Jump to content


Petition to rollback nerfing of P51 line

p51 nerfed

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
71 replies to this topic

Poll: p51 nerfing (74 members have cast votes)

Should wargaming rollback the recent downgrading of the p51 line?

  1. yes (23 votes [31.08%])

    Percentage of vote: 31.08%

  2. no (51 votes [68.92%])

    Percentage of vote: 68.92%

Vote Hide poll

SkywhaleExpress #41 Posted 27 March 2014 - 12:25 PM

    noob leader

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 4 battles
  • 10,731
  • [DRACS] DRACS
  • Member since:
    09-09-2012

The onus goes to the OP in this case. He has yet to even show evidence of this supposed nerfing of the P-51 line.

 

To placate him in his ignorance, I took a P-51A up in Lighthouse in a Training Room. I simulated an average player's ability to climb (maneuvering too much/etc.) and was still able to make over 3km= over 9900 ft. What's more, I was able to get back there after diving to 890m to chase the bot I was shooting at.... I got back there with no boost ability left... another simulated 'average player' mistake of keeping the throttle to 100%+boost.

 

I will post a video once I have the P-51D's performance simulated as well.



Air Raid 8 Champions - BrushFyre

MIA - pappabear


Noreaga #42 Posted 27 March 2014 - 12:34 PM

    Captain

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 8 battles
  • 3,067
  • [DRACS] DRACS
  • Member since:
    03-05-2012

i honestly dont know what your talking about, the 51 line hasn't received any nerfs that i have read. The only reason i can think you feel this is the fact that all planes received an acceleration bonus (correct me if im wrong), and acceleration and energy retention are the greatest strengths of the 51. I should also point out that the 262 has been hit by the nerf bat so many times since i started playing and the only so called nerf that the 51 received was doing away with their canon load out.

 

anyway i am sorry your not enjoying the 51 line after then patch but i still feel the way i did before the patch... played right the 51 is still a little crazy in terms of energy retention and climb. 

 

 

that's my opinion but you are entitled yours as well,

 

 

 

 

 


Nimis obnoxii curare


Heh #43 Posted 27 March 2014 - 01:40 PM

    Sky Whale Historian

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 11,960
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

There's a system I've seen in WoT where in people make an x axis of the WR of players and the y axis is that of the tank's WR. In each chart, there's always a line in which x=y as a reference. This system could be used for WoWP in order to look at the planes that are considered OP.

 

Now, the way to read it is simple. If you see the function starting from above for <50% WR on the x axis, then going under the x=y line for WR, then it's the sign of a generally inflexible tank. If it goes above too early (as in, under 50% WR get 50%+ WR), then it's a sign that it's probably OP. You could even use WN7 or WN8 instead for an even more accurate statement.

 

If such a system could exist, then we can easily determine if a plane is OP.


Heh - aeromarine biologist

View Posthahiha, on , said:


OMG Heh you have had so many posts O_O

mizer67 #44 Posted 27 March 2014 - 01:52 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Open Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 916
  • Member since:
    03-02-2013

The boost effectiveness reduction, upward dispersion reduction, damage increase while shooting up, damage decrease when shooting down, increase in supremacy and increase in energy retention while turning for other fighters have hurt the P-51's dominance.

 

It was needed.

 

You could solo an entire team back in OB after 0.5.2 with a single P-51A before the clock ran out on you.

 

I personally can't see the 1.2 changes having as much impact to the Mustangs as you're making out. 75%+ W/R and 80%+ S/R is still possible in that plane if you're good, flying 100% solo. Higher if flighted.



EspressoForHammy #45 Posted 27 March 2014 - 01:56 PM

    Captain

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 4 battles
  • 4,462
  • [3NIC] 3NIC
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostKatariana, on 26 March 2014 - 10:14 PM, said:

 

...before the game turned into the monumental train wreck it is today.

 

THANK YOU. I quit three months ago, and I still come back online once in a blue moon to see if the game still sucks, and has no players. So far, it does, and it does.


"More fun than a three-legged mouse covered in hash oil."  "This is like taking my p38 through a cloud of loose stools... watta mess."

- A55 BOTlistic Commie (Both quotes!)

 


An_Average_Jho #46 Posted 27 March 2014 - 05:08 PM

    Helvetic Polyglot

  • Alpha tester
  • 57 battles
  • 2,588
  • [WWPD] WWPD
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostHeh, on 27 March 2014 - 02:40 PM, said:

There's a system I've seen in WoT where in people make an x axis of the WR of players and the y axis is that of the tank's WR. In each chart, there's always a line in which x=y as a reference. This system could be used for WoWP in order to look at the planes that are considered OP.

