Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Kweassa on May 21, 2003, 09:20:41 PM
-
Modifications to existing perk planes
---------------------------------------------
Me262: 100 points
Spitfire14: 20 points
Tempest5: 30 points
F4U-4: 20 points
Ta152H-1: 10 points
F4U-1C: 8 points
Me163B: 70 points
Ar234: 50 points
Synopsis on modified perk values:
The argument for the Ta152 and the Spit14 is already well known, as the MA environment heavily relies on massive and chaotic engagements referred to as 'furballs'. Spit14s are much too vulnerable to afford the expensive 60 point perk price as they aren't particularly fast at low altitudes, and its amazing climb performance is limited by the short WEP periods. Ta152 lacks so much in conventional 'maneuverability' and acceleration to ever be used under certain altitudes.
The same argument as Spit14s and Ta152s can be made for the F4U-4.
The over abundance of Me163Bs near HQ fields, which bomber pilots complain about, are well noted and reasonable. The price should be increased.
The perks on the F4U-1C and the Ar234, is in my opinion adequate. It has regulated the C-hog scourge very well, and the fact that the Ar234 is a jet bomber, is enough for its 50 point cost.
The costs for the Me262 and the Tempest 5 has been suggested to be cut down to about 50%, based on the grounds that even a low perk price is adequate for regulating hoardes of planes(as been proven in the case of the C-hog - 8 points, neutralized the scourge phenomenon in its entirety!)
It takes average pilots a long time to earn 100 points - in an hour, I earn about 5~6 fighter perk points when I'm doing good. Maybe 8~10 if lucky. It takes almost a week for me to earn 100 points. For average pilots, even 30~40 perk points are pretty much a heavy burden.
As the vast number of people are always 'average', if the objective of perk prices is to regulate hoardes of super performance planes breaking arena balance, even 30points for the Tempest, and 100 points for the 262, is enough.
As it is now, only a few people who can manage to earn massive perks in a day will ever get to fly the 262 or the Tempest - people who can afford and shrug off maybe one, two losses of those expensive planes - and even they fly it only when it is particularly safe for them.
...
Newly perked planes
--------------------------
LA-7: 5 points
TYPHOON: 3 points
YAK9-U: 3 points
P-51D: 4 points
190D-9: 4 points
F4U-1D: 3 points
109G-10: 4 points
P-38L: 3 points
N1K2-J: 3 points
P-47D-30: 3 points
Synopsis on new perk values:
This idea was presented during the discussion on the La-7, in a thread named "Community vote on the La-7".
Perking the 10 suggested late war planes would shift the MA into a mid/late 1943 environment.
The F4U-1, P-51B, La-5FN, and the P-47D11 will be the four fastest fighters at low alts at military power, and F4U-1, P-51B, LA-5, Fw190A-8 would be the four fastest on WEP.
There's a much bigger chance to see people using various fighters, which before, have been ignored by a lot of average pilots for the reason that they weren't fast or maneuverable enough against 1944~'45 planes.
The survivability of the P-47s(which was a significant fighter in reality and yet, have massive disadvantages under current MA conditions) will be vastly enhanced. Since some of the 'super ground attackers' with 2k payload + rockets, have been suggested to be perked, it would earn a major role as a fast ground attacking fighter-bomber.
The N1K2 fans will probably just move on to Spit9s. We'll be seeing a lot less N1K2s, but more Spitfires. However, the Spitfire does not have 4 cannons - The main reason of contempt for the N1K2 lies in the fact that it is a superbly maneuvering fighter(equal to Spit9) with average speed performance, equipped with 900 rounds of 20mm ammo with four cannons.
The P-51D fans would shift to the P-51B.. which has a little less ammo load, and weaker jabo capabilities. We'll definately see less whinings about 'cowardly runstangs' who come in at 20k to do a single bomb drop and run straight home after. The P-51B is a magnificent fighter, but it is definately more limited than the P-51D.
The F4U-1 corsair will also start to shine out, but it will of course, be limited in jabo capabilities as with the case of the P-51B, compared to the C-hog and the D-hog.
La-7 fans can comfortably ride the La-5FN, since it shares simular characteristics with the La-7, and is still among the fastest non-perked planes. However, the speed difference between other fighters will be less than the case of La-7: meaning, it'd require some more careful flying. You can't out accelerate everything else and just run straight away. The smaller margin of speed/acceleration differences makes the La-5FN a dedicated fighter, but nothing like what the La-7 is in current MA conditions.
Also, some planes which only a few people rode just for kicks, might come into real recognition: such as the Bf109G-2, Bf109G-6, Fw190A-5, Fw190A-8, C.205.. which will be vastly enhanced in survivability and versatility. More variety IMO, definately can be expected. I would not want to take out a Fw190A-5 or a Bf109G-2 when I would have to face vast numbers of P-51Ds or N1K2s or La-7s. My choice would be the Fw190D-9 or the Bf109G-10. However, if my opposition is Spit9s, P-51Bs, P-47D-11s and La-5FNs.. taking out the Fw190A-5, A-8 or the 109G-2 would be a cool choice.
The Bf109G-10, Fw190D-9, Yak-9U are high performance late war planes, and the reason for them being perked is almost self explanatory.
The Typhoon as a perk would be puzzling for many, but in the matters of balance(virtually a non-perked, little bit slower Tempest) it is definately a perk material with my new suggested agenda. Quad Hispanos, superbly fast, more than 2000lbs Jabo loadouts. Also, it is to my knowledge, a 1944 Typhoon we have, which has solved almost all of the problems known in 1942 Typhoons.
Another distinctly positive changes we can expect with the suggested new perks, is that some jabo planes which people have totally neglected before, have a chance to become a very appealing jabo choice, since the planes that were very fast+carried huge bomb loads, will be perked.
Planes like the Mosquito and the Bf110G-2, Fw190F-8 might be able to get more usage as the preferred jabo ride of choice. As with the new suggested perks, those planes carry the heaviest bomb loads. When the 10 late war planes are perked, the Mossie and the 110, F-8 can all be considered pretty fast planes when it's main competition is not La-7s or P-51Ds.
The 3~5 point perk price would also be adequate. It'd be a super cheap price for the 'experts' who have amassed massive perks, and it would not really bother them from riding their favored rides. It is not a very heavy burden for average/low-skilled pilots, either. Work a bit with other fighters, and they'll achieve 3~10 points easily in a single day. They'll get a chance to ride better planes soon - and if they are shot down, it's definatley not as depressing as losing 30~100 perks in a single sortie.
On the other hand, 3~5 points could be just enough 'sting' to stop overuse. We have seen what mere 8 points can do to the C-hog. Many of the 'small perk' planes.
Currently, the difference between 'perked' and 'unperked' is "almost non existent" and "only few overly abundant".
Effectively, the new perk values I suggest, can be said that it has three categories "highly perked", "lightly perked" and "unperked" - from this, I attempt to achieve the following:
1) rare super-planes remain rare
2) historically abundant, but high performance late war planes which sees almost exclusive use(P-51D, La-7, Fw190D-9 etc..), would be controlled in numbers.
3) majority of unperked planes which are early/mid war planes, which have been previously neglected(Bf109F-4, Fw190A-5, C.205, Yak-9T, La-5FN etc..), will be used a lot more.
If those 10 fighters are newly perked, the planes people will use will have a speed range of 310~336mph range at deck speeds, where many many previously neglected planes can be used.
With my suggested perk setup, I think we can see more variety, less whining, and satisfy the people who want to fly fast monster planes(perks relatively almost non-existant burden for the experts), people who want to fly planes they want without too much of a burden(low perks, low burden), and also the people who want some plane numbers regulated(3 perks is not too high, but still needs some work for the vast majority of average/low-skilled players who make up AH community - hoardes will be limited). Also, my suggestion will give some great expert jabo planes(Mossie, 110G-2, Fw190F-8, A-20 etc..) their role back in the MA - currently they have no place at all, since almost every USAAF/USN plane can carry loads of rockets+2000lbs payload.
The one single problem is the P-38L, which doesn't have an earlier variant. With hopes that AH2 will introduce an earlier variant of the P-38, the P-38L will have to be perked also.
ps) Also, the survivability of bombers will go up a lot more.
...
Edit: The mistakes in the N1K2 cannons are corrected- Thx Karnak!
-
Note) My suggestion, however it may seem to others, is not an arbitrary one. It was carefully thought out, and I tried as hard as I could, to not show any "LW mentality" which some people might have negative responses against, as they would consider it "an attempt to neuter Alllied planes" - never, would I try to do something like that.
For example, one of it's specific objectives was separating the 'pure fighter' role and the 'ground attack role' - which in current MA, is all mixed up.
Most of the high performance, late war fighters(particularly USN/USAAF), are also all the best ground attackers. They carry huge loads of ordnance, and yet, after it is dumped, they can immediately switch to a fighter role. It is an admirable aspect, but that aspect also negates the very existence of some wonderful planes specialized in jabo roles. Why use a clumsy jabo plane you can take one plane and do everything?
A by-product of that idea, is that it would help solve the 'suicidal jabo' problem. A suicidal jabo mentality, IMO, derives from the fact that according to current structural durability settings, people start to think that "I might die, but if I can only get this one run on target, it'll kill the target" - thousands of pounds of loadouts on a single fighter plane, no doubt provokes such thinking, since about 2000~3000 pounds kill structures. Two suicidal runs, and they can kill a hangar. 6 suicidal planes, and a small field is closed. Though kamikaze death is not pleasant, if they only have to do it twice, than they might consider it "an expendable risk".
But what if perks on late war planes with very heavy loadouts are introduced? Will they still think that way? Experiences with light perks, as maybe seen in CT setups, show that if there is a perk, albeit a light one, people try to survive - not as hectic as trying to survive in 100~200 point planes, but still they try.
2~3 kamikaze runs with a perked plane with a heavy loadout, will cost them 6~9 perk points. Would average players still consider that 'expendable'?
But what if they try to do the same thing in expendable, unperked planes? Unlike the newly suggested perk planes, almost all of them have limited loadouts. For the most, 500lbs bombs is the max they can take. In some USN/USAAF planes, a bit more. It's going to take a lot of kamikaze runs for them to achieve anything. Also, the unperked planes are slower than perked ones - easier to intercept during their trip to the target.
I have high hopes that it will effectively reduce the 'kamikaze' aspect which some people hate, in the MA.
...
This perk list, in its original form, was suggested in the thread "Community vote on the La-7"
Here are some of the responses to the post, and my responses:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oboe: "if you do that without perking the Spit IX, P-51, N1K, I think you'd just encourage the LA-7 drivers into the next best ride; and then we'd have to have the same discussion again about a different plane."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- This is true, oboe, but let's consider the 'next best planes', in the case of the 'perk list' I've suggested.
The 'next best rides', in this case, are much more 'balanced' with lesser performing planes than when the late-war planes were unperked.
As I posted above, the P-51B, F4U-1, La-5FN, P-47D-11 are the fastest non-perked planes at low alts with military power, and the P-51B, F4U-1, La-5FN, Fw190A-8 are the fastest planes with wep. Of the five plane types, only one plane can be considered both 'fast' and 'maneuverable' (La-5FN).
The P-51B is a versatile fighter, but more limited in ammo load, firepower, and jabo capabilities.
The F4U-1 is also a great plane, but it definately isn't a like the La-7 or Yak-9U, which has almost every attribute in the top class.
P-47D-11, limitations are almost too clear..
and the Fw190A-8.. can also be simular to the P-47D-11.. heavy plane that needs lot of practice and effort to learn.
The only plane that vaguely shadows the 'super planes' of 1944~'45, is the La-5FN... but definately easier to fight than the La-7 or the Yak-9U.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shane:"...exactly, you'd be putting "noobs" at even more of a disadvantage. "
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- To apply a reverse logic, then would you suggest that if noobs have better planes, they'd have a fair chance against experts? Seeing many many statements from the experts in the forums it seems they always claim they can shoot down any noob in any plane whatever they fly.
'Noobs' suck in whatever planes they are in anyway. Besides, people who have a lot of perk points which can be thrown around , aren't really that many. As always, the majority is always 'average' or 'underskilled'.
Basically noobs will die against experts anyway whatever they fly in, and the real majority of their combat is against other noobs or average pilots.
ps) also, one other factor that should be considered, is the initially low perk prices. 3 points.. as an average pilot myself, earning 3 points takes a bit of effort in my case.. have to shoot down about 3~4 planes a sortie to get 3 points quick. Generally, people are sensitive about losing points. 3 points, IMO, is enough to regulate 'hoardes', but not too much demanding like the 70 point Tempy or the 200 point 262.
also, people will feel less attracted to a 3 point plane, when compared to 60~200 point perk planes. Besides, if the perks are applied in current condition, in most cases, the icons won't give away the plane type for the 3 point perked planes.. except maybe in the case of the P-38L(no other P-38 variant) or the La-7(icon specified as 'La7')
-
u have my vote,
all sounds resonable and give more "adrenaline" to game
anyway not finish kamikadze flying
som add
-c205 have big amno load for cannons and should be perked too
-p38 dunno, it big trg with huge load
ramzey
-
I hope HTC is listening.
-
Minor correction:
The N1K2-J is not armed with the Ho-5. That was an Imperial Japanese Army cannon.
The N1K2-J is armed with four Type 99 Model II Mk 4 cannon.
-
I LIKE IT! :cool:
suddenly you'll see A20, mossies, 110 and 190F8 in jabo roles. Also I belive that even a perk value of 1 would reduce the suicide attacks. People would fly extra low perk planes quite a lot but would be more carfull with them.
I'd even like to see such a thing done in the current MA, AH2 or not AH2.
Bozon
-
Originally posted by ramzey
som add
-c205 have big amno load for cannons and should be perked too
I dont understand why perk the 205, it's a medium '43 fighter, have no special attributes, and is underused.
For Kweassa's proposal, I agree 100%.
:)
-
I AGREE Kweassa !!
I Agree with naso too about 205.....
getting Perks to airplane not for guns or rate of fire but distinguish planes according to the year of manufacturing, also that we, the italians, got only 2 airplanes, if u perk the 205 i outta go in bicycle all the time ;)
so i think it would be nice setting, in MA, the Kweassa's perk list but not to all time long
2 weeks monthly:
That may produce a split in MA using......:rolleyes:
2 weeks during Which we are going to see more pilots getting mid-early planes :D, and 2 weeks Which we are going to have a MA as we have now :cool:
-
I hope HTC takes a look at this idea, too. I like a lot about this idea, for a couple of reasons:
1) Making planes cost something to fly will reduce their usage in the arena, as players choose the next best "free" ride. Variety should increase in the MA and the early-mid war planes will be more survivable.
2) With the current perk planes reduced in cost and the addition of lightly perked planes, there will be more pilots flying perked planes. More pilots will know the tension and excitement that comes with really risking something of value when you fly. I know I sweat bullets when I up a Spit XIV in the MA, but that's part of why I choose to fly it.
IMO though, it will be a huge problem to leave the Spit IX unperked. As it is now, the Spit IX is one of a group of 4 planes that account for 40-50% of the MA kills, tour after tour. Perking the other 3 and leaving the Spit IX free will push most of those flyers into the IX, and in addition many others who will now choose it as the most competitive free ride. I wouldn't be surpised if the Spit IX accounts for 50-60% of all MA kills during a tour where this plan was in place.
Don't get me wrong; I like everything else about the idea. It just seems to me you have something of a blind spot when it comes to the Spit IX. Add the IX to the lightly perked category and I think it's a real winner.
-
spit 9 is a mid-war plane. There's no excuse for perking it exept for over-use and I'm against that.
It doesn't have unbalancing features like extra speed or quad connon with 250 rpg or unbelivable bomb load. It's pretty good overall and easy to fly, but rather slow and with low ammo load that forbids spaying. It will not satisfy the La7/dora/p51 freaks, they will choose one of the faster rides as their none-perk and upgrade back to their speed demons from time to time.
The N1k pilots would most likly be the ones migrating to the spit or C205 or even the zeke.
btw, I find the spit9 easier to fight then the spit5 or the niks.
It's a good glorious and fun plane not much to be done about that.
Bozon
-
umm this forum is Aces High II: Tour of Duty
As you all know AH2 will be comprised of 2 types of gameplay. Aces High II: Tour of Duty will be mission based arean and Aces High 2 classic will be the same as the current main. Any requests for general gameplay changes for the "main" should be in the Gameplay forum.
This forum seems to be getting cluttered with general feature requests that have little or nothing to do with Aces High II: Tour of Duty.
I guess the best thing to do is request a General AH2 gameplay forum be opened.
But Kweassa is correct and using the perk system to enhance gameplay is a good idea. The perk system is very limited now and I know guys that have nearly 10000 perks and have little interest in flying the current crop of perk planes.
Not to be a forum Nazi its just I care more about Aces High: Tour of Duty then I do about AH2: Classic. Its getting hard to follow whats going on. I have been posting in this forum since it opened. A guy new to the Forum may have trouble understanding that AH2 will have 2 distinct forms of gameplay.
It may be easier on everyone if Pyro started another forum to help folks keep in mind that AH2: Tour of Duty is something different then the current main type gameplay. Folks also need to know that if they prefer AH main gameplay as is then nothing will have changed except the art.
-
hands off from spitfire or i start lobbing to perk c205 and c202:) :D
ramzey
-
LOL Ramsey. I'm just sayin'!
Its true, the SPit IX is mid-war, but its just all around one of the best planes; it's able to stand up well against the late-war 51Ds, N1Ks, and LA-7s. Leave it unperked while perking the others, and you already know what will happen.
;)
-
Would go a long way to encourage ppl to land their planes too. Also, I noticed that flying the older planes gave me a greater appreciation and skill in handling the newer planes.
HTC you got your ears on?
2Hawks.
-
Got my vote! (But stay away from the Hurricanes!!)
Sure the most used version (IIC) has quad 20mms (with limited ammo), turns tighter than most anyplane in the MA and.. um.. whatever else it has goin for it, it's speed is enough to take it down to average or below even..
Away! get away! :D
-
Originally posted by ramzey
hands off from spitfire or i start lobbing to perk c205 and c202:) :D
ramzey
Ramzey.. GO AWAY!!!!!! :)
-
You got my vote, Kweassa. Very reasonable and balanced.
Hope HTC is listening.
-
yeah perk em :)
-
I agree! Good proposal, Kweassa!
Camo
-
Add me in too.
___________
Isn't it Nifty
Gunns
-
CHeers, I'm all for it, but lets try it out next tour +)
I may even fly some...
SKurj
-
Well thought through idea. I'd like to see it tried.
Gatso
-
I'm all for this. I always thought it would be a good idea to perk everything that wasn't in production when Germany invaded France (or some other appropriate date). Of course it would be hard to attract new customers when you can't immediately (as a noob) jump into the legendary P51-D. But conversely, noobs get clubbed like baby seals (no matter what they fly) and I assume AH gets new customers just the same.
I don't think Hitech will be willing to try and sell a game that limits the plane set, even in this mild form.
But hey, I like it! Heck, I fly the F4U1-C all the time, thats why I have no perks Then I have to go and get 4-5 kills in a P40N to get me some perks back...it's like a coke habit
Magoo
-
For it.
-
For it.
-
Sign me up too!
-
LA5...LA7,,,still have to get close and conserve ammo. Tap the trigger, Kill with 10-20 rounds and so forth. Not enough difference in performance to matter which I fly. Russian planes are good tools. And LA5 with early mid war planes is like Chicken Hawk in Capitolist Farm yard...more so than LA7 now in the current plane set. I flew LA5 in AW...it did a good job there to.
For what its worth from a junior member....my vote is "Yes" also.
-bustr-
-
I like the idea about the Modifications to existing perk planes, but dont go perking the P51D and niki and so on... because all those planes are virtually all vunerable and can all be killed easily and loosing 3 perkies here and there will add up sooner or later
-
Well thought out and articulated, but when in doubt, the fewer rules, points, and qualifications the better. AH2 will be more or less a rolling plane set anyway, won't it?
If early, mid and late equipment is only available in AH2 as it became available in WWII, why have any perk points at all based on equipment perforance? Won't the limited life career progressions take the place of perk points?
WWII pilots flew what their units had, period. Isn't AH2 supposed to be more like a combination of Combat Theater and rolling plane set, i.e., making perk points an obsolete issue?
Depending on the scenario, one of the best attractions of Combat Theater now is finally getting to again try whatever ride you want without fiddling with perk points. Combat Theater simulates the equipment in place at the time. If what you want is at the base you select, fly or drive away and don't clutter your mind with perk points (okay, some of them have wee teeny perks, but not much).
The biggest downside of perk points in any venue is they make the best pilots even more formidable since they can most afford the premium rides. Particularly in environments such as Combat Theater and AH2, keeping the best rides as equally available as possible to newbies and less skilled pilots seems to be the fairest combat equalizer as well as keeping Aces High appealing to new members and their inevitable learning period.
-
Originally posted by Halo
The biggest downside of perk points in any venue is they make the best pilots even more formidable since they can most afford the premium rides.
The more i see this given as reason for not using perks the more i think its really not very accurate, Most of the veterans of AH dont use perk rides very often.There are many out there that have thousands and thousands of spare perks which they rarely spend.
I actually get the impression there are only a VERY few who would regularly fly a perk ride.Most of them seem to fly much older models as far as ive seen.
Theres also another myth used to say perks are wrong and that is that new players cant fly the perk rides while others with the perks to spare who are more experienced can and they will abuse it by picking on the easy planes.
Well sure this would be true if all aircraft that are perked are set at a very high price like 70 etc.meaning it takes weeks to earn enough perks But what most have been calling for concerning the top 4 used aircraft is a very small perk price of 1 or 2 or 3.
So how long would it take a complete newbie to gain 2 perk points even if he had minimal experience of flying games? Im only guessing but surely within a days playing he will have been able to bomb a few structures or even shoot someone down if they got lucky.Also consider a complete novice will be on a 2 week free trial and so is hardly going to complain that some of the game isnt immediately available.Why would they? they have no idea what planes are what and have all the fun of learning it ahead of them.If they cannot manage this then they wont care whether they learn in a 1943 aircraft or a 1945 one will they?
What we seem to have is a situation where we dont try a new idea because:
a minority of players (so called newbies) who generally are not paying subscribers being assumed to be incapable of learning(according to some they should be allowed to fly the best aircraft very early on to help them).
Then you have paying customers only able fly in an arena where 4 types of aircraft make up at least 50% of their engagements . They ask for a system that HTC introduced to be put to use and people complain they are out of line to be ruining the newbies chances of fun.
Am i the only one who sees this as a little wrong?
Im all for making a newbie welcome and helping them but are they really going to appreciate the top aircraft when they struggleing to learn everything in those early days? They wont suddenly have it easy in the aircraft mentioned by karnak above anyway would they?
