Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Karnak on March 20, 2002, 07:08:06 PM
-
I am absolutely thrilled that the Spitfire Mk XIV is going to show up in AH. I'm even happier that it is a razor back version. When I read that the Spitfire graphics were being redone I figured this was about the most likely time to see the Mk XIV added, but it wasn't in the 1.09 release. That was OK, I am having a lot of fun with the Spitfire Mk Ia.
And then to see those screen shots!!!:D
We may be off base in expecting it to show up in a patch, but I can hope.
My request is this:
Enable the 2 20mm and 4 .303 as an gun option on it, please. I know that this wasn't the most common configuration, but the first razor back Mk XIV's did have that gun package. To me it is the quintessential Spitfire armament and I will always pick it over 2 20mm cannon and 2 50 calibre machine guns.
Thanks.
-
It better be an E with the fuselage camera option.
-
Pongo,
Look at the screenshots. It is a razorback Mk XIV. It should have the c and e options available, but no camera.
For which I am very thankful for.
Those that want that look can go fly a P-51D. Fighter Ace 3 has a silver, bubble canopy, clipped wing Spitfire XIV. Looks just like a P-51D.
The RAF planeset in AH is stacked for low altitude fighters. What was needed, even perked, was a good high altitude fighter. The Spitfire F.Mk XIVc is just that.
(I'd still like to see a bubble canopy Spitfire Mk XVI added at some point)
-
\ Are they realy going to add the MK XIV?
-
I hope Grayarea doesn't mind me doing this. If it is a problem, post and I'll edit it out.
Spitfire F.Mk XIVc
(http://www.webtreatz.com/spit14_2.jpg)
-
Now, if you really want a high perk Spit, model the XII :) It sounds like it was the hottest down low. Though I'm with karnak on the bubble top XVI LF/E, it's my favorite of the breed.
Charon
-
shame if it's perked, plenty of late-war rides that aren't perked.
If it is perked however, it should get it's 4*20mm optional loadout......:D
Now all thats needed is the spit21.;)
-
How did you get that screenshot?
-
It has a "Spit14" icon, that means it will be a perk plane. That is as it should be. Unperked, the Spit XIV would be far, far too common.
The British planeset is already stacked with low altitude fighters (Hurri I, Hurri IIc, Hurri IId, Mossie VI, Spit Ia, Spit Vb, Seafire IIc, Tiffie Ib and Tempest V), the Mk XII would perform no better than the Mk XIV down there, and it would be terrible at altitude. The Mk XIV adds a high performance at altitude fighter to the British planeset.
The Spitfire Mk XIV was never eqipped with 4 20mm cannon.
The screenshot was posted by Grayarea from Apache's film of the Spit14.
-
All I am asking is:
Did sombody make this?
Or is this real.
If it is not and all those spit lovers are having their chains pulled I would say I feal your pain and join you all the hunt for this dasterdadly dude.
If it is for real i wonder how much it will cost, 60 like the F4U 4, or more? Spits are a pain as it is I wonder how much it will be....hmmmm
-
brady,
It seems to be quite real. HiTech was flying it.
If it costs 60+ I will be quite disappointed. The F4U-4 is a much later and more potent fighter than the Mk XIV, if you fly to its strengths.
At 60 points I will not be able to use it often enough to get used to its handling in combat.
Remember, the Mk XIV can only do 357-363mph on the deck. There are many free aircraft, including the #3 and #4 on the frequency list, that will run it down. It is slow down low and will have a perk icon than means every single enemy aircraft will be gunning for it.
I expect to land very few of them.
-
LOL
man I hadnt seen that..
Interesting combo of E wing and small horizontal stab..
Im honestly sorry they didnt go for a clip wing, Big tail, bubble top E model. Maybe they did want to put in some of the directional stability problems associated with the smaller tail to keep the beast under wraps..
Congrats Karnak. its been a long campaign bud..dont whine about the cost now....
-
Pongo,
There's always the CT if its too expensive for me to fly in the MA.
-
Well I am happy for you Karnak, it is good to want things but gereraly better to get them once in a while:)
-
I don't want to rain on anyones parade here.. But there are what like 4 spits in AH now?? And now we are getting another one. Before HTC adds another spit they should add a P-40 and a early model P-38 like a F or a late H model. P-38 has only one version and we need a P-40. Reason being the P-38 needs another version is the most US fighters have at least 2 models the 38 only has one. Well as for the P-40 everyone wants one :). We really don't need another damn spit in AH right now!!!! Other planes need to be modeled before the spit14 is addad.
Cw
=Twin Engined Devils=
-
BigCrate,
It is much, much easier for them to do a varient of an existing aircraft than it is to do a new aircraft, so a Spit 14 does not equal a P-40.
I agree that a valid case can be made for the P-38, but consider also the late war nature of this game and the fact that the most mordern Spit in AH is from 1942.