 

Now, the way to read it is simple. If you see the function starting from above for <50% WR on the x axis, then going under the x=y line for WR, then it's the sign of a generally inflexible tank. If it goes above too early (as in, under 50% WR get 50%+ WR), then it's a sign that it's probably OP. You could even use WN7 or WN8 instead for an even more accurate statement.

 

If such a system could exist, then we can easily determine if a plane is OP.

 

Like this?

 

 

It exists, to an extent, in noobmeter's OP rating. The OP rating is a measure of the win rate of the plane by the win rate of the player.


Everything tastes better if it tries to eat you before you eat it

I named my airplane Iosef because it kept on Stalin

 

"Quod natura non dat, Salmantica non præstat"


Heh #47 Posted 27 March 2014 - 06:15 PM

    Sky Whale Historian

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 11,960
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostAn_Average_Jho, on 27 March 2014 - 05:08 PM, said:

 

Like this?

 

 

It exists, to an extent, in noobmeter's OP rating. The OP rating is a measure of the win rate of the plane by the win rate of the player.

 

Ya, like this. In that chart, we can see that 50% WR people in the WT E-100 get 52% WR. The whole deviation starts at 47% WR, which we all know is low. Plus the WR curve never goes below the x=y line past that point. This pretty accurately states that the WT E-100 is overperforming.

 

I'm just saying that doing the same thing with WoWP, we may be able to accurately see which planes are OP. Especially if we're gonna be using WN7 and WN8 ratings instead.


Heh - aeromarine biologist

View Posthahiha, on , said:


OMG Heh you have had so many posts O_O

TheGreenTank #48 Posted 27 March 2014 - 06:20 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Alpha tester
  • 0 battles
  • 939
  • [MEMES] MEMES
  • Member since:
    01-11-2012

Yeah, no. The P51A ought to be rolled back to its UNBUFFED version that it had during closed testing.

 

Back then, it had speed, it had some maneuverability - better than a Bf109 but not as much as the Zero (or Spitfire, but it was still faster than these last two) - and it had somewhat lackluster firepower with the four .50s. It wasn't the best in tier, but it was competitive.

 

 

 

As it stands right now? It can keep up with any plane - no question - in climb, dive, or straight speed chase, it doesn't matter. It takes a jet to be able to outpace the P51A.

And don't even think about trying to beat the P51A in the vertical dogfight in anything besides the F4U-1 - which doesn't have the same altitude performance.

 

It has about the same maneuverability characteristics - which combined with the speed, means once you are targeted by a P51A, there's no getting away.

I literally see people target someone from over 7000 feet away *and below*, fly DIRECTLY across the map, and hone in like some kind of guided missile - without any noticeable loss of speed or controllability.

 

All that said, all it would take to fix this thing...is to change how "boosting" works fundamentally.

 

Divide boost endurance of all planes by half...decrease cool-down times by about the same to keep it balanced...and you remove a LOT of the P51A's superpower ability ingame.


Edited by TheGreenTank, 27 March 2014 - 06:21 PM.


mizer67 #49 Posted 27 March 2014 - 07:02 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Open Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 916
  • Member since:
    03-02-2013

View PostTheGreenTank, on 27 March 2014 - 02:20 PM, said:

Yeah, no. The P51A ought to be rolled back to its UNBUFFED version that it had during closed testing.

 

Back then, it had speed, it had some maneuverability - better than a Bf109 but not as much as the Zero (or Spitfire, but it was still faster than these last two) - and it had somewhat lackluster firepower with the four .50s. It wasn't the best in tier, but it was competitive.

 

 

 

As it stands right now? It can keep up with any plane - no question - in climb, dive, or straight speed chase, it doesn't matter. It takes a jet to be able to outpace the P51A.

And don't even think about trying to beat the P51A in the vertical dogfight in anything besides the F4U-1 - which doesn't have the same altitude performance.

 

It has about the same maneuverability characteristics - which combined with the speed, means once you are targeted by a P51A, there's no getting away.

I literally see people target someone from over 7000 feet away *and below*, fly DIRECTLY across the map, and hone in like some kind of guided missile - without any noticeable loss of speed or controllability.

 

All that said, all it would take to fix this thing...is to change how "boosting" works fundamentally.