You see what i mean? I think we are using these statements which i see often as a way to just stop any attempt at exploring the perk system.People who state them often claim 'HTC obviously doesnt want to perk these planes' when its HTC who added the perk system!! AND when they perked the F4uC they didnt tell anyone until it was done. They also claim no one in AH wants it.
well this thread seems to say something different doesnt it.Seems many would like to see a change of MA engagements if only for a tour!
(toad hope you read this)
-
I can straddle the fence on perks in the Main Arena, but I have to question whether perk points need to be imposed in AH2.
I get the idea only certain equipment and bases will be available (think rolling plane set) as people progress in rank/skill until they conk off or the campaign/scenario concludes.
Doesn't that make perk points unnecessary in AH2?
-
In AH2, there's gonna be the regular MA as we know, and then the TOD mode, Halo.
The MA of AH2, most people expect it will be pretty simular to what we have now. Thus, suggested perk agenda is for "AH2: Classic" (MA).
-
Ah, that's why I'm confused -- this forum title is Aces High II: Tour of Duty. I thought everything in it was about only the new Tour of Duty.
To better pinpoint concerns, recommend the bulletin board add a new forum: Aces High II: Classic.
-
* Punt *
-
Kweassa, while your list is coherent, we'll have even more spits that way.
-
Whatever it is, I'm against it. As I kept saying since I first commenced it, I'm against it.
With apologies to Groucho Marx.
Actually, I like the idea, a lot!!! :)
-
Mandoble has a point...
Didn't realize it the first time I read this, but Spit9 on down is still free. Not that I have a prob with them, i just think there is a possibility that this would make spits more common than current. (ok well current as in when I last played a couple months back)
SKurj
-
I like the idea I would perk the spit 9 of 3 or 4 though. It would give a guy some value on his life alittle more and less HOs too!!
-
Some more thinking, and consideration, about what makes up plane usage as seen now.... This one, was posted in the Perk The Big Four (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=88550) thread in the Gameplay forums.
It's an answer to Tilt, as he mentions:
Remove it and they go to another ride and the effect is unchanged.
...
That is unless one removes(or rather, regulates - "removing" a plane via punitive perk costs, is not the same thing as lightly perking them for regulating them) a total 'section' of certain fighters above certain performance levels, so that the very style of gameplay may change - currently, as I see it, the "MA style" of combat is a result of certain planes being interdependant on each other.
Planes being interdependant on each other is not a bad thing, but however, when those are the few plane types that are qualified for variety of purposes, being excellent in almost every category, the problem rises that practically other planes are rendered obsolete.
.........
La-7, P-51D, Typhoon, N1K2, Spit9 - these are all you need right now.
For jabo and suppression, the P-51Ds and Typhoons carry out the task with more ordnance than most of the jabo planes, far better survivability than most bombers, and then they can also immediately switch to versatile fighter roles after ordnance is dropped.
Mid to high alt fights, the P-51Ds used en masse takes the cake.
Low alt engagements and suppression, the La-7 does it all.
And the backbone of air power, the planes used in the 'grunt' role of air combat, chasing down slow planes or engaging other 'grunts', with high attrition levels - Spit9 and N1K2. These are planes that have exceptional maneuverability and yet, have decent speed(The N1K2 and Spit9 considered slow planes? Probably, to those who regularly use G-10s, D-9s, La-7s and P-51Ds, Typhoons. To the other planes below the "1944" levels, they are fast enough to be a big threat). Of those two, the former is a bit better suited for mid-high alt performance, and the latter can take on a jabo role if required, with four cannons of 900 rounds of ammo.
...
The combination of the above mentioned 4~5 planes(which, also happen to be the 'big four', except the Typhoon(if one considers jabo purposes, the Typhoon probably joins the 'big four' in usage)), is the exact element of their overusage. The 'big four' are the 'big four', because combination of those four, is the key to winning the land-grab theme surrounding the MA.
Then what about the superior numbers, alt-monkeying, running at the sight of co-E plane crap that's been going on? Simple.
Since all of the countries are now using that "Big four Combo" regularly, apparently there's no advantage gained in the combination of other plane types - thus, the advantage is earned by sheer numbers.
Since the "Big four combo" is so fediddlein' lethal, now, nobody, not even the vets, can be sure that they can meet a plane and win against it quickly in a major battle zone. As soon as you get that one guy, a La-7 comes on you co-alt, a P-51D drops down from high, and the Spits and N1K2s are waiting for you down low! Either you stick to that "SA" thingy like the ticket to heaven at Armageddon's Day, or you become a victim, and at the same time, the perpetrator of it.
..
So, what about the other planes? The G-10 and the D-9?
These are probably the only two planes which can vaguely substitute the above roles that the P-51D and the La-7 plays. However, the huge difference in armament(thanks to that long-range aspect of Hispanos and .50s) makes them crappy substitutes at best, not to mention they are both no match in the multi-purpose category(too limited in jabo role).
So, basically the G-10 plays as a substitue for the La-7, but due to their insane climb rates, limited ammo and sucky weaponery, and special 'gadgetry' such as the gun pods.. they play a more defensive version of it. The D-9 plays the mid-high alt substitute role for the P-51D. Thus, these become the only two planes really worthy of considering use in the MA environment.
The P-38L, is a cross-breed between the P-51D and the Typhoon(in efficiency as the MA fighter) - heavier jabo loads, limited "running" capability, but better conventional dogfight capability. These show up when either they are suicidal, or the target field is already suppressed.
...
So seriously, will they go for another ride when the "big four" is perked? Yes, with simular results. The 'accident' in the MA, where Spits couldn't take off in Bugisles, showed that the Spits move on to N1K2s. People will move to the crappier substitue versions of their former La-7s and P-51Ds, but still, the results won't be too different.
But when the entire "section" of late war planes are perked?
Some say diversity cannot be reached by perking or regulating. But they are wrong.
The perking of the F4U-1C, is a testament to that. The F4U-1C is a four Hispano armed plane - which adds a vast advantage to its A2A capabilities, which carries 6 rockets and 2000lbs ordnance, can take off from a carrier, and also is one of the fastest planes on deck(slow acceleration and limited WEP, but the F4U-1D and the F4U-1C, is faster than the Bf109G-10).
It was a "one-plane-do-all" fighter.
When it was perked, what happened? Since no other plane has that kind of capabilities, it's role in the MA is now carried out by three different planes - P-51D, La-7, and the Typhoon! Also, in carrier ops, it's role is split into three by the F4U-1D for jabo, and the F6F-5 and the Seafire for pure A2A suppression. In short, the F4U-1C alone, was doing the job of 6 different fighters in the MA.
With the perk costs, increased risk, and added correct weight, it is now 6 different planes that carry the job that once, the F4U-1C did alone.
That explains why we'll never see a single plane doing 20% of all the kills in the MA ever! And that also means that 20% is now not the standard on which 'overusage' should be judged upon. Relative monoploy is what should be considered.
8 points for the F4U-1C gave way to 6 different fighter types in the MA. Therefore, perking some of the "late war fighter" section, should also be able to give way to other fighters by splitting the role which once one fighter could do alone by itself.
Perks do increase diversity.
Regulating the total section of late war fighters, which is consisted of the "Big four" plus its substitutes, will force the overall planeset into an era prior to the emerging of the "Super planes", where realtive performance margins are better balanced. Not to mention that also, the roles formerly carried out by them(which was once carried by the F4U-1C alone) will also split into other plane types - jabo role to the dedicated jabo planes, fighter role to the pure fighter planes
-
Interestingly, in an attempt to justify my claims on the analysis of the F4U-1C, I took a quick check with AKDejavu's Fighter Stats:
...
In my analysis, the number of Spits and N1K2s remains constant - they are the "backbone" of the air power, equivalnet to the "everyday soldier" or the "grunt" concept. The people using Spit9s and N1K2s always use these planes, and they carry out the largest fights of most gruesome, high attrition level battles in the MA. Majority of these guys fight each other.
The F4U-1C - I claim that it has split roles into P-51D, La-7, Typhoon, and the F4U-1D, F6F-5, Seafire.
According to the stats:
Tour11 (http://www.dbstaines.com/TourStats/Tour11/Tour11.htm)
* Tour 11, marks the absolute peak of the F4U-1C, which has 23% of all the kills. Interstingly, up to this point, the Bf109G-10 carries a relatively high percentage of average 7~8% - equivalent of what the La-7 holds. Also, the combined percentage of the Spit9 and the N1K2 holds average of about 20%, too - with the N1K2 doing 11~12%, and the Spit9 doing 8~9%.
Tour14 (http://www.dbstaines.com/TourStats/Tour14/Tour14.htm)
* In Tour 14, the La-7 and the Fw190D-9 appears for the very first time, and immediately the usage of the two planes goes over 7%.
Tour18 (http://www.dbstaines.com/TourStats/Tour18/Tour18.htm)
* In Tour 18, four months after the excitement of the two planes have gone down, this is the first time that the "Big Four" phenomenon shows its face. And from since Tour18, the "monopoly" begins.
The percentage of the G-10 drops down to 4%, the D-9 about to 5%. The percetage of the La-7 is embedded at about 8%. From this day forward, the G-10 and the D-9 stays near 4~5%, and the La-7 near 8%.
* The tours between 20~25, is a period where the overall percentage of the N1K2, Spit9, La-7 and the P-51D holds tight at 40%. The main changes are between those four planes - the N1K2 simmers down, and the P-51D usage rises up. Spit9 stays constant near 9~10%, and the La-7 constant at about 8~9%.
* From Tour 29, the Typhoon rises to the 5th place, with about 5% average up to now. This, is the point where current style of gameplay is finally set. The monopoly of the four planes which achieve the 40% of the kills, plus the Typhoon in the 5th place, as the most used jabo plane of them all. With the "big FIVE", 45% of the kills are achieved.
......
My analysis is as follows:
1) The stats prior to Tour14 indicates the truth in the "substitute" aspect of the La-7-Bf109G-10. Before the La-7 was here, The F4U-1C was doing almost everything, with a large section of the people resorting to the N1K2s and the Spitfires. P-51Ds always remain constant at about 10%. Before Tour14, the skies were full of Chogs, Spits and N1K2s. The 10% of other people flew P-51Ds simular in the fashion now. On the low alt fights, the Bf109G-10 was doing what the La-7 was doing, but it wasn't as pronounced due to the vast numbers of Spitfires, N1K2s and F4U-1Cs.
2) Tour18, four months after the La-7 and the Fw190D-9, the Chog crowd begins to disappear. Parts of them move to form the new La-7 crowd. The "LW" crowd, from this point on, remains constant at 7~8% - two planes of the entire LW plane set, are the only planes that make up that 8% of total kills achieved. The Spit9-N1K2 crowd still remains constant.
The D-hog has a momentray surge in usage - no doubt that another part of the C-hog crowd, were in the F4U-1D as a substitute for their C-hog. This tendency, quickly dies off after another few months.
Slowly, between Tour18 and Tour29, part of the C-hog crowd are fully assimilated in the La-7s.
3) Tour29, marks the beginning of what is current. Typhoons are used en masse as suicidal jabos. Fuel porking and large scale jabo raids are visible. New crowds gather to AH.
The rise of F6F-5 hellcat is also visible - the preference for the carrier plane, has shifted from the C-hog to the F6F-5. The N1K2 crowd drops, while the La-7 crowd begins to rise even more.
4) By Tour35, the Spit and the P-51D crowd still stay constant. However, the relative difference between the N1K2 and the La-7 has reversed - now, the La-7 is doing 9~10% of the kills, and the N1K2, which previously was doing about 12~13%, drops down to about 7%.
This, is the point where people gave up on trying other planes to chase La-7s. N1K2 crowd, moves on to form the hordes of La-7s. This explains the relatively low skill levels of the La-7s - few tours back, they were all flying N1K2s!!
5) Tour38 - The Big Four remain big four, Typhoon is the undisputed jabo plane, with 5th place in kills. The LW crowd mostly just gives up on the Bf109G-10(drops down to 3%) , and moves to the Fw190D-9(rises to 4~5%). In my view, parts of the Bf109G-10 pilots gave it up, and moved to the La-7s or P-51Ds, and the Fw190D-9s.
6) Thus, the stats suggest that Spitfire9 and P-51D is always constant at 10%. Karnak once noted that the P-51D is over 10%, and this hasn't happened recently and it's a sad thing.
But he's wrong. The Spit9s and P-51Ds were always at 10%.
7) Large part of the former C-hog crowd, first moved to the N1K2, La-7 and the D-hog. The dedicated hog flyers were experimenting with the D-hog, and the average "dweeb" who flew F4U-1Cs because they were the best, moved to the planes they thought was next best - N1K2 and the La-7.
Then, the D-hog crowd dispersed, and went to the Typhoon. Former Chog crowd who tried out N1K2s, saw that it was too slow, especially against the new tendencies of super fast planes - P-51D, Fw190D-9, La-7.. so they moved to the La-7.
8) Average carrier pilots, now has no other option than the F6F-5, since the F4U-1D is a hard plane to manage.
Thus, as a result, the former C-hog crowd, is now scattered into the La-7 and the Typhoon, and the for carrier missions F6F-5 and the Seafire. La-7 + Typhoon + Seafire + F6F-5 = 22.21%. The former role of the C-hog, with 8 perks, is now divided into these four planes!
9) Simpy put, the perk on the F4U-1C split it's role to two fighters - Typhoon and the La-7. Cross breed the Typhoon and the La-7 and what do you get?
a) La-7 and Typhoon, is a very fast plane on deck
b) Both La-7 and the Typhoon is a free plane
c) Typh with four Hispanos
d) Typh with 2k ordnance
e) Lots of cannon ammo
Fast plane + free + four hispanos + heavy ordnance + cannons
That's a C-hog.
Planes that resemble certain aspects of the Chog, became preferable. There are other planes which match "fast on deck" and "free" category. But the La-7, of all those others, is naturally the only choice. The "cannon" category was the reason behind the momentary increase in the N1K2s after the Chog was perked. But N1K2s, compared to the La-7s, were too damn slow.
10) Seafire and the F6F-5 is also an interesting case. In theory, F4U-1D and the F4U-1C is only different in the armament. But strangely, when the F4U-1C was perked, people tried moving to the D-hog, but they gave that up soon. They started flying Seafires and Hellcats. D-hog, so much simular to the F4U-1C than any other plane, was neglected totally.
This means:
a) the La-7 is that much more preferable and effective for the former C-hog crowd.
b) Hispanos, mean that much in AH. To hell with all other simualrities - when the gun sucks, it's not a worthy substitue. They moved to the La-7, with sucky guns but super performance enough to cover that disadvantage, or moved to the same quad-hispano plane - Typhoon.
c) The Hellcat is now the preferred carrier jabo - somewhat like a Spit9 with heavy bombs.
d) of course, Hellcats can't really turn with N1K2s and Spit9s - they are like Spit9s only against other planes. So, when fighting N1K2s and real Spits, the Seafire is used. It's got Hispanos, too.
...
Thus, in conclusion, the perks split the monopolistic 23% Chog usage into bits.
Now, we need perks to split those 7~10% planes into 3~5%. However, when other late war planes remain unperked, there just will be another 10% planes arising.
Thus, perking the late war performers, and forcing them into the 1943 era, should be considered.
Whether the 1943 version of the "Big Four" will be a shadow of the late war "Big Fours", will remain something to be seen.
-
This would be a very interesting and worthwhile experiment I think. Problems with leaving the Spit IX unperked would surface quickly, but I'm sure it could also be adjusted. It would be so nice to see some variety in the MA!
-
Fantastic Idea, I would perk the LA7, NIK2, and spit9 atleast to 8 perks. It really doesn't take that long to gather perk points. Hec, to me they should delete your perk points after a certian period. Be it every campian, every 2 months or 3 months. But I'm sure that alot would really whine about that idea....LOL...I do like the idea of perking those other planes tho. as I said before I would raise the LA7, NIK2, and Spit9 to 8 perkies.
-
It seems to me the Perked plane was an infamous invention due some planes are under under used letting these planes almost out of the arenas.
Do you want a more realistic situation ?
Then make the planeset related to the war period.
If you figure out the entire war will last in a month or two (1940 to 1945), change dinamically the planeset during this period (withouth perks obviously) not permitting Zekes vs Me262 like now it is. (warbirds teach something yet)
Obviously this means a more complete planeset.
-
Better yet, how about breaking up the planeset by country. Sort of ala Fighter Ace, (Can I say that here?), where to fly say a P51, you have to fly for USA. Or to fly a Spit, you have to fly for Britain, and so on.
Nah, no one would want to do that....would they???
-
Good this thing too.
Anyway Warbirds teach something in this case too.
-
Well argued and researched Kweassa.................
You make an initial point that a goal of this would be to make a free ride cut off point of circa 43...... this leaves the Spit 9 as a non perked ride............
We know that the present goal of perking is to add diversity
Do you think that this would become the new ride of mass choice? I would expect it to ........ it became so in AW.
I presume you argue that the Typhoon is a 44 model.
What year were the FW 190 A8 and cannon equipped 205 introduced?(I have not checked)
I think I would like to take the "perk debate" further out of the box for AHII than we have here...........
There are several linked issues that make the present perk/scoring/game balancers somewhat muddled and "unsimple" IMO.
Some general points/opinions on my part.........
The main perks of "trade" (if you will) are fighter perks. I would like to see the fighter/attack button removed and any (non level bomb site) AC automatically given "attack" status when carrying bombs, rockets or cannon over 30mm.
In the present system this would develop a separate "attack" perk score.
I would like to see heavy ordinance purchased via the perk system (eg bombs over a certain weight) these would be bought with attack perks.
I would like to see some fighter armament options purchased via the perk system, eg the la7's B20 set up or certain wing gondolas and heavy cannon options on other AC.
I would not object to nearly every AC in the arena having a "perk" price (in which case "perk" would be the wrong word) provided even avarage players had ample oppurtunity to recover them if flown sensibly. The perk may be so low (or reward so high) that perks earned could easily recompence those lost if the trip did not successfully rtb.
This would be a matter of good maths. But I would suggest that (as a complete package) it would add to diversity whilst also controlling many of the suicidal bombing tactics along with the "big cannon HO tendancy"
Graphically this would make the present hanger system redundant.(its not easy to use now) It would be so much simpler if the AC once selected from the clipboard drop down list appeared in its basic format and an armament and ordinance button on the clip board was available to open a clip board window similar to that on the present mission editor (if not the same) where ordinance options were chosen / purchased.
Indeed such an interface could be used to select tracer and convergence settings per AC.
Back to perks.......... some thoughts for consideration........
What would be your opinion of the effect now if the Spit XIV was un perked?
Would the skies be full of SpitXIV's flown as La7's are accused of now? or would it attract players from several of the now popular rides?
Unperking the Chog would make it the CV ride of choice IMO. I agree with your logic here.....besides its already proven.
The dynamic perk model................
we have one now (of sorts) and the way its set up induces increased use of 262's by a country with a significant number disadvantage. However I do not see even this (or the multiplier) actually balancing any game play its just a sort of reward which is taken up by a few who would fly the 262 at reduced cost. We may as well make all rides free at the field local to the HQ.
With better maths a dynamic model could be made smoother but I doubt it could ever defeat the numbers game regarding the out come.....if it did then the ride quality diferential enforced would be very significant and very unpopular IMO.
The biggest problem with the dynamic model IMO is its inconsistancy........... folk do not know the cost of their ride or the value of potential reward. Its constantly changing. Surprising when consistancy and familiarity have been something that HTC generally (and rightly IMO) try to maintain in the MA.
I would drop the dynamic perk model as a game play control tool. To me gameplay is far more influenced by terrain design, its strat system and of course numbers. We cant do any thing (fairly) with enforced number control but we cann affect the other two. But thats for debate elsewhere.
Btw I agree with batz.......... if we are just talking about changing perk values in the present model then this debate should have been elsewhere.................... but then it seems to be every where
:) lobbying is a wonderful thing.........
-
The Spit9 and the F6F-5 has me torn. Probably those two planes are the weakest link in my suggestion.
Essentially, my perk agenda suggestion is based upon splitting monoplistic plane usage by limiting them with a price:
1) Limit the "one-plane-do-all" aspect
2) Limit the "exclusive performance margin" aspect
3) Balance the plane set according to (albet lossely) an era
...
The problem persists; despite the new suggested agenda, the Spit9 is the only plane that is on par in usage to other high-performance planes, despite the fact that it is essentially not a late war fighter, not an exceptionally high performance plane, nor a multi-purpose plane.
Literally, it's a plane that claims usage, which has nothing to do with all of the three major points of above. Literally, it's an easy plane to fly.
While a plane so simular in characteristics with the N1K2-J, the Spit9, the Spit9 lacks in spray quality.
...
Also, as analyzed in how a crowd moves to other planes when one preferred plane becomes perked - naturally it can be expected that the usage of Spit9s will rise even higher with my suggested perks. In my previous analysis, I have made the conclusion that people flock to a certain plane of simular attributes - that means, naturally the N1K2 users will flock over to the Spit9s, which means the Spit9 usage will go over 12~13%.
Now, the worst case scenario is, with the new perkage, all the former F4U-1C pilots who flocked to the La-7, would also move to the Spit9. That would "regroup" the former Chog crowd into the Spit9, but due to perkage, the people who would not fly Spits, N1K2s, La7s or Chogs anyway, would be more diversified in their choices.
Thus, we would see one plane at the top, the Spit9 maybe doing about 15%, if worse 18~20%... and all other planes in equal 1~2% status.
The new 'best contendors', such as the P-47D-11, Fw190A-8, P-51B, F4U-1.. the fastest free planes on deck, may do about 4%~5%.. but I don't think that would happen.
People don't go to the 190A-8 or P-47D-11, F4U-1 just because they are the fastest planes - the 47 and the 190, F4U-1 are initially pretty hard planes to master.
So, what I estimate is this - Spit usage goes way up, since the N1K2 people would flock to the Spit9.
The La-7 crowd splits into two, a part of them forming the new "La-5FN" block, and another part of them assimilated in the Spit9 crowd.
The P-51D people move over to the P-51B block, but the lack of P-51B's multi-purpose capabilities, and lesser firepower, limit their effectiveness.
So, What I estimate is..
Spit9 16%
P-51B 7%
La-5FN 5%
F4U-1 3%
190A8 3%
P-47D-11 2%
...
and all other planes, including lightly perked planes, diversely at 1~2%... and the 'beyond help', 1939~1940 planes at under 1%.
So, I guess it comes down to this.
In the worst case, how would it be, if all the La-7 and N1K2 crowd are assimilated into the 1 plane, Spit9? Would the overall frustration levels be the same?
