Myth: SpitXVI is "slow"

[crazyivan]

So a Spitfire LFIXc would be fine, just not a Spitfire LFXVIe?

You are basically saying that any RAF birds beyond 43 should be perked at this point.  Tiffie is 42, Spit IX is 42 version.  Spit VIII is 43.   The 44 Spitfire XVI should be perked to go along with the Spitfire 14 of 1944 and the Tempest of 1944.  

I guess in the end I question why do you care so much?  Do you get beaten down by Spit 16s in the MA?  

More folks are flying 109K4s these days.  I think we should perk em.  I see way too many guys flying them now.  They've got other 109G variants they can fly right?  How dumb would that be?  But it's the same argument.  I could add that the 109K4 drivers tend to be better sticks too so it's even more unfair to the rest of us!  Force em into another bird!  They're unbalancing the arena!  Get rid of the 51D, I see to many!  Perk it!  Make them fly 51Bs instead.  6 50s is unfair!

Quit whining, and start shooting the 16s down.  You aren't going to make folks fly birds you want them to fly.

Why not just go into the arena, take the challenge of fighting them and do it?  

There is no point in even discussing it with you.  You've claimed some sort of high ground on this one, and there is nothing anyone could say because you've decided and that's it.

And do answer the question.  Would an LFIXc be ok with you instead of an LFXVIe?

wow, let me not get into a verbal confrontation with you. And well said .

[Kev367th]

So basically the clipped wing is the issue.  The better roll rate and the limited speed increase from it makes it too much.  There goes my Spit XII right out the window then.

One other fundamental AH truth you might want to factor in to your crusade to perk the 16.  Remember what the AH world was before the 16.  It was LA7s.

And the greatest gift the 16 gave to the game was the Air Quake crowd got a bird they figure they can beat anyone with, and they started to stay in and fight instead of going light speed, shooting running 3 sectors and repeating it going the other way.

I'd take a crowd of 16s that think they can out fly my 38G then a crowd of LA7s that wouldn't even consider sticking around to fight.  You won't drive the horde into lesser birds, just the one they think is the latest and greatest.  Remember 16 is a bigger number then 9 so it must be a better plane.

That in itself makes the 16 a bird that should never be perked.  The Air Quake crowd won't move back to Spit 8s or 9s.  They'll be back in LA7s. 

Score 1 to the Gupster.

Many of us remember pre XVI times when you did nothing but chase La7's all over the map.

Perk the XVI, and all you do is go back to hoards of running LaLa's.

BnZ - Also if you want to perk the XVI to help increase plane variety, then better look at perking the Pony also, I believe it has been the most used plane for many tours now.

[Kazaa]

Please no, I don't want to start chasing La7s again!

[Saxman]

Perk the XVI, and all you do is go back to hoards of running LaLa's.

Wait, how is this any different from now?

[bucew]

i looked at some numbers 

tour 108: Spit 16 k/d 1.05
tour 109: Spit 16 k/d 1.06
tour 110: Spit 16 k/d 1.08
tour 111: Spit 16 k/d 1.10
tour 112: Spit 16 k/d 1.07

in those tours P-51D had 48%, 40%, 27%, 18% and 22% more kills than spit 16, successively. Also pony had better k/d ratio.
so ... yea .... spit 16 is unbalancing plane in LW arena and should get perked

[BnZs]

So basically the clipped wing is the issue.  The better roll rate and the limited speed increase from it makes it too much.  There goes my Spit XII right out the window then.

Without a clipped wing, all Spitfires have at least one weakness...poor roll at high speed. Again, you act like it is simply awful and a death sentence to fly a Spitfire that actually has a major weakness. As I pointed out before, the SpitIX was one of the most popular and effective MA planes before the VIII and XVI were added. Yet you will sit here and tell me that even the VIII is not effective enough to compete in the LW MA with a straight face.

That in itself makes the 16 a bird that should never be perked.  The Air Quake crowd won't move back to Spit 8s or 9s.  They'll be back in LA7s. 

First of all, the La7 also deserves a light perk price. Second, I highly doubt your logic. The La7 is inferior to the Spit16 in every way except top speed. The Spit8 would be the next logical plane of choice for someone who prefers the Spit16. The La7 is simply nowhere near the fighter any Spit is in average hands. If I'm destroying an La7 OR forcing it to run, either option is fine by me. If I wanted to be snide about it, I'd say something along the lines of, what's a matter Gupp, don't have the skillz to sucker a fast plane in, force him to overshoot, and snap-shoot him?  But we are both too good to use the tactics of feces-throwing monkeys, something which unfortunately is not universally true of the entire BBS.