The Spit was the main British fighter from 1941 through the end of the war, and there have not been representative Spits for that till now.
There are 5 109s and 5 190s (counting the 152, which I do) because those were the mainline German fighter through the war. Unlike the British planeset, they already had 1944 and even 1945 stuff, not just 1940-1942 stuff.
FWIW, I'd be quite surprised if 1.1 doesn't include a P-40.
-
"Unlike the British planeset, they already had 1944 and even 1945 stuff, not just 1940-1942 stuff. "
You're forgetting the Typhoon and Tempest, both 1944 planes as modeled in AH and quite British.
J_A_B
-
J_A_B,
No, actualy I'm not.
I was talking about their mainline fighter's representation in AH, the Spitfire. The Typhoon was never considered to really be a fighter and the Tempest was never the mainline fighter during WWII (if ever).
Verm has made valid comments about the Mk XIV not being the best representative of 1944 Spitfires, but it is more representative than the Merlin 61 Spitfire IX we have now. The Spitfire XIV saw service in 1944, unlike the Spitfire F.IX. A Spitfire LF.IX would have been the most representative, but HTC seems to have felt that a perk Spitfire should be very much better than the F.IX free Spitfire.
-
I know Karnak, I was just yanking your chain :) All meant in good humor.
J_A_B
-
Oh, we getting the Spit XIV and as a razorback, that will really be a representative late 1944/1945 RAF plane.
But i must admit as a good old LW whiner. I hope they do the 18lbs. boost pressure/100 Octane variant and not the 25lbs./150 octane variant.
If they do the 1st one i would say it should only be perked at low costs 8-15points, but if they add the later one i would think that 50-60 perks points would be the better choice.
Anyway, one more plane a LW driver has to run from if he meets it co-alt, and this time he can only get away with the D9 or G10 (not including the perk rides).
Edit: Just to make one thing clear. I am for the addition of the Spit XIV, it is just fair to give the RAF one of there late war planes. And i am for the perking of it, just for the gamebalance. Cause as the MA is setup now (and will be for ever i think) a free Spit XIV would badly change the already imbalanced Axis/Allied plane usage of the MA.
-
I'm very happy for our RAF friends. AH and his plane set badly needed a late war Spitfire.
And yes, another fighter axis pilots have to extend from ;)
P.S.: now its really time for a P-40 and a light/medium RAF bomber.
P.P.S.: wheres my G.55 "Centauro"? .... :mad:
-
karnak, there were varients of the spit XIV that had 4*20mm. All spit's with the C wing had the option for 4 20mm cannons.
-
The E wing could take 4 Hispanos. But it was not done on a XIV that I have ever seen or heard. It was not done on E wing Spit VIII, IX or XVIs either. It was done on Spit Vcs.
-
If we really are getting the XIV (I guess so since the icon's in the code), then congrats to Karnak and the RAF! You will now have a pretty good plane set for the entire war :)
mauser
-
Originally posted by Naudet:
But i must admit as a good old LW whiner. I hope they do the 18lbs. boost pressure/100 Octane variant and not the 25lbs./150 octane variant.
If they do the 1st one i would say it should only be perked at low costs 8-15points, but if they add the later one i would think that 50-60 perks points would be the better choice.
Naudet,
I agree with everything you've said here, except the "luftwhiner" comment. ;)
Thrila,
Pongo is spot on about Spitfire armaments. I have never heard of a post-Spitfire Mk Vc Spit that had 4 20mm cannon until the Spitfire F.21 showed up. They could almost all be equipped that way, but none actually were.
-
Congrats Karnak ole buddy!
Now feel free to shut up. Ok? :) :)
-
Originally posted by brady
All I am asking is:
Did sombody make this?
Or is this real.
If it is not and all those spit lovers are having their chains pulled I would say I feal your pain and join you all the hunt for this dasterdadly dude.
If it is for real i wonder how much it will cost, 60 like the F4U 4, or more? Spits are a pain as it is I wonder how much it will be....hmmmm
Look no further. I'm the spitV behind the 14.
-
Originally posted by J_A_B
"Unlike the British planeset, they already had 1944 and even 1945 stuff, not just 1940-1942 stuff. "
You're forgetting the Typhoon and Tempest, both 1944 planes as modeled in AH and quite British.
J_A_B
The Typhoon Ib first entered service with the RAF in early 1942, although the one in Aces High does have the 1943 style canopy (but the plane itself is the same as is the performance - 1942 performance!).
The Lancaster we have in AH has a 1944 rear turret but again the plane and it's performance is from 1942.
The Spitfire IX first entered RAF service in late 1942.
So, for me if the Spit 14 is perked then so should the 190D9, P51D, NIK2J, La7....
Regards
Nexx
-
Originally posted by Replicant
The Typhoon Ib first entered service with the RAF in early 1942, although the one in Aces High does have the 1943 style canopy (but the plane itself is the same as is the performance - 1942 performance!).
