Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Terror on June 06, 2003, 04:37:09 PM
-
The "Big Four" have 39.8% of all A2A kills in the MA. PERK the "Big Four". See for yourself in the Tour40 Fighter Stats page HERE (http://www.dbstaines.com/TourStats/Tour40/Tour40.htm). It takes the next THIRTEEN planes to equal the kill percentage of these four!!!!
Spitfire Mk IX -- 6pts
LA7 -- 5pt
P51d -- 5pts
N1K -- 4pts
This will bring *some* variety into the MA!!!
Terror
-
or just kill them.
-
Perking a late 1941 Spitfire? LOL Whatever next.... I don't fly the Spitfire but the RAF already have the Spit14 and Tempest perked, no more please.
-
Originally posted by Replicant
Perking a late 1941 Spitfire? LOL Whatever next.... I don't fly the Spitfire but the RAF already have the Spit14 and Tempest perked, no more please.
Perking these four is not about *capability*. It is about balancing usage. I would like to see more variety in the planes I fight. At least get the top 40% of kills from 10 planes instead of 4.
Terror
-
So how do you like the Tempest then Terror?
-
Perking those four planes would not increase the variety of plane usage. It might even do the opposite. You would just have 40% of the kills being reaped by the 4 next best/popular plane models .
-
Suave is right.
According to the listed OTD speeds courtesy of Whels (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=57526&highlight=whels)(Perked planes+"Big Four"/planes under 300mph with MIL, under 320mph with WEP removed from the list):
MIL:
TYPHOON 355
YAK9-U 355
F4U-1 350
P-51B 347
190D-9 346
F4U-1D 343
109G-10 337
LA-5 336
P-38L 333
P-47D-11 333
P-47D-25 329
P-47D-30 329
190A-8 327
YAK9-T 327
190F-8 326
190A-5 326
MOSQ 325
C205 321
109G-2 320
F6F-5 320
109G-6 317
109F-4 310
C202 307
KI-61 305
110-G2 305
WEP:
190D-9 375
TYPHOON 370
109G-10 366
F4U-1 358
P-51B 358
F4U-1D 357
LA-5 356
YAK9-U 355
190A-8 349
190F-8 349
P-38L 344
P-47D-11 344
P-47D-25 340
P-47D-30 340
109G-2 340
190A-5 339
MOSQ 338
YAK9-T 336
109G-6 336
109F-4 332
C205 331
F6F-5 330
...
It doesn't take a brain surgeon to see that it'll be 190 heaven.
Spitfire 'effectivity' will be controlled, since the SpitV, while a decent plane, is way too slow. Of course, their numbers won't go down, we'll still be seeing a lot of Spits. But with the N1K2 and Spit9 gone, the planes that turn well, are simply, too damn slow.
For sake of reason, let's say that the Yak-9U, F4U-1 and Bf109G-10 numbers won't rise so drastically - Yak-9U is stingy in ammo loads, Bf109G-10 is stingy in ammo loads AND a crappy high speed plane, the F4U-1 is a hard plane to manage well.
However, the Typhoon, Fw190D-9 and the P-51B is virtually unchecked now. Fastest plane with quad hispanoes, a 190 that virtually matches the P-51D, and the P-51B - a P-51 with smaller loadouts in armament.
The only big difference would be the La-5, which performance is outstanding in almost all areas as a pure A2A plane, will not be the fastest plane around. Thus, the "LA" complaints will go down, but they'll all be replaced by Typhoons or Fw190D-9s.
Perking the "Big Four" will not do anything.
-
However, as long as the topic of 'perking planes for balance and variety' is here, let's compare it to my agenda(links on my sig).
With my agenda:
*Listed OTD speeds courtesy of Whels(Perked planes+newly suggested perked planes/planes under 300mph with MIL, under 320mph with WEP removed from the list) (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=57526&highlight=whels)
* SpitIX included in the WEP OTD speed list
MIL
F4U-1 350
P-51B 347
LA-5 336
P-47D-11 333
P-47D-25 329
190A-8 327
YAK9-T 327
190F-8 326
190A-5 326
MOSQ 325
C205 321
109G-2 320
F6F-5 320
109G-6 317
109F-4 310
SPIT IX 310
C202 307
KI-61 305
110-G2 305
WEP:
F4U-1 358
P-51B 358
LA-5 356
190A-8 349
190F-8 349
P-47D-11 344
P-47D-25 340
109G-2 340
190A-5 339
MOSQ 338
YAK9-T 336
109G-6 336
109F-4 332
C205 331
F6F-5 330
SPIT IX 319
...
Notice any difference? ;)
19 planes in the MIL list, 16 planes in the WEP list.
In the MIL list, look at the top five planes - two are P-47s. So, anyone gonna complain that P-47s are super planes? Anyone gonna start overusing them because they are fast? I really, really think not.
-
Originally posted by Toad
So how do you like the Tempest then Terror?
I love the TEMP. I got a 30+ to 1 Kill/Death ratio last tour in it. I think it's PERK value is perfect.
Originally posted by Suave
Perking those four planes would not increase the variety of plane usage. It might even do the opposite. You would just have 40% of the kills being reaped by the 4 next best/popular plane models .
I don't think this is true. The next THIRTEEN planes make up the next 40% of the kills. I would think the "Big Four" would still stay in the top ten, but would spread the usage out a bit more.
Originally posted by KWEASSA
Perking the "Big Four" will not do anything.
I disagree. The "Big Four" will still be used and will still stay in the top ten, but next 5 or 6 planes will get more usage due to the added perk values on the "Big Four".
Terror
-
It is true, you can test it in any h2h room. Disable uber planes and you'll have half of the room flying spitV's and HurriII's .
People have been complaining about this for years, before there was AH. The best 4 or 5 planes are allways going to make up the majority of the planes in the arena. It doesn't matter what the planeset is .
If you perked the top four planes you would see them about as much as you see the f4u1c now, which is almost never. The 262 would still be the most frequently encountered perk plane, and people would just start flying the best non perked planes .
-
Originally posted by Suave
If you perked the top four planes you would see them about as much as you see the f4u1c now, which is almost never. The 262 would still be the most frequently encountered perk plane, and people would just start flying the best non perked planes .
For some reason, I just don't think people will walk away from these planes due to the 4-6 point perk. They are too good of rides. The only thing the -1C had for it were the cannons, these planes have alot more going for them. I say try it for a tour and see how things turn out. I bet these four planes will stay very high on the usage table. Heck, the F4u-1C is still 16th on the kill table!
Terror
PS. Disabling the best planes is different than adding a small perk for the H2H example. Of course, people will go with the next best available plane when the better planes are DISABLED.
-
So the next four will get the most use?
well isnt that the WHOLE F*%^%&*^ point of perking planeS????
sheesh !
I for one would agree to planes that see the most use having a small perk charge applied to them.
WHEN THE ARE COMMONLY USED YOU ADD A SMALL PERK PRICE.WHEN THEY CEASE TO BE COMMONLY USED YOU CAN REDUCE THE COST.
am i the only one here who thinks this would be a perfectly reasonable way of mixing the arena use of aircraft???? If we dont see this sort of thing used with the perking idea then WHY the hell are we using perks at all?
so you perk the top 4 and the 190 and p47 become the new top dogs? GREAT!! that would be DIFFERENT to now! Once we have OVERUSED the 190s and P47s we will , by then , have the spitfires and la7s back to a low or free perk cost, The result is a CONSTANTLY changing mix of planes.
Personaly i think this is an OBVIOUS answer to a stagnateing mixture of engagements. It seems some, generally those who play this game like a video shoot-em-up with sim planes dont want anything changed that interferes with their use of EASY to fly planes.They refuse to re-learn in a more difficult or challenging aircraft because they have it so easy with planes like la7s.
Well maybe they should be allowed what they want, but HTC should at least be aware this will lose them customers like me and terror in the long run. We get bored. Its perfectly natural and a lot of people i talk to in AH are indeed BORED at the moment in AH.
HTC needs to add little querks or additions to AH in order to hold our interest.Obviously they dont have to do this for everyone as some it seems are quite happy to do the same thing over and over.I suspect however that most who claim they dont need any changes are customers who havent been in AH as long.They have yet to play the game as much and so have yet to become a little bored with the repetative nature.
AH2 is HTC's attempt to adress this problem.If you dont think it is then why do you think ANY game online ever does updates? you need to evolve and change to keep the players there.
Terrors suggestion isnt new by any means but he asks for something a lot of us want to see, if only for a short period just for a change.
-
Sounds to much like a rolling planeset to me .
-
Originally posted by Suave
Sounds to much like a rolling planeset to me .
but theres nothing to stop you paying the small perk cost and flying ANY aircraft is there?
its actually nothing like a rolling planeset.I wouldnt want a rolling planeset either. All this would do is stop the 'masses' using the same aircraft constantly , thus preventing the arena stagnating as it is now where we see the same engagements 90% of the time.
-
I don't have any problem with the planes I engage. The most I see are probably La7s, 109s, Spitfires and P51s. Considering that there are several variants of Spits and 109s I don't see there being a problem.
I think the country you fly for, and also the time will decide which planes are popular. Play early in UK and you see a lot of N1K2s from Japanese players. Bishops have a lot of RAF squads so Rook & Knight players may see a lot of RAF planes, such at the Spitfire. I fly Bishop, I see many 109s and 190s but then since there are many Luftwaffe squads in Rook/Knightland I simply accept it.
However if 4 planes are perked because they're popular the plane they move onto (e.g. La5, Spit5, other 109s, F6F) will get perked.... blah blah blah. Leave it as it is, even though the plane I see most is the La7 (you see them but can't always catch them!).
-
Lemme guess here terror.. you are primarily a B&Z type player?
-
Originally posted by Toad
Lemme guess here terror.. you are primarily a B&Z type player?
Nope, I love to turn-n-burn in a Hurri2C or F6F. ('tis why my overall K/D is only 4/1) But to survive in my favorite plane, the F4u-1, you gotta be a B&Zer. Energy is the life blood of that bird. It's the same with the TEMP. You gotta keep up your E or the magnet TEMP perk tag will have you swarmed and dead in short order....
Terror
PS. Why do people think that since there is a small PERK that no one will fly those planes any more? Those planes will remain extremely popular even with a perk value put on them.
-
If Pyro had balls big enough to play with he'd perk every plane in the MA to some extent :)
Save the no perks for the SEA, TA, DA and H2H.
-
Does HTC ever comment on PERK this threads?
Just curious.....
Terror
-
I wonder if those aircraft were slightly perked, if it would alter some of the players' fighting styles when in them. Say, those George/Spit/LA7 pilots may feel more inclined to fly more safely or in a way that allows them to RTB rather than madmen and suicidal like many are flown now. That might prove interesting.
-
No they would still be flying like suicidal jerry's kids, just not in anything that costs perk points .
-
Kweassa, two points:
1 - WEP is not unlimited.
2 - It seems your main concern about planes is raw speed at sea level with WEP. Acceleration, turning, climbing, E retention and weapons seems secondary for you.
-
Mand, My concern is with the "margin" of performance efficiency between the most preferred plane types and the rarely preferred types - which includes all attributes; speed, acceleration, ease of handling, armament.. etc etc
I was working on some basic comparisons analysis on the average speed of top 5 planes, the next 5, and then the next 5 planes etc. I worked with about 15 planes, comparing the current perk agenda and my sugested ones, until a freak accident blew my Comp main board and power systems, burning off the second hard rive too :mad: (sounds like a lame excuse, but that really did happen! :D)
Was too disgusted to put my hand on it again, but I do remeber some good results - the margin of speed itself, was not anything stellar, however, the plane types became quite different when suggested perks were applied.