[BnZs]

And if you look at P-38J numbers, it has a higher k/d than both of them. Thus the irrelevancy of k/d numbers is demonstrated.

i looked at some numbers 

tour 108: Spit 16 k/d 1.05
tour 109: Spit 16 k/d 1.06
tour 110: Spit 16 k/d 1.08
tour 111: Spit 16 k/d 1.10
tour 112: Spit 16 k/d 1.07

in those tours P-51D had 48%, 40%, 27%, 18% and 22% more kills than spit 16, successively. Also pony had better k/d ratio.
so ... yea .... spit 16 is unbalancing plane in LW arena and should get perked

[Anaxogoras]

Didn't the La-7 have its wings clipped (pun intended) when it was updated?  I know it was only supposed to be changes in handling that occurred, but whatever they did drove the masses away from it.

If the Spit XVI were perked you'd see most of those pilots go the VIII.  I'm sure some would go to the La-7, N1K and others, but more than 50% would stick with the Spitfire series.

Don't go after me for this please.  I'm enjoying the peanut gallery.

[BnZs]

If HTC perks it, they perk it (they won't, it isn't imbalancing anything), but I am done talking about it to you.  You are convinced you are correct and nothing anybody else, nor any evidence, will change your mind.

By God sir, between the two of I am the one who has bothered to get evidence. You are the one who has irrelevancies such as "But this Spitfire Mk is actually equivalent to one from 1943!", which does not change the relative performance of the bird one bit, and who consistently ignores the fact that usage and k/d can be warped by a great many factors other than actual effectiveness. You are unable to distinguish between a mediocre performing plane whose popularity does not effect the viability of practically anything else in the MA vs. a superbly performing machine whose popularity darn well does effect the viability of many otherwise potentially useful rides in the MA. If I were to take up a position equivalent to yours as regards USN planes, I would be lobbying to get the F4U-4 unperked as we speak.

[BnZs]

Didn't the La-7 have its wings clipped (pun intended) when it was updated?  I know it was only supposed to be changes in handling that occurred, but whatever they did drove the masses away from it.

I find it quite a fine bird yet, in fact it is easier to see out of now with changes to the framing. I think there is certain amount of "urban legend" about the Lala being rendered horrible. It reminds me of how Soda's reviews of the P-51 and Ta-152 probably lead to a great deal of their use/disuse respectively...

[Anaxogoras]

And if you look at P-38J numbers, it has a higher k/d than both of them. Thus the irrelevancy of k/d numbers is demonstrated.

The problem with these threads is that you have to refute the same tired arguments every time before real discussion begins.  It's a task of Sisyphus.

Join my camp and tell them that they're wimps if they don't agree that the XIV and C-Hog should be unperked.

[BnZs]

The problem with these threads is that you have to refute the same tired arguments every time before real discussion begins.  It's a task of Sisyphus.

Join my camp and tell them that they're wimps if they don't agree that the XIV and C-Hog should be unperked.

The ONLY defensible reason for keeping the C-Hog perked is to keep the other 1-Hogs in use instead of this historically rare variant. There are other free quad-cannon birds in the game.

This is a reason I accept. It also means that reasons for perking an airplane can be diverse and not entirely consistent. Which is also fine. But because the reasons behind perking are diverse and inconsistent, don't hit me with the phrase "It's not unbalancing!!!" and expect that alone to stand as a valid argument.

[Saxman]

Unperked Charlie wouldn't change my usage at all. Just like now, I'd still use her primarily for air to ground work when the 1D doesn't quite have the firepower I want, and the 1A for air-to-air.

[BnZs]

Unperked Charlie wouldn't change my usage at all. Just like now, I'd still use her primarily for air to ground work when the 1D doesn't quite have the firepower I want, and the 1A for air-to-air.

And I fly a bloody A5 around quite abit when I could just as easily fly a Dora, but what is your point? Unperk the C-Hog and it will be majority of Corsairs. Mind you, its formidable gun package is *not* enough to justify perking it when other rides sport quad cannons, so the *only* reason left is to force people into other varieties of Hog.

[waystin2]

Mind you, its formidable gun package is *not* enough to justify perking it when other rides sport quad cannons, so the *only* reason left is to force people into other varieties of Hog.

I concur.