The Lancaster we have in AH has a 1944 rear turret but again the plane and it's performance is from 1942.
The Spitfire IX first entered RAF service in late 1942.
So, for me if the Spit 14 is perked then so should the 190D9, P51D, NIK2J, La7....
Regards
Nexx
Why? It's been stated more than once by HTC that planes are perked due to their unbalancing of the MA, not due to their arrival in the war or thier scarcity. It just happens that most of our perked planes are late model low availability models. None of the above listed planes are particularly unbalancing in the MA.
It remains to be seen whether the 14 would be, though I think it's a given that it'll be at least a low perk cost plane.
D
-
oh joy, more spits.
:rolleyes:
-
"but the plane itself is the same as is the performance - 1942 performance!"
There is also the matter of the 4-blade propeller which wasn't on Typhoons in 1942 and made a distinct improvement in performance, which makes your claim incorrect. Plus 1944 Typhoons didn't have to worry about having their tails randomly fall off. Nevermind that though, as I was merely trolling Karnak in that other post of mine.
Besides, seriously, why do introducation dates matter? WW2 ended more than 50 years ago; when some airplane was introduced to it is irrevelent. What country a plane flew for doesn't matter; nor does its wartime service record. WW2 is history, nothing more.
What matters to AH's perk system is how a given plane will affect the balance in the MA. The D-9, N1K2, P-51D, Spit9, LA7, all those planes balance each other out quite nicely. The 262, F4U-4, F4U-1C, Tempest and 234 (and arguably the 152) do NOT balance out so they're perked. Stupid unimportant irrevelent trivia like numbers produced or introduction dates have nothing to do with it.
Will the Spit 14 fit in with the rest of them? I'll let HTC decide.
J_A_B
-
Originally posted by J_A_B
WW2 is history, nothing more.
J_A_B
:confused:
And nothing less.
AH is a computer game from the late 90's, nothing more.
Not dissing AH; just rather worried by your sense of perspective.
regards,
Salem
-
yeah unperk it and the arena will be full off dweebs
-
Originally posted by BUG_EAF322
yeah unperk it and the arena will be full off dweebs
The arena is already full of dweebs, so why should tomorrow be any different:)
-
I hope the one we get is the monster:). Perk or not! We need a true "sputnikfire".
-
"Not dissing AH; just rather worried by your sense of perspective."
Worry not my friend, my priorities are quite in order. WW2 is far, far more important to human history than AH will ever be.
That though, doesn't change my opinion that what happened in WW2 is of little relevence to the AH MA.
J_A_B
-
mmmmmmmmmmm...the Spitfire 14........
I hope it is not going to be the last spit....I'd like 2 more at least.
Firstly the wing clipped Mk IX Lf, and then the Mk21....
The spit XIV is truly a monster, and needs to be perked in AH, simply because how good it is.
Although the deck speed is not that impressive, its acceleration and climb are insane, while the plane still turns equally to the Spitfire Mk IX. Hell, some Spit XIV pilots even allowed the 190's to bounce them, just to get them co-alt, co-E was not the issue. Once they merged, the 190 could not escape upwards, not downwards, and not turn, so the best it could do was roll around until it got shot!!
The G10 may be faster, but with such a tight margin, playing with a spit XIV is a dangerous business.
I wonder how many perks it will cost. I basically think that the perk rides too expensive, say double. But I'll be saving my points for this one, you can bet on it:D
-
Have a pic of a spit VIII with 4 hispanos (wartime) also with modded wings for high alt work
SKurj
-
Originally posted by SKurj
Have a pic of a spit VIII with 4 hispanos (wartime) also with modded wings for high alt work
A field refit perhaps? AFAIR Karnak stated that no Spit with 4 hispanos came from the factory after Spit Vc.
-
I have a nice little article comparing the Spit XIV against the Mustang III and the Tempest. Their conclusions:
Above 20k the spit is the better aircraft. Below 20k the Tempest. I'll have to reread it but it seemed to say the Spit and the 51 were equal overall (not considering range)
Perk value for the Spit?? how about and even 50 +)
SKurj
-
It somehow just doesn't strike me as right that the Fw190D-9 (700 built and introduced in Sept, 1944) and P-51D (many thousands built, introduced to service in May, 1944) should be able to be flown in the thousands and not suffer the "gangbang the perk" that the pilots in the Spit XIV (957 buit, introduced in Jan, 1944) will face.
The Ta152H-1 is only 30 points, many fewer were built and it was introduced in Feb, 1945. Its just as fast a low altitude as the Spit 14, if not as good in other areas.
The question is, "Is it appropriate for more that 500 Spitfire XIV sorties per month to occur?"
