Why the disparity between aircraft and vehicle perks?

[Vinkman]

The Yak3 can dictate rang on a Spit 9 for as long as it wants...all day long and the Spit will not touch it.   

Again meet me in the match play arena and I will show you that is not true.

As for your last paragraph...I think your point was to devalue what was said by using ad hominem which is a very poor way of arguing as its very transparent and shallow.
     

My last paragraph was sarcasm and humor. Hence the smiley face.

[DmonSlyr]

Again meet me in the match play arena and I will show you that is not true.

My last paragraph was sarcasm and humor. Hence the smiley face.

Vinkman, skill level does not represent the level of the plane. Each plane can be flown to a full envelope, some planes have different envelopes and perform those envelopes better than others. That's just a fact, that's the whole reason why planes got faster and faster and faster over time. Speed is king in real air combat. Agility is king in AH. This makes the Yak3 so much better than the spit based on performance. A smart pilot would not get in a stall fight yak3 vs Spit9, but in a fair 1v1, you fail to realize that the yak could simply and easily out rope the spit on the merge, every time, the spit would be in the defense the entire fight. Whether or not the spit pilot has more skill vs the yak3 pilot is not based on the pure performance of the plane. I'm sure players could run circles on me with a P40 agaisnt their spit16. Doesn't mean I wont give them a hard time, but they should have the advantage the entire time, it should be a no contest.

The MA is far different that 1v1. The MA requires a lot more indepth SA and a lot more indepth understanding of how each plane performs. A yak3 in the MA is far superior in every way compared to the spit9. They were built long before. What we are trying to say is, The fights overall would be more fun, and more close combat if everyone flew in midwar planes most of the time. A small perk on late war planes would achieve this. An ecosystem is good with sharks, but not too many. Right now, there is just too many yak3, 190Ds, and P51Ds, to run away and pick when the advantage comes, this creates poor slow game play because the fights are more drawn out. 

[waystin2]

I think they should perk planes based on usage/impact in game using real statistics not subjective opinions.  I see no planes that are not currently perked that deserve a perk at this time.  However, there are some planes that are due for some ENY adjustments based on usage/impact in game.

[bustr]

You would create a new pecking order of aircraft use based on a player's tolerance for risk. The same people who are risk averse in the late war aircraft will not suddenly become fire breathing risk takers extraordinaire. Forced to settle with lesser rides they would once again determine what rides give them the best chances to run away at will and stick with those.

The risk averse in life outnumber risk takers and are the norm. When you have 100 players in the MA where the norm for risk takers is 10-12% of the population. Even as shown in WW2 with that percentage, there are more in the 10-12% who will tend towards a conservative approach(risk tolerance again) versus fly into 50 109's and attack them to defend their bombers. When we had 300 players in the MA, the chances of running into a top tier risk taker was high and made it look like more existed than there was. The risk takers made the DA look crowded because they naturally found each other and competed taking risks which was their form of fun.

Because of our low numbers it's obvious the majority of customers are risk averse and their choice of things to do and methods to accomplish them reflect this. It's insultingly obvious to the risk takers(constantly complaining in the forums about it) who are generally intolerant to understanding what makes the risk averse not want to fight. And bores them because they cannot always get at the few other risk takers for fights. While the risk averse just run away when things start getting good for the risk takers. Forcing everyone into lesser aircraft for their own good to have fun, will just make them runaway from you slower while you chase them slower. 

Funny thing with the risk averse you used to see in the DA furball lake and still in the WWI arena. When it's obvious they are fighting against players in their general skill level and risk tolerance. They stay around, fight and take risks. They start loosing interest as the number of risk takers goes up. Guess they don't like being cannon fodder after they were having so much fun.

[DmonSlyr]

You would create a new pecking order of aircraft use based on a player's tolerance for risk. The same people who are risk averse in the late war aircraft will not suddenly become fire breathing risk takers extraordinaire. Forced to settle with lesser rides they would once again determine what rides give them the best chances to run away at will and stick with those.

The risk averse in life outnumber risk takers and are the norm. When you have 100 players in the MA where the norm for risk takers is 10-12% of the population. Even as shown in WW2 with that percentage, there are more in the 10-12% who will tend towards a conservative approach(risk tolerance again) versus fly into 50 109's and attack them to defend their bombers. When we had 300 players in the MA, the chances of running into a top tier risk taker was high and made it look like more existed than there was. The risk takers made the DA look crowded because they naturally found each other and competed taking risks which was their form of fun.

Because of our low numbers it's obvious the majority of customers are risk averse and their choice of things to do and methods to accomplish them reflect this. It's insultingly obvious to the risk takers(constantly complaining in the forums about it) who are generally intolerant to understanding what makes the risk averse not want to fight. And bores them because they cannot always get at the few other risk takers for fights. While the risk averse just run away when things start getting good for the risk takers. Forcing everyone into lesser aircraft for their own good to have fun, will just make them runaway from you slower while you chase them slower. 