 

Divide boost endurance of all planes by half...decrease cool-down times by about the same to keep it balanced...and you remove a LOT of the P51A's superpower ability ingame.

 

I personally don't think it's all that unbalanced now (in an overall unbalanced game) that 1.2 indirectly nerfed the P-51A and it would likely be too drastic to hit it again soon with anything but gradual changes.

 

Look at the noobmeter ratings and the FW-190 A-5, and 109F aren't that far behind the P-51A and if you whack it hard, you'll just have to whack everything else in tier too since there are several LF that are very competitive and almost match it in W/R.



Mercsn #50 Posted 27 March 2014 - 08:08 PM

    Captain

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 2616 battles
  • 3,299
  • [A-S-S] A-S-S
  • Member since:
    04-17-2013

In closed beta, at one point, the p-51a was such a dog that they were literally the last plane I would prioritize.   A big part of this was due to the MG bug that had the .50 cal way underperforming.  But it also had bad energy retention and seemed to bleed speed really fast in a turnfight on top of having low maneuverability.  The fact that it still works so well across such a broad range of altitude and can even catch the other energy fighters like the fw190 and UK HF which don't have altitude or maneuvering advantage seems a bit OP in my view. 

 

In regards to the Bf109f, that plane is the reason I gave up on the heavies I loved so much in beta and was starting 1.0 on the German LF line.  It was the ONLY plane that was able to counter a P-51a and I figured with my limited game time, i'd be in that tier range for a while.  The p-51a was one easy to abuse plane and I figured I'd try to offer my teams some help with them.

 

Then somehow I got distracted with these darn RU fighters, possibly after I was so befuddled by spending any time at all in the junk heap that the fw190v turned out to be after waiting 8 months for that line to show up.  I guess I'll try the 190a-5 one day, but I'll lose some games in WoT to earn the xp for it there running over trees and houses. :izmena:


All the Important Thread Links (go here for answers!) Might be outdated!

All-in-one thread with 2.0 related guide links.

 

The below was said to me (Mercsn), from a concerned player:

Edited, on 12 March - 2:01PM , said:

and PS...play more, forum less.  Your opinion might be more credible.

IllustriousCheeseburger #51 Posted 27 March 2014 - 08:13 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 372
  • [PTATO] PTATO
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postelisurf81, on 27 March 2014 - 08:56 AM, said:

 

THANK YOU. I quit three months ago, and I still come back online once in a blue moon to see if the game still sucks, and has no players. So far, it does, and it does.

 

If not for the occasional event that pays gold, I wouldn't even bother with this game at all anymore myself. Pays for my WoT account.


"Don't worry about me when you see me on the enemy roster. I'm completely harmless."

DirtyWings #52 Posted 27 March 2014 - 08:32 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 421
  • [LIGS] LIGS
  • Member since:
    02-16-2013

View PostKatariana, on 27 March 2014 - 09:13 PM, said:

 

If not for the occasional event that pays gold, I wouldn't even bother with this game at all anymore myself. Pays for my WoT account.

Ya so keep spamming the thread about something that has nothing to do with it..  This thread is for the 51.. and you guys are just spamming this game sucks. Not cool your just wasting space.. make your own thread if you got something else to complain about. People like you don't encourage others... your still here everyday reading the forums.. the game must not suck that bad if your sticking around everyday. Not by encouraging others to quit that you will get anywhere.


 

 


GeneralLeeStoned #53 Posted 28 March 2014 - 12:35 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 13 battles
  • 176
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
Deleted- by me

Edited by PKStar, 28 March 2014 - 12:36 AM.


K538 #54 Posted 28 March 2014 - 12:43 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Open Beta Tester
  • 7 battles
  • 289
  • [RCAF] RCAF
  • Member since:
    07-28-2013

This thread gives me a headache, but I'm a sucka for Internet fla debates.


A few points:

 

  • The P-51A as it exists in the game isn't a real fighter historically, so any argument that it should be powerful on the basis that the P-51 was a successful fighter is fundamentally flawed.  As has been already mentioned the A-36, P-51 and P-51A sucked at altitude.  It did have a supercharger but it was single stage and the plane was not very impressive above middle altitudes.  (This begs a question about why the P-51B isn't the fighter used in game, but that's another thread.)
  • The P-51A is a very good plane in game (don't let my poor stats fool you, I've had very bad luck in that plane, but I've rarely felt that it's not competitive or even overpowered).
  • MMOs are not usually balanced because of player complaints, I don't follow WG that closely, but I used to follow a couple of other MMOs very closely and the developers almost always use statistical models to figure out what classes, gear, spells, weapons, planes, etc. outperform the others.  Given that this isn't a realistic plane the only real reason to change it is if it's breaking the game in some way by being too good or too bad.
  • The game is still relatively new, we should all expect that there will be significant rebalancing of planes over time and take it in stride.  If they nerf a plane too much then they'll likely fix it.
  • Anecdotal, I know, but right now I consider the P-51s the supreme planes in their tiers.  I was working on the British and Russian light lines, but I've more or less abandoned them for the time being to play the US Army Air Force line just because they're so good.  That should be a sign that something's not quite right...