I think it is. I don't want to see 10,000 or 20,000 or 50,000 sorties, but I do want it to be cheap enough to have fun with and not be unwilling to lose it.
Maybe the average pilot in AH has 1000s of perk points, but I'm willing to bet not. The twin price of being gangbanged by aircraft that are only marginally worse than what you are using and the cost a good percentage of the average pilot's perk points causes the perk planes to be under utilized.
I don't think that the Tempest, Ta152H-1, Spitfire MkXIV or F4U-4 have enough of a performance edge compared to Bf109G-10s, P-51Ds, Fw190D-9s, Typhoons and La-7s to make flying them enjoyable given the gangbang that inevitably results from their appearance at a location. This is amplified by the fact that the pilots are not often used to the performance of the aircraft because they are not able to use them more than a few times a month.
Clearly these aircraft need to be controled, but I think that a more moderate price, such as on the F4U-1C, can do that job just fine while still allowing players to actually have fun with their perk points.
Fun is, after all, what a game is about. Perk points are supposed to be a reward, I have never found any perk plane other than the Me262 or F4U-1C to meet that description.
-
An enterprising perk-plane pilot can probably use that ganging effect to his advantage. It's more people trying to kill you, true, but it's also that many more targets who probably are willing to take extra chances.
J_A_B
-
Originally posted by Karnak
It somehow just doesn't strike me as right that the Fw190D-9 (700 built and introduced in Sept, 1944) and P-51D (many thousands built, introduced to service in May, 1944) should be able to be flown in the thousands and not suffer the "gangbang the perk" that the pilots in the Spit XIV (957 buit, introduced in Jan, 1944) will face.
The Ta152H-1 is only 30 points, many fewer were built and it was introduced in Feb, 1945. Its just as fast a low altitude as the Spit 14, if not as good in other areas.
The question is, "Is it appropriate for more that 500 Spitfire XIV sorties per month to occur?"
I think it is. I don't want to see 10,000 or 20,000 or 50,000 sorties, but I do want it to be cheap enough to have fun with and not be unwilling to lose it.
Maybe the average pilot in AH has 1000s of perk points, but I'm willing to bet not. The twin price of being gangbanged by aircraft that are only marginally worse than what you are using and the cost a good percentage of the average pilot's perk points causes the perk planes to be under utilized.
I don't think that the Tempest, Ta152H-1, Spitfire MkXIV or F4U-4 have enough of a performance edge compared to Bf109G-10s, P-51Ds, Fw190D-9s, Typhoons and La-7s to make flying them enjoyable given the gangbang that inevitably results from their appearance at a location. This is amplified by the fact that the pilots are not often used to the performance of the aircraft because they are not able to use them more than a few times a month.
Clearly these aircraft need to be controled, but I think that a more moderate price, such as on the F4U-1C, can do that job just fine while still allowing players to actually have fun with their perk points.
Fun is, after all, what a game is about. Perk points are supposed to be a reward, I have never found any perk plane other than the Me262 or F4U-1C to meet that description.
Yup Karnak, I totally agree. I have more than enough fighter perkies but if the Spit 14 is priced over 10, maybe 15, then I will rarely use it. It's not fun taking up a perk plane and flying all conservative when really you want to get deep into the action, start turn fighting rather than boring BnZ. Ok, I have enough points but that's really not the point.
Additionally I also agree that the current perk planes do not hold a significant advantage over some of the unperked planes. The single one that springs to mind is the Tempest. When you compare the La7 and the Tempest they both perform equally well although the Tempest have clearly the better guns. Apart from that then you have to be rather careful when engaging a La7 in a Tempest... which then goes onto this 'flying conservative' thing...
Just imagine a Spit 14 vs a P51D, or even La7, do you all honestly think that the Spit 14 is really that much better than these two aircraft? ;)
Regards
Nexx
-
yes
-
I repeat that i would link the perk price of the Spit XIV too the actual model we get.
If we get the 25lbs. boost/150 octane fuel variant (that was only used for V1 hunting), it should be an expensive perk plane (50-60 perks), cause it combines extrem speeds with G10 like climb, spit IX like turn and Mustang like dive.
On the other hand the 18lbs. boost/100 octane fuel variant should be not much more than 10 perks. It might climb exellent, but it's speed below 20K can be matched by LA7, D9 & G10, and its performance above 20K will be close to P51, TA152.
It still should be perked, cause it is the perfect plane for the MA, and will - when free of charge - outnumber any other plane in the MA in usage.
-
If we get the 25lbs. boost/150 octane fuel variant (that was only used for V1 hunting)
150 octane and 25lb boost were used widely in late 44 and 45, and not just by Spits. Even the Mosquito FB.VI was allowed 25lbs boost, and some were futher modified with NO2 injection.
Historically the Spit XIV should have 25lbs boost, but for playbalance it would be too expensive a perk.
-
ok my veiw on it is :
USAAF have had the p51D for almost 2 years?