I think, maybe not.
The Spit9, at least, hasn't got 4 cannons and 900 rounds. It's very close to the N1K2 in flight characteristics, but it has fine differences - it hasn't got the "UFO" quality. You see the N1K2 sometimes doing strange and incredible things, but you rarely see a Spit9 doing that. It doesn't dive as good as the N1K2, too.
Also, it can't just run away at a whim(with the perkage suggested, none of the planes can!). It's not the fastest free fighter. Neither does it have that incredible climb rate from 0 to 5~7k alt, nor is it a high survivability fighter which covers up for lacking pilot skills - it has always been, and always will be a low survivability fighter(note, the La-7, despite it's high overusage (over 10%) from the "dweeb" crowd, still has over 1.0 K/D).
So, for the price of seeing all the "dweebs" horded into one plane type, their overall effectiveness drops down dramatically. For the price of seeing as many Spits as all the former numbers of La-7s, N1K2s, and Spit9 gathered into a single Spit9, we achieve relative variety among all other fighters.
...
That's the worst case scenario. At the very worst of the worst, the "variety" issue remains the same - but still, the jabo plane effectivity is in place, since heavy bomb fighters are perked. Of all those "dweebs" who just point nose down and run, still, they can be caught this time. Also, suicidal base porking is limited - at least it won't be that effective when they all have to carry only 500lbs and maybe two or four rockets.
So then why don't we just perk the Spit9, too..?
..
That's what gets me torn. The perk agenda has a nice, rounded form thanks to the fact that it shifts certain segments of the planeset into a uniform "late '43"(maybe with the exception of the P-47D-11, which is essentially not that different from '43 P-47Cs or Ds) era - probably one of the reasons it seems so reasonable.
But what if we try to perk the Spit9 also? A 1942 plane?? At least the Chog was a late war, very rare plane with incredible multi-purpose qualities - despite the official reasons given reflects only the usage levels, people still were reasonably calm due to the fact that it was "a rare, late-war fighter anyway.. I understand that".
But if we perk the Spit9, I fear that the people, especially the RAF fans, will not tolerate that. A plane which only advantage comes from the fact that it has a balance of speed and maneuverability, a 1942 plane, has to be perked because it's a good plane? When all other planes of 1943 even, are unperked?
There's gonna be a huge ruckus, one, that we can't just calm it down with the single reason of "arena balance".
....
Thus, I hope to leave the Spit9 alone.
Even in the worst case scenario, the monopoly of the single plane visible, is still better than the monopoly of three free planes, vastly less effective than the former version of it(N1K2+La7+Spit9). This monopolized plane, at least, is not the fastest nor a heavily armed "UFO".
Even at it's worst, the other reasons behind the suggested perkage - limiting sucidal jabo effectiveness, giving dedicated jabo planes their roles back, relative diversity among majority of the planes - is still valid.
Or, there still may be hopes that "lazy" people, who are now only limited to the free spits, would actually try other planes from the Spit - if they want the fastest plane to run away with, they've got various choices - P-51B is probably the most worthy consideration, but at least it has two less MGs, and can't carry huge ordnance. The La-5FN only has two ShVAKs with 50 less rounds.
....
The F6F-5 is giving me the trouble that it's a free fighter with largest ordnance loadout now. Will people still neglect jabo planes, and flock to the F6F-5?
..
Thus.. there might be a need to consider perks for the F6F-5 and the Spit9, too - even smaller, 2 points perhaps.. but still, it's a path I'd like to stay away from.
It'd be great if there was an opportunity to experiment these setups right now, so there can be more fine tuning.. :( but as it is, it stays only a possibility..
-
Kweassa, I agree with most of your agenda and support it heartily.
What people fail to understand is that this WILL NOT eliminate p-51D, La7, D9, G10, N1k from the areana. These planes are lightly perked and this will give people something to use their perks on. Now, we have lots of vets with thousands of perks in their account and they use it perhaps for an occasional 262 ride. Other then that, they just pile up.
If people think 4 perks is alot, you may even go down to perking planes by 1 perk - the psycological effect will be that people would rather not spend their precious perks. If one side is vastly outnumbered, costs will go down as well with the dynamic perk system (which I like by the way).
There is just no excuse for perking the spit9 inspite the overuse. I bet the La5 and p-51B would get a much larger croud then expected.
Bozon
-
i like the ideas
-
Great proposal. I have always liked this general idea and feel it would certainly open up my plane choices in the MA.
As for the Spit 9... It is a 1942, plane but it's a pure interceptor that can catch anything given a 2K alt advantage.
How about 3 pts for the Spit 9 and 8 pts for a new Spit 16 LF? :)
Charon
-
Love the idea as i stated before, but I still think the Spit9 should be perked. I also have another idea I thought you may like to hear. Instead of perk points, what about the concept of percentage. For example, and this is merely an example:
ME262 - 10%
Spit14 - 8%
Tempest - 5%
LA7 - 3%
NIK2 - 3%
and so on.
In this manner it wouldn't matter if you where new to AH with 50 perk points or an old vet with 1000's of perk points racked up. The cost to fly a perked plane would be based on costing you a certian percentage of your total perk points. Not sure if anyone has brought up this aspect. This way if a newer guy wanted to risk a certain % of his points to fly a 262 he wouldn't have to wait months to build up his perk points to do it. May need to incorperate a minimum amount of points before you could use them. (I.E. 50 points and the percentage lose can't take you below 10 points for example) Might be hard to calulate if a guy only has 3 perk points and wants to gamble 10% of his points for a 262. So they should have a predetermined amount before being able to use them. Just another idea for you all to think over.
(http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid67/p6031c4705f7379093e97c70c371d4e82/fbd45435.jpg)
-
Somewhat of a hijack but I think that having different sets of perk values for different years is a good idea. So when themap gets reset we may get NDIsles with a 1940 planeset or Uterus with a 1945 planeset or something else.
-
PERK EVERYTHING
this way you 50 or so guys out of 100's that play this game can have it just the way you want it, but enjoy it for it will not last long as many people will cancel their memberships and AH will go tit's up.
Just my Nostrohandsomehunk prediction.
100's of people pay $14.95 to play but it seems 50 or so want it their way.
Fly what You want let the rest of us fly what we want.
Looking forward to having ya on my 6 :D
-
Some more thinking..
1) The Chog was doing 20~23% alone.
2) The P-51D always had a stable rate of 10% - regardless of the Chog.
3) The Spit9 and N1K2 share a total rate of 20% - this means the overall rate of those two is set at about 20%, and which plane's more used, fluctuates throughout the tours. ie) In some tours, the Spit9 does 7%, and the N1K2 does 13%. In other tours, the Spit9 might do 12%, and the N1K2 8%.
4) The La-7 saw steady but continuous increase until recently, where it blew over the 10% line.
5) The Typhoon, which claims 5%, is probably the most intersting case of them all. It remains about 5%/fifth place ever since Tour29. The top five is set since that tour, up to today. (*note: recent stats of Tour41, is also very interesting in the fact that a change of terrain, can also significantly effect plane usage. "Bigisles" no doubt, is the main reason behind the Seafire and the F6F-5 getting more used than the Typhoon!)
6) The Seafire and F6F-5 is hard to track - only within three~four tours since they appeared, the La-7 and the Fw190D-9 appeared, and then, the Chog became perked. The usage fluctuates anywhere between as low as 1% to as high as 7% - with these difficulties in consideration, a lot of guesswork has to be made in its usage levels. About 1% each, is what I estimate as the "true" figures, before the Chog became perked. All the figures above that, is a result of new planes introduced in too quick a time period.
...
Comparative analysis of above five points, suggest:
* Point 2) suggests that there's a stable P-51D crowd, who are uneffected by whatever may happen or whichever new plane might come around(unless it's something like a P-51H ;) ) - probably due to its high fame, and high versatility as a MA fighter. They have no reason to falter whether or not the Chog was around.
* Point 3) reveals the fact that the N1K2 pilots are also Spit9 pilots. They too, fly nothing else. When someone gets bored with the N1K2 they take out a Spit9. Vice versa with the typical N1K2 pilot. This means the N1K2/Spit9 crowd is also set.
* Points 4), 5), and 6), reveal where the Chog crowd went. We can track the "actual" usage of the Chog as a fighter, with slight assumptions and some clever sleuthing, based on the facts in the three points above.
It's 23% impact, as previously analyzed by many, comes from its significancy as a do-it-all plane. After the Chog was perked, the Typhoon saw significant increase. A 1% plane, suddenly jumps up to about 4% immediately after it was perked. Over the tours, it stabilizes at 5%.
The significancy of the Typhoon, reveals the fact that a large share of Chog usage was due to its jabo capabilities. People who don't fly Chogs regularly, would still up a Chog when doing jabo, or when they had to fly off a carrier. Therefore, it is often misleading to see the "23%" figure and think "great, 23% of fighters in MA is the Chog" - this never happened.
From point 6), we can see how much the F6F-5 and the Seafire was increased in usage - those two planes are each about 4% in average since Tour29. Thus, over the tours, they saw total increase of 6%.
Point 4), thus, is where the secret lies. The Chog crowd, has been transformed into the La-7 crowd.
In conclusion, of the 20~23% kills achieved by the Chog at it's prime, 4% of them are from Jabo attacks. 6% was due to carrier duties. That's 10%. About 10~13% of the Chog kills, is achieved during regular, land-based, non-jabo fighter duties.
This, reveals a shocking truth on overusage.
Some of the claims of people skeptical on perking the Chog, turns out to be true: "I don't see that many Chogs to be a problem." Yes, the Chog never was 23% in "true fighter" usage. It's actual usage as a regular fighter, was 10%!
Which part is so shocking? This part, where we arrive at this fact...
* P-51D - 10%
* Spit9+N1K2J - 10%+10%
* Chog - 10%
What does current stats say? The new plane, La-7, is now 10% in usage. This is some serious shi*..!
The "Big Four" phenomenon, wasn't caused by perking the Chog!!
In previous theory, supposedly the pilots of the perked planes, moved over to "next best planes" - and thus, when 1 plane was perked, the "next best planes" quickly became the new head honchos of the MA.
Thus, this led to the assumption that perking planes, just cause more whinings, people continuously asking to perk the best planes until every plane was perked - freedom is clasped in chains, and AH dies.
The whining about the "big four", was the result of the Chog being perked, and the classic case of perks decimating freedom of choice, and causing more and more whining.
My latest analysis, totally blows away that idea. It never was like that.
The "Big Four" did not appear suddenly. The Chog seemed to be overused only due to the fact that it was a do-it-all plane. Remove the do-it-all aspect and observe it's nature as a normal fighter, the Chog was actually doing 10%! This magic number, "10%", is also what the P-51D, Spit+N1K2 has.
We always thought in the past days, only the Chog was a scourge-terror, everywhere you run into you see only Chogs. That's how we were all brainwashed by the "20% kills" figure. That thought was practically embedded in our heads that we never saw the truth.
We never thought the P-51D, Spit9, N1K2 was a serious problem, because to us, it always seemed like:
"Yeah, the P-51D, Spit9, N1K2 is used a lot.. but never like the Chog. The Chog is the real problem - anywhere you go, you see them always. For god's sake, they claim 23%!"
In shocking truth, the "Big Four" phenomenon - where four of the top fighters sharing about an equally high rate of usage and kills claimed - was already there.
It was always the "Big Four". After the La-7 came and Chog was perked, all the Chog pilots moved to the La-7, and formed a new "Big four". The rest three planes of the Big Four, were always as much a problem as the Chog.
The current stats of plane usage, is nothing but a reflection of what was past - The Typhoon, F6F-5, Seafire and the La-7, are direct heritage of what was once, superbly overhyped as the "Chog".
I was wrong, perking the Chog did not increase diversity and split its usage among four other planes. Like many, I had that thought embedded in my head, too. Ofcourse, this does not falter the potential of perk points used as a method of limiting usage.
The perking of the Chog did what it was intended to do - it split some of the multi-roles the Chogs carried out alone, to different planes. However, it did not increase 'diversity' as what one would expect in normal fighter-to-fighter combat in AH.
This, is not because perking itself is wrong. It is a direct result of wrong method of perks applied - adding in a new super-plane which immediately replaced the perked one.
Thus, in the end, these newly revealed facts ultimately strengthens my agenda: unless an entire section of certain fighters are perked, perking individual planes will not help in variety.
-
While the suggested constant perks remain intact, a system of dynamic perkage which calculates the kills achieved by a certain fighter type in a set 24hour period, and perks it accordingly would assure that some of the "nightmares" stay away.
What I envision as a sub-system of the proposed new perk agenda, is system which collects stats by a 24hour period. A much simpler system to model, than some of the other dynamic perkages suggested by others - ones that calculate all the take-offs of planes, and determines a perk price for every plane.
In what I envision, a standard of 6% kills in MA would be used. This 6% would be subtracted from the total percentage of kills that fighter achieved during the given 24hour period.
For instance, when a typical Spit9 achieves 8.4% kills that day, this figure would be rounded out as an integral number of 8. Subtract 6 from that 8, and you get 2.
In the next 24hour period, the Spit9 would be perked at a price of two points! Not a too high perk prices, and comparable with the constant perked planes(which are perked between 3~5 points).
If incredible overuse makes some plane do 20%, it would become a 14point perk plane.
Let's say the P-47D-30, a constant perk plane of 3 points, is for some reason used 7.89%(which, I don't think it's a likely thing).. the 7.89 turns integral to 8. 8 minus 6 equals two, and thus, two dynamic perk points are added to the constant perk point. It becomes a five point plane!
These perk costs, are ofcourse, finally calculated through the perk multiplier as we have now.
...
The reason I had to come up with this sub-system, is that the latest analysis in the prior post, shows a grim truth about the people's tendency in plane choices.
There's a fixed, unmoving crowd for a certain plane of overuse(which, the real standard for 'overuse' is actually 10%). The P-51D crowd remained constant 10% both before and after the perking of the Chog. It was a part of the previous, "hidden Big Four", a best suited plane for MA.
The Spit9/N1K2 crowd also retained added total of 20%.
The Chog crowd dispersed into four planes - Typh, La-7, Seafire, F6F-5.. among them, the normal conditions as a land-based pure fighter is represented by the La-7. The La-7 also remains at 10%.
These constant crowd, searches out for an alternative plane that most closely resembles their plane of main use, if for whatever reason it becomes unavailable.
Thus, in my darkest nightmare, even if the new constant perk agenda I have suggested, the problem of variety remains the same. Some problems - such as sucidal jabos, and over abundance of late war fighter-bombers - will be solved, and with great confidence I can say so. However, the variety may remain same!
* The P-51D crowd moves totally to the P-51B.
* The N1K2 crowd flocks entirely to the Spit9.
* The La-7/former Chog crowd, now flocks to the La-5FN.
10% P-51Bs, 20% Spit9s, 10% La-5FNs, even under the suggested new perk agenda...! Overusage problem of the Spit9, is now totally serious - the Chog 20% figures were achieved by combined usage of jabo, carrier duty and fighter duty. Now, the Spit9 is doing 20% entirely in fighter duty alone!
Oh my god, I've created a monster!
The only solution, if this nightmare comes true, would be going back to the original AH perks(not an option: will kill the positive changes), or slap up an another constant perk value for 1943 era(not an option: since initial costs for the new perk agenda was low, the 1943 planes would be even lower 0.5, 1 points.. this will rid of the effectivity. Thus, 1943 planes will have to be set at 3~5 points, and this will result in upping the 1944~'45 planes to 8~10 points, which in turn, will result in the originally perked planes becoming even higher in prices).
While there are some optimistic points that might regulate this from happening too seriously..
* limited armament, shorter range of the P-51B
* limited armament, smaller performance margin of the La-5FN
(This may cut off about 3% top from these planes, in optimistic estimates. But the Spit9, is totally unaccounted for. It could still be 7% 51Bs, 7% La-5Fns, and 20% Spit9s)
... it still is a very risky gamble. I can't take that chance. "Dweebery", is the most powerful force in AH, and that, just cannot be disputed.
Thus, a second CP(constant perk) for 1943 era is impossible. The only real option left, is to run a dual perk system that uses a combination of CP and DP(dynamic perk) factor.
* The positive changes with CP applied to '44~ planes will be retained.
* The DP will regulate remaining potentials of overuse not by a fixed CP value, which is vastly incompetent and inefficient, but a DP value based on a 24hour collection of kill percentage.
Thus, planes with estimated figures over the standard of 6%, will be perked between 4 points(10% kills) to 14 points(20% kills). If people lazily just flock over to the Spit9, P-51B, and the La-5FN, even when a nice-guy NPA(new perk agneda) CP has provided a good and fair 1943 environment for varous fighters, bombers and jabo planes... the DP will make sure they decline from that path.
It's a harsh system, and yes, it takes away some of the freedoms. But the truth about people's choices, is even harsher.
It's not as menacing as a RPS, nor complicated as a 'true' DP system. Implied DP prices will fluctuate everyday, and the more they try out various planes, the more planes become totally free. (The planes that were not on the NPA CP list, but became perked due to overusage, will ultimately become free, when they grow under 6% usage)
It doesn't really take away the choices. It just makes sure that there are consequences following a choice. Not too scary to totally drive people away, but not a slouch, either.
ps) Then why don't we just do away with the NPA, and apply the whole plane set with the suggested "6% DP" system? That's because the NPA is not just about achieving the fun of variety. It has secondary goals which are just as much, maybe even more, important as variety.
-
Still support the idea
-----------------------------------------------------
A few points I would like to make...
First, do not get too focused in analyzing events and data involving the F4U-1C "Hog" specifically. The fact that this plane saw inordinate amount of usage is, in fact, not the issue. The issue is the "+20 vorpal bunwhacker" to which I have already referred. It is always natural, and in fact, correct behavior for individuals to always choose the "best", whatever that may be. The psychological reason for the choices in planes that we are seeing is because they are the "best". These late war planes, which have the best handling characteristics, speed, guns, etc; are the natural evolution of the "Age of Flight" (prop style)(after a 6 year war killing millions and encouraging improvement). As such they are the apex predators of the game. The cause for concern lies in the fact that out of a set of 35 to 40 planes (haven't ever counted) a mere fraction can command such an overwhelming amount of usage. This is the issue, which must be addressed.
How can it be addressed? By "charging" for the ability to use such weaponry and by adjusting the charge dependant on strategic situations.
Regarding a dynamic system, do not focus on a 24 hr based system. Such a concept would cause problems in that players in certain geographical locations will end up with an advantage (Europe, Asia, etc) because they are at the "reset point" while also being around 6PM Local Time. The exact region ending up at the apex of such a system depends on arbitrary information and is as likely to end up being U.S. Pacific as it could be Russian Eastern. Due to this inserting randomizing factors in how often these statistics might assist... 24hrs +/- 12hrs per harvest of stats with the second and third elements of the function being random numbers and the first being some arbitrary value, would be such an example. Note that, HTC already avoids day/night issues by mating the Arena clock to a value that isn't 24hrs so that people all across the world can enjoy having their HQ bombed in the dead of night when you can't see a thing. Another idea would be to set the dynamic perk cost of a plane according to "old data", for instance last week and saying OK this is the costs for this week for a 190D9, etc. The initial seeds for such a formula would be "The Last Tour" or anything else that amuses you, "1.0 for instance". The effect of any dynamic perk point system or lessening of only the late war plane effect is a tendency toward a median capability plane without enforcing it. Allowing people to choose any "cool toy" they want while insisting that the "coolest of toys" comes at a price.
-
I support Kweassas perk list, too.
Ecke
-
I can't freeking believe the Spit9 was left off the list. No vote here. Perk the "overabundance" planes or just leave it alone.
-
Tumor,
Kweassa's list is based purely on date. The Spitfire Mk IX doesn't make it onto the list because it is a 1942 aircraft. Kweassa wants a 1943 arena, not the 1944 one we have.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Tumor,
Kweassa's list is based purely on date. The Spitfire Mk IX doesn't make it onto the list because it is a 1942 aircraft. Kweassa wants a 1943 arena, not the 1944 one we have.
All I'm looking for is more (better) variety in the MA. I don't care what plane, the year, or the "side". This is why the only "perk agenda" I'll ever seriously support will include the top 4-5... and preferably ALL of them. Truthfully... I want easy-mode perked.
-
Tumor, read six posts up from your last post.
The two lengthy posts are entirely about the Spit9. Considerations and still more considerations, and yet, still the Spit9 fills none of the major categories I've considered for the perk candidates. That's why it's always a dilemma :o
And no, Karnak, it isn't based purely on date - technically, the reason it has a rounded out exterior of about 1943, is because all the planes after 1944 in AH breach either one, two, or all of the major aspects requiring perk in my opinion - performance, rarity and multi-role aspect.
Usually those aspects are interlinked - in the case of most of the late war planes, they came out after 1944, which means:
1) they are most usually very high performance
2) some of them are rare
3) they developed multi-role aspects
So, very naturally, the planes before that era lack most of those three aspects - relative high performance planes exist, but none of them are like the La-7.
The problem is, the Spit9 fits into none of the three reasons given which effect people's choice on planes, and yet, it holds 10%. The sole reason for its success is balance of maneuverability and speed like no other plane except the N1K2 - their maneuverability is excellent, and they are very fast, compared to the handful of planes that turn even better then they.
Frankly, that translates into "easy plane to fly and fight in", "easy mode" if you will - regardless of actual effectivity or impact.
Most Spits and N1K2s form the 'grunts' of the MA forces, fighting the highly risky and dirty battles where survivability is hardly expected. They usually are ignored by fast planes, and usually fight the same types used by other countries on deck. Simply put, its a plane loved by dweebs. No need for understanding in real ACM, no need for careful E management, just fly, point, fire, then get shot down.
...
But the problem is, perking a 1942 plane for the reason it is a good balanced plane, which is not a super plane like the La-7, doesn't make sense. It sees heavy use by all kinds of people, and for one thing, the dedicated RAF fans will never ever understand that. The N1K2 is a quad-cannon plane with 900 rounds, a relatively rare plane, and also a 1945 model. At least the N1K2 got reasonable grounds to limit it.
And that's what I was trying to figure out 6 posts above - what will happen when the Spit9 is alone, among the big four, left unperked.
Since all of the suggested perks aren't really penalizing, maybe there can be a compromise to perk the Spit9 even lower than most planes, maybe 2 points - just to make average pilots who have to really concentrate to earn 3~4 perks in an hour, so that they think twice about the 'dweebing'. But as I said above, it's a path I'd like to stay away from...
