see, the numbers are all over the place and not related at all to the power of the unit.
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: tunnelrat on October 23, 2014, 12:33:48 PM
The problem is that you made them up.  Your numbers aren't based on historical production, but on what you think should be available to the player.  Lets say you get 1 of a type per tour for every 250 built, but not less than 1, otherwise rounded to the nearest whole number.  Ok, a single Ta152, Ostwind, Wirbelwind, F4U-1C, but also a single Brewster, C.205, Spitfire F.Mk IX (system will actually allow more Mk XVI's than any other kind of Spitfire) and so on.  It gives six Me262s, four Spitfire Mk XIVs, three Fw190D-9s, two N1K2-Js. Twelve to fourteen Ki-84s and a whopping thirty-three P-51Ds.  As you can see, the numbers are all over the place and not related at all to the power of the unit.

I've always found it interesting that so many people are absolutely zealous when it comes to historical numbers, yet oddly satisfied with the Axis/Allied combined arms exercises in the MA.

Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: bustr on October 23, 2014, 02:21:32 PM
You think it has something to do with changing sides at will to fly the uber ride of the matchup?

In 12 years I've seen that as a draw back to CT\AvA. Takes a different kind of perspective to knowingly choose the dog rides in each matchup. When Waystin last year was a CM in the AvA, I agreed to fly the dog ride side with him to have numbers. It was simply amazing how many lemmings chose the other side because they believed they would have a good night off my dog ride. Many did and got very angry when killed. You cannot play this game for 12 years and not learn a few things besides HOing with your tracers off.

The MA keeps paying customers happy by letting them have their illusion of uber ride whenever they want it ENY respective. While the most divisive rides are perked on purpose. Don't mess with it. We need paying customers with their illusion of uberness returning, because they can get their ride mostly when they want it. And get lucky with it more often than in none uber rides.

HiTech has never billed the MA as a WW2 arena. The closest thing would be a millionaires flying club in Texas with fully restored rides from WW2 to play air combat with using lasers like some of the pay to ride dogfight companies.   
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Randy1 on October 23, 2014, 02:57:32 PM
The problem is that you made them up.  Your numbers aren't based on historical production, but on what you think should be available to the player.  Lets say you get 1 of a type per tour for every 250 built, but not less than 1, otherwise rounded to the nearest whole number.  Ok, a single Ta152, Ostwind, Wirbelwind, F4U-1C, but also a single Brewster, C.205, Spitfire F.Mk IX (system will actually allow more Mk XVI's than any other kind of Spitfire) and so on.  It gives six Me262s, four Spitfire Mk XIVs, three Fw190D-9s, two N1K2-Js. Twelve to fourteen Ki-84s and a whopping thirty-three P-51Ds.  As you can see, the numbers are all over the place and not related at all to the power of the unit.

Note, I made no claim to even being close to being right and it was merely an example to show a possible method of plane balance.  Do you not know what WAG means?

I said
Quote
I made these numbers up as a WAG example only.

I only suggested it be based on historical production numbers or I might add, some better data for the each war arena.  HTC has much more data than I do
If the numbers work out that you  have six 262's for the tour and 1 brew, then so be it.  Everyone would have the same hanger load-out.  Better players would keep them longer and worse players would not.

The end of the tour might be blast depending on what people has left in their hanger.
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: bustr on October 23, 2014, 03:26:11 PM
If we were WT, why yes, WT already charges for better toys. People pay a flat fee for the MA and everything available with HiTech imposing perks on some rides. What you want will limit their choices which the current customer base of credit card owners didn't fork over their number to HTC for.

Please before you try to convince HiTech to suddenly devalue their $14.95. Convince all of the customers En blanc who's $14.95 keeps HTC in it's payroll and the lights on, that they should concede to your idea and self devalue their expectations of what they will get for their $14.95.
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: craz07 on October 24, 2014, 02:35:49 PM
All i can say to these posts are ooh oohh ahh ahhh .... lol  :angel:
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Debrody on October 25, 2014, 11:12:40 AM
VISIT WWW.ALPINIISAWESOME.COM FOR MORE TIPS ABOUT USING THE CAPS LOCK BUTTON

 :aok
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: bustr on October 26, 2014, 03:56:15 PM
Just put your fingers in your ears when you read his posts.
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: Devil 505 on October 26, 2014, 09:41:50 PM
(http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff252/DropkickYankees/Caps.gif~original) (http://s241.photobucket.com/user/DropkickYankees/media/Caps.gif.html)
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: GhostCDB on October 28, 2014, 12:44:07 PM
Personally, I'd rather fight against these planes than running temps, 190Ds, and p51s, but that is just me.

The fact that you can get a LA7 to not run does excite me.

Just a question though, why would you expect a Tempest to fight? They don't have much going for them in a fight. Not saying they aren't any good in a fight but a lot of people can't even control K4 torque let alone the Tempest torque. If you see a tempest that should automatically signal in your head he won't fight. Same with a 262, running is their best defense. Unless you expect 262's to fight also, then you're just a ... idk and I recommend lowering your consumption in weed to a healthy gram and a half a day.  :D

I have found the people that fly 190D and P51D are the K/D sluts and they care about their K/D a ridiculous amount. They can have a .3 hit % and have a 15 K/D with a .19 K/S and 2 kills per hour and be completely okay with it. I am not sure where the fun in that is but its their 12.95 or 14.95.
Title: Re: PRODUCTION NUMBERS VS IMPACT ON THE WAR, DO THEY DESERVE TO BE IN GAME?
Post by: -ammo- on October 28, 2014, 01:03:37 PM
P-47M is a great AC, but only becomes a "beast" at 26K or better.  As we all know (with a few notable exceptions like zoney), most players come into the fight with much less altitude.