USN had the F4uc for months (before it was perked)
LW have had a dora for months, maybe even a year?
VVS have had the LA7 for months?
IJN have had the NIkJ for a year or so?
I beleive all are late war (1944-45?) aircraft, some very rare others in large production numbers.
Who out of all the countries/sides in the AH war has had the crown of basically the best performing NON PERKED aircraft for the longest ?
certainly not the RAF!
sure they got the tempest but it was quite expensive as a perk and i think a good dora or p51 or la7 etc pilot could give it a real hard time and with no risk of the huge loss of perks.
what have the RAF fans had in all this time? A spitfireIX. An excellent aircraft sure but guys it is a 1942-43 plane!!
So we get sick of it a bit. fair enough but its because the damn thing is a good aircraft.
The spitfire IVX is a superb aircraft. It will probably become the top plane in terms of performance(?).BUT why does it get peked when all other tastes(LW,USAAF,VVS etc) are catered for with FREE rides?
I think it would be extremely unfair on the RAF fans to perk it before its even had a chance to show its stuff in the MA.
You find you cant beat it in your favourite ride? you can handle the spit IX most of the time right? but you dont want to lose your top position to spit IVX flyers? WELL TOO BAD!!!
IF its the best plane of 1944-45 then so be it. I personally wont be flying it much if at all after ive tried it out as im an LW fan.That doesnt give me or you guys the right to declare it perk ride just because we choose not to fly it.
IF it starts to see usage on the scale of the F4uc (25-30% of ma) then GO AHEAD perk it for a SIMILAR cost.
If it was a low production run/rare aircraft like the Ta152,arado,me262,F4uc(only 200 or so) then GO AHEAD perk it but it wasnt was it?
all i see here is players deciding it should be perked because it will out perform their chosen ride or countries best planes.Theres no other basis for arguement.It hasnt pissed everyone off with overuse,its not a rare aircraft so why perk it?
I say give it its place as top dog for a while.
or are ye all Skeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeered? :D
i think its cool that a new spit is arriving to match the era of the other planes.I dont think its right YET to perk it.
-
wow!! i can feel the heat from here!:D
-
"Who out of all the countries/sides in the AH war has had the crown of basically the best performing NON PERKED aircraft for the longest ? "
Well, I'd have to say the British with the Spit 9. It is, after all, frequently the most common plane encountered each tour.
I have yet to see people whining on these boards about "Too many Doras". I see Spit whines all the time. How can you say the RAF doesn't have a competative fighter, yet they have what is commonly the most-used plane in the game? You should re-word your statement to say "the RAF planeset doesn't have a plane which fits MY flying style".
What year a plane was made or what country it flew for or how many were built doesn't matter to the AH MA anyway. It's interesting trivia, nothing more. I too am glad to see the Spit 14 making its way into AH. But not because it's British (in AH it's rook, knight, or bishop), not because it was made in 1944 (this is 2002), and not because a lot were made (you have unlimited production in the MA). I'm glad to see it because a lot of guys have been asking for it for a long time.
HTC will decide whether it needs to be perked.
J_A_B
-
JAB if you count furballing as the top type then yes spit is probably ONE of the best but to say it is THE best performing is total bs. its not competative in fast late war matchups unless the pilot of the late war planes flies the spits fight.
1 on 1 i could beat a spit with P51d dora or f4uc by simply employing bnz tactics and not turning.
You try to imply i want it non perked for my own agenda because im british or something? Like i said I fly LW 99% of the time in MA and until the dora came along the plane everyone who flew LW most disliked was the P51D because it could engage and disengage at will. When the dora arrived we had the aircraft to give them a run for their money.what have the raf guys had to counter the p51d,dora or p38s high alt performance and speed?
I dont want to fly the spit14 other than to try it out and i dont mind having aircraft that are faster than the dora anyhow.You seem to be accusing me of having some sort of reason or personal agenda when what I am actually saying is I expect it to be better than the dora(my chosen ride) but unless it floods the arena it shouldnt be perked.Im sure it will flood the arena like every other new plane for a while and im guessing i will get sick of seeing it but that is no reason for it to be perked.
Your reasons for wanting it perked are?
hmm lemme guess, you fly p38s or p51ds? :D
Game of 'P51D aces high' anyone?
-
Originally posted by J_A_B
What year a plane was made or what country it flew for or how many were built doesn't matter to the AH MA anyway. It's interesting trivia, nothing more. I too am glad to see the Spit 14 making its way into AH. But not because it's British (in AH it's rook, knight, or bishop), not because it was made in 1944 (this is 2002), and not because a lot were made (you have unlimited production in the MA). I'm glad to see it because a lot of guys have been asking for it for a long time.
HTC will decide whether it needs to be perked.