 

I don't like nerfs any more than the next guy, but it's part of the reality of online gaming and in the long term they're almost always good for the game in the long run.  I would sooner have a more balanced game at the higher tiers so that we get more higher tier players than have my favourite planes be more successful.  It's also more fun to have some variety, especially if I do want to switch to another kind of plane than to just fight in the vertical above 2km.

 

Hopefully this is the first of many game improving changes that will help to grow the player base.


The is a signature.

2girls #55 Posted 28 March 2014 - 02:51 AM

    Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 67
  • Member since:
    01-27-2014

View PostAn_Average_Jho, on 26 March 2014 - 08:55 PM, said:

http://planes.noobmeter.com/tankStats/na

 

Tier 6 fighters in order of win rate:

190-A5

P-51A

Yak-1M

109F

La-5

F4U-1

Spitfire V

Yak-9

A6M5

 

 

Tier 6 fighters in total games played:

P-51A

109F

F4U-1

Spitfire V

A6M5

La-5

190-A5

Yak-1M

Yak-9

 

The P-51A is the most played tier 6 fighter, but it is also a close second in terms of win rate (both recent and overall). The P-51A doesn't need to be even better or more popular than it currently is.

Interesting charts. Statistically it says quite a bit about some planes in this game. If the p-51 is the most played T-6 plane then it should naturally also have the highest win rate, and therefor is right where it should be. Then take a look at the Yak 1-M and 190-A5. These 2 planes are some of the least played planes and ironically have some of the highest win rates. It would seem that these two planes are badly in need of nerfing, if they were not so OP they would have win rates that corresponded to the amount that they are played. It would also look like the Spits and A6M5 could use a buffing. 

 

The best thing for WG to put this all to rest is to have all planes preform exactly the same, the only difference would be the shape of the planes.. Just think it would solve everything until a group of better than average players decide they are just going to focus on the pink ones. Then we would have to change the pink to light red and so on. 


Edited by 2girls, 28 March 2014 - 02:57 AM.


Mercsn #56 Posted 28 March 2014 - 12:56 PM

    Captain

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 2616 battles
  • 3,299
  • [A-S-S] A-S-S
  • Member since:
    04-17-2013

2girls, your assumptions are flawed or all of your post is sarcasm, not just the last part.

 

The a-5 has less games played partly because it was not available at launch.   This has a compound effect on lower games played.   Obviously,  it hasn't been available for use for the same time as the p51.  With the p51a being a proven strong performer and the a-5 being unknown,  the p51 would get more players who want a sure thing instead of having to experiment with a new plane.  Further,  players who had invested time in the US line might not want to lose that time changing lines.  Players who already had the p51a had a fun, strong plane, they might not want to grind out an a-5 when they already could play the p51a.

 

The yak-1m would have a lower games played because the RU line is not novice friendly.  Low hp, low firepower and low altitude make for short, unhappy games if not flown with skill.  So, more skilled players will be in the yak while less skilled players will be in something more forgiving.   

 

Also, having more games played wouldn't necessarily mean a higher win RATE ratio, unless the plane was somewhat stronger than its peers (it should mean more NUMBER of wins). 


All the Important Thread Links (go here for answers!) Might be outdated!

All-in-one thread with 2.0 related guide links.

 

The below was said to me (Mercsn), from a concerned player:

Edited, on 12 March - 2:01PM , said:

and PS...play more, forum less.  Your opinion might be more credible.

SkyWolf__WM #57 Posted 28 March 2014 - 01:21 PM

    Captain

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 10582 battles
  • 4,778
  • [GW__S] GW__S
  • Member since:
    07-13-2012

View PostGeorgePatton, on 26 March 2014 - 03:21 PM, said:

Whoa whoa whoa mate, slow down...