-
The two lengthy posts are entirely about the Spit9. Considerations and still more considerations, and yet, still the Spit9 fills none of the major categories I've considered for the perk candidates. That's why it's always a dilemma
Kweassa,
I think your "Perk List" is well thought out and well intentioned and I certainly hope HTC can find a way to implement some form of it. If it doesn't work out, they can always revert back to the current system.
Let me make a suggestion for curing the Spit9 problem as it applies to your perk list. I have suggested before that all planes should be perked except the models that were in service at the beginning of the war. You could alternately say all models that were in service when the BOB commenced but then we're choosing an arbitrary date that's open for alot of criticism.
New players could be issued some perk points upon signing up, just to make sure potential customers are not lost because they cant fly their favorite plane right off the bat. Taken a little further, some Perk points could be issued to everyone at the start of a new camp, just to satisfy those who dont budget or fly well.
So lets have some constructive criticism on this idea to see if it's feasible...
Magoo
-
I'd like to add that although supporting this perk list may make me appear to be the AH version of a Democrat/Republican politician ("I know what's best for you and will make all attempts to shove it down your throat"), I am actually a Libertarian...so eventually you just have to let the peeps fly what they want ;)
Magoo
-
I think adding a 1 or 2 point perk to the Spit IX would probably do the trick. Just enough to convince some people to take a ride in the Yak-9T, Ki-61, C.205, 109G2, Spit V etc. And all the Spit-lovers who aren't just looking for the best free plane can probably maintain enough perks to fly the Spit 9 for a very high percentage of their sorties.
-
very good i like it since i never use any of those planes. he did tons of research and i hope htc listens. GJ
-
PERK EVERYTHING
I got a better idea JustJim, why not just dump all the so called good planes and keep just the B-17, Zero, P-40, and F4F. Then no one will have to fly against a super plane and have to complain about it. Then again there wouldn't be anyone around to fly them. To those 50 or so all I can say is get a life. People play this game to have fun, but if it takes away your fun then find another flight sim to fly. WWII Online or even War Birds needs pilots. Start perking all those planes and you'll find Wild Bill happier then a dog in heat. The influx back to his game will really make him happy. So yeah please perk almost everything in this game. Oh and while your at it don't forget the GV's. Now just flame away.
-
Ever read the consequences of unchecked "fun" and "freedom"?
It's in the book called, "Lord of the Flies"
-
Ever read the consequences of unchecked "fun" and "freedom"?
Yes I have but in the same context have you ever read what happens when a few dictate to the many how they should live and think?
Try reading George Orwell's 1984!
People come here to have fun not have a few dictate how they should fly or what they should fly. Plus the vast majority know
the difference in a fantasy role and a real life career. Do I like having to fight the super planes? Not especially, but I have learned to deal with them. Do I get upset when the Super Planes shoot me down?
Sometimes, but I won't tell those people what to fly or even bad talk them over the open channel. It's their fun and who am I to even try ruin it for them. If they like to TnB great, if they like to BnZ fine. Just don't force people to fly what you want them to fly, that is not what the main arena is about. That is what we have TODs and the CT for. Everyone that pays their monthly fees has a right to choose what they will fly.
Just because your a very accomplished pilot, doesn't mean the vast majority is. Some of those same people work extremely hard to get what little perk points they do have. If you want to play Big Brother, please do it some where else. Leave people to have their fun!
-------------------------------------------------------------
IT'S THE MAN NOT THE MACHINE!
-
:rolleyes:
And pure unadulterated freedom to everything is automatically ensure everything is fair and square?
It is interesting a mere suggestion on a few perks, you automatically equate it to "forcing a certain ride". Having fun is so easy when nothing comes with a price tag. And that unadulterated fun, can sometimes have a vast, social effect as a whole. There is a strict need to see things apart from a very individual basis you ask.
It's the same principle why laws are made. Who are those bananas making laws for us to abide by anyway?
It would be the way you describe it had I the power to change everything on my whim, but unfortnately, I do not. That's why this discussion has taken place - to lead a consensus.
If a mere discussion to lead a consensus to advise, or recommend, or request to the developers what a certain portion of community thinks would be appropriate, is such a shackling experience in your eyes, then we might as well do away with the process of debate and communication as a whole - since every argument on something is essentially, according to your logic, a 'dictation' to others by a few.
-
*And pure unadulterated freedom to everything is automatically ensure everything is fair *and square?
Nobody said it was going to be fair and square. Even if you perk all the later rides it will do nothing to make things fair and square. As I said you are a accomplished pilot, but the majority are not. I like you have gathered many perk points but I rarely ever use them. As I said earlier there are many that struggle to get what little perk points they do have so you would be penalizing new players and the not so good pilots. Thus forcing them to fly a ride they would not normally fly.
* It is interesting a mere suggestion on a few perks, you automatically equate it to "forcing *a certain ride".
As I just said many will be forced to fly rides that they wouldn’t normally fly. That is my point. Only the people that get a constant flow of perk points will be able to fly what they prefer, but many will not.
*Having fun is so easy when nothing comes with a price tag. And that unadulterated fun, *can sometimes have a vast, social effect as a whole. There is a strict need to see things *apart from a very individual basis you ask.
In a way you are correct, but the price tag comes with the monthly fee. Why should a majority have to pay extra for the right to fly what they want? There are better ways to solve this problem other then perking planes. None of those ideas however were excepted by HTC.
*It's the same principle why laws are made. Who are those bananas making laws for us to *abide by anyway?
I understand what your saying but unless people speak out those bananas as you put it, they get away with making those laws. Those same bananas are a minority who make laws on a whim for the majority.
*It would be the way you describe it had I the power to change everything on my whim, *but unfortnately, I do not. That's why this discussion has taken place - to lead a *consensus.
Ok understand this Kweassa, I have in part known you for quite a while, and have much respect for you. I certainly have admiration for your flying abilities, but this is one time I just disagree with your thinking. It’s not a slam or a flame on your part. I just simply disagree with your idea, and have stated so.
*If a mere discussion to lead a consensus to advise, or recommend, or request to the *developers what a certain portion of community thinks would be appropriate, is such a *shackling experience in your eyes, then we might as well do away with the process of *debate and communication as a whole - since every argument on something is *essentially, according to your logic, a 'dictation' to others by a few.
By your own logic that this is a discussion then opposing views should do nothing to do away with a debate. A debate is one that has pro and cons or both sides of the coin. I am only expressing my view point as a paying customer. As far as I could see everyone that replied to this thread except one agreed with you. So myself and JustJim are a minority in this discussion. I don’t normally get involved with these discussions, but this one time was an exception. I have seen too many times where one sided discussions ended up being implemented into this game only to give the advantage to a few. Perking just about every plane is just one thing I am totally against. Personally though I seriously don’t think HTC will even consider this idea. So there is it, no hard feelings Kweassa, so I will end my end of the discussion. My views have been stated, my feelings have been expressed. It’s in HTC’s corner to see which opinion they agree with.
-
TheCage,
in this perk agenda, most perked fighters have an earlier model that is not perked. so if you are 190,109,p-51,p-47, la5/7, spit, f4u, fan you'll always have free variants to fly.
The perked models are so lightly perked that it would be easy to get the needed perks - we are talking about 1-3 perks only! this can be achived just by droping a few bombs on a city in attack score, no kills needed.
The TnB players will find this setup more comfortable since most TnB fighters are early-mid war and they'll have less speed-demons-BnZ planes buzzzing around. less, but they'll be there still.
and perhaps if there are many perked planes out there, it will stop the "hey! there's a perked plane there, lets all go kill it!" mentality.
Bozon
-
Very well thought out!
HERE! HERE!
-
Yup, good point Bozon
-
Always liked Kweassa's perk idea.
Would it be such a nightmare to try it for one week and see if it works?
-
Kweassa, I've been using Perk Points just like yours in the CT for exactly the same reasons you have proposed on the 10 other aircraft in a variety of scenarios.
Guess what... they work.
It's not about earning your ride, or making sure that dweebs are not using the same planes over and over, it's to historically limit planes that otherwise can dominate an arena. Perk points work. Period.
(http://forums.combatsim.com/html/emoticons/xyxthumbs.gif)
-
Just perk them all and be done with it :o
The TnB players will find this setup more comfortable since most TnB fighters are early-mid war and they'll have less speed-demons-BnZ planes buzzzing around. less, but they'll be there still.
I rest my case, fcrceing others to play the game the way you want it. Sorry no dice. The day HTC starts that is the day I leave. So will many others. I fly the P-38, and because it's a late war plane I am force to fly something else simply because there is no other models to fly? I am sorry if my plane ruins your fun, but don't force others to play the game your way. Unless you want to pay my way! But I can hear the screams now, when 50% of the planes flying are all La-7s.
-
I rest my case, forcing others to play the game the way you want it. Sorry no dice.
3 or 4 perk points, maximum 8 in just a few planes, is going to force someone to stop flying their favorite plane? Damn, you must really suck or something, if you can't afford that price so it stops you from your favorite plane.
Well, guess what, somebody is already forcing to play the game the way they want it - HTC puts 8~200 perks on the perked monster planes. They feel they need that much punitive perk costs to keep it under control for sake of balance. I didn't see you complaining about that.
What I came up with is basically a revised version of what HTC is already doing, nothing more. Besides, the prices are cheaper than anything HTC offered before, and even the other massively perked planes are cut down nearly half in their price in my original suggestion. And you're saying I'm forcing others to play my own way? You think my favorite plane ain't up at the perked list?
The day HTC starts that is the day I leave. So will many others. I fly the P-38, and because it's a late war plane I am force to fly something else simply because there is no other models to fly?
You can't afford 3 points? Pick a F4U-1 and get three kills, and you earn enough lose three P-38s in a row. If you've been playing this game for a long time and have at least 100 perks, you have enough to die 33 times in a row. Kill Spits or N1k2s, La-7s in your P-38s like you normally do in the MA, and I'm very sure your balance sheet will always remain in profit.
So, what's the problem? I'm suggesting a perk price, not to delete the plane from the hangar list or something, sheesh!
I am sorry if my plane ruins your fun, but don't force others to play the game your way. Unless you want to pay my way!
Your plane's fine, as long as people fly it like it should fly. Now, when they come plumetting in CVs five, six times in a row in a glaring kamikaze, that's not fine, by my standards. You want to fly it that way? Fine, pay 18 perks for 6 kamikaze sorties, and do what you want.
But I can hear the screams now, when 50% of the planes flying are all La-7s.
How much of this thread did you actually read?
If 50% of the people flying is willing to pay 4~5 perks each time they fly La-7s, yeah, things might be that way.
But when suggesting 3 perks on a P-38L seems to make you think I'm forcing you to do something, then I think I have a good idea that La-7s aren't going to be as numerous as you think.
After all, that's the whole point of this thread: restraining the "Big Five", and controlling the suicidal mentality courtesy of mega-ordnance late war fighters.
-
Damn, you must really suck or something
Yeah you just go ahead and believe that one, and I got a bridge for you to buy. That’s about as delusional as your idea!
-
Yeah you just go ahead and believe that one, and I got a bridge for you to buy. That's about as delusional as your idea!
If you don't suck, what the hell are you complaining about?
-
If you don't suck, what the hell are you complaining about?
The rights of others who are not as good as you and I are! Too many people that are flying this game are struggling just to get a kill. It doesn't matter if your plane or mine is perked, I seriously doubt that I would ever run out of perk points. But what about the others that are not so fortunate or blessed as we are? If you want more variety in aircraft, a rolling plane set is the only way it can be done. But HTC has already said no to that idea. Just as they will say no to this idea.
While the 38 is my main ride, it’s not the only thing I fly. On occasion I do fly the P-51D, but there is no challenge to flying it. When I am in a TnB mood I will fly early model planes. But the 38 is my main ride, and having to pay for it just because it’s a late war plane is just plain stupid. Yeah they already have planes with high perks, and for a good reason. Perks are based on how much the plane type upsets the balance of the game play. If you really want to do something useful, then train people to fly those early warplanes so they can deal with the late war planes. An early warplane in the right hands is every bit as deadly if not deadlier then the average pilot in a late warplane. Many times I have seen people flying early model planes and just kicking behinds on late war planes.
It’s not impossible, but in order for a person to do it he has to fly his plane from the strengths of his aircraft while forcing the opponent to fly his plane to it’s weaknesses. This I know you understand, as your are a very good pilot. But for many they don’t know this and get into bad habits that get them killed. Oh and before you try the come back well why don’t you help others, I do on a regular basis bro. Been doing that since my old AW days.
-
The rights of others who are not as good as you and I are! Too many people that are flying this game are struggling just to get a kill. It doesn't matter if your plane or mine is perked, I seriously doubt that I would ever run out of perk points. But what about the others that are not so fortunate or blessed as we are?
You aren't automatically entitled a right to everything, not to mention this game's hardly a democracy in anyway.
This game never started out from a perfect equilibrium of checks and balances and thus, changes will be made in its steps of evolution - we've seen how some planes free, were eventually perked. There were changes, and there will be changes - you gonna challenge every eventual change that even slightly shadows some people's notion of "I wanna do everything I want", as a breach of human rights?
The only difference is whether the source of the change is from the developers themselves, or if someone else makes a suggestion. If the developers think it's a good idea, they'll make the changes whether or not some people think it is bad. You gonna challenge HTC and threaten to quit, then? Hey, it's your loss.
You'll need to come up with a better excuse/grounds for saying 'no' to a mere proposition on improving the status of the game for a common good. Especially when it seems you understand not even the least bit of what is said in this thread. There are research materials, some studies, and reasons why it is for the better. Read it, please.
If you have something to disagree from the specifics of this proposition, then I'd gladly accept a more intelligent conversation with you. At the moment, we're all going around in circles with this metaphysical bullshi* on "rights".
While the 38 is my main ride, it's not the only thing I fly. On occasion I do fly the P-51D, but there is no challenge to flying it. When I am in a TnB mood I will fly early model planes. But the 38 is my main ride, and having to pay for it just because it's a late war plane is just plain stupid.
What's plain stupid, is that the reasons why late-war planes are perk material, are already given. Which you either did not read, or dismissed it without a logical procedure of thinking.
Yeah they already have planes with high perks, and for a good reason. Perks are based on how much the plane type upsets the balance of the game play.
The point is, (1) how much game balance is disrupted, (2) by which planes, (3) to which degree, (4) for what reason. You think all planes, which are not currently perked, are same in everything to the same degree?
If you really want to do something useful, then train people to fly those early warplanes so they can deal with the late war planes. An early warplane in the right hands is every bit as deadly if not deadlier then the average pilot in a late warplane. Many times I have seen people flying early model planes and just kicking behinds on late war planes.
You're talking of something irrelevant. Not to mention, making a typical assumption of how faults derived from the system, should always be fixed by the individual, instead of touching the system itself.
Also, you're contradicting yourself, as you seemed to be so concerned about those "not so fortunate or blessed as we are" when starting off.. and now, suddenly your closing the statement hangs about how we should train everyone into a pilot good enough to be deadly in early war planes?
Why, if that's useful, I'd reckon perking the late war planes to balance the arena out, and then training pilots to become skilled enough to earn the incredibly high, woppin' THREE perk points when they want to fly those planes, would be even more useful. No?
Why not? If we do that, we:
1) motivate people to learn to fly better, to get more chances to fly their favorite planes, without having to pay punitive costs to fly them...
2) place a check upon the late war monster planes which people flock to for their versatility, which usually makes a stale and dull environment..
3) place a heavier check upon people who choose late-war fighters for the sole purpose of kamikazeing themselves, instead of learning to bomb and rocket, strafe
4) promote the use of free planes, the '43~'44 fighters with a wider variety but smaller performance margin, than compared to '44~'45 planes with smaller variety and wider performance margin
5) promote the use of dedicated ground attack planes, as the late-war fighter-bombers with piles of ordnance, would be perked lightly.
.....
Read the thread, sahib. And then come up to me for a counter-punch.
-
What game in the world do you sign into and instantly have the ability to use every weapon in the game?
Every other game I've ever played used a carrot and stick approach.
You wanted to reach the next level to get to do this..
You wanted to get more Strength points so you could use this weapon..
You wanted to explore the maze until you found the BFG 2000....
You had goals, and you did all you could to achieve them.
I'm for Kweassa's idea. Actually, I'm more for a tougher perk cost, but kweassas idea is more acceptable for the masses.
Please ask yourself this and be honest....
WOULD IT BE SO TERRIBLE TO TRY THIS IDEA FOR 1 TOUR IN THE MA?
-
I vote "Yes".
MRPLUTO VMF-323 ~Death Rattlers~ MAG-33
-
Heed the old saying... "be careful what you wish for"
Personally I vote no, because I know where this path leads too.
The rolling plane set (similar concept of "plane variety", just a different mechanism) in Warbirds started this exact way. It sounds reasonable and fun. Hey... what the heck lets try it.
It soon leads to more and more division in the player base, and less and less choice for the player.
The end result in Warbirds? The Axis versus Allied rolling planeset. Warbirds maybe 30 or 40 players on a weekend "primetime", Aces High 300 or 400 players.
The numbers tell the tale. period.
-
I am especially aware of that, Verm.
The general approach may sound simular to a RPS system, but frankly, there's a large difference in that the planes are still accessible, and quite easily, in the suggested NPA.
I think there's a big problem in player mentality of AH, that people automatically respond to any type of secondary gameplay devices of limitation/augmentation/alteration/influence/encouragment , as "taking away choices". Obviously, "limiting choices", "taking away choices", and "encouraging choices" are not the same thing. If we put 50~70 perks on a plane that saw regular service in WW2(Spit14, F4U-4, Tempest..), that's clearly limiting choices. If we pull a plane out of the accessible plane set, that's taking away choices.
But 3 points for late war planes, 4~5 for the slightly better ones, such as the D-9. G-10 and the La-7? That's to encourage choices of a wider variety, with a little motivation in survival and collecting perks which can be spent regularly without heavy burden(unlike having to spend 50~200 a time..). Not to mention the multi-objective it holds.
The perk system in general, is fundamentally different from the RPS. I didn't come up with the system, HTC did. My suggestion is but a slight alteration of the original.
-
I'm with Cage on this one.
Kwassena I don't want to get flamed for voicing my opinion, but for the newer guys I don't think the perk idea is the way to go. I say this for the same reason Cage has.
Kwassena I respect your "opinion" and you are more then entitled that, but "I" don't think it's cool you're trying to make everyone "have" your opinion.
You both have raised a good arguement. In "my" opinion some late war planes could be perked, but not "all" of them. The PJ doesn't need to be perked in my opinion. It's not superior to the early war planes if you ask me. That's if they have the right pilot.
Guys we all play this game because we love it, for our own reasons. Don't knock another player because they don't have the same view as you. It's immature, inconsiderate, and just plane irresponsible.
I'm not flaming here, it's just the 3 of us fly for the same country and we should be taking our frustrations out on the bish and knights ;).
:)
-
And now for the other side of the coin.
I've been flying for quite some time, but I still suck big time. I tend to fly the 205, Seafire, Typhoon, Spit V (sometimes 9), TBM, and whatever bomber takes my fancy. I die a lot. This does not faze me because I'm having fun. I'm a somewhat casual, rather than truly serious player.
I don't often fly the Spit 9 as I get very few perks with it.
To me, one perk is quite a lot.
I build up some perks over time - I've got several hundred in each category - and every so often I'll take up a perk plane, and like as not, I'll get shot down.
I'm not sure that the perk values are that amiss with the current scoring system. What I do think is amiss is the way perks are given. We've all seen the suicide dweebs. I'd suggest that there needs to be a real incentive for returning to base, especially for the newbie. Give a perk point - or more - per plane for returning to base after combat (defined as being pinged at least once, unmanned flak not counting) even if you score no kills. Give a large bonus for landing more than one kill perhaps a cumulative bonus, (1 for 1 kill, 1+2=3 for 2 kills, 1+2+3=6 for 3 kills etc), with some targets (e.g. CV) counting double or more. Drop the perk value for actually scoring the kill. Now there is a big incentive for actually landing your kills.
-
I agree with the naysayers, all this idea would do is remove the chance to fly half the planeset unless you can maintain over a 2:1 k/d.
Given that a majority of players struggle to get a 1:1 k/d, I see a lot of folks giving up for being unable to compete with the core of veteran players that can always fly anything they want against their poor Spitfire (even high perk planes are reduced in this plan for benefit of us vets and tends to make the whole plan look like a vet agenda).
Someone do the actual math for proof, but only getting only 2 kills landed for each death in a late war plane (say 2-2.5 perks earned for 3-5 perks cost) will drain the perk pool of the average players. It's not just the brand new guy that suffers, but most average guys too. But the system is painless for 4:1 k/d vets.
The way to change voluntary plane use without penalizing average players is to greatly skew ENY's of early vs late planes.
EDIT: Actually ENY mods might make Kweassa's plan useable... Kweassa, figure out an even return for a 1:1 k/d pilot for ENY levels that won't limit them from flying late war to go along with your perk costs. This could be the answer for the auger jabos, too expensive to waste 4 in a row, but not denied if flying normally.
-
Personally I think it's a great idea - trawled through two pages of posts but never saw anything from HTC - what do they think?
-
Leave me with a new sucky p38 then, so I don't feel like a dweeb flying a perked one. :D
-
I like this proposal...It will make us see more variety. Also I think it's a bit stupid that flying a 43-44 plane can almost be suicidal hordes of La-7's and N1K's...Also it will cut down on the HO's. Also I like the idea of being able to fly my A8 competitevly.
-
I too would like to see this! My only suggestion and it is totally off the hip, would be to use an algorithm with the ENY values to set the perk cost. I would be in favor of perking any ride under 20 ENY. Now of course maybe the ENY values need tweeking but that is a whole 'nother discussion.
g00b out!
-
As it stands, I hardly ever fly perk planes because of the hoops I have to go through to manage them. I think your idea would be great, Kweassa, if we had an easier way to keep track of our points.
Usually, I have a few rides that I like to fly, but don't bother with them if they're perked because I don't always have the needed points to buy the plane.
I think it'd be great if we could see our perk points in the tower before a flight and have plane presets that we could select (say with the keys 1 through 10) in the tower to get flying immediately.
This way, if I'm flying an F4U-1 for an hour and see that I have enough perks for a yak-9u, I can just hit my preset for it with a hotkey and be on my way.
Otherwise, I'd have to check back in the hanger every time to see my perks and then go through the list to select the perked plane that I want and the customized loadout for that plane, which would be hell with so many perked planes from your idea.
There's a lot to be said for being able to hop back in to battle with the plane that you want without having to fool around in the hangar queuing up a new ride that you just got the perks for--especially if all of these new planes are going to have low perk costs that we'll constantly gain and lose the ablitity to purchase.
Most people like to jump back into battle immediately with the plane that they've been flying since they logged on and if we have this new system of a ton of perked planes, then we need an easier way to fly those planes.