For instance, in the current perk agenda, the top 10 planes in speed category(both MIL and WEP), are usually also quite easy in handling, great in acceleration, great in firepower and carries heavy ordnance. Usually those 10 planes have more than two, three of those attribites mentioned above.
All of their 'disadvantages' are usually covered up by advantages so powerful that practically the numerous mid-year war planes don't have much chance against them - of the many attributes, it is undeniable that the 'speed' category is often the most pronounced, powerful and evident one.
In an absolute comparison, it is no doubt the "new free Big Four(or big five, or ten or whatever)" with my perk agenda, are naturally easier planes to fight against, when seen from the cockpit of your average "1942~1943 plane".
Not only that, but their strengths and weaknesses are much more diversified(!).
For instance, as you pointed out, the fastest planes are almost all US planes - limited in WEP time, not so great in acceleration, hard handle in a pure dog fight. Of the four US planes in the top 10 speed category with my perk agenda, two are P-47s. Among the four, only one of the two P-47s really carry "heavy ordnance" - bombs and rockets, and those rockets are by pods not pylons, even. Meaning: the P-47 pilot will have to carefully decide on his configuration. Unlike the P-51Ds or P-47D-30s we have now, you can't just carry max ordnance, dump all and immediately expect it to become a fighter. Of course, the rest two, P-51B and F4U-1, are even more limited in jabo capabilities.
The next best planes are the three 190s - A-5, A-8 and F-8. The Antons are all limited in jabos. Performance wise the A-5 is balanced, A-8 is heavy in firepower but limited, F-8 is a dedicated jabo plane. These planes have twice as longer WEP time, accelerates better, and also has great firepower - though slower than those fastest American planes.
It is like this all along the edges. Most of the "best" of the free planes in my agenda, are strictly limited in strengths and weaknesses, and not a single of them have more than two, three strengths in the most important attributes of performance.
The roles are diversified, even their armament configuration and selections of ordnance, is diversified according to role(because of the limits in ordnance, unlike our '44 super planes we have). The situation where they can be proved effective, is also diversified.
The balance I look forward to, is a literary one, concerning many attributes, specific roles of planes, era of plane types etc etc.
-
Originally posted by Terror
...But to survive in my favorite plane, the F4u-1, you gotta be a B&Zer..... It's the same with the TEMP.
Let's see....... Tour 40: 31 kills in Hurris and F6F's out of 205 kills total. 15% in your favorite T&B planes.
137 out of 205 kills in either a F4U-1 or a Tempest. Only 67% in self-admitted B&Z mode. But, you're not primarily a B&Z'er. OK.
PS. Why do people think that since there is a small PERK that no one will fly those planes any more?
PS: Why do you think your personal need for "variety" should lead to a system that restricts other players' choices?
Fly what you like. Allow other players the same courtesy, please.
None of those planes "unbalance" the arena. They are all quite "killable" from a "variety" of different cockpits.
-
Originally posted by Toad
Let's see....... Tour 40: 31 kills in Hurris and F6F's out of 205 kills total. 15% in your favorite T&B planes.
137 out of 205 kills in either a F4U-1 or a Tempest. Only 67% in self-admitted B&Z mode. But, you're not primarily a B&Z'er. OK.
PS: Why do you think your personal need for "variety" should lead to a system that restricts other players' choices?
Fly what you like. Allow other players the same courtesy, please.
None of those planes "unbalance" the arena. They are all quite "killable" from a "variety" of different cockpits.
OK, why again is B&Z bad? I didn't say I was NOT a B&Zer, just that I do indulge T&B quite often and that is where most of my deaths occur. As B&Z'ing is much more survivable, this should be a no brainer.....
Why would paying a small perk "restrict" players choices? It would just make them think about their choices as they make them. Just as I do when I choose a TEMP or F4u-1C.
Those planes do "unbalance" the arena if they are making 40% of the kills. Why have the plane choices if only these four make up almost half the kills? Obviously these four planes have capabilities that out weigh the other 44 planes available or they wouldn't be used as heavily.
And to offset the newbie factor, give a new player 25 free perks to start. That should allow them to fly the "Big Four" planes for a bit....
Terror
-
Top speed, WEP or not, means little other than getting from here to there and in possibly making an escape. I would rather see *acceleration* of aicraft posted as that's more pertinent in an actual dogfight.
-
No, B&Z is neither bad nor good. It is just a style of flying and a choice a particular player makes.
Note however, that the 4 aircraft you want to perk are somewhat more difficult as targets of the B&Z. The LA-7 and the P-51 are both fast at top speed, so unless you catch them slow, they can evade the B&Z pretty well by separating. The N1K1 and the Spit IX (as well as the rest of the Spits) evade the B&Z well by turning. In the hands of accomplished flyers, they can often reverse and ping the unwary B&Z artiste.
So, it seems to me that perhaps another factor here is that these 4 are a bit tougher to B&Z and thus your interest in perking them. I'm sure you would deny this ever crossed your mind, however.
Where perking them would "restrict" player choice is particularly at the level of the newer players. While a few perks seem like nothing to the older hands that can and do kill quite easily in say the F4U-1, a continual loss of perks by newer players can significantly restrict their choices. And, these are the guys that die a lot even if they are determined to RTB.
The more advanced players? Most avoid these aircraft in general. They are easy to fly, easy to kill in. So a lot of folks go looking for a bit more of a challenge. Some even turnfight in the F4U-1. ;) So perking these four would probably not affect the more advanced guys much and those probably aren't the guys you're seeing "too many of" anyway.
25 perks free? Your generosity overwhelms; you'd allow a player to have 5 free La-7's? How long would that last a new guy?
You are simply using a personal prejudice... that you feel that you see/shoot too many of these aircraft...... as justification for telling other folks what to fly. You're certainly entitled to your opinion on Spits/La's/51's/NiK1's, but that doesn't mean it is any more valid than anyone else's opinion.
Obviously, these are popular aircraft. But they are certainly no more "uber" than most of the rest of the planeset. 1 V 1, Drex would probably kill you or me consistently if he flew a C 202 against either of us and we had our pick of these 4 aircraft and chose to engage him. It's the pilot, not the plane.
In the hands of a newbie, the very guy you wish to deny access to these aircraft, none of them are really dangerous at all.
Certainly no performance reason to perk any of these four. There are other aircraft just as fast, just as well armed, just as capable in a turn fight that you don't mention at all.
You just don't like seeing so many of them. That's the long and the short of it. You want folks to make choices that show YOU more variety.
And that is not your call to make. That call belongs to the guy that's paying his bill and making his own choice. Just as you make yours.
Bottom line is that HTC..... so far...... clearly doesn't agree with you. That's a good thing for the game, IMO. Keeps the new guys interested.
-
The numbers in this Tour (innom's stats page) show ...
Spit IX - K/D 1.11
La-7 - K/D 1.22
P-51 - K/D 0.90
N1K - K/D 1.21
Average K/D for all combined - 1.11
If I remeber correctly, these numbers are very close to the final numbers of the last tour for these planes.
So ... If they account for 40% of the kills, then they also account for almost 40% of the deaths. So they are dying almost as fast as they are killing.
Hardly enough of an impact to unbalance the area.
-
toad I think youre reading too much into the rquest.
Most people fly all types of aircraft , I know i do. From hurricane IIC's to me262's they all require different types of flying.True we tend to favour one or the other but its hardly set in stone.I dont know about you personally but I find i drift from one type to another depending on my mood.
I would like to see some aircraft perked purely because I see too many of them on a regular basis.Its the repetative engagement tactics that make it boring for me.
The whole point people seem to consistantly forget is that PERKING an aircraft DOESNT HAVE to be a perminant change.
If for one tour they perked these aircraft and for that tour we saw more and more 190s,p47s,205s and la5s would that really be so bad? once that months up you could remove the perks and go back to this endless story we are currently forced to follow.
I just think a change in the MA would be a good thing at the moment in AH as we havent had any new aircraft or updates in quite a while and nor are we due one in the immediate future.Why not use this time to mess around with the perking idea.I dont think anyone can claim perk points dont work when its never actually been adjusted in any easy to understand way.
we havent ever had perk costs running from a single perk point to 10 erks for instance.
even a small perk cost of 2 or 3 would make a difference to the viability of an aircraft for overuse. It doesnt stop the "fan" who wants to fly it all the time as he will always have a few perks to spare and can rearm etc too,
Only those that waste many of their aircraft would be discouraged and 9 times out of 10 these people fly it because its there and dont care what they fly anyhow.Theres very few true fans of the LA7 for instance because it really isnt as well known to the average online gamer as p47s,p51s,spitfires etc.
Anyhow like i said the true fans wuld easily be able to afford to fly them.
What I see in here is stubborness by people who for the life of me i cant understand.They complain about calls for perking certain types yet they could easily afford to ignore the perk cost and fly them anyway.They would still see these perked rides in the arena, there would be no icon change, they would still get to fly them whenever they like, they COULD have more fights with the rare aircraft like P47d11's and 190f8s or 202s because people would use the free aircraft to defend etc, makes no sense at all.
If I were HTC id use this lull in updates to do some manipulation of the planeset in order to see what people enjoy most. It might not work I can understand that.If perking starts to suck then I'll be first to accept its no good but from what ive seen of it , its never really been used properly apart from one time to fix the f4Uc numbers.A job it did perfectly.
P.S. My favourite type for bnz is 190d9 and Id happily pay a few perks to fly it if HTC did the same for the p51D. people in mustangs would switch over from the p51 to maybe the p38 or p47 for a while or p51B.I'd go over to 190a8 or whatever else is nearest. which means instead of you and i meeting in p51d vs 190d9 we'd have a few 190a8 vs P47 fights. if only.
-
The idea of perking certain planes is very sensitive. While The gaggles of lala's and 51's certainly can get old, perking them crimps choice, and we pay for choice. We already have great rides perked, some to a point that it isn't worth taking one up and becoming the perk magnet. I much prefer LESS perking, as long as planes are modeled correctly. In the end, its more the pilot than the plane (hordes excepted). Currently the two big maps essentially force us to take fast, long range planes like the p51. Taking a plane with short legs to a fight a sector and a half or 2 sectors away gives you very limited stay time (hmm sorta like 109's over England). I for one get a few hours every couple of nights and sure as &ll dont want to fly a crappy ride for 20 minutes, run out of ammo lickity split, then rtb for 20 minutes. Variety would be nice, agreed. Heck, to find guys (terror's p47's come to mind) working better planes with a "maneuvering challenged" plane sure makes for some memorable flying, but pushing the plane envelope down just reduces the choice factor. Wait, let me summarize: I want my SPIT:cool:
-
Originally posted by Toad
So, it seems to me that perhaps another factor here is that these 4 are a bit tougher to B&Z and thus your interest in perking them. I'm sure you would deny this ever crossed your mind, however.
This is true, this did not cross my mind. These planes are no different than any other when B&Z'ing in a TEMP or F4u-1. I actually target the faster planes first though when I enter a battle area. Especially the LA7 or P51d (followed by the TYPH then 190/109) because these have a better chance at removing my escape avenues during the fight. Their speed or turning effectiveness is mostly negated with a correctly performed B&Z though.
Originally posted by Toad
25 perks free? Your generosity overwhelms; you'd allow a player to have 5 free La-7's? How long would that last a new guy?
I actually had that set to the newb factor to 100 free perks at first, but thought I would get yelled at for being "too generous" and changed it to 25. Just give them some to work with and then let them work to use these above average capable rides.
I agree that these planes do NOT have a *performance* advantage in the MA. I would just like to see the numbers balanced some. 40% of kills in the MA is TOO much popularity. Of course, that is my opinion, but it was HTC opinion to perk the F4u-1C when it was getting 15-20% of the MA kills. So I do not think HTC would be that opposed to putting small perks on these four aircraft because they are getting such a majority of usage in the MA.