J_A_B
ok J_A_B why have the tempest, arado , me262, ta152 and every other plane been perked then?
these were all perked because HTC felt they would upset the 'ballance' of the arena.or in the case of the F4uc they were being used so much that they took up 30% of the flying being done.
what is the aircraft thats accepted as the top aircraft but without upestting the ballance? the one all these are rated against to decide their impact? where is the perk line/'ballanc' line drawn and for what reasons?
-
Hazed for a very good honest reply and I know you're a LW fan! I totally agree with you. The RAF should be given a free late war and very capable plane that is roughly equal to the likes of the D9, P51D, La7 etc. Why? The Tempest is far too expensive and is it really that better than the La7? I fly the Typhoon and I will continue to do so no matter what plane they release. I fly the Seafire from CVs but rarely fly the Spit IX.
So, the Spit IX is that popular? Well it's a very good newbie plane indeed. It can turn but there are better turn fighters. When people see the icon 'SPIT' do they automatically think it's a Spit IX? Remember we do have the Spit I, Spit V and the Seafire. I prefer the Seafire personally.
Anyway, if the Spit 14 is introduced will that mean everyone flying the La7, N1K2, 190-D9, P51D will suddenly swap to the Spit 14? Well if anyone is really fond of their personal ride then no, but if others who simply want to fly one of the best planes then yes, perhaps. It will require a different flying approach than the current Spits so I think you'll see it in different kinda of engagements.
To all those who want it perked.... remember when the Mosquito, the Hurricane IIC and even the IL2 were introduced, some wanted all of those planes perked! Crazy! Let's introduce it as a non-perk and if it is overwhelming the MA then yes, perk it, but please give it a chance!
36 RAF Squadrons flew the Spit 14, which is more than those that flew the Typhoon and the Tempest.
Regards
NEXX
-
*holds hands with spit groupies*
"Aaaaaall weee are saaaaying is give spits a chaaance...":D
-
To answer your earlier post first: No, I'm not accusing you of having any sort of secret agenda. I'm just suggesting that you're not looking at every side of this issue.
Example, you said:
"its not competative in fast late war matchups unless the pilot of the late war planes flies the spits fight. 1 on 1 i could beat a spit with P51d dora or f4uc by simply employing bnz tactics and not turning. "
Here is the problem in your argument--you say that the Spit 9 is not competative unless the guy in the BnZ ride messes up. Yet, your argument is based on the opposite and equally true idea that in order to win, the 190 or P-51 needs the Spit to mess up.
By this line of thought, I can easily say "1 on 1 I can beat a P-51 or Dora with a Spit 9 simply by employing angles tactics and not allowing him to rope me".
So how is the Spit 9 so inferior? In either case, the winner requires the loser to fight to the winner's advantage. The assumption--the mistake--is the belief that one way of fighting (BnZ) is superior to the other (TnB). This is a matter of personal opinion only.
Now, on to your second post:
"what is the aircraft thats accepted as the top aircraft but without upestting the ballance? the one all these are rated against to decide their impact? where is the perk line drawn and for what reasons?"
Good questions. The "top aircraft" is dependent on what you fly. As a P-51 driver I consider the LA7 to be the top dog. However, when I fly an F6F I consider the Spit 9 to be the most dangerous fighter. If I'm on the deck in a N1K2 I worry most about Spit 5's and Zekes....but if I'm 30K in a F4U then my main fears are P-51B's and 190D-9's.
As for where the perk line is drawn.....I honestly can't answer that. Neither can you. Only HTC can answer that. Judging by the F4U-1C, they perk planes which will dominate airplane usage in the arena (over 20% usage was the figure for the C-hog).
My OWN opinion on whether the Spit 14 will be perked? I figure HTC will make the right choice :)
Thanks for the good discussion.
J_A_B
-
Originally posted by J_A_B
"its not competative in fast late war matchups unless the pilot of the late war planes flies the spits fight. 1 on 1 i could beat a spit with P51d dora or f4uc by simply employing bnz tactics and not turning. "
Here is the problem in your argument--you say that the Spit 9 is not competative unless the guy in the BnZ ride messes up. Yet, your argument is based on the opposite and equally true idea that in order to win, the 190 or P-51 needs the Spit to mess up.
By this line of thought, I can easily say "1 on 1 I can beat a P-51 or Dora with a Spit 9 simply by employing angles tactics and not allowing him to rope me".
So how is the Spit 9 so inferior? In either case, the winner requires the loser to fight to the winner's advantage. The assumption--the mistake--is the belief that one way of fighting (BnZ) is superior to the other (TnB). This is a matter of personal opinion only.