-
I say leave the Main Arena alone thats what it is a MAIN ARENA general flight grab a plane and either see how many you can kill or see how many times you can avoid being killed by uber pilots.
Equalling out planesets be it early war, axis vs allied is already availible in the TOD do the perk mods there this game is about choice IMO
Not everyone who plays this game can fly as good as some in here hell most of the planes you want to perk even at a little value are the only ones some can handle.
You already see the big Come Kill Me sign now when a perked plane flies into any area, all perking more planes will do from what I have seen is bring the percentage of 20 people chasing 1 poor schmuck all around the areana to kill him.
I never fly perk planes for that reason alone, plus I suck in general anyhow :lol
-
Seems like a good idea but, this will never stop people from crying.
This idea is to make the MA a mid war arena, by shooting for a mid war arena, it even gives the early warbirds a chance to play.
A new "dweeb" plane will emerge.... but oh well..
None the less... I like this idea, and hope its considered.
-BM
-
I'm all for an arena with more variation, both more early/mid-war planes AND hi performance perk planes.
I've lost track of all the thoughts on this thread so I'll just offer my simple observation.
I already fly early/mid-war planes for my own reasons that have nothing to do with earning perks. I almost never fly perk rides, mainly because of the kill-me-neon-sign effect. I would up the spit14 and F4U-4 more if the icon was "unperked". I think we would have some fun fights if we're not sure if we face a spitV/spit14 or F4U-1/F4U-4 before the merge.
I think the idea to increase perk earning capability of lesser planes (and possibly with lowered perk cost for hi perf. planes) would work.
I agree with those that state that we need a system that encourages rather than limits.
It's very risky to perk the spit9 and P51D. But I want the lala perked to a place where the buses don't go :p Ooooh and the niki too...
-
Boozer:
I agree with the naysayers, all this idea would do is remove the chance to fly half the planeset unless you can maintain over a 2:1 k/d.
Given that a majority of players struggle to get a 1:1 k/d, I see a lot of folks giving up for being unable to compete with the core of veteran players that can always fly anything they want against their poor Spitfire (even high perk planes are reduced in this plan for benefit of us vets and tends to make the whole plan look like a vet agenda).
That is true only when we can say that the mediocre pilots are facing equal numbers of veterans as they are, in the current MA.
However, as you yourself described, "the majority" are people who struggle to get a 1:1 k/d. These people, who consistitute the majority of the MA population, are typically in combat against each other by all odds.
If there were so many veterans in the arena that the people will actually feel that they are unable to compete in anything when the suggested NPA is in action, then we wouldn't be able to call those people who are struggling to get a K/D ratio of 1, a "majority". The existence of "veterans", or people who virtually have no worries of accumulating perks for flying what they want, are negligible in this aspect.
Also, it must not be automatically assumed that having easier access to (very lightly) perked planes will mean that the vets will always fly those planes. The mindset of the vet is not the same as the mindest of the rookie.
Someone do the actual math for proof, but only getting only 2 kills landed for each death in a late war plane (say 2-2.5 perks earned for 3-5 perks cost) will drain the perk pool of the average players. It's not just the brand new guy that suffers, but most average guys too. But the system is painless for 4:1 k/d vets.
Again, you are assuming that the "average" will always face a "vet" in a typical engagement at equal numbers, which is absolutely untrue. For every death of an average pilot in a perked plane, we must realize that his death was most likely caused by another "average" pilot. The perks are not drained by the vets - it fluctuates among the average. If people must pay perks for every death your notion might make sense - however, people are in supply of endless number of tools of profit with endless number of lives. They never 'drain'.
You're way overestimating the influence of "vets" in the MA.
JustJim:
Not everyone who plays this game can fly as good as some in here hell most of the planes you want to perk even at a little value are the only ones some can handle.
You should think in a wider aspect. They're the only ones they can handle because they're the only ones they ever fly. If the conditions on what is available changes, then their choice also changes.
You already see the big Come Kill Me sign now when a perked plane flies into any area, all perking more planes will do from what I have seen is bring the percentage of 20 people chasing 1 poor schmuck all around the areana to kill him.
People react to the amount of points, not to whether it is perked or not. That is easily proven in the CT.
jodgi:
I think the idea to increase perk earning capability of lesser planes (and possibly with lowered perk cost for hi perf. planes) would work.
That might work if the majority of people were interested in perks. However, as it stands, for the average pilot the current perked planes are way out of their reach. They've almost totally given up on them. It is something they'll get to fly as a reward for six months of flying.
Already in the arena, when you bring up a Spit9 or a N1K2, which is severely popular amongst people, you only get mere 0.4~0.7 points per a single kill. If people were interested in earning perks they wouldn't be flying so many Spit9s or N1K2s, or La-7s in the first place.
I agree with those that state that we need a system that encourages rather than limits.
As an ideal, I'd also agree with that.
However, the reality is different. Overuse of certain planes is like drug use. You can't stop people from buying/selling drugs by encouraging a better life alone. Only a system of strict limitations along with a decent rehabilitation programs and major social reforms, can anyone expect people to take their hands off material for instant pleasure.
In AH, that's like saying the whole system concerning planesets must be redesigned - ie. like alternatives of the RPS, or AH2:ToD.
However, it is clear that's not gonna take place in the MA - then should a system of minor limitations not be a better alternative?
-
One vote for strong opposition.
Perks are there to prevent domination of the arena, and if you look at overall stats the -51D does many things, but dominate isn't one of them. We're talking about an aircraft with LESS than a 1:1 K/D in the main arena.
P-51D: 0.97 K/D
La-7: 1.06 K/D
P38L: 0.87 K/D
P-47-30: 0.75 K/D
These are NOT dominant aircraft. The perk system you're proposing doesn't limit the use of monsters, it is an attempt to control how people fly in the main arena.
I see way to much effort to control gameplay, and this looks like yet another. Gameplay should be up to the player.
Now, if you want more of a purist atmosphere that encourages smart flying, skill, landing your aircraft, and overall cooperation the SEA runs events with these attributes in mind. The CT is a great place for such things. The main should be open for everyone.
YMMV. HTH. HAND.
-
Puck if your trying to say that the La-7 isn't a dominate plane maybe your a few sandwiches short of a picnic basket...Seriously, the plane is fastest unperked below 10k, it can accelerate away from anything, climbs like a bat out of hell, and on top of that, has 400 cannon rounds. That is the making of a dominate aircraft, one that can pick and choose how and when it engages and unfortuneatly when it disengages. The La-7 is a very high performance late war aircraft.
The N1k is also a problem, the fact that is has near helicopter like abilities is crazy! That and 900 cannon rounds?? Give me a break, I'd like to see a reliable refrence that says N1k's had that much ammo...If there is such a resource, fine, but I won't beleive it until I see it.
-
Originally posted by DYGCaps
Puck if your trying to say that the La-7 isn't a dominate plane maybe your a few sandwiches short of a picnic basket...Seriously, the plane is fastest unperked below 10k, it can accelerate away from anything, climbs like a bat out of hell, and on top of that, has 400 cannon rounds. That is the making of a dominate aircraft, one that can pick and choose how and when it engages and unfortuneatly when it disengages. The La-7 is a very high performance late war aircraft.
The N1k is also a problem, the fact that is has near helicopter like abilities is crazy! That and 900 cannon rounds?? Give me a break, I'd like to see a reliable refrence that says N1k's had that much ammo...If there is such a resource, fine, but I won't beleive it until I see it.
It's dominant in the right hands. If it were unbeatable the overall K/D wouldn't be barely above 1:1.
People see La7s and N1K2s and suddenly have bowel control problems; it's not the aircraft so much as the person driving it. I've got a 3:0 K/D against N1K2s and 1:1 against La-7s in a Spitfire Mk 1 on this tour. Bluntly, I suck, so tell me a real pilot couldn't own either one of those in anything they wish to fly.
So, if HTC were to perk the most common planes in the MA, the ones with the most actual kills, such as the La7, N1K2, P51D, Spit IX, and Typhoon, we'd have a few hundred new pilots with limited ACM skills and equally limited desire to improve them in aircraft they have no chance at all flying. Where's the fun in that? At least now they can up one of those late war monsters, kill someone, die, wash rinse repeat.
As I said, limiting these rides is an attempt to limit the kill/die gameplay many people enjoy. IMO that's the wrong reason for perking an aircraft.
-
Originally posted by Puck
People see La7s and N1K2s and suddenly have bowel control problems;
:rofl that line just caused keeping coffee in the mouth control problems :rofl
-
Makes sense, Puck.
However, I refuse to use the K/D ratio as a standard for suggesting variety. K/D ratio merely reflects how an average pilot performs in those planes.
K/D does not reflect on the amount of kills earned. Typically in these discussions the "kills earned" are usually used as the standard for determining usage.
And it is the usage of certain planes, which people are complaining and whining about, not how a certain plane performs.
There is an interesting psychological phenomenon in all of us - I'm sure even you have expereinced such a feeling:
You are surrounded by 5 planes in a Bf109G-10.
The funny thing is, it feels a lot different when those 5 planes are all N1K2s and Spitfires, than compared to the instance when those 5 are a C.205, P-51B, Fw190A, Bf109, and a La-7.
If the ability to dominate were the standard of people feeling contempt towards certain planes, then the first instance would actually be less ghastly than the second - as the chances of escape are much higher.
However, in reality, it is the opposite: people feel contempt for the former situation, while feel less emotion when meeting the latter situation. We all have experiences in griping about "those Lgay hordes" or "those Niki tards" etc etc. I don't think anyone can deny it, no matter how individually they are capable of dealing with the SPits, Nikis, P-51Ds or La-7s.
Why is this?
The sense of variety, is irrelevant of how a plane performs, or what kind of 'dominant' scores a pilot achieves in a plane. The simple truth is that people just feel tired when they see the same handful of enemies again and again and again.
Is this situation any different with the NPA? Maybe, maybe not.
But if it would not be so different there'd be rarely any harm in trying it - as the NPA specifically mentions beneficial changes in other aspects of MA combat, rather than just fighter to fighter action.
-
It sounds like you're trying to perk all the late war rides because you are personally tired of seeing so many of them. Well...me, too, but that's still not enough reason to limit game play. The MA is a late war battle for a large percentage of the players. If HTC were to take your perk set completely out of circulation they would just be replaced by a different set of the latest and best performing aircraft in the hanger.
You're trying to treat a symptom. The fact remains that a good percentage of players just want to barrel through the air in the "best" aircraft available and blast anything that might cross in front of them. If the Hurricane Mk 1 was the fastest and best armed aircraft in the hanger, you'd see hoards of them and we'd be flying around in fabric covered bi-planes shouting PERK THE HURRICANE!
I understand your sentiment, but I don't agree with your proposed solution.
...by the way, if you're in a G-10 surrounded by anything you did something incredibly stupid and deserve to die :D
-
It sounds like you're trying to perk all the late war rides because you are personally tired of seeing so many of them.
Actually, when I thought of the NPA idea, it started out as small measures to reduce the suicidal jabo problem and brutish field porking tactics. It evolved along the lines of "encouraging the use"(like jodgi said, and I agreed) of planes that were suited and greatly respected for its jabo roles, but in reality totally neglected in the MA.
At that point it became clear that shifting the MA into mid '43~early '44 environment should provide distinct alternatives to what the MA has become now.
Well...me, too, but that's still not enough reason to limit game play. The MA is a late war battle for a large percentage of the players.
Is there a mission statement from HTC concerning how and what the MA should be? I think not.
It is given that the MA, as it is now, is a late-war environment. But there's no reason why it should not change. It is the circumstances of AH1 development that brought such environment to reality - AH started in the first place, with late war craft. The basic system of MA was complete before any mid/early war plane even came into existence in AH. By the time they added in mid war/early war planes, the arena was already formed in the way it is.
While it is true that the developers may or may not agree to what we give as reasons, that does not mean what we give out for reasons are always untrue or invalid. Your tired of seeing same planes again and again. So am I. So are a lot of other people. If we can say that we have a reasonable consensus amongst ourselves, that qualifies as a good reason as any other.
If HTC were to take your perk set completely out of circulation they would just be replaced by a different set of the latest and best performing aircraft in the hanger.
Mid-war planes are free. Late-war planes are perked.
So, does this mean that people will tend to find the 'next best planes' within the mid-war range, and will it be overused just the same? Perhaps, to an extent. But I think there will be a large difference in the extremity of it all.
In the current plane set, perked planes are typically perked very heavily, while other late-war planes are free. Currently, if we wish to choose a plane that outperforms the best of the free planes, we must risk a very high price.
The large perk price and the "kill me" pheromone, largely limits our effective use of perked planes - usually limited to very timid cherry picking. The perked planes, are so rare, that their impact in the arena is negligible. Naturally, the best of the free planes becomes also the best of the planes in arena impact.
However, imagine my perk agenda in circulation.
The best of the free planes are the best of the mid-war planes. Will they become so high in arena impact that things will remain exactly the same? Well, if that logic is to be true, we must assume that a perk price of 3 points will totally kill the use of all the lightly perked planes.
As a mild comparison, please take note on the usage of the C-hog. It is currently perked twice as heavier than the average perk price of my suggestion, and yet its usage is around 2%. For a number of reasons which I have given very early in the discussion, 2%, is the 'average' number I am looking forward to achieving for all planes.
The Chog, is not an impressive performer compared to the currently free and high-performance free planes like the La-7 or the P-51D or the N1K2. It is perked for 8 points, and it will most definately meet free planes that performs better than itself - but it still sees 2% usage.
Now, imagine my perk agenda in place. No doubt, the 'best of the free, mid war planes' will boast quite some arena impact. But will they simply fill the place of the "Big Five" in the exact same way? When you can use perked planes for a very very small price, which is significantly better in performance compared to most of the free midwar planes?
You must understand that perking lightly the late war fighters, was never intended for making them 'rare' at all. You are assuming that with the perks in place, people will all together giveip on all of the late war planes, and then move to the free ones - which, they will take place in, and created the 'next best group' which is exactly a mirror of what was before.
The perks suggested, is merely a means to diverge some of the pilots away from the "Big Five", and relocate them into the other planes.
Currently, the "other planes" have no 'merit' which to attract pilots. So, we're creating the merit for them - it's gonna be free. But the currently best planes, won't be shackled away like 262s or Tempests, too - it'll just require a very cheap price.
If you can't pay the price all the time, than you'll fly free planes some of the time, which will earn you some perks, which will allow you to fly lightly perked planes again very soon.
Oh yes, some of the best war planes will form a new 'best group', that is no doubt. But this 'best group', won't be as menacing as the 'big five'. They'll be seen often, but so will the perked planes be seen often <- my my, if we see that many planes that often, then could it be that 'variety' has been achieved? I think that's a safe assumption?
Currently, the "Big Five" each has 10% kills in the arena, while some of the next best planes have around 3%, and the rest somewhere between 0~2%. I'm looking forward to reducing the Big Five into some 1~2%, and relocating the rest to the mid war planes. That's what I'm counting on - yes, a 'new best group' will form, but this 'best group' does not get 10% usage each.
You're trying to treat a symptom. The fact remains that a good percentage of players just want to barrel through the air in the "best" aircraft available and blast anything that might cross in front of them.
That's undeniably true.
So, touch the heart of that truth, and you get a solution.
If you want to fly the "best planes"? Then fine, go ahead.
But you're gonna have to pay some price for it this time. It won't be so expensive that it will discourage you from selecting it - like Temps or Spit14s in the old agenda(which btw, are made greatly cheaper in my NPA) - however, it is a price you must pay nonetheless.
If the light perks makes you fly 2 sorties in midwar planes out of total 10, that is still enough to considerably reduce the dominant usage of the big five, and shed some light into the late war planes.
If the Hurricane Mk 1 was the fastest and best armed aircraft in the hanger, you'd see hoards of them and we'd be flying around in fabric covered bi-planes shouting PERK THE HURRICANE!
True. So in that case we'd perk the Hurricane. Would we not? The Chog wasn't even the "best in everything" as your hypothetical Hurricane would be, but it still became perked.
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
Is there a mission statement from HTC concerning how and what the MA should be? I think not.
So what is it your trying to do again?
-
Suggesting a change, silly.
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
Suggesting a change, silly.
Why?
Everyone pays thair $15, let 'em fly whatever they want (as opposed to what someone else wants them to fly)
Not too surprisingly this has become a religious debate. The good news (for me) is it's not the first (or last) time and I suspect HTC has already voted.
Kweassa; it was well thought out, even if I don't agree :)
-
Far better if AH gets 15,000 players and HT finally decides to try Early, Mid and Late war arenas. :)
Was it Laz that had the idea of seperating them based on top speeds falling into three different ranges?
-
Thank you for thinking that way, Puck.
Hehe, 'religious debate'? Let's just say it's this boy's version of dreaming Utopia. ;)
What you say is true - everyone pays there money and gets to fly what they want. However, I don't aim on taking away anything from anybody - it's like in the theaters :) : everybody pays their money, but they can't all sit where they want.
It's an attempt to bring a minimal artificial structure to solve what people are already complaining about.
Anyhow, to tell you the truth I also don't expect we'll ever get to see this implemented any time soon ;)
-
Kweassa, big salute to you for doctoral level research on the perk system.
However, to weigh in however feebly in the opinion spectrum, I despise the perk system and it appears some others do too.
It gives the best players more advantages that they need less than anyone else. A reverse perk system would be more balancing, but that would penalize the best players -- there is an injustice with either kind of perk system.
It often seems that arguing for or against perk systems consumes more energy than any other topic on Aces High forums, energy that might be more productively applied to other needs.
My vote is to kill the perk system in the Main Arena and encourage those who want more balanced historical rides to use the Combat Theater.
And -- quit perking rides in Combat Theater! How the malady spreads! (Limit availability of some types as necessary, but without perking them.)
HiTech, just for grins, why don't you begin an official Aces High Poll category in this excellent Community forum, and make these the first questions (all answers yes or no):
1. Do you favor the present perk point system in the Main Arena?
2. Do you want any other kind of perk point system in the Main Arena?
3. Instead of perk points, would you prefer that certain rides in the Main Arena be limited in availability (e.g., fewer numbers or more distant bases)?
4. Do you favor any kind of perk point system in the Combat Theater?
5. Instead of any perk points, would you prefer that certain rides in the Combat Theater be limited in availability (e.g., fewer numbers or more distant bases)?
6. If the present perk system is abandoned in the Main Arena, would you continue your Aces High subscription?
7. If the present periodic perk systems are abandoned in the Combat Theater, would you continue your Aces High subscription?
It's important to realize that any such poll area would NOT dictate to Aces High management. HiTech and associates obviously can run Aces High any way they choose.
However, periodic polls could be valuable management tools to more clearly give management an idea of what the majority of customers really want rather than trying to decipher the intent of the most vocal customers who post in the forums.
The polls should not be anonymous since management might need to correlate things like length of membership and amount of time played, maybe even scoring, to weigh results in various forms as well as simply tabulate overall responses regardless of qualifications.
Nor should management necessarily be expected to report publicly all results. Credibility would rise in proportion to exact numbers, but general summaries could also be useful to both management and customers.
And, finally, can't let any new poll area become an administrative morass impairing optimum development of Aces High improvements.
That's about it. Easy, huh?
-
I'm not understanding the oposition??? No one is suggesting perking the "big four" or what ever they are called equal to the 262. Heck...2 perk points would probable do the trick. As for the argument concerning the La7 and its K/D ratio...that is probably due to the fact it is the plane of choice when defending a base that is being vulched. If you could break the K/D up into "air-to-air" and "vulched-on-the-ground" stats, I think it would paint a different picture.
Also, by placing a 2-8 point perk on these planes, the "vulched-on-the-ground" stats would be attainable just by the comparison from before-perk to after-perk implementation.
I'm al for perking as suggested in this post. Of course, I currently have over 1300 fighter perks. I do fly the La-7 alot, however I prefer the Spit-5 to the -9 and I would rather fly the Hurri-2c to the Nik. If the La-7 were perked, it would push me back into the Spit-5 and even the P-40/KI-61 I have been flying a little lately!!!
all...see you in the air!
-
Thank you for the salute Halo :)
However, to weigh in however feebly in the opinion spectrum, I despise the perk system and it appears some others do too.
It gives the best players more advantages that they need less than anyone else.
It's been mentioned before, but personally I think what you have said is just a popular myth. I admit it is quite difficult to set a standard on which pilot is a "veteran", and which is "average", but regardless of it all I believe the influence of "veterans" in the MA, at least in a large scale, is close to non-existent.
The best players don't need any advantage to be the best - they've already got what it takes(even if we give the Tempests and F4U-4s, Spit14s to the 'average/rookie' pilots for free, they'd still be shot down regularly, striving for a 1:1 K/D ratio. :) ).
Nor have they become recognized as "the best" by using planes that require a lot of perks. I don't think we have statistics on this, but empirically, it seems most of the recognizable vets are usually P-51D/P-38L pilots, with speck of LW veterans in usually G-10s, and few more Spit/N1K2 veterans of PAC timezones. <- Note that all the suggested planes, are actually the best of free planes which I am looking forward to seeing them perked.
If there is any advantage that the vets gain from this system, it is that they get to fly the 'super planes' on their whim. But even that, is a product of how the certain planes are priced, not a fault of the system itself.
A reverse perk system would be more balancing, but that would penalize the best players -- there is an injustice with either kind of perk system.
In regards to sort of a 'philosophical' discussion, it is very intersting to see people again and again referring to perk prices as a 'penalty'. Having to pay perk prices, are conceptually recognized as 'punishment'. Sort of reminds me of how many people view taxes :D
It often seems that arguing for or against perk systems consumes more energy than any other topic on Aces High forums, energy that might be more productively applied to other needs.
That is true.
But you must realize this: "other needs" do not form an alternative to this particular problem at hand. It can merely divert our attention to something else, temporarily. Once the excitement is over, sooner or later people will again start complaining about all the malicious kamikaze attacks, all the runstangs and Spit/Niki dweebs.
One way or another, people must face this problem, and either decide to 'tolerate' or 'object'. Of course, no matter how perfect a system there will always be complaints. But that doesn't necessarily mean that there's no way to at least partially treat the problem and make it better.
My vote is to kill the perk system in the Main Arena and encourage those who want more balanced historical rides to use the Combat Theater.
That actually might happen. If the MA is just full of Tempests and 262s, people will start looking for an alternative.
I don't believe anybody views the MA as 'historic'. Gameplay balance does not necessarily aquaint itself with history - meaning; there are people who don't care about history at all, but still want to see a MA nicely rounded and balanced out, without too many jets and rockets, and without too many planes of a certain type infesting the whole area.