Originally posted by Toad
Bottom line is that HTC..... so far...... clearly doesn't agree with you. That's a good thing for the game, IMO. Keeps the new guys interested.
I would love to hear HTCs opinion on this subject. Both from a "player" perspective and a "business" perspective. It would probably quiet alot of the threads about plane perking in the BB when people understood HTC stance and method for determining perk aircraft. I have just the opposite feeling about how perking these rides will effect game play, I think by creating a larger variety of planes in the air, you will create a more varied fight and keep people coming back for more, rather than getting bored with the same thing over and over.
Terror
-
Personally I think that a mid-1943 setup would be the best of all worlds. Just for the Pony boys, make it Dec. 1943 so they can get a free P-51B.
I would love to see the MA try this for a single Tour.
However, there are problems:
1) The Spitfire Mk IX is already the most popular aircraft, what effect will removing the other three have? It can't be good. Also, can the Spitfire Mk IX be effectively handled and contained with the other three of the big four removed?
2) The scarcity of appropriate US aircraft. We have no P-38 from 1943 or ealier for example.
I still think that a 1943 focused MA would be vastly more entertaining simply because the "do everything wonder fighters" would be controled and the speed would lower to the point that interesting aircraft like the Bf110G-2, A-20G, Mosquito Mk VI, Il-2 3M and Fw190F-8 would be much more useful and seen with much greater frequency. Undertilized fighters like the Ki.61, Fw190A-5, P-40E, P-51B, F4U-1, P-47D-11 and the Yak-9T would also be much more competive and therefore seen more frequently.
Obviouly these are guesses and I can't back any of it up, but I would love to see it tried for a Tour to see what would happen.
-
Hazed, Terror.....
The point is that the desire to "perk" planes that are basically unremarkable in performance is solely based on an opinion (apparently held by both of you) that you find the choices other players make to be "boring".
Perhaps they find your choices "boring"?
The core issue is that while there may be a performance reason for perking the jets or other "high performance/unbalancing performanc aircraft, there's absolutely no performance basis for perking these four.
It's simply a "preference" of yours that you don't want other players to choose so many of them.
If you can't see the problem with that idea......
........let me decide what YOU should fly from now on. :D
-
Karnak the way you describe it it sounds like a rolling planeset which it obviously isnt. Everyone can fly the later varients if they pay the small perk cost.
Terror would you have trouble paying 2 or 3 perks to fly a 1945 aircraft?
we keep saying the poor newbie this or the poor newbie that yet the ones saying they dont like it are not newbies and I have yet to see a newbie who even cares he cant fly the me262 or arado.
They accept it as part of the game because....they are new to it! :)
anyhow we are drifting off the point a bit.
!) if these four aircraft are perked for small values of say 2 or 3 perks it doesnt have to stay that way. Once they cease to be the 4 most common aircraft in the game other aircraft can take their place on the perk table
Again i'll say it, people are assuming perking doesnt work and restricts play yet they are basing this on the use of aircraft like the tempest and me262. Aircraft that cost A LOT and have never really been changed/adjusted to see if their price is right.
The F4UC IS used by many newbies because its one of the first aircraft they can afford.Most find it too tricky to use but they still try it.
Do you see them complaining they cant afford it? NO.
Do you see too many of them in MA? NO.
Before we all write off perking as a usefull tool lets at least see it get a few REFINEMENTS.
lets keep the introduced perk costs real low so it hardly notices.Then add a point or two until we can afford to use them but choose to try a different aircraft for scoring. We shouldnt let the 25 to 200 perks prices we have now to influence your idea of what would happen.
These 4 wouldnt suddenly dissapear altogether.
Toad if we added 2 perks cost to an LA7 would it stop you flying it? I know the same cost wouldnt stop me flying the 190d9 when i wanted.Surely you must have untold perks available.who would it stop?
Ah yes the fellow whos just downloaded the game and is yet to fly 4 or 5 sorties! he wont be able to fly the la7 for what 16 hours? :)
these total newbies rarely care what aircraft is the current favourite. Once their 2 weeks are up they can surely get a few perks a day without much effort.Still your right if its bad of me to want a bit of a change to the MA then ok but i still say it cuts both ways.some will like it some wont and the only way to appease all of them is to keep things varied.I thought thats what perking was all about, instead it seems to be used at the moment to just keep the best british aircraft from dominating or the me262 from doing the same.To stop the high altitude ta152s being used as a fast heavily armed rammers? :)
just what is it the p51D and LA7 etc doing?
oh i see THATS different! ...right...i...er....see...
now dont get me wrong here but if it was my game and the choice is keep the guy on the free account happy for his 2 weeks and leave paying subscribers feeling bored OR keeping the game enviroment changing to keep PAYING subscribers happy and BARELY restricting the 2 weeker from flying a few planes I know what id choose.
-
Hazed, the basis for your argument is that you think you see/fight too many SpitIX/N1K1/La-7/P-51.
That is clearly a subjective opinion.
Lots of people disagree, in fact it appears the vast majority disagree... for whatever reason. HTC disagrees.... for whatever reason.
Could it be that this idea is simply bad?
Could it be that this idea is simply selfish?
Come up with some other reasoning besides "I think I see too many SpitIX/N1K1/La-7/P-51 flying around in MY Main Arena" and then there might..... might...... be something to discuss.
Your entitled to your opinion. But that's all it is. Clearly, there's a majority that don't agree.
Just look at all those folks flying free SpitIX/N1K1/La-7/P-51's.
:D
-
As your rank improves in each category, those vehicles increase in perk prices. Player ranked #1 in fighters would be paying highly for the good stuff or forced to fly mediocre aircraft and the newb would have better access to the good stuff.
-
Hazed,
Yes, of course the 1944 and 1945 aircraft would be available, they would simply be lightly perked like the F4U-1C.
Toad,
But how many of the people flying those aircraft are doing so only out of a desire to be competitive with their common opponents?
There is simply no way to know. I suspect many of them would be fine with an earlier time period, they would simply switch to different aircraft that are competitive in that earlier time period.
-
Originally posted by Toad
Hazed, the basis for your argument is that you think you see/fight too many SpitIX/N1K1/La-7/P-51.
That is clearly a subjective opinion.
Lots of people disagree, in fact it appears the vast majority disagree... for whatever reason. HTC disagrees.... for whatever reason.
It's not a completely subjective opinion. The stats are objective. Almost HALF of all kills are to these four aircraft. (And they also make up the top 4 for deaths, BTW.) Doesn't that seem a bit unbalanced? Of 44 FREE planes, these four make up almost half of the air to air activity. To me, that is too many of these particular aircraft in the air.
Originally posted by hazed-
Terror would you have trouble paying 2 or 3 perks to fly a 1945 aircraft? .
I don't have trouble paying 70+ perks for the TEMP let alone a few perks for an LA7 or P51d. But that is me, perks are not much of a deterent for my choices in aircraft. It's too easy to earn perks in planes like the F4u-1.
Terror
-
Karnak, and maybe they just fly what they like.
Perk is just a different aspect of RPS in a way. It's a restriction on what is available to fly. The community has been pretty adamantly against that. As they are in the various "perk this, perk that" threads.
Terror... your view of the stats is anything BUT objective. Who, besides a few people in this thread out of THOUSANDS of players, really cares which planes are "dying" the most?
I surely don't and I'm not alone. I simply DON'T CARE what other people fly. The various perking threads seem to show more folks like me than like you. By a wide margin.
In YOUR view which planes die most is important. To YOU. But that doesn't make the stat anything at all... except a stat.
A target is a target. If it makes you happy.. fly it. Because when I see ya, I just see a target.
-
Toad for president! well, maybe moderator of a barely used arena in AH :D . But i agree 100% with his last thread. More choice, not less...more taste, less filling.........plus, don't forget what Adolph Galland told Goering: "i'd like 2 squads of spitties, some lala's, a group of alt monkey 51's, and a few of them Japanese Niki things....."
-
Toad,
That is certainly a possiblity.
As I said, I'd like to see it tried for a single Tour and see what the results are.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Toad,
That is certainly a possiblity.
As I said, I'd like to see it tried for a single Tour and see what the results are.
not a unreasonable request i dont think and id like to see this too.If the results arent to everyones liking or it causes people to threaten to quit etc then just change it back :)
-
"Ah yes the fellow whos just downloaded the game and is yet to fly 4 or 5 sorties! he wont be able to fly the la7 for what 16 hours?
these total newbies rarely care what aircraft is the current favourite. Once their 2 weeks are up they can surely get a few perks a day without much effort"
Hazed ... thats a rather large leap there !!!
I don't know about you, but for the first month or two, I couldn't hit the broad side of a barn, nor find my SA and ACM bellybutton with both hands, and that was flying the Spit IX exclusivily.
To eliminate that ride from the newbie, and making the assumption that they will be able to easily obtain perks after the 2 week trial is a wrong assumption IMHO.
"not a unreasonable request i dont think and id like to see this too.If the results arent to everyones liking or it causes people to threaten to quit etc then just change it back"
Threatening is one thing, actually quitting before the time period ends is another. What would be the attrition rate ? Hard to determine ... you betcha. Maybe you and I would hang around to see the results, but if HTC were my business, I would not venture into this realm ... no way.
-
that would be cool. Just perk the 51 and doras I would be happy. nikis and spits and lalas fight 51s and doras run
-
when I flew the dash 1a allmost exclussively... I would have agreed to the perk list.
the lala is death to Hogs unless the hog flys a really really really boring careful sortie. 51's fly really really boring sorties every time so they were annoying too... dee 9's could run away so they were bad too... spit 9's could do everything but roll and top speed better than the -1a so they needed perking too.
lazs
-
All these people complaininga about not perking the big4? Well..if the big-4 pilots are such hot shots, whats the fear in flying a perked ride, unless, yo dont care about landing :rolleyes: If you can fly, and rtb safely, whats the big deal inflying a perkie? perk em all, I say!
No complaints here with my hog-4 flying arse....come up and dance if ya wanna :) Put the F4U-1 at 30 perks, the Hog-4 at 100, I'll STILL whup every one of ya
Sorry, I'm mad because Im grounded...
Gainsie
-
lets just get rid of choice altoghter since no one agrees with anyone elses choice. You have to fly all planes, in order on the hangar selection screen. You keep your ride until it dies. Done, no reason to complain about what other people fly, except perhaps the guy who crashes 8 out of 10 rides to get a decent plane. Or maybe you get a ride for a whole day, it is the only one you can up until the next day.
-
"Perk is just a different aspect of RPS in a way. It's a restriction on what is available to fly. The community has been pretty adamantly against that. As they are in the various "perk this, perk that" threads."
The community is? Than, gasp, what's this? an almost unanimous agreement and support of Kweassa's perk agenda? I can't believe it, it surely supports how against everyone is of perking anything.
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=87356
-
Right on, Suave -- perk four, then the next four dominate; perk them, then four different ones ... and so on until there are less than four planes left.
Foo on perks. The Combat Theater is the most fun on the rare occasions when like the good olde days of Air Warrior you get to fly anything with no perks.
-
What an old, old argument :rolleyes: None of them will ever be perked anyways, but IMHO:
Who cares if everyone wants to fly only a certain few planes out of the set? Not me. I only care if any of those certian planes are so far out of balance (heavy on advantages, and light on weaknesses) with the rest of the set that they negate the whole idea of simulating air combat.
Spit9- Good balanced plane, no reason to ever perk.
P51D- Good balanced plane, no reason to ever perk.
N1k-Shouldnt be able to hang on its prop without tourque effects, but its never gonna change, no reason to perk.
La7- Outragous acceleration, can reverse to face a plane, reverse again after the merge, and still run down 90% of the planes in the set in a matter of seconds. No reason to ever be a non-perk.