 

I've heard a lot of complaining about the P-51 line. Specifically the '51A. A lot of people thought they were very OP. I thought they were a little OP myself in the current tiers. I would personally rather see them bumped up a tier (and remove P-51H) and upgraded a little to match the stories about the '51s. They were OP at tier, but would do well with a little buff and bump a tier up.

 

As far as your argument of 'people having the DEV's ear' I suggest you go look at the EU and RU forums. A lot of stuff goes on over there (especially in RU) that a lot of the NA players are unaware of. If there is a large outcry in any of the regions, the Developers will potentially make a change to the game, which will of course affect all regions. I agree about losing your money, but you did agree to some special terms when you signed up.

 

 

Cheers!
Glenn

 

Glenn.....Bump it up a tier?

I'm running a 33% W/R now in the D. The six 50's are given short shrift in this game. It's OP in the hands of about 6 people.


***************Fail to Suck****************

I shall use my aircraft and my skill to slightly inconvenience mine enemies.


SkyWolf__WM #58 Posted 28 March 2014 - 01:25 PM

    Captain

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 10582 battles
  • 4,778
  • [GW__S] GW__S
  • Member since:
    07-13-2012

View PostSteelpaw, on 26 March 2014 - 05:39 PM, said:


Almost all pvp games buff/nerf balance. It makes some people happy and some sad. The fact that the P51 is such a popular often winning airplane makes it a target for the nerf bat. Hang in there rumor, they'll probably buff the 51 in a couple months.

 

Some of them work off the actual stats from actual aircraft and get it right the first time.


***************Fail to Suck****************

I shall use my aircraft and my skill to slightly inconvenience mine enemies.


SkyWolf__WM #59 Posted 28 March 2014 - 01:29 PM

    Captain

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 10582 battles
  • 4,778
  • [GW__S] GW__S
  • Member since:
    07-13-2012

View Postrocketbrainsurgeon, on 26 March 2014 - 04:06 PM, said:

 


The patch did change how going below optimal altitude drains more energy from the P51's for sure

 

Below "optimal" [edited]"pretend" compressed (badly) altitude.


***************Fail to Suck****************

I shall use my aircraft and my skill to slightly inconvenience mine enemies.


An_Average_Jho #60 Posted 28 March 2014 - 06:15 PM

    Helvetic Polyglot

  • Alpha tester
  • 57 battles
  • 2,588
  • [WWPD] WWPD
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Post2girls, on 28 March 2014 - 03:51 AM, said:

Interesting charts. Statistically it says quite a bit about some planes in this game. If the p-51 is the most played T-6 plane then it should naturally also have the highest win rate, and therefor is right where it should be. Then take a look at the Yak 1-M and 190-A5. These 2 planes are some of the least played planes and ironically have some of the highest win rates. It would seem that these two planes are badly in need of nerfing, if they were not so OP they would have win rates that corresponded to the amount that they are played. It would also look like the Spits and A6M5 could use a buffing. 

 

The best thing for WG to put this all to rest is to have all planes preform exactly the same, the only difference would be the shape of the planes.. Just think it would solve everything until a group of better than average players decide they are just going to focus on the pink ones. Then we would have to change the pink to light red and so on. 

 

There are two reasons a vehicle has few games played: It's either bad or it's new.

 

There are two reasons why a vehicle has a high win rate: It's OP or it's new (the exception being the tier 10 Campaign gift tanks, as these were distributed to skilled players).

 

There's only one reason a vehicle has a lot of games played: it's fun.

 

Players don't want to play something that is terrible, players move to the "fun" vehicles. This is why vehicles like the Type-59 and 110C-6 were sold en-masse. People don't buy things that are bad. There is a reason why the AGO Ao 192 has 64k games played while the average tier 2 has 9k games played.

 

People don't play the frustrating vehicles that take time to master. People want stuff to ROFLstomp their opponents. The average joe (huehue) gives up or skips past things they don't enjoy. People keep the vehicles they enjoy and do well with. Since vehicles that are good are kept, they tend to be played more. I keep the I-16(late) and 110B in my garage because they are mindless fun; and those two tend to have more games played than other tier 4s. 

 

I don't have enough games in the release of WoWp to point any fingers to any particular plane I've played. The planes I have the most games in are the ones I have had the longest grinds in. In WoT, however, the tank I have the most games in was the most OP of tanks at one point; the KV-1. 


Everything tastes better if it tries to eat you before you eat it

I named my airplane Iosef because it kept on Stalin

 

"Quod natura non dat, Salmantica non præstat"





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users