I understand what you are saying here J_A_B but i feel i must point out the flaw in this arguement also.The spit pilot cant escape (skills being equal) unless the p51b or dora runs out of fuel. At any time,however, as a p51 or dora pilot i can disengage and run as long as i dont make the mistake of slowing down before i try to diengage.Now admitedly 7 out of 10 fights in MA are not at this knife edge level(ie needing to really choose your moments) but i have fought spits often and when i engage with alt advantage i can attack once or twice(admitedly hard snap shots because they can avoid them easily) and if it looks like its going wrong i dive and run or even level and wep and run..ahem egress :). taking it the other way a spit with alt is indeed very dangerous but a quick jink and power dive followed by extention will usualy get you out of harms way.
what will we do with the new spit14? I dont know yet but we should have fun finding it out right? btw dont get me wrong here, I doubt ill enjoy this much! :) but Im willing to give up some of the dominance ive enjoyed in the dora. Who knows perhaps we will all become better pilots for it?.
Originally posted by J_A_B
hazed:"what is the aircraft thats accepted as the top aircraft but without upestting the ballance? the one all these are rated against to decide their impact? where is the perk line drawn and for what reasons?"
Good questions. The "top aircraft" is dependent on what you fly. As a P-51 driver I consider the LA7 to be the top dog. However, when I fly an F6F I consider the Spit 9 to be the most dangerous fighter. If I'm on the deck in a N1K2 I worry most about Spit 5's and Zekes....but if I'm 30K in a F4U then my main fears are P-51B's and 190D-9's.
I think youre close to hitting the nail right on the head here.Its all about where each plane performs.but after reading more about the spitfire 14 it was in service in january 1944 and was exceptionally fast at 450mph at 26,000 feet this means its approximatly 14mph faster than the P51d (436mph at 25,000feet)which isnt that great a leap from the extra speed the p51d has enjoyed for so long in AH. The P51D is 11mph faster than the 190d9 (425mph) which is 1mph faster than the F4ud (424mph)which is 14mph faster than the p38L (415mph) and on it goes. What HTC have to decide i guess is if there is ever going to be a faster plane than these that isnt perked.
As the F4U-4 is perked and its top speed is (446mph) my guess is HTC will indeed perk the spit14 but the spit 14 was in combat for almost 18 months(european theatre) whereas the f4u4 was only produced in the closeing stages of the war.This means the P51 keeps the top speed crown for non perkies.Is it really fair after all this time?
couldnt we have at least 1 tour with a new 'king' ? :)
(ps tempestV 435mph at 18k)
btw it is a good discussion ;)
-
Ouch. This is getting ugly.
I think its clear, based on Spitfire Mk IX numbers, that an unperked Spitfire Mk XIV would quickly imbalance the MA. Because I feel that is clear, I think that it must be perked, even though it is my favorite aircraft.
The question that I have is, how much does it need to be perked at?
At 60-70 points I will only fly it very, very rarely as it won't be terribly fun and I simply don't have enough points to bankroll many of them.
At 20-30 points it wouldn't hurt so badly to lose that I couldn't have fun with it.
I personally think that all perk planes are too expensive, save the F4U-1C (which is also blessed with a non-perk icon and thus doesn't summon an instant gangbang to itself). The Me262 can kind of make do with its 200 point price simply because its performance is so far beyond anything elses, but even the Me262 costs too much in my opinion.
The Tempest and F4U-4 are particularly overpriced for their performance. The Ta152H-1 is too costly, but I do question how many would be flown even if the price were lowered to F4U-1C levels. There just doesn't seem to be much interest in that aircraft.
How often do you see P-51Ds, La-7s, Bf109G-10s, Fw190D-9s and Typhoons? How often do you see F4U-4s, Tempests and Ta152H-1s? In my case the answers would be: "Everytime I log on" and "Never".
Do these aircraft actually perform that much better that they should be so rare and be gangbanged whenever one does make an appearance?
I don't think so.
Do they need to be controled and limited in any way whatsoever?
I think they do, I just think that they are too controled right now.
-
"what will we do with the new spit14? I dont know yet but we should have fun finding it out right? btw dont get me wrong here, I doubt ill enjoy this much! "
Indeed, nothing wrong with trying it out.
My point about the speed of aircraft was made based on the AH MA, not based on reality. Basically, speed in AH is only of import to those of us--like me and you--who like to live. There's a lot of guys who much prefer going down fighting and not bothering to land; for this group that extra speed is useless. You're right, the Spit can't escape.....but chances are, the guy in the Spit doesn't care about escaping. One of the interesting effects about the "life after death" nature of online gaming.
Karnak--not getting ugly at all; in fact this IMO is one of the better debates I've seen here in awhile :)
J_A_B
-
J_A_B,
Count me as one of the Spit pilots who flies to live. However, the Spit IX can't do it reliable and neither will the Spit XIV. The Spit IX is too slow and the Spit XIV will have a "Spit14" icon which says "Come and gangbang me with your free fighters that are faster than my perk fighter".
That is the unfortuante truth for us Spit pilots that fly to live.