And -- quit perking rides in Combat Theater! How the malady spreads! (Limit availability of some types as necessary, but without perking them.)
But the CT perks, work EXACTLY the way it is expected to be working, with EXACTLY the desired effect.
...
If there is one thing I can say, abolishment of perks, will bring to the MA a catastrophic disaster.
All the negative problems of the current MA, are direct results of non-structured gaming. The current perked planes, are the "absolutely unallowable" last resort planes that will kill the gameplay - that is why they are so heavily perked(in this case, the word 'punitive' does seem adequate).
It is not the existing methods of structure that people are dissatisfied with - it's the lack of structure, which fuels the certain types of activities solely concentrated on "winning the game no matter the cost", that people feel uncomfortable with.
If AH compares itself with the the growth of cities, AH is like Rome. A modern day city which evolved from the ancient times - where a certain "core" of gameplay components formed the very first stages of the "city". As new concepts and developments appeared, they were added around the "core" in a patchwork.
The result, is a very beautiful and impressive cultural city, with unfortunately a diabolical road system and messy patchwork of city blocks and zones - that's how current AH is like.
In the first stages of AH, where planes and pilots were few, the territorial combat didn't mean much. Everybody knew everybody, and they all enjoyed pure A2A combat. Even if there was a land-grab scheme, it was simplified, easy, and not even all that important. Important real-life concepts that influence large scale battles - such as attrition, logistics, economical structures, and etc etc. - weren't in the game.
As AH grew older, more and more concepts were added in to accomodate certain aspects of the game which were newly required with the growth of gamer population. A lot of them helped, but some aspects, just weren't compatible with how AH was designed in the first place.
Now, if we want to get rid of perks, we would have no choice but to ask HTC to implement a new MA, with all the current concepts and aspects of gameplay re-evaluated, re-designed, and restructured - like how one would build a totally new city in the modern times. Preplanning and structuring.
I suspect that kind of restructuring is what we might expect from the AH2:ToD mode. The MA will remain as it is. But that does mean, that the current problems of the MA will also be preserved.
Then I say we find a method to 'tweak' the gameplay without having to add in any major/new gameplay system that would take time and resources - *shrug* the only real alternative for doing that, is using the perk system. No other choice at all. :)
-
Well, Kweassa, to use your Roman analogy, you certainly are among the emperor's most articulate inner circle perk advisors.
However, I must remain one of the unconvinced hillside peasants, gazing down at a Rome mired in mathematical apportionments instead of the freedom of opportunity that made it great.
To subdue the dweeb hordes by crippling weapon selection is all the more ironic because it is not only unnecessary but counterproductive. Look at all the perk thread contagion -- whining about superior rides will never stop until every ride is perked, and then it will start all over again.
Likewise, even in the Combat Theater where matchups are the most carefully limited in both perking and availability, has any scenario ever ended with everyone pleased about the choices of rides and gameplay? Unanimity is not the nature of combat simulations.
If enough perk protestors get tired of having ride choices limited, perk nobles might have nobody to play with but themselves.
Let Emperor HiTech get past the noisy senate chambers and poll the masses, or his will not be the first empire that did not listen far and wide enough.
Perk proponents are always bringing up the spectre of everyone flying only Me 262s or Tempests or Chogs or whatever. So what? That wouldn't last long. People would get bored and choose whatever ride gave them the most challenge.
That is already rewarded with higher scoring for lower performing planes and vehicles.
People with little time or talent or inclination to amass perk points would have renewed delight in the game. People with plenty of time and talent could fly whatever is most challenging to them and amass higher scores by zapping better planes.
Combat Theater would have increased participation by those who want more balanced and historical matchups. Aces High staff could devote more time to giving us more planes and vehicles instead of trying to sort through the uproar of perk point debates.
How did the purity of Aces High ever get so complicated?
Regarding my previous poll, one question is the most crucial of all for the Main Arena:
Do you favor having all planes and ground vehicles equally available at all times for all players without any kind of perk point or other limiting system?
Answer yes or no.
I vote Yes to no perks at all in the Main Arena.
-
I won't object to much of what you say, Halo - I guess it's just difference in the point of view which cannot be amended ;)
However, about this line, I must comment:
People with little time or talent or inclination to amass perk points would have renewed delight in the game. People with plenty of time and talent could fly whatever is most challenging to them and amass higher scores by zapping better planes.
It's really ironic, and also subtle, on just how one might be able to balance this problem out.
Flight simulations, especially combat flight simulations, are inherently competitive. It's basically a dog-eat-dog world where talent speaks out for itself, and where the shot down have no rights to complain about anything.
So, just exactly how much does the system have to stand in for the "People with little time or talent"[/b]? The MA isn't like the real world society, needing a social welfare for the meek.
Basically, no matter how the system is tweaked, ultimately a combat-based flight simulation genre will always remain as an area of competition. "People with little time or talent", simply have no place to be. It's either learn and become better, or lose interest and die out.
However, what the system can do, is assume that with enough time, sooner or later everyone can come to manifest reasonable grade of talent(presumably a K/D ratio between 0.7~1.3). It is when they come to that certain level, that the gameplay may be balanced to their terms.
Obviously many people come and go in AH, and many of the people in the MA are total newbies. We aren't really inclined to design a system that makes their miserable newbies days any easier. They must learn for themselves.
And if they reach a certain average level, then they may benefit from the perk system, at least, the one I'm suggesting. It's subtly different from what it is now, and the two, aren't the same thing.
-
Regarding the little time OR talent statement, I was echoing what I've read from several apparently good players who were lamenting not having as much time as others to amass perk points.
There was no doubt about their talent or competitiveness.
I hadn't previously considered that aspect, and thought it an important new consideration.
Little talent shouldn't be taken lightly either because apparently Aces High needs all the player base it can get (e.g., a major reason for TOD supposedly being to tap new potential players for a different aspect of simulation).
Whether newbies face perks or no perks, they certainly have a steep learning curve and will or will not endure according to their own inclinations. No perks is a better deal for them, but probably it is only one of many factors influencing whether they decide to remain in or leave Aces High.
As for me, I have adequate time to play Aces High, and I've been here and in other simulations for a long time, but my talent varies between mediocre to average. Yet I still enjoy the game because it always has just about whatever challenges I care to face.
For the most part I've kept silent about the perk points, but by this time I feel that the non-perk viewpoint deserves more consideration than it has been getting.
What has always surprised me is that the Combat Theater is so perfect for balancing and limiting rides that I've always wondered what all the perk fuss was about in the Main Arena.
Combat Theater is more varied and fun than any rolling plane set, which I'm glad Aces High never used the way WarBirds did.
I played in Aces High before perk points and enjoyed it more then. I accepted the later perk point system because of all the uproar, but after listening to the debate a couple years now, I still question why all the fuss, which just gets worse.
Some people will never be happy until every single ride is perked and reperked after every month's statistics are in. Reminds me how the federal income system has grown into a monster that no one can figure out anymore without outside help like TurboTax.
Take a look sometime at Fighter Ace arenas. Many of them are just arcade shootouts, but Aces High could learn some things from the most difficult arenas, which are tougher than anything in Aces High even if the flight models and views from the interior are not as good.
Okay, a potential compromise: if Aces High has the capacity, how about adding a new Main Arena WITHOUT perks? Offer a Main Arena with all rides available with no extra cost alongside the current Main Arena with perk point limitations.
No separate poll necessary. The customers will vote with their feet.
-
I support this (Kweassa's idea for light perking).
Good thought in this Kweassa.
I would suggest that the Spit IX get perked, even if for just 1 point. I don't see the argument for what year a plane was made as entirely valid. The key point, as I see it, is how a plane is modeled. Accurately modeled or not, if a plane dominates the arena in numbers like the spit IX has, it seems there is good reason to consider the light perking of it.
As for perking of the F6F, if you're going to perk the D-hog I don't see why you wouldn't perk the Hellcat as well. Has the same armament and virtually same ordinance payload as the F4U-D but climbs and turns a bit better while cruising a bit slower.
-W
-
What a fantastic idea. Very well thought out and very well presented. <<<
>>>, hope it gets acted upon.
-
from Kweassa's New Perk Agenda (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=87356&perpage=50&pagenumber=1):
Newly perked planes
--------------------------
LA-7: 5 points
TYPHOON: 3 points
YAK9-U: 3 points
P-51D: 4 points
190D-9: 4 points
F4U-1D: 3 points
109G-10: 4 points
P-38L: 3 points
N1K2-J: 3 points
P-47D-30: 3 points
2 quick notes:
1) I think you ought to add 8 to 10 perk points to each listed above.
and,
2) I would suggest that HTC consider (for both AH1 and AH2) requiring that each pilot earn a certain number of perkies in an earlier version before advancing to the later-model aircraft.
ie: Bf 109E -> promoted to Bf 109F -> promoted to Bf 109G2 -> promoted to Bf 109G6 -> promoted to Bf 109G10
P-51B -> promoted to P-51D
Spit V / Seafire -> promoted to Spit IX -> promoted to Spit XIV
etc., etc.
-
Originally posted by TBolt A-10
2) I would suggest that HTC consider (for both AH1 and AH2) requiring that each pilot earn a certain number of perkies in an earlier version before advancing to the later-model aircraft.
ie: Bf 109E -> promoted to Bf 109F -> promoted to Bf 109G2 -> promoted to Bf 109G6 -> promoted to Bf 109G10
P-51B -> promoted to P-51D
Spit V / Seafire -> promoted to Spit IX -> promoted to Spit XIV
etc., etc.
2) Newbies will not stand a chance and they will leave which will mean no new customers for htc.
-
Originally posted by B17Skull12
2) Newbies will not stand a chance and they will leave which will mean no new customers for htc.
This would probably be true for only a very few noobs. They have no character & don't belong here if all they care about is flying the best w/out earning the right to do so. That's the idea behind T.O.D. And, I think it can be applied to the M.A., as well.
-
Originally posted by TBolt A-10
This would probably be true for only a very few noobs. They have no character & don't belong here if all they care about is flying the best w/out earning the right to do so. That's the idea behind T.O.D. And, I think it can be applied to the M.A., as well.
again your wrong.
all the expirenced players would be in the ubber planes and newbies would never be able to get any perks and like all humans they would get frusttrated and leave.
Better off creating an arena for newbies than doing that.
-
Originally posted by B17Skull12
all the expirenced players would be in the ubber planes
do you fly uber planes often?
and, it's you're; not your. :)
-
Ï haven't got the patience to read through all this... this may have been suggested already.
But what about letting the ENY (or something like it) value of planes also affect the rank, in the same manner as perks.
Many players up "the best" planes in attempt to maximise their kills and survivability in order to get high rank. This clearly shows when you review the top contenders.
There is no difference (as far as I know) in score/rank between a kill by a C202 and a niki.
What if a kill in a C202 gave much more score/rank per kill than a niki kill? There are many people flying for rank in AH, and I am positive that many of them would change from their usual 51d, spit, lala and nikis and fly planes that would be better for score/rank.
This way people could choose how they want to play, noone would be forced in any way. We get more variation in the MA because people choose freely among "lesser" planes. Players who like to see themself land numerous kills can still choose to up a lala or niki without having to pay for it. People that don't care about rank can continue to not care. I can't see any serious hooks with such a system.
Imagine this opn ch. 1:
"Ahhh, you P40B scoredweeb... up a good plane instead!"
Wouldn't that be something! :lol
When I first started I wanted a lot of perks, so I learned to fly the planes that had high ENY value. Now I have more perks than I have use for, but I still fly those planes because they challenge me.
Dang! I think this is a very good idea! ;)
What do you think?
-
One vote FOR.
-
Very interesting project Kweassa. I vote for it. :aok
-
I support Kweassa's perk agenda, but jordgi's idea is a very interesting one, and should be discussed further...
-
As for me the basic idea is correct, but the final result would be even more people flying spitIX, which I don't consider a good outcome.
IMO AH planeset would be great by implementing the TOD as it is in WB, where the whole wartime is elapsed during the month, getting new planes according to historical release data.
It allows to fly slow, turning plane at the beginning, then fast and heavilly armed ones later on.
Best regards
Promet
-
Originally posted by DYGCaps
I support Kweassa's perk agenda, but jordgi's idea is a very interesting one, and should be discussed further...
I'd vote for either one myself, something should be done to reduce the volume of the big-4, just to have some more variety if nothing else.
-
Other than the Jets and the Tempest, I despise the perk system.
This game is already way to difficult to learn, and the life blood of any flight sim is the newcomers.
We keep pushing "realism" and sacrifice game play. Let the newcomers fly in P40s so they will get really frustrated trying to fight the top pilots in top performing perked aircraft.
Can you imagine a flying a Tempest in a arena where LA-7, Pony Ds and 190 Doras are nearly extinct due to perking? It would be slaughter. I personally fly perks very little, because knowing the envelop edge on the aircraft you are flying and how to maximize your rides strengths and weaknesses are more important than sheer performance. It is not the plane, it is the pilot of the plane.
No matter how you perk the planes to make the MA the way YOU want it, it will still be massive raids by one side on the other. Big furballs with one side vulching the other. Some call it realism, I call it an arcade first person shooter. And I call it fun.
Yeh, perk the NIKI and the Spits and the LA7s, and then try to attract newcomers.
You screw with the perk system, you screw with a proven formula, and just may kill what you love.
AKFokerFoder+ (call sign AKff)
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
Thank you for the salute Halo :)
It's been mentioned before, but personally I think what you have said is just a popular myth. I admit it is quite difficult to set a standard on which pilot is a "veteran", and which is "average", but regardless of it all I believe the influence of "veterans" in the MA, at least in a large scale, is close to non-existent.
The best players don't need any advantage to be the best - they've already got what it takes(even if we give the Tempests and F4U-4s, Spit14s to the 'average/rookie' pilots for free, they'd still be shot down regularly, striving for a 1:1 K/D ratio. :) ).
Nor have they become recognized as "the best" by using planes that require a lot of perks. I don't think we have statistics on this, but empirically, it seems most of the recognizable vets are usually P-51D/P-38L pilots, with speck of LW veterans in usually G-10s, and few more Spit/N1K2 veterans of PAC timezones. <- Note that all the suggested planes, are actually the best of free planes which I am looking forward to seeing them perked.
If there is any advantage that the vets gain from this system, it is that they get to fly the 'super planes' on their whim. But even that, is a product of how the certain planes are priced, not a fault of the system itself.
In regards to sort of a 'philosophical' discussion, it is very intersting to see people again and again referring to perk prices as a 'penalty'. Having to pay perk prices, are conceptually recognized as 'punishment'. Sort of reminds me of how many people view taxes :D
That is true.
But you must realize this: "other needs" do not form an alternative to this particular problem at hand. It can merely divert our attention to something else, temporarily. Once the excitement is over, sooner or later people will again start complaining about all the malicious kamikaze attacks, all the runstangs and Spit/Niki dweebs.
One way or another, people must face this problem, and either decide to 'tolerate' or 'object'. Of course, no matter how perfect a system there will always be complaints. But that doesn't necessarily mean that there's no way to at least partially treat the problem and make it better.
That actually might happen. If the MA is just full of Tempests and 262s, people will start looking for an alternative.
I don't believe anybody views the MA as 'historic'. Gameplay balance does not necessarily aquaint itself with history - meaning; there are people who don't care about history at all, but still want to see a MA nicely rounded and balanced out, without too many jets and rockets, and without too many planes of a certain type infesting the whole area.
But the CT perks, work EXACTLY the way it is expected to be working, with EXACTLY the desired effect.
...
If there is one thing I can say, abolishment of perks, will bring to the MA a catastrophic disaster.
All the negative problems of the current MA, are direct results of non-structured gaming. The current perked planes, are the "absolutely unallowable" last resort planes that will kill the gameplay - that is why they are so heavily perked(in this case, the word 'punitive' does seem adequate).
It is not the existing methods of structure that people are dissatisfied with - it's the lack of structure, which fuels the certain types of activities solely concentrated on "winning the game no matter the cost", that people feel uncomfortable with.
If AH compares itself with the the growth of cities, AH is like Rome. A modern day city which evolved from the ancient times - where a certain "core" of gameplay components formed the very first stages of the "city". As new concepts and developments appeared, they were added around the "core" in a patchwork.
The result, is a very beautiful and impressive cultural city, with unfortunately a diabolical road system and messy patchwork of city blocks and zones - that's how current AH is like.
In the first stages of AH, where planes and pilots were few, the territorial combat didn't mean much. Everybody knew everybody, and they all enjoyed pure A2A combat. Even if there was a land-grab scheme, it was simplified, easy, and not even all that important. Important real-life concepts that influence large scale battles - such as attrition, logistics, economical structures, and etc etc. - weren't in the game.
As AH grew older, more and more concepts were added in to accomodate certain aspects of the game which were newly required with the growth of gamer population. A lot of them helped, but some aspects, just weren't compatible with how AH was designed in the first place.
Now, if we want to get rid of perks, we would have no choice but to ask HTC to implement a new MA, with all the current concepts and aspects of gameplay re-evaluated, re-designed, and restructured - like how one would build a totally new city in the modern times. Preplanning and structuring.
I suspect that kind of restructuring is what we might expect from the AH2:ToD mode. The MA will remain as it is. But that does mean, that the current problems of the MA will also be preserved.
Then I say we find a method to 'tweak' the gameplay without having to add in any major/new gameplay system that would take time and resources - *shrug* the only real alternative for doing that, is using the perk system. No other choice at all. :)
Kawessa , " I have never seen so much BULL CRAP " run outa one mouth on this BBS in four years of reading it . Volumes of it !!!
You want to build a custom game just for you , why don't you go some Where else, and do it . You remind me of people who knock on my front door on Saturday mornings , and try to convert me into a witness of sorts . "
Well, Kweassa, to use your Roman analogy, you certainly are among the emperor's most articulate inner circle perk advisors.
The existing perk system works !
CHECKERS
-
Originally posted by AWCHKRS
Kawessa , " I have never seen so much BULL CRAP " run outa one mouth on this BBS in four years of reading it . Volumes of it !!!
You want to build a custom game just for you , why don't you go some Where else, and do it . You remind me of people who knock on my front door on Saturday mornings , and try to convert me into a witness of sorts . "
The existing perk system works !
CHECKERS
Hmmm I have been getting the same feeling.
If anyone starts suggesting that the BBS is a suitable Poll for such issues...Well HORSE HOCKEY. So far there are 129 replies. Some of which are repeats. Hardly a gauge of the opinion of the general populous of AH. Nope..Its always us same babblers that reply to the BBS. Most of the replies in the BBS are from Long timers. NOT the casual MAJORITY that pay a subscription to HTC. I would think LONG and HARD before implementing such a proposal.
-
The existing perk system works !
how does it work?
If the perking of a plane means removing it from the game - it works.
the 262 is one exception since people who fly it are veterans with thousands of useless perks. The other is the CHOG since it's cheap and has no perk tag (and this is what is suggested in the new perking).
how many tempestes, spit 14, F4u-4, Ta152 do you see flying around? They might as well have never been introduced to the game. Same goes for the 109e, spit I, hurry I, boston, P40e, SBD and other hangar queens, that have no place in a 1944-5 areana.
you say it works, bacuase for you it's the same as if none of the above planes were in the game.
Either make the perks usefull or make two areanas with no perks at all.
Bozon
-
Originally posted by bozon
how does it work?
If the perking of a plane means removing it from the game - it works.
the 262 is one exception since people who fly it are veterans with thousands of useless perks. The other is the CHOG since it's cheap and has no perk tag (and this is what is suggested in the new perking).
how many tempestes, spit 14, F4u-4, Ta152 do you see flying around? They might as well have never been introduced to the game. Same goes for the 109e, spit I, hurry I, boston, P40e, SBD and other hangar queens, that have no place in a 1944-5 areana.
you say it works, bacuase for you it's the same as if none of the above planes were in the game.
Either make the perks usefull or make two areanas with no perks at all.
Bozon
How do you know "Whats for Me ? , FYI I use the LA 7 , The P 51 b&D , The F5, The F4u D and P 47 .! thats my ride of choice. I also use the Zero on occasion . Also I use the Spi IX . Either make the perks usefull or make two areanas with no perks at all. Good Idea , save all this FR perk crap for the Concept of Tour of Duty , and I have always wanted to see the complete perk system "go away" and use a rolling plane set . As for the ME 262 ..... maybe if HTC would add some late WWII planes ( Like the P47 N, the late KI 94 high alt IJN fighter / bomber interceptor or the Spit XIX for example) they would not be such a good ride . Also they could be in limited
numbers per terrain set / time / maybe 20 per country / or 1 or 2 allotment per player, per terrain set ...hell who knows? , but it could be setup some kinda way ....that worked . Of corse this is just my personal thoughts and not to be "read into" as a "push " like whats going on in the other "Dead Sea Scrolls volumes of BS that are this thread !
I belive that a player should have the right of choice, as to what ride they want, with out having to pay a silly "token price of tokens " just to beable to fly a Spit XIV ...... next thing we can expect is that the ability to shut down crosswinds will beable to had for a few perk points , and maybe also try to perk amo counters in the cockpits too while their at it, oh and don't for get the blowtorch sunglare ........ Heck who knows ? maybe "the Kawassa perk addgenda supporters" will decide to include a drop tank for the LA 7 and LA5 at a perk price too ..... Ya. this perk addgenda crap would be really FR COOL ......for gameplay ..
Either make the perks usefull or make two areanas with no perks at all.
I also want you to know , That I respect your concerns and opinions in regards to this matter , and hope you will beable to read, and understand that !
CHECKERS
-
Originally posted by bozon
how does it work?
how many tempestes, spit 14, F4u-4, Ta152 do you see flying around? They might as well have never been introduced to the game. Same goes for the 109e, spit I, hurry I, boston, P40e, SBD and other hangar queens, that have no place in a 1944-5 areana.
Bozon
The C-Hog was in no way removed from the game.. it still thrives but just isn't "thrown away HO'ing everything" like it used to be. It's nicely controlled, I meet C-Hog's all the time but not every Hog I meet is a C (like it used to be).
The problem with the other perl aircraft is simply the lack of value vs. the perk cost. The Me163 and Me262 are so special that they DO represent their value in perks. The Spit XIV, Tempest, F4U-4, Ta152 do not, they are marginally better under certain conditions but the perk tags basically remove that advantage.
If you perked, lightly, plane as Kweassa posted, you'd certainly drive people out of their main rides a bit, but honestly most people can early 2-3 perks a sortie, probably enough to get them back into their ride of choice at least 75% of the time.