-
I hate to break it to you, but the La-7, P-51, Spitfire IX, and N1K2 will never be perked. They've been running about 40% of the kills and 60-70% of the usage for the past year now at least.
One thing you need to get through your heads. HTC doesn't give a **** about air combat. They don't care about 'dweeb planes'. They care about money, and that is all they care about. And there have been more people in the MA in the past year then ever before, and do you think they are happy or unhappy about this?
Yes, the Spit IX and N1K2 are 'easymode'. Well, I don't know if you could stretch it that far, but you could make an argument for it. They are the fastest "good turners", so of course they are going to be popular. Look at it like this. By themselves, the Spit IX and N1K2 render about 75% of the planeset useless. Again... if you think HTC cares about that you are deluded. HTC would rather have 5,000 people flying Spits and N1K2s than 4 people flying P40E's or 109F's. And, if choosing between a plane that is faster, turns better, has better firepower, and accelerates better and some other plane.... why on earth would you choose the other plane? You can't expect people to voluntary put themselves at a disadvantage vis a vis anyone else in a game, thats plain ****ing retarded.
Personally, I don't feel that the P-51 needs to be perked. Yes, it is fast, yes it has good firepower, and yes it climbs well. OK, so it is the boom and zoomer of choice. So? It has weaknesses. The biggest one is it accelerates poorly, so if a P-51 pilots finds himself slow and in a crowd of enemies he is in trouble. Second, it is balanced vis a vis the other fast planes- namely the Typhoon, 109G10, and 190D9.
The La7? Well, that renders the rest of the planeset useless. The P-51 outperforms one up high, and the guns are easy to hit with, so the P-51 is still a viable alternative. The La-7 is the suckass pilot's plane of choice. And typically, it shows in the way they fly it. I haven't run into an La-7 pilot yet than I can't kill in a fight about 9 times out of 10, if they fight. Of course, since they KNOW they are suckass pilots, they don't fight. They Bore and Zoom, "fighting" only until they don't have a huge and very clear advantage in numbers and altitude. I think the La-7, more than any other single factor, has changed our main arena into a sissy arena. The LW planes have always had to fight like sissies, since they suck, but there was a stigma attached to them. There is no such stigma attached to the La-7, in fact most of the sissy's flying it are idolized by other people for being such 'smart' pilots.
So, lets say the few hundred 'vets' that aren't happy with the way the game is all decide to quit. Ok, lets make it a round 300. So 300x15 is 4,500. Ok, HTC just lost 4,500 a month. Now lets say HTC gets tired of hearing about how ****ing boring his game is now and decides to change it. Ok, La7/runstang/Spit IX/N1K get perked and the emphasis gets shifted from milkrun/landgrab/gangbang back to air to air combat. Well, unfortunately the 4,000 people that think it is fun the way it is quit. So... 4,000 x 15 is.... 60,000. Which do you think will put a bigger dent in aircraft maintence charges?
So yes, the game has changed a lot from when it was fun. And yes, there are many many times more suckass timid pilots than there were. And if they pay their 15 bucks a month... well, HT has a plane now, so do you think he is happy with the way his game turned out? I do.
-
HTC doesnt care about those asking for a less boring arena?
They are making AH2 arena as their latest project. I think they do care.
Urchin your 4000 people who you seem to think would leave. this figure your favourite number? cant think where esle you got it from because theres no way of knowing who would leave or stay. You have ignored the fact that a lot of people in AH come and go all the time while others stay long term.I think HTC must have a list of long term customers as this is the group whos income he can RELY on. theres probably high numbers of players trying the game for a while and moving on and HTC has to add features and updates to attract new players and maintain interest for longterm players.
HTC I doubt ignore any group of players. Why else would they give us 4 or 5 different arenas?
Im sorry but what you just said was nonsense. Perhaps you might have a point about the p51 or spit as they are so famous but the nik ,La7 ?? people dont come to AH to fly them! most like me when i started have never heard of them.
As for perking the p51D and spit9, well if they were the only models of their type then id agree people would be annoyed if they couldnt fly them but as BOTH have other models which arent perked like the p51b or spit5 I doubt anyone would be that bothered.
Another thing is you seem to think that 4000 people you quote wouldnt be able to grab the next best 4 and continue to have fun.
Mountains out of mole hills urchin. Just like when HTC perked the f4uc.People screamed that the american market would be pissed off and will complain they cant fly the F4uc when they want.AH is ruined they cried! :)
well it wasnt was it. There really wasnt many that couldnt earn the few perks it needed to fly it.People realised they COULD fly it almost whenever they wanted but as it could be a little costly they decided to fly something else MOST of the time and save the f4uc for special occations that it truelly suited. The exact same thing would happen to the top 4 we mention.
They will still be there
they will be easy to afford
there will just be a few less of them around whilst other aircraft take over the popular spot for a while.
'oh this is terrible! nothing will have changed they will call for the next 4 to be perked! blah blah blah' Im sure we'll see this kind of poop too :)
Well when the next 4 aircraft become all too common the old top 4 can be unperked and the new takes their place.
RESULT
constantly shifting choices of engagements.one month its 205s the next its la7s. I think id would be great for the game.
leave things as they are now?
RESULT
quite a few of HTC's longterm reliable custom base will either quit or move on through boredom because of a constantly repetative gameplay.(ie same 4 planes fighting all the time).
I might be wrong here but thats the way I think it would go and im not alone in thinking it.This recent call for perking of the 4 is more a call for some kind of temporary change to tide us over until AH2 than some kind of conspiricy to remove someones favourite plane. No one asked for them to be takken out.
-
Actually I picked 4,000 because I took my lowest rank, which was 3526 in vehicles, and figured that if I've never been in one, there are 3525 people with a higher rank than me. There are also probably some people who have ALSO not been in a GV this tour, and would be tied with me at 3526. I don't think it'd be that great a stretch to say there are 4000 people playing this game- compared to 'mainstream' MMOG's this is small fry.
Actually... let me play devils advocate here. Alright, lets say we want the two best turners perked, and the two best 'runners' as it were. Then the top 4 aircraft get perked every month and the old top 4 get unperked, right? Month 1 : Spit IX, N1K2, La-7, P-51D are top. Month 2: Spit V, Typhoon, probably the Hurricane 2C, and possibly the 190d9 are top. I doubt the 190, I think everyone would be in the Typhoon. Month 3: See month 1, Month 4: see month 2. Yea, what a shocking difference.
-
Yes, people would fly the "next four", but the current "BIG Four" would not drop off the list. They would still be right up at the top, even possibly stil stay as the top four....
Terror
-
I don't think there's reason to be that pessimistic all over what HTC thinks(tho' I do admit it's frustrating some times..).. maybe they'd rethink how perks are applied if there was an alternative that was reasonable enough.
How'z bout the perk list I thought of, Urch? Have you ever read it?
The link is in the sig...
-
Urchin,
Normally you present reasonable arguments, but sometimes you veer off into some other place.
This time that other place was hyperbole.
I do agree that those four aircraft are over used and that, the La-7 in particular, they are too good in relation to the other aircraft.
However:
The Spitfire Mk IX and N1K2 do not make 75% of the planeset obsolete. They do make some aircraft obsolete, such as your P-40E and Bf109F-4 examples, but unless we use a 1941 planeset without including the Spitfire Mk Vb both those aircraft would still be obsolete due to things like the F6F-5 and C.205.
The only aircraft that the Spitfire MK IX and N1K2-J really render obsolete are the aircraft that are the runners up for the fast turn & burn fighters. Remove the Spitfire Mk IX and N1K2 and those runner ups now occupy the top spot and render their runner ups obsolete.
It is simply a matter of picking which aircraft you want at the top of the fast turn & burn list. If HTC wanted the Bf109F-4 and P-40E at the top of the list they would have tp perk an awful lot of other aircraft.
(I also noted that the N1K2 seems to be falling from favor with the dweebs, and that last Tour the La-7 surpassed the P-51D and almost equaled the Spitfire Mk IX).
Furthermore I have seen no evidence that HTC doesn't care. They are busy working on a major upgrade and staleness is to be expected given the length of the dev cycle required for such an upgrade. I have met the HTC staff and none of them meet your description. They are in this business because they like WWII air combat and your portrayal of them as mere corporate flacks is simply wrong.
-
Just a comment on the 4000 people. Industry numbers suggest that at any given time an average of only 5% of game subscribers are online. Up to 10% during peak usage hours. I checked it out when EA would let you download the entire score list, it was pretty accurate. Following those percentages 4k is only about 65% of the total
-
Only read the 1st few posts of this thread but I'd be willing to try about anything for 1 tour if i'd bring more variety to the MA. My $0.02 ;)
-
Yea Karnak, I guess I did take a trip to the land of hyperbolia there, huh? So perhaps some of it was exagerated, slightly.
Actually, I'll give you a list of the planes that I think the Spit IX and N1K2 make pretty much useless. I might miss some planes, but I'll try not to.
P-47 (all of them), P-38, F6F, P-40 (both), F4F (both), Hurricane (all), Mosquito (?), 109 (except G-10), 190 (except D9), 110 (both), C202/205, and Ki-61.
That's all I could pick out in my brief run-through. Also keep in mind that my list is purely A2A combat, I know the Spitfire doesn't carry any sort of heavy A2G load. Now, when I say that these planes become "useless" I don't mean that a Spit IX will utterly dominate these planes in a fight (although it will, assuming the pilot skill is even), I mean that if someone takes the time to compare the planes, he would almost invariably go with the Spitfire (or N1K2, as the case may be, below 10k the planes have almost identical performance). The Hurricane is 'useless' for a different reason- The Hurricane out-turns almost every plane, but then so does the Spit IX and it has much better performance in other areas so there is no point in flying a Hurricane. The rest of them are lacking in speed (the slight top speed advantage doesn't justify the huge losses in the following), acceleration, turning, firepower for most of the planes.
Just to keep it brief, since I have to go to work, the La-7 does the same thing for the 'fast' planes. The Typhoon, P-51D, 109G-10, and 190d-9 are relatively well balanced vis a vis the others. They each have strengths and weaknesses the other planes can exploit. The La-7 has strengths, but no weaknesses to go along with them. So why on earth, if you are a discriminating consumer (read, wannabe fighter pilot) would you fly an inferior plane and voluntarily put yourself at a disadvantage? The answer is, of course, you wouldn't.
And again I'll submit that this is a business, folks. If what HTC is doing has brought more people into the game than ever before... it isn't going to change. That is just the way life is.
-
Originally posted by Urchin
Just to keep it brief, since I have to go to work, the La-7 does the same thing for the 'fast' planes. The Typhoon, P-51D, 109G-10, and 190d-9 are relatively well balanced vis a vis the others. They each have strengths and weaknesses the other planes can exploit. The La-7 has strengths, but no weaknesses to go along with them.
Its "weakness" is comparative performance with altitude........ and in some cases control responce at very high speeds.
My view is that its other weakness's should be armament......... and stability.
In gun range it is disadvantaged but I would go further to perk the 3 gun version over the 2 gun version.
If we ever get to perking different load outs (heavy bombs etc) then I would advocate to perk the La 7's third cannon. (out of over 5000 la7's produced before May 45 less than 400 three cannon versions reached the front).
It is not the stable gun platform presented by any of the other 4 mentioned......... however given some revision and considering a short air frame with massive elevator and rudder surfaces it should be more of a challenge to those wanting fine control.
Added to this if HTC ever model (more fervently) its landing and taxi'ing characturistics it may well become the least popular AC in the arena.
-
Increasing restrictions is not the way to promote diversity. The top utilized plane is used the same % as the 4th utilized plane 2 years ago. The fact that people now have to complain about the 4 most utilized planes instead of the one or 2 most utilized says alot about how much things have changed with the game... and how little its changed with those that feel the need to complain about it.