Funny thing with the risk averse you used to see in the DA furball lake and still in the WWI arena. When it's obvious they are fighting against players in their general skill level and risk tolerance. They stay around, fight and take risks. They start loosing interest as the number of risk takers goes up. Guess they don't like being cannon fodder after they were having so much fun.

100% why the #s are down is because bases are too far away, and people are tired of running 190Ds, hoards of 190Ds, P51Ds, LA7s running them down after take off, and Yak3s with their 5K alt per minute zoom climb (along with spit8, and spit16). If people aren't taking these planes to the full envelope, than they don't understand how good these planes are. Apparently it's hard for yall to grasp this very specific reason on why the #s have died. It is that simple.

Secondly, the Midwar planes do not run away as fast. The speeds are more relative for all planes, and most midwar planes turn well, thus giving people more of a reason to turn and fight.

Slower planes generally create better furballs. Shorter base distance create less time to get to the furball, and more time to actually fight. That is the big picture. This will bring the #s.

 

[Zoney]

100% why the #s are down is because bases are too far away, and people are tired of running 190Ds, hoards of 190Ds, P51Ds, LA7s running them down after take off, and Yak3s with their 5K alt per minute zoom climb (along with spit8, and spit16). If people aren't taking these planes to the full envelope, than they don't understand how good these planes are. Apparently it's hard for yall to grasp this very specific reason on why the #s have died. It is that simple.

Secondly, the Midwar planes do not run away as fast. The speeds are more relative for all planes, and most midwar planes turn well, thus giving people more of a reason to turn and fight.

Slower planes generally create better furballs. Shorter base distance create less time to get to the furball, and more time to actually fight. That is the big picture. This will bring the #s.

Thank you for sharing your guess as to why numbers are down, again.

[Lusche]

Slower planes generally create better furballs. Shorter base distance create less time to get to the furball, and more time to actually fight. That is the big picture. This will bring the #s.

You are projecting your own narrow gameplay preferences on everyone  else. What if many or even most weren't actually looking for 'better furballs'? How do you actually know why people left? Or better, why AH just didn't recruit enough new players, because players do leave games, even great and fun ones, all the time. What is your data base for a whopping '100%' knowledge?

Interestingly enough, we DID have such places for better furballs, the early EW & MW arenas and WWI. After the split about everyone was in EW & MW arenas first. And yet they left to return to LW. WWI was nothing but a close range furball for a month. Then players just went back to LW, never to be seen again for the most part.
If everybody just wanted the best and quickest furballs, why did they leve those places?

On the other hand, AH had all that, the hordes (even more extreme ones than today), the landgrabbing, the utter dominance of a very few 'endgame' fighters. Yet AH's number kept growing for years.

I think your view is much biased and very simplistic. It's as if I would claim "100%, the numbers are down because the central strats are gone" (which is actually my personal pet peeve).

[Zimme83]

The removal of the center strats was a huge misstake imo too, after that strat runs is more about noe and JABOs, if they arent too far away to hit. Bring back the central strats. Some of us do want to do the hour long bomber missions, but there has to be a target Worth the effort..

[Zygote404]

You are projecting your own narrow gameplay preferences on everyone  else. What if many or even most weren't actually looking for 'better furballs'? How do you actually know why people left? Or better, why AH just didn't recruit enough new players, because players do leave games, even great and fun ones, all the time. What is your data base for a whopping '100%' knowledge?

Interestingly enough, we DID have such places for better furballs, the early EW & MW arenas and WWI. After the split about everyone was in EW & MW arenas first. And yet they left to return to LW. WWI was nothing but a close range furball for a month. Then players just went back to LW, never to be seen again for the most part.
If everybody just wanted the best and quickest furballs, why did they leve those places?

On the other hand, AH had all that, the hordes (even more extreme ones than today), the landgrabbing, the utter dominance of a very few 'endgame' fighters. Yet AH's number kept growing for years.

I think your view is much biased and very simplistic. It's as if I would claim "100%, the numbers are down because the central strats are gone" (which is actually my personal pet peeve).

I can tell you why I am thinking of leaving.

#1: I'm an Aussie and when I log on there are usually 20 players on.  There is usually a number of teams of GV base takers one manning or two manning bases ever few minutes.  There is usually no one to fight.

#2 I love fast hard hitting planes, Mossie, Tiffie.  My favourite plane is the Typhoon.  I don't fly it because it is so outmatched by a few planes that are very common.   The La7 and now Yak3 being the most deadly.

# I feel almost forced to fly planes I don't like to fly (Spit, LA, Yak, F4U) to compete.

Whether I'm an example of why the average player who starts and quits is quitting is up for debate but these are some things that might be fixed pretty easily:

Planes

Why are most people going for the 5 or 6 specific planes they are?
Can something be done to reduce the number of these planes so more planes are represented in game?
Will perking these planes work?
Can something else be done other than perking?  Carrot rather than stick?
Is the lack of diversity even the reason people are not staying?
Can something be done about AH reality vs WW2 reality (scaling of performance AH vs RL)?