HBlair, a year or more ago, ran a CT setup that used this scenario and I think it was the only time I spent more time in the CT than MA. He had Axis/Allies sides but when you upped you never knew exactly what you could face. Would you bump into the free 190A5, the 2 point 190F8, the 3 point 190A8 or the 6 point 190D9... there were lots around of all three. Diversity was way up, little advantages between models were worth the 2-3 points, and the huge perk "stigma" didn't matter... sure, I may shoot down your D9 in my Spit V but it likely didn't mean that much other than that I had enough points now to fly a Spit IX next sortie. It wasn't "i got stuck in a crappy aircraft while everyone else beat me up".... honestly you were more likely to bump into someone in the lower part of the spectrum, or someone maybe slightly more capable, advantages that were pretty easy to overcome.
-Soda
-
Originally posted by ramzey
som add
-c205 have big amno load for cannons and should be perked too
-p38 dunno, it big trg with huge load
NOOOOOO! PPPuuullleeeaaassseee do not perk me favorite ride, the C.205!:D
-
Hey man, I was just looking for gunsights. It's certainly easy to understand where you're coming from Kweassa, I think there's a lot of knee jerking going on. I hate Spits, but lousy pilot that I am, I occaisonally take one anyway, just so I can lose those getting shot down blues. I seem to aquire them so quickly jumping into furballs flying 51s and 190s. But I love those fast planes, and as long as they are available to me, I'm going to fly them, much more than most. I too wish to vomit with profuse force when some people fail to take the game as seriously as I think they should, e.g. augering during a jabo without a care in the world. But I hated spending $200 a month to play AW a lot more. So even tho I do empathize with your frustration, I disagree with your premise. I think Halo is dead on target. Let em vote with their feet in an arena of their choice. It's a joy to only spend $15 a month to fly in such a cool sim, whatever it's imperfections. The last thing I want to see is a philosophical difference cost this company customers and endanger my fun. In the end, when I do kill those hated planes with something different than a UFO, it's just that much sweeter. Should an arena open where I can engage in the hi-speed, late war model fights I really like, so much the better. Until then, I see no point in alienating paying customers or taking chances with their patronage. Just my two cents.
airCOW (screwed up my handle, I'm a dweeb here as well as the MA ):(
-
Will perking everything make players even more timid then they already are? "Timid meaning run from a 1 vs 1"
IKON
-
Kweassa, you have to be one of the most long winded individuals I have ever seen.
I read, blah blah blah, perk it, blah blah, perk, blah blah, perk some more, blah blah…
I know you probably put a LOT of thought into this and kudos for having a genuine idea but really the only thing I’m getting out of this thread is:
Perk the witch! Perk the witch! Perk the witch! Or witches rather, whatever the case is I don’t think it’s going to solve whatever perceived problem that you are seeing.
Oh yeah, I fly the 51 and 4 perks isn’t crap but why stop there. After a few more tours there will be an abundance of other aircraft that you see all the time. Diversity can’t be forced; people are going to fly what they want to fly.
Then of course you can lobby to have the perk amounts increased, other aircraft added, go for the rolling plane set, or choose the lazs segregation arena.
I’m having fun regardless of what shows up in my crosshairs or what is punching holes in my Cadillac. Too bad you all aren’t. Must get tiring having the same complaints, over and over and over and over and over and over again.
Can someone point me to the horse; I have a new stick I want to try out!
-
Surely you perk hounds realize your pissing in the wind?
I would love to see some of these perk lists put in place. I've even advocated perking everything that wasn't in production at the onset of wwII.
I also realize that any of these types of discussions are just mental masturbation. Why do you think my eyesight is so bad?
Magoo
-
I like it.
--Peregrine.
-
Haven't read all 3 pages of posts, but like the original post very much. Well done Kweassa, you've got my vote.
-
the idea has my vote.
As a relative newbie I like the idea. I also like the suggestions for perking the Spit IX and LA5's as well. Otherwise the area will be flooded with them both. On the other hand I would rather see the initial suggestion implemented than get held up over this debate.
-
Originally posted by Zippatuh
Kweassa, you have to be one of the most long winded individuals I have ever seen.
But dude....Im tryin too. Little credit here would be nice :rofl :D
well i guess i do have a ways to go...but im coming up the backstretch.
-
Why won't this thread die?
Oh yeah he has it linked in his sig.
Well all I'll say is that while "K" is entitled to his opinion, his opinion is of such that if he got his way I would instantly quit AH, never to return. And I wouldn't be the only one. I guess our ideas of "fun" are mutually exclusive.
J_A_B
-
Zip
Kweassa, you have to be one of the most long winded individuals I have ever seen.
I read, blah blah blah, perk it, blah blah, perk, blah blah, perk some more, blah blah…
I know you probably put a LOT of thought into this and kudos for having a genuine idea but really the only thing I’m getting out of this thread is:
Perk the witch! Perk the witch! Perk the witch! Or witches rather, whatever the case is I don’t think it’s going to solve whatever perceived problem that you are seeing.
A witch hunt this is not. And the "hunted" don't go extinct either.
Oh yeah, I fly the 51 and 4 perks isn’t crap but why stop there. After a few more tours there will be an abundance of other aircraft that you see all the time. Diversity can’t be forced; people are going to fly what they want to fly.
Diversity IS ALREADY forced. There are perks already in existence. The suggested perks is only a different version of it. What do you think it is when HTC perks some planes on grounds of 'balance'??
Besides, the whole "long winded" explanations are about why this system would not cause the mesozoic mass extinction to the Big Five, but allow the former hangar queens exist in reasonable numbers alongside the now reduced "Big Five", which won't be a "Big Five" anymore. I take it you never read it carefully(or never felt the need to, which is a sad thing).
Then of course you can lobby to have the perk amounts increased, other aircraft added, go for the rolling plane set, or choose the lazs segregation arena.
1. No reason to increase any of the perks as of yet
2. What's wrong with wanting more planes?
3. Never supported the RPS in entire history of forum participation
4. Never agreed with lazs
I’m having fun regardless of what shows up in my crosshairs or what is punching holes in my Cadillac. Too bad you all aren’t. Must get tiring having the same complaints, over and over and over and over and over and over again.
I know you as one of the people skilled enough to use small perked P-51s exclusively without trouble. Also, if you don't really care about what crosses your sights like you say, then you should have no reason to oppose to what changes in plane usage the NPA brings out.
Your own attitude contradicts your words.
Besides, who's saying I ain't enjoying the game right now? Have you even flown AH2 lately? Didn't see you with the rest of the 13th in Rookville.
JAB
Why won't this thread die?
Because its finding new supporters everyday(well, not everyday. It was good for the first few weeks, and since then its new supporter for every one week or something like that..).
Well all I'll say is that while "K" is entitled to his opinion, his opinion is of such that if he got his way I would instantly quit AH, never to return. And I wouldn't be the only one. I guess our ideas of "fun" are mutually exclusive.
Why?
You like suicidal dweebs kamikazeing you airfield objects?
-
"Why? "
Because of the P51D was perked I would no longer have any reason to play AH
J_A_B
-
I think these ideas are excellent, although the P51-B is a really superb aircraft - forced to fly it, people will soon realize it's qualities and you will see it used almost as extensively as the 'D' model is now.
The 109G10 appeared in the interval between my leaving AH and rejoining in May. I've been very impressed by it's capabilities and am surprised that it is not perked already to some extent. Maybe it isn't quite fast enough to be perked in the present environment?
-
Eh, the 109G-10 has been around since beta.
J_A_B
-
Witch hunt, snipe hunt, whatever hunt, that’s about what it is, kind of worthless. My opinion anyway.
Only 1 has been perked due to “balance”, as far as I’m aware of, the infamous C-hog. I fail to see how this has enforced any type of diversity… **That’s not completely accurate, there was the 20% usage thing but that’s not happening again.** ok, so I have to pay for the C-hog, everything else being targeted is and has been available.
No I didn’t read it carefully; it’s too much about a subject that has been discussed in the past to the point of being ridiculous. I’m not sure what’s sad, not reading a diatribe about perking planes for diversity, or typing a diatribe to get aircraft perked in order to achieve diversity.
Nothing wrong with adding more aircraft, it was worded wrong, the original meaning was “adding more/new aircraft to the perk list”, not brand new aircraft.
I do not believe that perking any aircraft is going to achieve what you want it to other than restricting someone who just started playing from flying the aircraft of their choice. In any case, if you do this then everyone should get at least 200 perk points at the beginning of each tour.
Thanks for the compliment but I’d end up paying the perks, I want the 6 guns, especially with the new gunnery difficulty.
If you’re enjoying it cool, from the in depth thought and some of the discussions in this thread and in the past it appears that some people’s fun is affected by the type of aircraft they have to fight. So, they want it changed, or enforced that their opponents have to fly something different.
I’m up in AHII, I just don’t get as much time online as I used to. I’m getting a bit more with the new load. I’m really digging the clouds, flight model, gunnery, icons, not sure there’s much I dislike about II. I am a card carrying member of the Rooktonian society and I may even get an hour or so tonight.
I got kind of long winded here didn't ;).
-
I don't understand how ppl can waste time posting to this thread
when they could be flying.
HT has done a fine job with values assigned to planes in MA.
If it ain't broke , don't fix it..........
Keep on truckin' Dale......:aok
-
Only 1 has been perked due to “balance”, as far as I’m aware of, the infamous C-hog. I fail to see how this has enforced any type of diversity… **That’s not completely accurate, there was the 20% usage thing but that’s not happening again.** ok, so I have to pay for the C-hog, everything else being targeted is and has been available.
Oh come on, Zippatuh, don't play naive. The F4U-4, Ta152H, Spit14, Me262, Ar234 and Me163, Me262, Tempests are all perked planes in reasons due to balance.
Only one has been perked, from being unperked, but various others are perked punitively high from the beginning of their introduction to AH.
If diversity, or at least, a diversity representative enough to portray something that resembles WW2 air struggle did not matter in the first place then the 262s and 163s would be free all along. The skies would be filled with jets and rockets and we'd might as well call it AH:1946.
In reasons of balance, certain planes deemed powerful in performance to shake the arena into monopoly of a handful of superplanes, is perked at a price. Diversity, is FORCED by HTC.
My suggestions are mere expansions/tweaks to existing schemes. Don't act as if the arena was all freedom, and I'm suddenly coming up with shackles to enslave certain planes.
No I didn’t read it carefully; it’s too much about a subject that has been discussed in the past to the point of being ridiculous. I’m not sure what’s sad, not reading a diatribe about perking planes for diversity, or typing a diatribe to get aircraft perked in order to achieve diversity.
In other words, your commenting on something which you have not read carefully. But merely commenting on past experiences of such discussions, without knowing what specific strengths or weaknesses my suggestion has to offer.
I do not believe that perking any aircraft is going to achieve what you want it to other than restricting someone who just started playing from flying the aircraft of their choice. In any case, if you do this then everyone should get at least 200 perk points at the beginning of each tour.
Perking aircrafts, have already proven to achieve what you are skeptical that this suggestion can achieve. You merely fail to acknowledge that fact.
Perks as means of limiting plane choice is already here, and the suggested NPA is also tested out in the CT and has been proven to work.
1. Playing whatever plane of one's own choice, is a freedom cherished as long as it does not disturb arena balance. This doctrine is already embedded in the default perk system. HTC limits use of certain planes free of price, and sometimes will go in lengths as to perk previously unperked planes, to achieve that goal.
2. The NPA is a tweaked/expanded form of perks applied, to actually make it easier, and a realistic goal, for people to get their hands on currently perked planes.
The suggested perk prices are about only half the price than compared to what it is now, for a large bulk of perk planes. Spit14s, F4U-4s, Me262s are all much cheaper in my suggestion. It actually expands the chance for new people to use perked planes.
3. The NPA also aims to newly perk a certain bulk of late war planes at a very cheap price, in order to allow frequent usage. Any newbie who HOs three planes during a 15 minute time span of their short, highly dangerous virtual lives, earn at least 3 perks. Enough to fly a P-51D.
...
Nobody is taking away anything. Even at 8 perks, the Chog usage is constant at near 2%, which is about the average rate of '2nd class planes', such as the 205. The suggested prices for most of the planes that are to be perked is more than half cheaper than that.
As a result, new people will be yes, FORCED to ride 2nd grade planes a bit more than they used to. But as soon as some meager points are accumulated, they can indulge in their favorite planes - its that cheap. Not to mention that the 2nd rate planes are also much higher in ENY values, which will at least compensate for their limitations of plane choice.
And that "bit" of less usage in the majorly overused planes, as a collective total of all the players in the MA, is what I'm expecting to hold the effect of reducing the "Big5" usage quite a bit, and redistributing them to other planes - without making it impossible for newbies to fly perked planes, like in the case of the Me262 currently, which they'll have to collect points for months to ride it for the first time.
-
tho i loved the rolling planeset in WARbirds in my short 2 week stay with them till i find out about this game before i paid them
got my vote:aok
-
test
-
i are beings in
-
After reading ALL the posts (phew), I was initially against the idea.
But since the introduction of AH2 it has definately become a late war MA. We may only see the early planes now in the SEA.
Mildy perking the 'big five' shouldn't present a big problem, if HT is worried about losing new players he could start them off with say 100 perks. This would at least give them the opportunity to fly the late war planes.
Overall I think it's a good idea, just see very little chance of it being implemented.
Never thought perking to reduce numbers was a good idea (F4U-4) as if this is the case the Pony, Spit9, Nik, LA7 would all be perked in the same range as the F4U-4. But perking based on availability makes more sense. Perk costs are lower and would promote a wider variation of aircraft in the MA.
Even a 1 week trial based on Kweassa's idea might be a good idea to judge the actual affect on the MA.
For example, for its capabilities the Spi 14 is ridiculously over perked at present. It is very under used in the MA because most people when they see a high Spit 14 dive for the deck. Spit 14 options, stay high get called a woose, follow him down to low alt where the LaGays etc excel.
One nice change would be to see the discontinuation of perk tags. Spit is Spit etc, although this would still leave the Tempest etc in the same boat.
-
I LUV THIS IDEA..HTC listen to Kweassa .. :aok
-
You got my vote , though after reading it all I have come to the selfrealization i am dweeb for favoring the 109g6 and hurri2 for 80% of my flights. I'm gopnna go eat a quart of chunky monkey and feel sorry for myself, rub one out and then take a nap........
-
I think its time to dig this thread up once again.
Since this thread was created the trend of speed demon usage has been even bigger. Also the trend of using late war fighters for JABOs instead of Attack planes is also very very clear.
Adding to that the addition of the earlier P38 models makes this case even stronger. We have also seen a shift in the Spit9 (which was a concern at the time of this thread) to the Spit5 which basicly eliminates the suspected problems of leaving Spit9 unperked.
Tex.
-
HTC should charge money to buy additional perks ;)
Think of all that revenue ;)
GrmRpr
-
That is an outstanding idea!
Fly for free but only get the planes that were flying at the onset of hostilities. You want more? Belly up to the bar big fella, have I got a plane for you...but there's a small fee involved.
There would be plenty of guys flying around for free using the P40 and such. and plenty of cracklike addicts blowing their bank account getting vulched in an La7!:D
Magoo
-
I really don't think that the Spit 14 model we have should be perked. It's not much better than a Spit 9 with a Merlin 66. Well, cancel that: It *isn't* better than a Spit 9 with a Merlin 66.
Now, I'd definately say otherwise if we had the Spitfire F Mk.XIVe model.
-
I'm just wondering, is Hitech Creations staff reading this thread?If so, does it carry water with them? Or is this just so much mental masturbation?
:D
BTW, I wasn't serious with my post 2 replies ago...
Magoo
-
Yeow.. who keeps bringing back the dead..?? :D
..
-
TexMurphy did it. Gets an A for researching and not duplicating a thread topic ...
-
Ever played a car game where you have to progress through the bad cars to get to the sleek speed machines?
A system where someone learns the ropes before getting unleashed on the best machinery is tried and true gameplay stuff.
Vets will have more than enough points to fly whatever the heck they want.
If you want to give newbies a go, give em a 500 perk balance with each new account.
Please HTC, give the perk system more teeth and get rid of the ENY limiting. Use the perk system to encourage more early-mid war aircraft use. There's 60 odd planes in the plane set, getting the top 10 perked still leaves a heck of a lot of variety.
-
I'm 100% for it.
-
The horse isn't just dead.
Its long since rotted away.
The beauty of this game is that anyone can come into this game and fly just about anything they want from the ww2 era. With a little time and work, they wont have to wait long to fly some of the higher priced perk planes.
Basicly all you guys have done is whined about the faster planes running away from a slower better turing plane.
But you'll scream till you're blue in the face about how I'm wrong and how it's wrong to let a newbie have a fast plane and how its wrong to just let these 51s run around with bombs and not fight. ect ect ect ect.
Get over it already.
-
agreed 99%
just perk the spitIX also and its complete.
its way better than a Nik2 and probably out classes the La7 IMO.
perk heavy bombers too, a newb will have to do some A20 work to get enough for the Big Ugly Flying F***ers (BUFFs)
-
Originally posted by streetstang
The horse isn't just dead.
Its long since rotted away.
The beauty of this game is that anyone can come into this game and fly just about anything they want from the ww2 era. With a little time and work, they wont have to wait long to fly some of the higher priced perk planes.
Basicly all you guys have done is whined about the faster planes running away from a slower better turing plane.
But you'll scream till you're blue in the face about how I'm wrong and how it's wrong to let a newbie have a fast plane and how its wrong to just let these 51s run around with bombs and not fight. ect ect ect ect.
Get over it already.
What's wrong with trying to improve gameplay? Why do you think the perk system is there if not to influence who flies what and when? Obviously HTC have recognised a need to impose limitations on plane choice.
You said it yourself, with some time and effort almost all can afford to fly the perked aircraft anyway. This post is not about keeping planes away from people, it's all about using the perk system to get people to treat the aircraft as something other than an insta-respawn BFG for HO'ing and/or porking toolsheds.
It's a positive attempt at improving gameplay, if you can't see that, I feel sorry for you.
-
It'll never happen.. if 3 years of the same 6 planes being in the top 6 hasn't made that perfectly obvious.
-
Mechanic the spit V is a better plane than the spit IX for use in the MA. Perk the spit V!:D ;) I would also rate the n1k marginally better than the spit IX, the la7 being far superior than both.
-
How will it improve game play?
If you think that you better define your definition of "game play".
If game play is of the 1 Life to live category then you cna throw game play right out the window. All there will be is a bunch of scared 51d's who dont want to die to lose their perks. No matter how large their bank of perks is, they'll always do anything they can to get out of trouble and stay safe in a perk ride.
Its taking chances, pushing you and your planes limit and sometimes dying is what makes the game what it is.
Those 51's who climb to 20k to drop bombs most often wont turn and run home. They continue to loiter over the field, play in the ack trying to pork troops, ammo or get a vulch and then die. Perking the D is going to force them into making 1 pass, dropping their bombs and running home period.
I dont know where, or how you think this silly little system will help game play. But it'll do everything to ruin the bigger picture.
Its like putting a bandaid over a bullet wound and thinking everything's fine.
-
Morpheus
What you are describing is exactly how every single perk ride we have now is flown.
If everyone who flies a D Pony today will stay in a D Pony then you are mostlikely right. But if they will swich to the B Pony then....
As we have seen so far in player behaviour most people dont fly perked planes. Just every now and then. Which would be an indicator that people would swich from D to B Pony if the D got perked, from LA7 to LA5 if the LA7 got perked, ect, ect...
What this would do to "improve" game play is that it would add veriaty to what you see in the skies. Note that I say "improve" and not improve. This because improvement is subjective.
Some people dont see it as improvement to have more veriaty of planes in the air. Some people only see improvement in BETTER planes.
Personally, for me, its more fun if I fight 20-30 different plane types during a gameing session then just 5-6. Why? Because I have to think more as each plane has to be fought differently.
Problem though is that there will always be a *best* plane.
The posiblity is there that everyone, his grandma and her ceramic eyeball will fly SpitVs. But in a way I do see that as an improvement. You vets might say what you want about the SpitV (dweebfire what ever) but I do respect the SpitV pilots, they fight.
Tex
-
If game play is of the 1 Life to live category then you cna throw game play right out the window. All there will be is a bunch of scared 51d's who dont want to die to lose their perks. No matter how large their bank of perks is, they'll always do anything they can to get out of trouble and stay safe in a perk ride.
People will cower over 3~5 perks?
Or, even if that's true, what's the difference? The MA is already full of P-51s and La-7s and Fw190D-9s and Bf109G-10s who don't want to die to lose their perks. Might as well slap a perk on and at least see less of them in the air, wouldn't you agree?
Its taking chances, pushing you and your planes limit and sometimes dying is what makes the game what it is.
Except people don't like dying even if most all the planes are free. If everybody in the MA agreed to your definition of 'gameplay' then we'd not be seeing the same 4~5 planes boast 40~50% usage for something like 2 years straight.
People will always try to run away in the fastest plane they can fly in. That's a given fact in the MA. So, if it must be the way it is, might as well limit people from getting their mitts on those planes in the first place and make them fly something slower for a change. Ofcourse, not by applying a super penalizing perk cost, but by applying a light cost: the goal is to come up with a price that people wouldn't be so jittery about as if they were flying a Tempest, but still penalizing enough if they continuously lose their planes at a very fast rate.
Newbies and average players, who incidentally make up 80~90% of the arena, will be able to fly these 3~5 perk point planes something like once or twice in every five sorties. That means majority of the people in the MA will be flying the '44/'45 superplanes 60~80% less than they use to.
Imagine an MA with 60~80% less P-51Ds, Fw190D-9s, Bf109G-10s, La-7s, N1K2s, and etc etc.
That's the 'better gameplay' I've envisioned, when I first came up with the NPA long time ago.
Those 51's who climb to 20k to drop bombs most often wont turn and run home. They continue to loiter over the field, play in the ack trying to pork troops, ammo or get a vulch and then die. Perking the D is going to force them into making 1 pass, dropping their bombs and running home period.
Probably. But perking the P-51D will also make them fly less P-51Ds in the first place - don't forget about that.
If someone really likes the P-51s, then they always have a perk-free alternative: P-51B.
So what you are saying is true. If HTC perks the P-51D, for example, at 4~5 points, they will be doing one drop on the field and be going home, like you say. However, it will also mean that most of the "P51" icons you see in the air would be P-51Bs, not P-51Ds.
I dont know where, or how you think this silly little system will help game play. But it'll do everything to ruin the bigger picture.
Perhaps. Or, it could cure the Bore-'n-Zoom fundamentally.
Its like putting a bandaid over a bullet wound and thinking everything's fine.
A band-aid is probably better than just leaving the wound wide open and letting it rot.
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
Probably. But perking the P-51D will also make them fly less P-51Ds in the first place - don't forget about that.
If someone really likes the P-51s, then they always have a perk-free alternative: P-51B.