MiniD
-
Originally posted by Mini D
Increasing restrictions is not the way to promote diversity. The top utilized plane is used the same % as the 4th utilized plane 2 years ago. The fact that people now have to complain about the 4 most utilized planes instead of the one or 2 most utilized says alot about how much things have changed with the game... and how little its changed with those that feel the need to complain about it.
MiniD
Ive never seen someone complain so much about others complaining. Kind of ironic, isnt it?
-
Originally posted by Murdr
Spit9- Good balanced plane, no reason to ever perk.
P51D- Good balanced plane, no reason to ever perk.
N1k-Shouldnt be able to hang on its prop without tourque effects, but its never gonna change, no reason to perk.
La7- Outragous acceleration, can reverse to face a plane, reverse again after the merge, and still run down 90% of the planes in the set in a matter of seconds. No reason to ever be a non-perk.
Spit9- Overused...perk it.
P51D- Overused but used poorly...no perk
N1k- Adjust FM, never perk IJN planes
La7- Perk, or reduce ammo load by 95% :)
Gainsie
-
Originally posted by Urchin
P-47 (all of them), P-38, F6F, P-40 (both), F4F (both), Hurricane (all), Mosquito (?), 109 (except G-10), 190 (except D9), 110 (both), C202/205, and Ki-61.
That's all I could pick out in my brief run-through. Also keep in mind that my list is purely A2A combat, I know the Spitfire doesn't carry any sort of heavy A2G load. Now, when I say that these planes become "useless" I don't mean that a Spit IX will utterly dominate these planes in a fight (although it will, assuming the pilot skill is even), I mean that if someone takes the time to compare the planes, he would almost invariably go with the Spitfire (or N1K2, as the case may be, below 10k the planes have almost identical performance). The Hurricane is 'useless' for a different reason- The Hurricane out-turns almost every plane, but then so does the Spit IX and it has much better performance in other areas so there is no point in flying a Hurricane. The rest of them are lacking in speed (the slight top speed advantage doesn't justify the huge losses in the following), acceleration, turning, firepower for most of the planes.
In some cases you are correct, but others, no.
P-40B: Come on, the N1K2 and Spit IX aren't rendering it obsolete, it is rendering itself obsolete. The P-40B is obsolete compared to the C.202. You can hardly blame it's obsolesence on the N1K2 and Spit IX.
P-40E: The Spitfire Mk V and C.205 are markedly better. The P-40E's obsolesence cannot be blamed on the Spit IX or N1K2.
Mosquito: I actually feel fine in combat against either of these aircraft as I know that I out perform them. I know most people probably wouldn't feel that way, but I suspect from the Mossie's K/D ratio that most people think it can't fight back and simply give up when an airbourne enemy fighter shows up. I do not think the Spit IX or N1K2 make the Mossie obsolete.
Fw190s (except the D-9): Like the Mossie they out perform the Spit IX and N1K2. I don't know if they do so as well though. I'd have to play with them more. I will say that I feel quite comfortable in a melee while flying the Fw190A-5.
P-38L: It is the same story as the Mossie, except more so. The P-38L has marked performance advantages that can be relatively easily exploited in order to beat the Spit IX or N1K2.
F4F-4: This is an out dated aircraft, and like the P-40's it can't simply be blamed on the Spit IX and N1K2 as removing those would not remove it from the list of obsolete aircraft. In fact it's performance is so poor that removing those two aircraft wouldn't affect its usage at all.
FM2: This think is a built N1K2 killer. If anything, the N1K2 gives the FM2 a reason to be used. Don't know how it stacks up with the Spit IX.
P-47s: See Mossie: They are, so far as I can tell, essentially used the same and should have the same success.
Hurri I: See P-40B and F4F-4.
Hurri IIc: See FM2.
Bf110s: Spitfire Mk IXs should, based on historical anctedotes, make this obsolete. Every Allied fighter pilot I've ever heard a comment regarding the Bf110 from considered it a free kill essentially. The N1K2 being a similar aircraft should have much the same affect on it. The only way to change this is to artificially promote the Bf110 by removing all those things which would otherwise stomp it.
C.202: See P-40B and F4F-4.
C.205: Yes, this one is rendered obsolete by the Spitfire IX and N1K2 if selecting only the best is the criteria.
F6F-5; See C.205, except that it retains usefulness even with the Spit IX and N1K2 in existance because it is carrier based.
Bf109s (except G-10): The F-4 is pretty well screwed, but the G-2 has some advantages and I imagine the G-6 probably does too.
Ki-61: It is too underpowered to really be in the running. I put it about on the level of the Bf109F-4. It is good, but there are other things (like the C.205) that are between it and the Spit IX and N1K2.
For me, it is the fast planes that are damaging the game. They are the things that allow the one way fuel pork trips to be a sure bet. They are the things that force most of the aircraft on your list to turn and become meat for the N1K2s and Spit IXs. If not for the fast, 1944 kites most of those aircraft could play with the Spit IX and N1K2 at their leisure. The La-7 is my single biggest gripe, and it is becoming more and more common. It actually overtook the P-51D and is closing on the Spit IX. The La-7 has far more impact on my game than the other three of the big four combined. P-51Ds I respect, but Spitfire Mk IXs and N1K2-Js I simply regard as juicier kills because of their low ENY values.
Tilt,
As to the La-7's disadvantage is poor performance at altitude::rolleyes:
Cry me a river.
A) The vast, vast, vast majority of fighting in AH is at low altitude.
B) It is far,far easier to escape to low altitude than it is to escape to high altitude.
The La-7's low altitude optimization is an advantage, not a disadvantage. The Ta152H-1 and Spitfire Mk XIV got jacked because they are perked due to their performance at high altitude, even though that is pretty useless in AH.
The guns on the La-7 are nothing special, good or bad. They are simply adequate.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Tilt,
As to the La-7's disadvantage is poor performance at altitude
Cry me a river.
despite sarcasm............still true tho
A) The vast, vast, vast majority of fighting in AH is at low altitude.
B) It is far,far easier to escape to low altitude than it is to escape to high altitude.
also true.......unless your trying to dive away from a D9, p51 or G10.
The La-7's low altitude optimization is an advantage, not a disadvantage.
At higher alt it is disadvantaged against other AC
The Ta152H-1 and Spitfire Mk XIV got jacked because they are perked due to their performance at high altitude, even though that is pretty useless in AH.
Really?
The guns on the La-7 are nothing special, good or bad. They are simply adequate.
true... or in comparison with every other AC listed on the "uber"list .......less than adequate.
Its still a very good ride however.......
-
Originally posted by Karnak
They are the things that force most of the aircraft on your list to turn and become meat for the N1K2s and Spit IXs. If not for the fast, 1944 kites most of those aircraft could play with the Spit IX and N1K2 at their leisure. The La-7 is my single biggest gripe, and it is becoming more and more common. It actually overtook the P-51D and is closing on the Spit IX. The La-7 has far more impact on my game than the other three of the big four combined. P-51Ds I respect, but Spitfire Mk IXs and N1K2-Js I simply regard as juicier kills because of their low ENY values.
What he said.
Gainsie, guess we agree to disagree on the spit9. Its amount of usage doesnt bother me a bit. Btw whats the number of the spit9s produced? Just curious if it is as lopsided as N1k and La7 usage in AH.
-
There were approximately 300 Merlin 61 powered Spitfire F.Mk IXs built. This is what we have in AH.
But before you get irritated, there were more than 3,000 much better Merlin 66 or Merlin 70 powered Spitfire LF.Mk IX or Spitfire HF.Mk IXs built.
There were just over 400 N1K2's built and , IIRC, a bit more than 5,000 La-7s built.
-
And of those 5,000 I think what, 180 or so had 3 cannons? Might have been 280, can't remember correctly. And every single La-7 in the MA has 3 cannons, at least the ones being flown by people with even an eighth of a brain.
Regarding your responses- Of course I know some of the planes out there aren't competitive against anything. I don't even know why some of them are in the game. I'm not that familiar with the Mosquito, I don't fly it. I don't have any trouble killing one in anything, so I'd assume it would be even easier in a Spit/N1K. The only 109 with a large speed advantage over the Spit IX is the G10. The rest are fast enough to run away, but not fast enough to build up any kind of speed cushion to play in the vertical with. Same with the 190s, except none of them can really go vertical on a Spit IX unless they start with an altitude advantage. Even so, I honestly don't care much about the Spit/N1K's, they are good easy planes to fly and there SHOULD be some planes that allow comparably unskilled pilots to compete on more even footing with everyone else.
I do have a problem with planes that allow unskilled pilots to dominate anyone else, which is why I'd love to see the La-7 perked to about the Tempest's cost. The La-7 is the only plane in the game (other than the Tempest) that allows a completely suckass pilot to do whatever he wants and live, against any plane other than a 262 in a crowd, or another La-7 or Tempest. The La-7 outperforms the Spit 14, F4U-4, and Ta-152... all of which are perked. Furthermore, it outperforms many planes in the exact same way that say the Me-262 outperforms many planes... except it is better.
I also don't see what the huge gripe is about the cannon's on the La-7. Ok, so they aren't Hispanos. That doesn't mean they suck, they have about the same trajectory as a Mg-151 and hit harder, so 3 of them is more than enough for any kind of kill. I think thats some lame bellybutton excuse from the La-7 pilots (along with the "well, well, um.. it sucks at 30k!" argument) to try to make it seem like that plane does in fact have some sort of disadvantage vis a vis other planes.
Tilt- I find it amusing that you apparently haven't discovered the most basic evasive for an el gay 7 pilot yet. If a P-51, D-9, or 109G-10 (although.. if you can't dive away from a G-10 you are messing something up horribly) is diving with you, once you hit the deck just start turning in circles. Once you go around 2 or 3 times, straighten out and run, and by the time any of those planes get their guns pointed on you you'll be 2.0k away and accelerating.
-
Originally posted by Murdr
Ive never seen someone complain so much about others complaining. Kind of ironic, isnt it?
It would be ironic if I were trying to get other people's planes of choice turned into perk planes.
I don't expect you to be able to see the difference.
MiniD
-
just curious, how many of the people in this thread have less than a 1:1 kill ratio on the LA7? It is a good plane, but the way it is usually flown never really impresses me. Only prob with it is when you are low/slow and one latches on, but that prob applies to almost all planes.
-
I think a good pilot could go 8 or 9 to 1 in the La-7 without much effort at all. Probably 80 or 90 to 1 if he flew it like most of the sissy squeakes in the MA fly it. But just flying it 'normally' like another plane, I'd say somewhere in the 8-10 K/D range would be about right. Now most La-7 pilots suck so bad they couldn't take anything 1v1... but how many La-7s do you see flying alone?
-
Big 4 Last 4 Who cares if a vet cant kill a pony or a lag or a spit or nik in his favorite early war or mid war ride well then he sucks. The only time you have to worry about one of the big 4 is if a skilled vet is flying one. But a skilled vet is prolly gonna get you no matter what hes flying. Or your going to have a good fight. I kill the big 4 all day long in f4u-1 and fwa5s and f6fs. I dont understand the vets with the skills some of you have crying about the big 4 your much too good for that. Your greatest threat is the lamer that is going to HO you on every pass. Thats a crap shoot you avoid it most of the time but some times that dedicated lamer HO biotch is gonna get you.
I love getting bounced by high big 4s getting the reversal and waxin them. With out all the lamers flying them. You would run into many more vets in them and then where would you be. In a world of hurt.
Just my opinion but WTF do I know.
-
Murdr,
disagreeing is good :) Spit9 doesn't bother me either, but I wouldn't cry a monsoon if it came with a small tag.