Time Zones
Why are there some many GV base takers in downtime rather than in planes?
Is it because of the nerfed GV icons? Towns too easy to take down with just GV's and no air support?
Is the lack of players on non-prime time hours related to a lack of people in planes because they're in GV's taking bases?  Is the lack of players in non-prime time hours reducing player numbers in non-prime time hours? (does a guy subscribe, find no one to fight in planes, so unsubscribes?). 
Can something be done to alleviate that? Etc Etc.   
Can bases be buffed in non-prime time hours? Etc ETc.

 

[Lusche]

Planes

Why are most people going for the 5 or 6 specific planes they are?

Human nature. AH is a game, and in almost all games players tend to optmimize their choices. You can see similar stuff in AH just like, for example, in Eve online or Elite Dangerous

Can something be done to reduce the number of these planes so more planes are represented in game?
I somewhat doubt it. There will always be a top choice for a certain job, and severe regulations might frustrate many players even more.
Also I believe the AH plane usage is actually quite diverse, but I'm sure we could debate about this for a long time

Will perking these planes work?
To some extend, certainly. But as noted above, you might annoy a lot more people than you might make happy.

Can something else be done other than perking?  Carrot rather than stick?
Honestly, I do not think so.

Is the lack of diversity even the reason people are not staying?
There is no 'The Reason' inasmuch theres a single simple, clear gameplay reason. At times, AH even had strongly rising numbers despite having not more diversity at all. Then back in early 2008 the number stopped out and went donward without any negative change in plane diversity, furball density, base distance


Can something be done about AH reality vs WW2 reality (scaling of performance AH vs RL)?
You mean nerfing a certain plane because it's too powerful? That's not a can, that's a supetanke full of worms you would open with that 


Time Zones
Why are there some many GV base takers in downtime rather than in planes?

Because when about nobody is on, it's the best time to sneak a base

Is the lack of players on non-prime time hours related to a lack of people in planes because they're in GV's taking bases?

The old problem: Correlation or causality?
I can say for myself: One of the reasons I primarily went bombers in my last years of regular playing was the lack of battles in my timezone - no point to fly a fighter. So it was a result of sinking numbers.
Of course such things are rarely entirely unidirectional.

  Is the lack of players in non-prime time hours reducing player numbers in non-prime time hours? (does a guy subscribe, find no one to fight in planes, so unsubscribes?). 

I could imagine that, but only HTC has that data.

 

[Lusche]

A word on plane diversity:

In 2008, the top 5 fighters had 34% of all A2A kills and deaths. Today, it's down to 26%. The top 10 fighters had 51% of all A2A kills+deaths, today it's 44%.
If you look at just the top 3 fighters, it's even more obvious: In 2008 they had 25%, today only 18%.

[Ack-Ack]

A yak3 in the MA is far superior in every way compared to the spit9. They were built long before. What we are trying to say is, The fights overall would be more fun, and more close combat if everyone flew in midwar planes most of the time.

Again, you're doing nothing more than trying to dictate what other people fly to suit your needs, not everyone else's.

[Zygote404]

Again, you're doing nothing more than trying to dictate what other people fly to suit your needs, not everyone else's.

You could also say that insisting the planes dominating the MA stay as they are that those insisting they stay as they are are trying to dictate what everyone flys to suit their needs.

You can say that because if they stay as they are then everyone has to fly comparable planes or be very outmatched.  Comparable planes of course mean those small set of planes that are currently dominating in the MA.

Real choice would come about by adding a small perk cost to the problematic planes so that players could comfortable choose 1) to fly one of the capable non-perked planes 2) to pay a small perk cost to fly one of the excellent late war models.  That's more choice than fly La7, Yak3, D9, Spit XVI, N1K or die.

[lunatic1]

You could also say that insisting the planes dominating the MA stay as they are that those insisting they stay as they are are trying to dictate what everyone flys to suit their needs.

You can say that because if they stay as they are then everyone has to fly comparable planes or be very outmatched.  Comparable planes of course mean those small set of planes that are currently dominating in the MA.

Real choice would come about by adding a small perk cost to the problematic planes so that players could comfortable choose 1) to fly one of the capable non-perked planes 2) to pay a small perk cost to fly one of the excellent late war models.  That's more choice than fly La7, Yak3, D9, Spit XVI, N1K or die.

so your saying that if a person has to pay for a plane it will make him feel better? in what world do you think that will work.
I would like it to be my choice if I want to pay for a plane.

if your having problems with the late war planes I suggest you practice and get better, than trying to get us to play this game your way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You could also say that insisting the planes dominating the MA stay as they are that those insisting they stay as they are are trying to dictate what everyone flys to suit their needs.

no because those planes were already here/there when you started, and there is no logical reason to change them.and your wanting this to change for you.

[lunatic1]

#1: I'm an Aussie and when I log on there are usually 20 players on

so when are you mostly on? the reason I ask because I saw you on tonight wed night during US. primetime with at least 140 people on and you landing kills several times.