OK. What I would like to know is why it bothers you that people fly P51-Ds and how it affects your enjoyment?
What plne/planes do you ususaly fly?
I`d also like to know what makes you think that people who enjoy flying the P51-D would pick the B as an alternative.
To me there is no comparison. A lot of it has to do with history. A lot has to do with the feel and capability.
-
Gentlemen, I think the reality is that if you want a game setup the way you describe it in this thread, then you will need to start your own company and design it yourself. We will then see who knows the customer best, you or HTC. I reserve judgement at the moment.
Magoo
-
I strongly disagree! This is why good pilot's have enough perk points to use that all they would fly is the perk planes. A average to beginer player would be stuck flying these slower and second to best aircraft. This gives the guy that is already better than average a better chance for easier kills. What is 5 to 15 perk points to someone that has 1000 plus perk points. I do think the ar234 is over perked, if you notice you very seldom see one flying around bombing a base. Perk price for a 262 is 50% to much I do agree. This leaves only the better than average pilot flying them which is a disavantage to the average and less. which is the same point i was trying to bring out about the other planes you guys are talking about perking. This is just my opion which means nothing so don't take it to heart.
68racer:aok
-
If you guys want to talk about making a change eny value should be the issue. My vote is for eny to be banned. I like fighting against equaly valued planes not a 205 against a spit 9. It is two easy of a kill. Even if where out numbered I hate to see another country's eny go up.
-
OK. What I would like to know is why it bothers you that people fly P51-Ds and how it affects your enjoyment?
What plne/planes do you ususaly fly?
Well.. maybe it has something to do with all of those 'veteran comments' about how the MA has transformed into a 'Bore N' Zoom' arena. You know, the "all I see in the game are Fw190D-9s, P-51Ds, La-7s, and Typhoons. All these guys do are BnZ all day long.. and when they find a co-alt plane they will run straight to their horde from 15k to deck" stuff.
So I figured if the usage of those late war planes can be dropped down to a certain level, and the overall usage of '42~'43 planes can be dramatically increased, it would be helpful to the situation since the overall margin of absolute performance for the mid-war planes, isn't as drastic as the late-war planes.
I was kinda envisioning more P-47s, Fw190A-5s, 109G2 and G6s, La5FNs, C.205s, F4Us, Ki-61s and etc etc..
I`d also like to know what makes you think that people who enjoy flying the P51-D would pick the B as an alternative.
To me there is no comparison. A lot of it has to do with history. A lot has to do with the feel and capability.
By perking them.
Most people in the MA barely manage a 1:1 kill/death ratio. Thus, if a P-51D is perked at about 3~5 points, they will have to fly about two~three sorties in some other plane to earn the price needed to fly a P-51D once. The price isn't jaw-droppingly high as the Tempest is.. it's just a small burden that could catch up if one is too careless.
When I made the initial list of planes that should be perked, I thought a lot about how this would be different from the RPS. A RPS system totally limits a person from flying his favorite plane. I didn't think that was the right step to go.
If you dig up the original list in the very first post, you would see that most of the planes are post '44 latewar planes with midwar versions in the game - such as P-47s, P-51s, 109s, 190s, etc etc..
So, a P-51 fan wouldn't be totally blocked from flying his plane. If he can manage a positive perk balance he can fly it indefinately. However, if he cannot do that, all he has to do is fly an alternative mid-war variant of that plane for a couple of sorties and he'll be able to quickly earn enough perks to fly his favorite again. With a bit of exaggeration, all he has to do is take up a mid-war plane and go HO two~three people and he'll get the points he needed to fly his favorite.
..
However, the real reason I made the NPA was in the fact that it could diversify the roles in the MA. This was my true intention.
The MA is full of late-war planes, which are also most usually multi-role planes. The Mossies and 110s are mostly hangar queens, unless some devoted fan makes up a mission featuring them. A-20s, IL2s, Ju87s and etc etc.. are virtually useless in the MA. There isn't any need to use any of the mid-war buffs or jabos, because a single P-38L or a P-47D-40, or a P-51D-20 still carries more ordnance than any of those dedicated groundattack/jabo planes.
So, I figured, why not give those planes its role back?
If a late-war plane is perked lightly, it won't cause too much grief if someone lost the plane, but it'll still sting a little. If the usage of late-war stuff drops, the chances of mid-war jabos and bombers becoming competent in the MA would increase greatly. For instance, if the post '44 planes are perked, the Mosquito comes within 10th place of the fastest non-perked ride in the game.
In any case I thought this would benefit the MA more than it would hurt it.
Anyhow, like Magoo said, it's just a dream for now.
-
So ultimately speed is the issue.
Just put governors on all planes and limit top speed to 300 mph. :rolleyes:
-
Better yet, why not give people a reason to choose slower planes rather than pick the most powerful arena performers? :)
-
as stated since day on the board here i am against perking the 190d
always will be, and i would probably lose enough interest in the game to leave once i ran out of perks.
my reasons have been stated, but i will restate them
the 190D is not that fast, and in AHII can be chased down by many planes easily.
it is the worst turning fighter in the entire game. name one fighter that turns worse.
it is outclimbed be even the new early war p38j, let alone pretty much everything close to it. even the spitV can climb with it for a while.
the only reason it has a higher k/d is because many people who fly it fly it timid. watch em fly it sometime, i almost never get above 10K and am killed in it by spitV's and other "slow" planes all the time.
it has never been much higher than 11th in total kills, not the top 5 like some make believe it is in.
with radiator damage (which is the first thing damaged in any fight in the 190D) you are dead. there is almost no way to escape and RTB with it.
thats all i have to say about that.
-
Just for the record, the Fw190D-9 in Aces High is the second fastest non-perked plane in the entire set.
-OTD Speeds(WEP)-
TEMPEST 386
LA-7 380
F4U-4 378
190D-9 375
TYPHOON 370
P-51D 367
109G-10 366
.....
The 3rd and 4th fastest non-perked plane OTD has only about 5 minutes supply of WEP.
-
JB73,
Your defintion of "many", "11" and "early war" must be different than mine.
Only the La-7 is faster than the Fw190D-9 and the Fw190D-9 placed at 7th for total kills in Tour 60. The P-38J is a late 1943 fighter which, in my book, puts it at the end of the mid war period.
-
As much as I like the idea of perking things like La7s, where will it stop? Shall we perk everything but F4Fs, P40bs, and white zekes? How about an 8k altitude cap? Shall we turn the BnZ arena into the TnB arena? why? Because you'd rather TnB on the deck?
sorry. not buyin it.
-
+Heretik I agree with you 100%.
Perking all your planes wont do anything but encourage running away from even the slightest hint of danger.
To perk a plane because you dont like how its used is asinine. Whats more is it'll only ruin game play even further.
BTW. Before I forget. You mongrels who no longer play yet feel like you've got something to add. Who are you kidding? You know who you are.
I'll just put it as bluntly as I can. NO need for pretty words when crude will do.
This perk system of yours Kewnesesa is the gdam dumbest thing I've seen anyone agree with ever. Nothing against you. Its just how I feel about your idea here. And for others... To agree with it... I might add that many of you people agreeing with this stupidity are the ones I've chased down countless times while trying to run from a fight (In many OTHER PLANES NOT on the list so what are we going to do? Perk the freakin 205s' now? So IMHO a perk prices on your plane will only make you run even sooner.
There... As blunt and as crude as I could be.
Just play the freakin game and enjoy it for what it is.
-
Morpheus,
It isn't about speed. It is about the elimination of roles that AH currently has. At least that is how I see it.
If I were up in arms about the speed I'd want the P-51B, F4U-1 and La-5FN taken out too, but I don't.
From your posts, you just don't get it. You think this is about aircraft that run. We'll always have that. It is about setting the MA in a time when a fighter was a fighter, a strike fighter could to both, but not as well and bombers (other than suicide Lancs and 24s) had a purpose. In the current MA has focused all of that into just a few airframes.
The reason I am not really happy with the NPA is that it would result in literal hordes of Spitfires.
-
You guys want a controled enviorment. Wait for TOD. I've said it before along with countless others before me. And I'll keep saying it. The beauty of this game, and the MA is that you can jump in there and fly any plane at will. Who are you to try and justify how a plane is used? Not just you Karnak... But ANYONE...
And btw. I know exactly what you people are b1tching about. I only refer to the running part because so many keep going back to it.(The speed factor) AND All this POS system is going to do is make the MA a BnZ run for you one life to live crap hole. Who wants that? You? You think I'm wrong? I'll bet money on it right now. You people think the MA sucks now with all the BnZ chit? If this watermelon was put into place forget it. You'll see guys in A20s and B26's trying to cherry pick.
I absolutly cannot wait for TOD to come out so you people can be weeded out of the MA for good. The ones who have the balls, more so think they have the right to tell others how the hell they are saposed to fly and use a plane... Any plane.
I dont care what your trying to do or what you think this is going to do to help. Your looking at one small corner of the world rather than the bigger picture.
And If you think I' care because Im worried I'll have to pay for a 51 your wrong. I mostly fly spitV's its rare for me to get in anything faster than a 38. I disagree with you simply because soon, if this handsomehunk system was ever put in the MA... BnZ is all that your going to see.
-
Upon re-reading this old, old thread, I find that in the end HTC did not even have to perk the P-51D to limit it enough to completely destroy the fun I had playing and cause me to un-subscribe.
Someone please let me know if the ENY thing is altered in such a manner as to once again permit me free use of my favorite ride.
J_A_B
-
AH2 and the ENY limiter has always allowed you to fly any ride you choose.
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
Well.. maybe it has something to do with all of those 'veteran comments' about how the MA has transformed into a 'Bore N' Zoom' arena. You know, the "all I see in the game are Fw190D-9s, P-51Ds, La-7s, and Typhoons. All these guys do are BnZ all day long.. and when they find a co-alt plane they will run straight to their horde from 15k to deck" stuff.
ROFL
Kweassa, you are making my head hurt. :D
First of all, let me make it clear that I`m not trying to get into some big BBS war with ya here. I`m just seriously trying to understand your thoughts. As of yet I don`t.
You posted the above anwer to my question below.
My question was..........
"What I would like to know is why it bothers you that people fly P51-Ds and how it affects your enjoyment?
What plane/planes do you ususaly fly?"
My second question was....................
"I`d also like to know what makes you think that people who enjoy flying the P51-D would pick the B as an alternative.
To me there is no comparison. A lot of it has to do with history. A lot has to do with the feel and capability."
Unless I`m missing something here, that one was quoted also but then you went on and still didn`t answer it, but instead went into other details that you believe to be so.
Bud I just can`t see any logical reasoning for any of it.
You stated.....
Most people in the MA barely manage a 1:1 kill/death ratio. Thus, if a P-51D is perked at about 3~5 points, they will have to fly about two~three sorties in some other plane to earn the price needed to fly a P-51D once. The price isn't jaw-droppingly high as the Tempest is.. it's just a small burden that could catch up if one is too careless.
So what would this help? The ones that can fly the P51-D good would still be flying them whenever they wished to. The ones that can`t wouldn`t be a threat to anyone no matter what plane they are in. Appears to me this would just be making more cannon fodder for the experienced and hindering the non-experienced.
You stated.....
The MA is full of late-war planes, which are also most usually multi-role planes. The Mossies and 110s are mostly hangar queens, unless some devoted fan makes up a mission featuring them. A-20s, IL2s, Ju87s and etc etc.. are virtually useless in the MA
I have seen the usage of more 110s and Mossies as of late than I have ever experienced.
A-20s, IL2s, Ju87s are useless??????
I`m thinking we are not talking about the same game here. These planes are finaly being put to their role IMHO and I`m proud to see it. Especialy the IL2s. They are being brought out in force in the role they really shine in.
I`m sorry. I just can`t make sense of it.
-
"AH2 and the ENY limiter has always allowed you to fly any ride you choose."
When I quit back in september, I would frequently log on and have to hunt around and switch countries in order to find the P-51D available. When I'd log off then back on a couple hours later, often times country numbers were different and my plane would be unavailable and I couldn't change countries due to the side-switch limitation. Yes, my gameplay time was always very sporadic--an hour here, an hour there. Add in the fact that I never did like changing countries, and I'm sure you can see how I ultimately decided that it wasn't worth the hassle.
Since I am but one person and HTC has to keep their product popular with many people if they are to succeed, I understand their design decisions and didn't make any noisy "I quit" posts.
That was months ago though, and things can and do change. If things are different, feel free to update me as to the current state of the MA. Just because I'm not active now doesn't mean I won't be again at some point in the future, and I try to keep myself as least somewhat aware of what's going on development-wise.
J_A_B
-
stfu u chigger.:mad:
:lol
-
CHIGGA FLICKA!!! :o
-
Morpheus,
Sorry, I have very little interest in ToD. I'll try it, but it doesn't sound like my bag.
Likewise, I don't support the NPA because of the effects it would have, IMO.
The current system has serious flaws, but I've never thought of, or heard of, something that fixes it. But to claim it is flawless is silly.
J_A_B,
The ENY limiter is only a rare occurance now. That said, you'd be one of the first affected and your choice would be to switch contries, log off or fly something you don't have any interest in flying.
-
I agree with you Karnak in that it does have flaws.
But show me a game that doesnt. Or anything for that matter.
There are ways of improving or fixing flaws. This is not one of them by an streatch. I also never said the current system was perfect. I never thought I had to clarify that.
I'll always use the F4u4 as a perfect example of something that needs to be changed. Where most of the fights take place. The La7 by far out performs this hog. Some are going to disagree. I'll be happy to demonstrate. But the hog4 is perked to the degree that the tempest is perked. I'm not saying that the La7 needs perking. Lord knows 75%+ of the players flying it are little more than cannon fodder. But what I am saying is that the Hog4 doesnt need to be perked to the degree that it is currently at. I just dont see the reasoning behind it.
BUT> I also dont see the reasoning behind this thread.
-
Just wait for Tour of Duty:
Historical matchups (have now in Combat Theater).
Equipment availability limited (have now in MA perks).
Rank and skill ladders (sorta now, score is being kept).
Death and injury regression (no penalties now).
Many rules and procedures (not so many now).
Meanwhile, back in the Main Arena ... I pay my $14.95 and I wanna fly any plane I want any time with NO perks waaaaa waaaaaa waaaaaa. That's my attitude, wailing included.
So what if I don't fly much anymore. I might fly more if I could be totally uncluttered from perks.
And hey, I still want exterior views for all fighters and vehicles just like Fighter Ace, MS Flight Sim, X-Plane, and IL-2 Waaaa waaaa waaaa, I weally do.
It's astounding that a game with so much virtually unlimited potential imposes so many limitations on equipment selection and viewing. :(
-
Originally posted by Halo
Meanwhile, back in the Main Arena ... I pay my $14.95 and I wanna fly any plane I want any time with NO perks waaaaa waaaaaa waaaaaa. That's my attitude, wailing included.
Sorry, but that won't happen. It'd be 50% Me262s and shortly after it'd be empty.
-
Originally posted by streetstang
You guys want a controled enviorment. Wait for TOD. I've said it before along with countless others before me. And I'll keep saying it. The beauty of this game, and the MA is that you can jump in there and fly any plane at will.
As a 2 month new player, IMO your opinion on "The beauty of this game" is what makes it less realistic, and a bit ridiculous.
Can I please import my early 70's era Phantom from Wings Over Virtnam, a game I've mastered? I think that would add to the beauty.
Whats the goal here anyway?, a huge BS free for all? Because the MA sure as hell looks nothing like any real war, actually it is just a big BS free-for-all come to think of it. Yea, it's an entertaining, even fun, BS free-for-all... but is this a flight sim or sci-fi? Right now it should be the "Fiction Arena" where planes that never flew against eachother go head to head.
I like his idea, somewhat, because as of now I really dont even see a real point in perking anything.. there is already a climate where certain aircraft vastly outclass others, so why not just unperk everything and let the Sci-fi arena carry on business as usual. Toss in a few UFO's and cows that blast ack from thier anus and it wouldn't really matter since the MA is already so far removed from reality.
I'll say it again, the "game" is fun, but it seems like a real shame to me that such great realism & detail was put into these aircraft, yet the main arena is little more than a giant unrealistic mess. Leveling entire towns that have magic buildings that just re-appear?.. whats that!!! lol
I really have to laugh sometimes at how heated and serious some discussions get on particular planes abilities, it seems many people here are real sticklers for realism... yet they happily jump into a Mess Arena that's as 'real' as a $4 bill.
As arcade like as BF 1942 is (or the better WWI mod for BF Vietnam), it's a lot more realistic that this alleged flight sim, you fight for 1 country using thier gear in maps that represent actual scenarios..
So in the end, whats the point of this game? is it a "sim" or a nutty sci-fi adventure?
I really dig on the squad nights and CT, flying closer to the was it "was", the MA is the way it wasn't, i.e fiction... and trying to ballance fiction, IMO, is next to impossible... but I do like your idea.
-
Originally posted by Halo
Just wait for Tour of Duty:
And hey, I still want exterior views for all fighters and vehicles just like Fighter Ace, MS Flight Sim, X-Plane, and IL-2 Waaaa waaaa waaaa, I weally do.
(
Guards, carry this person from here immediately !!!!!!!
External views for fighters is waaaaaaaaay cheesy.
Ya made a list where you can get this. If that`s what you want you have a few places that your wish can be granted.
-
Originally posted by x0847Marine
As a 2 month new player, IMO your opinion on "The beauty of this game" is what makes it less realistic, and a bit ridiculous.
Can I please import my early 70's era Phantom from Wings Over Virtnam, a game I've mastered? I think that would add to the beauty.
Whats the goal here anyway?, a huge BS free for all? Because the MA sure as hell looks nothing like any real war, actually it is just a big BS free-for-all come to think of it. Yea, it's an entertaining, even fun, BS free-for-all... but is this a flight sim or sci-fi? Right now it should be the "Fiction Arena" where planes that never flew against eachother go head to head.
I like his idea, somewhat, because as of now I really dont even see a real point in perking anything.. there is already a climate where certain aircraft vastly outclass others, so why not just unperk everything and let the Sci-fi arena carry on business as usual. Toss in a few UFO's and cows that blast ack from thier anus and it wouldn't really matter since the MA is already so far removed from reality.
I'll say it again, the "game" is fun, but it seems like a real shame to me that such great realism & detail was put into these aircraft, yet the main arena is little more than a giant unrealistic mess. Leveling entire towns that have magic buildings that just re-appear?.. whats that!!! lol
I really have to laugh sometimes at how heated and serious some discussions get on particular planes abilities, it seems many people here are real sticklers for realism... yet they happily jump into a Mess Arena that's as 'real' as a $4 bill.
As arcade like as BF 1942 is (or the better WWI mod for BF Vietnam), it's a lot more realistic that this alleged flight sim, you fight for 1 country using thier gear in maps that represent actual scenarios..
So in the end, whats the point of this game? is it a "sim" or a nutty sci-fi adventure?
I really dig on the squad nights and CT, flying closer to the was it "was", the MA is the way it wasn't, i.e fiction... and trying to ballance fiction, IMO, is next to impossible... but I do like your idea.
OK, the short bus is here.
ALL ABOARD!!!!!!
Sit down Noob!
-
the minute the MA starts trying to be anything but a glorious orgy of free for all chaos, i'm canceling my account forever.
If you want realism and limited planesets, the CT is that way ---->
-
Originally posted by 68racer
I strongly disagree! This is why good pilot's have enough perk points to use that all they would fly is the perk planes. A average to beginer player would be stuck flying these slower and second to best aircraft. This gives the guy that is already better than average a better chance for easier kills. What is 5 to 15 perk points to someone that has 1000 plus perk points. I do think the ar234 is over perked, if you notice you very seldom see one flying around bombing a base. Perk price for a 262 is 50% to much I do agree. This leaves only the better than average pilot flying them which is a disavantage to the average and less. which is the same point i was trying to bring out about the other planes you guys are talking about perking. This is just my opion which means nothing so don't take it to heart.
68racer:aok
-
Originally posted by 68racer
If you guys want to talk about making a change eny value should be the issue. My vote is for eny to be banned. I like fighting against equaly valued planes not a 205 against a spit 9. It is two easy of a kill. Even if where out numbered I hate to see another country's eny go up.
-
Originally posted by Vermillion
Heed the old saying... "be careful what you wish for"
Personally I vote no, because I know where this path leads too.
The rolling plane set (similar concept of "plane variety", just a different mechanism) in Warbirds started this exact way. It sounds reasonable and fun. Hey... what the heck lets try it.
It soon leads to more and more division in the player base, and less and less choice for the player.
The end result in Warbirds? The Axis versus Allied rolling planeset. Warbirds maybe 30 or 40 players on a weekend "primetime", Aces High 300 or 400 players.
The numbers tell the tale. period.
You are missing one big difference. That Warbirds costed me two bucks for an hour, while AH and AH2 offers flat rate charge.
I insist RPS was more fun. You can feel U.S. Naval wildcat pilot's despair against superior Zekes, and that turns into acclamation when hellcats becomes available. it's payback time :D
Flying a P-39 aircobra or 109-F4 as an alternate for P-51 was acceptable, because no other planes could catch them up in 1940. You always can enjoy your playing style within relativeness of the plane perfomance, even you do not have specific prefered fighter at that time.
If I had to pay two bucks for an hour of AH play, it will lead me to the blackhole of bankrupcy. I believe this also is reality to dear other AH players, if and only if he or she is not as rich as Bill Gates. In Warbards age, once I had to pay $250 for one month of play which caught me a serious financial problem.
Even one more thing to point out - which relates number of players to the cost. When Warbirds II offered 2 weeks of free arena, the number of players suddenly increased to 200+. You will never forget when you see 30 B-17s having 7 seprate gunners (all humans) rided, filling out all directions of the sky with 50 caliber shootbacks against interceptors - The scene remains a shock and excitement in my memory, despite of the mid 1990's crappy 2D graphics effects. Man, which hooks me to the combat flight is the situation (or flashback of WWII memories? :) ), not graphics.
BTW, above was my very personal experience, and I am not dare enough to ask you to agree my point of view. It is not likely to see RPS in AH2, I can gladly give a vote to Kweassa's agenda - of course a strong one. IMHO, true joy of the game comes out of limitation which should players overcome.
-
Sheesh let it die guys lol.
Dead horse.
-
idiots
-
If you perk the suggested planes, thats just gonna cause more running and timidness. If you are wanting to improve arena play, this is not how to do it. You will stop those who do like to knife fight in those planes, to start running just so they can keep their planes/perks. I understand Kweassa's point and I don't mind the idea all together, but people are gonna fly how they want, and when they want to. That's the beauty of this game.
-
La7 15perks