Urchin, I don't think the La-7 "outperforms" the F4U-4. Sure, on the deck it's faster, but the wise pilots learn to keep a harddeck on planes that have high alt advantages. if I get into a 5k firball in a p51, F4U-1-D-C-4, or anything else, then I deserve to get spanked.
No sour grapes here. I enjoy taking the perked rides and seeiong my enemies dive out. I was 32:1 in the hog-4 before my modem crapped out.
I have no solutions, so I guess Im part of the problem, but there should be "some" penalty in ruining an A/C via suicide jabo, or endless furballing. I run the risk 95% of my sorties, so I'm looking for an even playing field.
See you all when I get my internet back...emailing at works gonna get me fired!
Gainsie
-
Originally posted by Urchin
And of those 5,000 I think what, 180 or so had 3 cannons? Might have been 280, can't remember correctly. And every single La-7 in the MA has 3 cannons, at least the ones being flown by people with even an eighth of a brain.
Regardless of brain capacity I fully agree with this point......
I find it amusing that you apparently haven't discovered the most basic evasive for an el gay 7 pilot yet. If a P-51, D-9, or 109G-10 (although.. if you can't dive away from a G-10 you are messing something up horribly) is diving with you, once you hit the deck just start turning in circles. Once you go around 2 or 3 times, straighten out and run, and by the time any of those planes get their guns pointed on you you'll be 2.0k away and accelerating.
Assuming a diving run rather than a low yo yo
If I have not dived at 500 both the P51 and the D9 have caught me.....now I have to scrub speed to gain full stick control while they have very good control ......... this is the la7's most vulnerable period..... ..if I have remained evasive down to 400 then you are right I can simply flat turn or attempt rolling siccors agin the d9 (who may have just zoomed at this point) ........ although if properly flapped the 51 has a few turns on me ...... but usually they zoom now too.
The G-10 can dive with and catch the La7 however it too has lost considerable stick control at the highest speed.
I have no complaints about the La7...... I believe it should have a lower stall point..... however I also believe it should be less stable.......but my evidence for this is not irrifutable.
I agree that an La7 pilot could BnZ with comparitve safety and never get killed. He wont get many kills either although he may garner many assists.
It suits players who prefer this style of play and so they prefer it Remove it and they go to another ride and the effect is unchanged.
I get bored with this and so am easily sucked into inappropriate combat with turners or high alt climbs to P51's & D9's etc.
The acceleration is v good but it cant out run a bullet. I have film when I am agin you (p38) where your speed is continuously 15 / 20mph slower than mine yet your turn rate has produced angles my speed cannot overcome........and indeed you did not need to take snap shots you remain guns on for a considerable period.
OK your angles play and total skill is superior but the point re the advantage of acceleration remains the same. Its advantage is in pursuit not so much defence.
-
Originally posted by icemaw
Just my opinion but WTF do I know. /B]
Good question... :D
Gainsie
PS I dont think we vets are complaining, I'm not, but it is a valid argument. I've lost count of the late war cons that evacuate from co-alt engagements, and that's a drag.
-
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! :D 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.
-
Great post Kweassa!!!
Terror
-
No big deal in perking, marginally, the late 43-44 planeset, sans IJN rides. Consider it a "luxury Tax" for all you rich (in perks) people.
Gainsie
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
Perks do increase diversity.
A well thought out arguement but it hinges totally upon this...........
You show the diversifying effect of perking the Chog.........but then assume that from this, that perking always has a diversifying effect.........
However by perking the 4 (or 5 if you include the Typhoon) how can you be sure that the result would be diversification...... it may even be the opposite ......
The 4 could be replaced by "the new 2" or cod forbid "the new 1" its really a matter of choices and preferences.
I would not be surprised if the Typhoon became very popular should the 4 incur cost. And imagine if it and the P38 were flown by the horde so detested in this debate. Presumably we would then perk them as well.
-
I really need some variety.
AH has got to be one of the few games where you can just log in and use ALMOST any weapon you want without earning it.
Is this what society has come to? A bunch of spolied brats screaming, "I want it and I want it now!".
Does'nt anyone enjoy a challenge anymore? Don't you want to EARN your ride?
I can to AH from a game called Ultima online. When you started there, (It was a Dungeons and Dragons type deal) you were given a dagger, a cloak, 100 gold, and sent off on the world. You would get your butt kicked by a rabbit. NO EXAGGERATION!
So you worked at it. You earned your heavy crossbow or your Londsword, or your Valorite Armor. Sure you got owned ALOT, but it made the rewards that much sweeter. And when you were going into a high risk situation, you took your less expensive weapons. WHy? Because you earned them, and they were too important to you to lose.
Same thing can apply here. Perk ALL planes, except for the very bottom of the barrel. Let the Newbs (and me, I think I have 200 fighter perks in 2 years of flying) and the vets earn their rides.
There will still be plenty of planes to choose from.
And for those that argue that these 4 planes do no present that much of an advantage, why were they made? Because they were advancements over their Predecessors, and obviously were successful. If they were not, the planes fighting WWII in 1945 would have been the same ones fighting in 1939.
Like many, I'm just looking for diversity. I sighed in exhaustion the other night when I looked behind me and all I can see was a conga line of 5 LA-7's chasing my lone F6F.
I respect the man that kills me in the c202.
TOD last week..I got 4 kills ( A miracle ) in a C205 vs. P-40's and Spit Vs. I had a blast flying a new plane.
Would I fly it in the main? Not unless I just want to give away kills. I simply cannot compete in a 205, but would happily fly it if everyone had the same handicap, ie an arena not composed entirely of late war rides.
We need some diversity. We need a challenge. We need something to strive for in this game that will make earning that much more rewarding.
-
LMAO, this is off topic, bbut related to U.O.
One of my former AW squaddies, who everyone hated...was complaining about U.O. he was in a fight with other guys against this monster, and he logged in and helped the party attack it. but then they all backed off, let him get killed, then stole all his stuff...
ROFL...friggin hilarious...I recorded the whole damn story and still laugh my arse off...but I guess you had to be there :(
Gainsie
-
You guys are forgetting the most feared nightmare for a La7, Spit or Niki: Yak9U.
-
However by perking the 4 (or 5 if you include the Typhoon) how can you be sure that the result would be diversification...... it may even be the opposite ......
You're totally correct on that.
That's why I advocate a perk agenda as described in the post in my link. 4~5 planes won't cut it. Perking the entire "section" of fighters from about 1944 onwards, is what I have envisioned.
-
IMO, only a dynamic perk system based on usage has sense. So, the cost of every plane is being recalculated hourly based on usage, that is, take offs. And the perk value keeps there for two hours, independently of the usage. This perk system may assign between 1 and 10 perks to the planes based on usage plus the static perk cost based on country population.
-
Muckmaw youre absolutely right. Ive said the same thing myself before.
Its the carrot and the stick. Basically the fundamental principle behind games of all sorts for hundreds of years.
Show the players the carrots make em work to get the carrot then start all over again with a bigger carrot. :)
Its the basis of video games and IT WORKS!!!.
Take a game like a first person shooter. You play it more and more because you want that next weapon or to see the next level.Remember Half-Life??? .Years ago you flew sims to get the later planes or the next medal or promotion.Remember the classic their finest hour???. You collect your money or peices of the ancient symbol until you gained in level and got that +4 sword!!.Remember Dungeons and dragons??
what kind of games would they have been if everything was there at ther start requiring no effort? We would have played them for a few hours and got bored out of our minds with no real reason to progress onward through the games.
I think the perk system is totally being wasted.Its used half heartedly and so the detractors are claiming it doesnt work. I see these same people saying the rolling planeset idea doesnt work and as ive never seen it being used i have to take their word for it, however i do wonder if the rolling planeset idea has been used before in the same half-hearted non commital way we have used the perk idea. No wonder it never worked. Too many braty kids want everything for nothing in games as well as in life :D , I say make em damn well EARN the goodies.
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
IMO, only a dynamic perk system based on usage has sense. So, the cost of every plane is being recalculated hourly based on usage, that is, take offs. And the perk value keeps there for two hours, independently of the usage. This perk system may assign between 1 and 10 perks to the planes based on usage plus the static perk cost based on country population.
absolutely mandoble.But this would be far too fair for the 'say no to perk crowd' who claim it stops them flying what THEY want to fly.Regardless of the fact 99% of them have 1000's(if not 100's) of perks to use.They often say they got more than they can ever use and yet they refuse to pay 1 to 10 perks for anything when this could make the MA a constantly changing enviroment with a constantly changing top ten of most commonly used planes.
they just say no to it for the sake of being devils advocate if you ask me.that or they too tight fisted to spend those big piles of perks they seem so determined to keep. :)
:)
-
What is clear is that actual perk system has no effect at all. It does not help anymore in country balance, and actual perk planes have minimal use. So we'll keep saving useless perks forever. The only scenary where perks have some usage is just with ground vehicles and the Tiger (and mainly defensive, spawning at their own base), but this is clearly because we have only two tanks in the game.
-
If you perked the top four planes you would see them about as much as you see the f4u1c now
The Chog got more then just perked. It had a bunch of weight added as well. If it still handled as well as it used to, you would see more of them despite the paltry perk cost.
Yet the La7 which outperforms the premodified Chog in every catagory except gun package is unperked. Go figure.:rolleyes:
-
The la7, n1k, and ostwind are cash cows for HT. they will never change.
The N1k will always have its easy mode no torque or other negatives flight model. The la7 will never be perked because n00bs need it to chase crippled planes down and feel special when they manage a kill. The Ostwind the biggest friggen joke in the game. 70 some odd Ostwinds were made, how many kills did they score in real? How many TANKS did they kill in real. Ostwinds will still disable a tank now. In real how many T-34 or Sherman drivers, or even PzKw IV if you wanna get ridiculous wouldnt love to see 5 ostwinds alone coming at him. The lame arsed spray for 10 minutes straight 1 ping kills anything crap that is the cash cow ostwind.
-
So basically we have 3 camps here.
Let me see if I can summarize this argument:
"Perk Everything" crowd:
*Wants Diversity in MA
*Bored of fighting same 4-5 aircraft
*Wants most historical accuaracy
*Wants to be able to compete using early-mid war planes
*Wants to earn their rides, and have all others do the same
"Perk Nothing Crowd":
*Wants almost any plane available at any moment, regardless of skill, or time spent in game
*Happy shooting down the same planes, and cares not what type they are.
*Feels anything that could even possibly restrict their A/C choice is terrible
*Feels Noobs need to be protected from a steep learning curve.
"Hi-Tech's View" (Speculation, of course)
*Keep the planes open to all, so noobs have a chance to learn the ropes on an easy plane, do not get frustrated, and quit, thereby canceling subscription
*Walk a thin line of keeping the Perk and Non-Perk crowds happy so as to not lose subscriptions.
*AH has grown by leaps and bounds..why fix what ain't broken
The more I look at it, the more I think AH is simply becoming Quake with WWII airplanes, and is vulnerable to losing customers if a viable alternative becomes available.
I truly hope AH2 will fix, these problems, but I think many are waiting for this like Christians waiting for the second coming. I don't think AH2 is going to solve everything. If it fails, it could be the end of my AH career.
-
Originally posted by AKWeav
The Chog got more then just perked. It had a bunch of weight added as well. If it still handled as well as it used to, you would see more of them despite the paltry perk cost.
Yet the La7 which outperforms the premodified Chog in every catagory except gun package is unperked. Go figure.:rolleyes:
Weight was not added to neuter or pork the C-Hog, it was added to correct the modeled weight.
Are you suggesting that HT add weight to plane models to pork them to the point that they are on even ground with other planes ?
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
Weight was not added to neuter or pork the C-Hog, it was added to correct the modeled weight.