-
"Count me as one of the Spit pilots who flies to live. However, the Spit IX can't do it reliable "
Sure it can. It's not as good at it as the P-51 or 190D-9 is, but it can still be a survivable ride. Despite this, I find it unlikely that most Spit pilots are overly concerned with landing their flights. It's sort of like although you CAN TnB in a FW-190, few pilots choose to do so because a Spit or N1K2 or F6F is better suited to the task.
Which is good. AH would get very boring, very fast if EVERYONE wanted to always live.
Still, the Spit 9 isn't a deathtrap if you WANT to fly it to live. The hardest part, I think, is you have to remember "Don't fly it like a Spit". Don't get low and slow on the deck, don't take off from capped bases, don't turnfight people when other enemies might arrive and jump you. Fly the Spit like you would a P-51D or 190 and it can bring you home more often than not. The one thing it lacks is the "get out of jail free" effect that having a high top speed brings. If you make a mistake in a Spit9, then you're stuck with it. So the lesson is clear--if you want to live in a Spit 9, be very careful and don't make an error in judgement.
The thing is, if you choose to fly the Spit like you would a P-51 or D-9, then why fly a Spit 9 at all (aside from sentimental reasons)? If you're not using that turning ability and low-speed handling, then you're not using the Spit's main advantages. And this is where the comments of "The 1942 Spit 9 sucks" begin. It's not that it REALLY sucks, it's that it sucks for the way some people want to fly it. Just as a dedicated TnB pilot will invariably say the 190 or P51 "sucks".
I don't know what to tell you Karnak, because from your perspective you're 100% right--for the way you want to fly, the Spit 9 simply isn't as good as the Dora or P51. Believe me though, I feel your frustration. I fly the 51 for the same reason you take the Spit--sentimental value. I like to fly at low altitudes, where the LA7 is utterly superior to me. And on some days, I really do feel like the P-51 sucks (usually when I have an LA7 bearing down on me). I guess I just remind myself that it's my choice to fly the 51 in a way that works against its strengths. It's Fate, I suppose, that leads us to "needing" to use an airplane which doesn't really suit the way we like to play.
I re-read this post, hope it doesn't offend. I'm just trying to offer up some more discussion here :)
J_A_B
-
J_A_B,
I don't turn with it in slow fights on the deck. I don't take off from capped bases either.
I prefer the Mosquito because it is more survivable.
You say, don't get low and slow when there is a possiblitiy of a faster fighter arriving above you. Well, in the Spit IX it doesn't matter if you are turning or not. If a P-51D, Fw190D-9, La-7, Typhoon, Yak-9U, P-47D, P-38L or Bf109G-10 arrives above you and fights smart, the Spit IX is dead. It can't get away. It has to break turn to survive, which kills its speed. It can survive for a while by converting altitude and speed into break turns, but eventually its going to run out of energy. Then it dies.
I have had some very successful flights in the Spit IX that I landed. These were typically notable for the fact that no higher, faster fighter arrived to kill me. As long as I was on top, I lived. Dive down, kill (or try to kill at least) then zoom climb back up. Repeat until out of ammo or low on fuel, then fly home. If a fast high fighter shows up, hope it either doesn't see me or that the pilot doesn't know how to use his fighter, otherwise I'm dead. I'm no NathBDP or Citabria.
-
I agree with you completely Karnak; the Spit 9 is NOT the best choice for the pilot who prefers to land his flights. It CAN do it (if you're very careful), but it's certainly not well-suited to the task.
What I'm saying is that although the Spit 9 isn't well-suited to your own flying style, doesn't mean it's a bad plane overall.
J_A_B
-
I would like to see the Spit 14 initially unperked. Yes, a lot of people will go for it, but that happens with every new plane. Then, when the true capabilities are realised, and only then should its perkability be evaluated.
Personally, I'm not a good flier - yet - but I go for the Spit, the Lanc, and the Mossie simply because I'm British.
-
I would like to see Me-262 unperked.
Sure it's fast but it can't turn with prop-fighters and in battle situation higher enemy plane can catch it.
That was joke; I really wouldn't like to see a sky full of jet-fighters and same applies with XIV.
-
What makes you guys think that the 109G-10 or the 190D-9 is faster than a Spit XIV? or the P-51D for that matter. If modelled right it will be as fast or faster than anything except a TA152. 448mph max speed approx. In fairness, its the speed AND the manueverbility of it that should make it a perk ride, but not so high that its never seen, its not an Me262.
-
Too many spits as it is. It's beginning to look - and feel-and sound- like Airwarrior. It just seems that no one's taking time to learn the planes. Get a 25-30 ENY ride, furball, die, get a perk ride....not much fun in that, for me.
The CT is looking ever more appealing to me...
-
Thanks for the guns HTC. You guys have really made at least one person happy with the last two versions, me. The Mosquito FB.VI Series 2 and now the Spitfire F.Mk XIVc.