Are you suggesting that HT add weight to plane models to pork them to the point that they are on even ground with other planes ?
I'm suggesting that some planes be perked to add diversity to the arena. If the Flight Model is correct on an aicraft, don't change it, but use perks to put planes on even ground. At the very least, diversify the arena.
The Chog was a monster, and was therefore perked. Rightfully so. It just so happens, the flight model was wrong as well. Is the plane useless now? Of course not. It's still a great plane but it does not permeate the arena like it once did...that job belongs to the "Big 4".
-
Muck ... That was intended for AKWeav. From what I have read, the weight was added to the C-Hog because they modeled it too light ... not to neuter it. If HTC were to start porking the models to balance, then this game goes down the crapper.
Perk planes for balance ... I am on the fence leaning towards "perking".
-
to much text!! aaaarrrghhh!!!!
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
Muck ... That was intended for AKWeav. From what I have read, the weight was added to the C-Hog because they modeled it too light ... not to neuter it. If HTC were to start porking the models to balance, then this game goes down the crapper.
Perk planes for balance ... I am on the fence leaning towards "perking".
Yes, I knowm but I thought I would share my thoughts so you could start a "perk Mucks bombs" thread.
PERK SLAPSHOT'S LA-7!!!:D
-
Originally posted by muckmaw
Yes, I knowm but I thought I would share my thoughts so you could start a "perk Mucks bombs" thread.
PERK SLAPSHOT'S LA-7!!!:D
Muck ... I have over 5000 perk points, and I have taken a strong liking to the Spit V so perking those planes would not bother me at all.
In other posts, you have introduced the "Carrot" theme. You "must earn your ride", "step up to the challenge".
Why can pilots like Drex, Lev, Mathman, Rude, Toad, Shane, etc ..., who fly these early warbirds, be so damn successful ? ... while scores of other piss and moan. The "Carrot" / challenge for me is to try, thru hard work and getting my bellybutton kicked, aquire the abilities of these guys.
Ya know, you don't really die here ... ya get your bellybutton handed to ya, ya think about what happened and what ya did wrong, ya up another plane and try it again. With persistence, patience, and evaluation, you will eventually get it right.
People are so afraid to die in this game ... like a "plague of huberts" will be cast upon your house if you die. I don't like to be killed as much as the next guy, but I do not lose any sleep over it, I don't destroy keyboards over it, I don't yell at my wife and kids over it, and I don't get nasty with the guy who killed me. I just up another plane and do it all over again ... hopefully better.
I started in the martial arts about 15 years ago, and when I joined the dojo, my goal was to obtain a black belt and to kick my master's ass. Well after many many bruises, dislocated fingers, broken ribs, mild concusion, and many other scrapes, I got my black belt and finally kicked my instructors bellybutton in a tournament. He and I are the best of friends (I married his sister !!!).
I am planning on some day, giving these guys a good fight and maybe kick their bellybutton a few times. Thats my "Carrot".
Perk away ...
-
Are you suggesting that HT add weight to plane models to pork them to the point that they are on even ground with other planes ?
You're reading way to much into my statement. I never said anything about why the weight was added, only the result of that added weight, which is the plane is now virtually unused, yet it maintains a perk cost. The La 7 otoh, surpasses the Chog in almost all performance catagories, and is free to all.
-
Damn slappy you have 5000 perkies. You have come a long way its been a long time since we dueled. Consider yourself called out.
Its time to see if you can snatch the pebble out of my hand grass hopper.
-
Originally posted by AKWeav
You're reading way to much into my statement. I never said anything about why the weight was added, only the result of that added weight, which is the plane is now virtually unused, yet it maintains a perk cost. The La 7 otoh, surpasses the Chog in almost all performance catagories, and is free to all.
I call BS on this.
The F4U-1C has 7750 kills and has been killed 2806 times.
The F4U-1C is still used a lot, and that is despite the base 10 point perk cost. Remove that perk cost and the F4U-1C'll most probably shoot mack up to the #1 spot within a single Tour.
The La-7 also does not surpass the F4U-1C in almost all performance categories.
Speed: LA-7
Roll: F4U-1C
Turn: La-7
Acceleration: La-7
Low Alt Perf: La-7
High Alt Perf: F4U-1C
Firepower: F4U-1C
Ammo Endurance: F4U-1C
Ordinance: F4U-1C
CV Capable: F4U-1C
Durability: ?
Fuel Range: ? (Should be F4U-1C, but there are modeling issues with the La-7 here)
Clearly, as a do everything plane (which seems to be what peopel prefer, the F4U-1C far, far outdoes the La-7.
As to "virtually unused", compare the F4U-1C with some other good, potent and free aircraft and you can see that it is far from unused despite its perk price:
The F4U-1C has 7750 kills and has been killed 2806 times.
The A6M5b has 7698 kills and has been killed 8464 times.
The P-47-D30 has 6107 kills and has been killed 7659 times.
The Bf 110G-2 has 5642 kills and has been killed 7641 times.
The Hurricane IIC has 5320 kills and has been killed 3976 times.
The Yak-9U has 5029 kills and has been killed 4842 times.
The Fw 190A-5 has 4916 kills and has been killed 3155 times.
The La-5FN has 4091 kills and has been killed 3334 times.
The C.205 has 3876 kills and has been killed 3468 times.
The Mosquito Mk VI has 2491 kills and has been killed 2946 times.
The F4U-1 has 2335 kills and has been killed 2214 times.
I submit that the F4U-1C is anything but virtually unused. This is what virtually unused looks like:
The Spitfire Mk I has 458 kills and has been killed 1962 times
The C.202 has 400 kills and has been killed 802 times.
The Bf 110C-4b has 314 kills and has been killed 721 times.
The Hurricane Mk I has 238 kills and has been killed 914 times.
The Hurricane IID has 215 kills and has been killed 825 times.
The Bf 109E-4 has 173 kills and has been killed 416 times.
The P-40B has 147 kills and has been killed 493 times.
Calling the F4U-1C unused is balderdash.
-
Karnak's right.
The current tendency of fighter usage began since Tour29 - with the "Big Four + 1"(La7,P51D,Spit9,N1K2J + Typh), five planes being in the top from that tour till this day.
The F4U-1C usage, since that point, has remained almost constant between 1.6~2%.
It is because the seven most used planes(Big four+1, Fw190D-9, SpitV) make up about half of all the planes you see in the MA(about 50% from since Tour30), that the 1~2% feels like "unused".
However, anything between 1~2% in usage is practically average in usage - no way you can consider it "unused". Get rid of the seven planes in analysis, and consider only the other "competitve" planes, and the F4U-1C is on par with them, despite the perks and added weight.
-
Kweassa, you should consider deaths instead of kills as MA usage indicator. You can kill more than one enemy in a sortie, but you can die only once.
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE
Kweassa, you should consider deaths instead of kills as MA usage indicator. You can kill more than one enemy in a sortie, but you can die only once.
Using deaths makes the HUGE assumption that an equal percentage of take offs in, say, the F4U-1C and C.202, end in successful landings.
Using kills is a far better way to gauge the impact of a given aircraft on the MA.
-
I really liked Kweassa's idea about a floating perk rate based on A/C usage.
Keep in mind, I only have 200 fighter perks, so I'm not talking from an Ivory Tower here. I'd just like to see more diversity in the arena, and more people trying to survive missions.
What's the difference, anyway.
Does HT actually read this board, and grab ideas from it?
Nothing's going to change. At least, not until after AH2.
-
Originally posted by AKWeav
You're reading way to much into my statement. I never said anything about why the weight was added, only the result of that added weight, which is the plane is now virtually unused, yet it maintains a perk cost.
Exactly ... and that is why I did. Mentioning the adding of weight without explanation, in the context of your statement, would leave some to believe that the plane was perked because of usuage and HTC porked the weight to further balance the plane.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Using kills is a far better way to gauge the impact of a given aircraft on the MA.
Kills may be an indicator of impact, but deaths is a much more clear indicator of overusage. Personally, I'm not concerned about the success of a particular plane killing other planes, that is, its K/D ratio. I'm much more concerned about the overusage of planes, independently of their respective K/D ratios.
-
Calling the F4U-1C unused is balderdash.
Without going to the stats page, I can only rely on what I see in the MA. I can't remember the last time I encountered a Chog, but I see multiple La 7s every sortie.
Someone must be passing the word: "Weavs coming! Hide the Chogs, and grab the La 7s!" ;)
-
On the contrary, about 1/3rd of every Hog I see, especially during CV-Land base battles, is a Chog. Yesterday I met and fought two Chogs at a same base.
Stats will prove, that you see about as many Chogs as you encounter those occasional 109G-2s, Fw190A-5s, C.205s and etc.
As I've mentioned, it is solely due to the fact that the top seven planes have more than 50% usage, that gives the impression that all other planes are not really used.
-
I completely disagree kweasa... you assume virtually every aspect of your theory. When was the highest spike in usage for the P51, Spit 9, La-7 and N1K2?
Virtually every release except 1.04 (fixed e bug) saw a decrease in the big 4 listed above. The N1K2 and Spit IX are seeing very stablized trending... as are all the other planes. The only plane seeing a steady climb in usage is the La-7. All of the other 3 have seen all time lows in usage at some point between tour 30 and now... with overall averages being lower for % usage.
Basically, usage of the top planes dips with the introduction of new planes. The biggest spike in their usage came with the perking of the CHog. Boredom seems to lead to increased usage of the top planes (the month after a new release) as the novelty of new planes wears off.
Perking the planes will just cause a huge spike with the next highly used planes in the top 10. Their overall average % will go up and everybody posting here will pretend its for some other reason once again.
Perking the top plane caused a major jump with the next 4 in line. What do you think is going to happen if you perk the top 4... other than the next 4 seeing a major jump in usage?
MiniD
-
AKWeav,
You've killed two F4U-1Cs and been killed by them three times this Tour.
-
Karnak, I've killed 5 La 7s, and been killed 10 times by them this tour. So thats 5 Chogs vs 15 La 7s. Of course thats not counting the ones seen but not encountered, on both sides of the fence.
You might also have noticed that only two other items have a higher kill rate on me, the Ostwind, and the Spit 9. Been killed 15 times by each.
Rather fond of the Zeke and Mossie ain't cha?:D
-
Originally posted by AKWeav
Rather fond of the Zeke and Mossie ain't cha?:D
Yup.:D
-
Originally posted by Terror
The "Big Four" have 39.8% of all A2A kills in the MA. PERK the "Big Four". See for yourself in the Tour40 Fighter Stats page HERE (http://www.dbstaines.com/TourStats/Tour40/Tour40.htm). It takes the next THIRTEEN planes to equal the kill percentage of these four!!!!
Spitfire Mk IX -- 6pts
LA7 -- 5pt
P51d -- 5pts
N1K -- 4pts
This will bring *some* variety into the MA!!!
Terror
Why is that in the name of variety, some try to limit what others can fly? There is no valid reason why those planes should be perked. None of those planes are a threat to game play balance and the excuse "most people fly them" isn't a valid reason, just a copt out.
For every 1 good attribute of those planes, there are at least two negative ones.
Ack-Ack
-
Because variety and balance cannot be achieved without artificial intervention. The whole "natural equilibrium" concept is bullshi*. It has always been.
Ofcourse, that'll probably lead to the discussions on whether if we really need "variety" and "balance" at all...
Which in that aspect, AH does not need to grow any further anymore. Because anything that will not see use, is a mere waste of time and money for HTC.
So, if we want merit for more planes and more features, and if you want to shoot down more different planes in many different types of battle conditions(which, I probably think has to do a lot with what people call "the fun factor"), we need variety and balance.
Ofcourse, some people may not be bothered by fighting the same handful types of planes over and over and over and over again - their concept of fun lies with pure contest of ACM, or that's what they say at least.
Which is kinda puzzling since they don't seem to like an idea of a air combat sim with just one or two planes modelled, but investing all the rest of the development time into developing realistic features and eye-candy. Apparently, according to their logic, it won't matter if they had only one plane, as long as they have someone to fight.
But of course, in reality, people won't pay to fly an online game with one plane. So I guess the basic fundamentals for "fun" is pretty much set - lot of different planes to enjoy.
..
So then, how will they enjoy those different planes when certain conditions of the game promote the use of only certain aircraft types?
Yup, nobody forces them to use the "big four", but it's just a conclusion they reached on their own - they like fun in variety, but they also like the fun in killing stuff.
They grow tired in fascinations to other wonderful different plane types when they get repeatedly shot down by the fastest and turniest of them all. In the fastest, you may not win, but at least you won't lose much. In the turniest, at least you get to kill one, before getting killed(but if it's too turny and too slow at the same time, they won't get a killing chance, so naturally they flock to the next turniest, but also averagely fast planes..).
..
So basically that's the logic behind limiting choices. There can be a natural method of limiting overuse - via changing the very fundamental aspects of the MA so people naturally achieve variety, or artificially limiting choices through perks.
The first method is preferred, and it is the most idealistic of all solutions but it takes time and money, and besides, the power's not in our hands to do so. We don't have the power to force the second method, but it provides easy temporary solution which can be experimented and fine tuned, so it provides comfort and satisfaction until the developers can really tune the more important issues.
-
in answer to the pure acm aspect, this game is at its peak when a good fight is in progress. I don't mean just a one on one, but a duel pitting the machine's best traits against another, one where you can see the brilliance of the other pilot in action, win or lose. There are some sticks in here that when encountered make the game worth playing. I have had recent fights that wrung me and my plane out. I can fight to the limit of my plane and my skill in any plane, but I don't want ride selection to become a major issue, it would be like a ladder game. Let the super planes of yesteryear roar to life, if only virtually. Let the acm begin, and lets see who's skill is triumphant. [hats off to recent pilots who showed great skill..some too much - ammo, some of the ak's, terror, silat, murdr, and ahem drex and his wingy second fiddle guy ;), who shot down me and my wingy, both being second fiddles ]
-
Originally posted by Ack-Ack
Why is that in the name of variety, some try to limit what others can fly? There is no valid reason why those planes should be perked. None of those planes are a threat to game play balance and the excuse "most people fly them" isn't a valid reason, just a copt out.
Ack-Ack
For goodness sake, we're talking about 5 perks per ride. At best.
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
Because variety and balance cannot be achieved without artificial intervention. The whole "natural equilibrium" concept is bullshi*. It has always been.
Ofcourse, that'll probably lead to the discussions on whether if we really need "variety" and "balance" at all...
Which in that aspect, AH does not need to grow any further anymore. Because anything that will not see use, is a mere waste of time and money for HTC.
This is perhaps the biggest load of crap I've seen you write. Pure and simple.
You just said that restriction and limitation will promote variety. Really... you did. So, if we want merit for more planes and more features, and if you want to shoot down more different planes in many different types of battle conditions(which, I probably think has to do a lot with what people call "the fun factor"), we need variety and balance.
There will never be balance. never. To argue based on it is simply being obtuse.
Of course, that leaves variety... but then again... we should restrict existing planes and not bother with adding more... right?
"If you don't use the planes we already have, we're just not going to make more." Damn glad you're not in charge at HTC kweassa.
I checked your stats Kweassa... Of 88 fighter kills, you've shot down 30 different fighters. Did you expect that to be 70 different fighters? I mean really?
Your deffinition of variety and blance is based on some kind of wouldn't it be wonderfull fantasy that could only be met by either killing variety or admitting balance is not really necessary.
40% of the arena chooses to fly the big 4. But you are 9 times more likely to encounter an aircraft that isn't a p-51 than one that is. 9 times more likely to encounter an aircraft that isn't an La-7 than one that is. 9 times more likely to encounter an aircraft that isn't a Spit IX than one that is. You are twice as likely to see an aircraft that isn't one of the above, than one that is. The numbers show all of this kweassa. Your hypothetical situations and one sided observations carry no weight.
MiniD
-
Originally posted by Ack-Ack
Why is that in the name of variety, some try to limit what others can fly? There is no valid reason why those planes should be perked. None of those planes are a threat to game play balance and the excuse "most people fly them" isn't a valid reason, just a copt out.
For every 1 good attribute of those planes, there are at least two negative ones.
Ack-Ack
I agree with you 75%. One place the 4 add to game play balance is trying to hold back the pig pile. When the primetime land grab starts. There are always players who will take the task of close base defence, and its foolish in many situations not to take one of those planes. Meanwhile the more seasoned pilots are upping their ride of choice at a rear field. I can see where the absence of those planes would affect MA play in that respect. Who wants to throw away perks, no matter how small, on repeated suicide defense sorties.
The only part I disagree about is the performance of the La7. Its not its speed, the dora is almost as fast, the 51d is alot faster in some situations. It is its acceleration. To anyone in the "mix it up" crowd it is almost pointless to bother with E managment because the la7 negates it in almost all of the planes. It can accelerate from 275 to top speed in about 12 seconds on the deck. With that kind of acceleration it can start at cruise speed, pull a 360, and run down most of the plane set AC going by it in a straight line at its respective Wep speed in a matter of seconds. Akak, I saw elsewhere where you replied to someone to learn to kill them. That is not the point. Come down in the dirt and play sometime and see how it can throw away E like its free (because it almost is) and beat your best efforts to keep the E you have. Thats my opinion, Ive seen it do too many things that only perk planes are able to do.
-
IMO, many are off base re: guaging the use and success of an a/c and using the info as an indicator of impact on the arena or effectiveness.
If a country or two gangs another country, and one of the gangers has a bunch of pilits who fly Lala's or Spittys etc., it doesn't seem to me to be that they are more effective; it just means there are a lot more of them.
The numbers issue has to be figured in somewhere, because it has a lot to do with advantage.
So any a/c in use in the MA has to be evaluated for effectiveness based upon conditions in the arena. If there was a month in the MA that saw mostly furballing, I am certain the numbers of popular a/c in use would change, or perhaps, if a study were done to see the effects of country changes (by squads that still do it); perhaps the numbers might change as well.
IMO, there is no way a spit fire or a Lala could impact an arena in significant ways; mostly due to pilit quality as well as utility of plane types.
-
For the record... I support Kweassa's proposal to perk very lightly the late war planes. Even though this means that 99% of my sorties will have to be in a different plane.
--------------------------------------------------------
Regarding the worries about the F6F becoming the new suicide JABO plane here is the following data that tends to support the idea that it will not.
1) F6F only has a 30 min fuel supply.
2) Auto climb speed is a miserable 155mph.
3) Time to climb to 20,000' is 12 min 15 seconds with a full ORD and fuel load. 10,000' around 5 min. No WEP usage.
4) It isn't particularly fast or horribly manueverable.
5) Many dedicated JABO planes and light bombers perform better and carry heavier loads. They can climb faster and have greater fuel endurance.
6) Sortied against 2 Knight and 2 Bishop bases. The result 1 SpitIX, 1 N1K, and 2 LA7s. Didn't even get my ord off once, died all 4 times, managed to take the N1K with me, missed my target because I was rushed once.
--------------------------------------------------------
Regarding the worry over not perking the SpitIX. Don't worry about it much. The Spit is fairly self limiting. Low ammo and fuel loadouts prevent this plane from being to extreme. It is fairly fragile and easy to destroy as well. Of course this means we have to continue to deal with the Spit HO but hell someone will always go for a HO no matter what we do.
--------------------------------------------------------
Everyone please keep in mind that Kweassa is not proposing a permanent, sweeping change. He is asking that the system already in use be tweaked for a trial period. Perhaps he would get more support if instead of a month of trial it becomes instead just one week. Certainly HTC would see this as easier since it means changing just one map for the new perk values. If the change was inserted at the beginning of the month it would be easy to examine the differences caused in the stats. If it was done in the middle no great issue it can still be figured out.
--------------------------------------------------------
Now let us consider why the change is even being proposed.
It certainly appears that the late war planes are unbalancing. Yesterday, I was defending against a NOE raid. The planes... SpitIXs used as air-superiority fighters and P51s being used as the Jabos. That is right Pony's flying heavy on the deck!?!?! My sorties today in the Hellcat resulted in the predicted N1K, Spit, La7 response. How many times have I been attacked by these planes after a Jabo strike; far, far more than is reasonable. Why are the late war planes unbalancing? Simple, by the end of the war every country had refined their aircraft designs to make them the best they could be. All of these late model planes are superior to the previous models. What we are seeing in the MA is everyone leaning toward the best possible plane. The effect is exactly the same as the desire to acquire the "+20 vorpal bunwhacker" in UO, Everquest, etc. What has been seen in those games however is that since it is the best weapon everyone wants one and after a stunningly short period of time everyone has one. Anyone who doesn't have one can not compete against other players. After awhile when the critters are upgraded to deal with the threat of this weapon people without can't compete against the critters either. The late war planes are the "+20 vorpal bunwhackers" of this game.
---------------------------------------------------------
Awhile ago I was stunned to see a P40 come up in response to a JABO run in my P38 I blasted it out of the sky while still loaded down with bombs with a shot from it's 10 oc and went on with my run. No great surprise the pilot came back up in a LA7 and zapped me on my egress. Why relate this story? Well because first of all I had forgotten that P40s were even in the game. Second, because I managed a 6 shot while still loaded with ord. Third, because right after that I got blasted by a LA7. Fourth, because this pilot relented to grabbing a LA7 because he knew that it was his only real option.
--------------------------------------------------------
OK, the cons to this proposal. I have to relearn defensive and offensive strategies for dealing with planes. At this point most of the time I'm engaged with something besides the top 4 I'm thinking in terms of which of the top 4 this particular plane is like.
Next it means that I'll actually start spending my perk points for real instead of hoarding them.
If this proposal is implemented I'll also have to sift through whining by those pilots who don't even know other planes exist. Naturally, these pilots have chosen these planes because they are the best and they worry about having to fly something that is not the best. Of course they miss the point that everyone else will stop flying the uber planes as well.
Last but not least it could mean an end to the "lemming horde" attacks by the Bishops in the Eastern Standard morning flying Typhs. Instead of 15 to 20 Typhs immolating a base I could be facing 45 to 60 B17s in close formation. 50 cals coming out of the sky like rain. So many that the sky is darkened. Since my favorite bomber interceptor the 190D9 would also be off the list I'd have to use... gasp... the 190A8 which was actually made to kill bombers.
-
scJazz I agree.
I like some early war planes but every time I up one I get killed outright by late war uber planes.
If thats not limiting my choice, I dont know what is.
I dont think they will try it though :(
But I'll cross my fingers. :)
-
Things aren't that optimistic anymore, Jazz, since I've discovered some grim truth by analyzing more tour stats.
Basically, I'm afraid a single NPA(new perk agenda) perk list cannot solve all the major problems, like I thought it would.
The over-abundance of late war fighter-bombers negating the existence of jabo planes, and suicidal jabos totally porking a field, will be solved, I have confidence in that.
But the major issue we have at hand - the pleasure of meeting and battling a variety of wonderful planes - may not be solved with my NPA.
Thus, now, my position has changed, that the NPA can't cut it alone. We need a system that includes CP(constant perk) via the NPA, plus an additional backup system using DP(dynamic perk).
Ofcourse, the desired secondary effects of the NPA will probably increase the gameplay more than as it is currently, but the variety issue may not change.
The explanations, can be found in the latest two articles I posted at the NPA thread. Follow the link in the sig.