Jump to content


Ki-88, Hurricane, Blen, Energy....

Ki-88 Hurricane energy blenheim Suggestions Balance anything but MM

  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

WanderingGhost #1 Posted 01 January 2015 - 07:18 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 6 battles
  • 1,041
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:
    01-27-2014

So I'm posting this with my suggestion for things for the next update or two but before I get started because someone will inevitably post it -

 

I'm not including matchmaking in my list because we already have 1000's of threads on it so it's been done to death and they likely get the idea most people still have issues with it.

 

That out of the way. Some people have in other threads brought things up that may be on here, but generally what I was thinking and not as often talked about.

 

The Ki-88 - After the last patch of 1.6.3, this and the hurricane are kinda on my "wthguys" list. The Ki-88 has always had poor accuracy, and it's handling was okay, but the 20 mm's with the 37 mm made up for it in pure devastation if you could get hits. Then 1.5.1 happened. This plane has been shelved by most pilot's since due to module destruction becoming nearly non existent. This plane I think needs two things -

 

- Increased accuracy of 37 mm hub cannon and increased damages much he way the Russian MRF's and fighters got in 1.6.3. possibly an increase as well to 20 mm accuracy.

- better energy retention and possibly speed, it needs to at least be able to out climb the Russian fighters to stand a chance against them at that tier. As is can't out maneuver them or out run them, and can't at least try forcing them to stall.

 

Hurricane IID - The problem with this plane is despite being a MRF now, it's still dealing with an identity crisis. Not particularly well suited for a GA role, as expected of a more fighter type, but doesn't really excel at all in air to air combat. It's relatively flimsy despite that it now has the ability to turn inside of a wildcat in a continuous turn. What kills it is the accuracy of the 40 mm cannons, or rather the lack there of. It's not as terrible as it once was, but still needs work.

 

- This plane needs at the very least an increase of accuracy to the 40 mm cannons to make it more competitive as a MRF. or the bullet needs to be bitten and classify it as a GA again, and given that much better protection from AA, some more hitpoints, and any boost made to make GA better against ground or air targets.

 

 

Blenheim - After the patch where they added cannons as an alternative to even more MG's, the other changes made made this plane feel competitive. The change to adding bombs to an actual bomber finally came, but removed the extra armaments as an option. While the Blen isn't terrible, it still once again kind of loses out to the 110 series planes of it's tier.

 

- as said in another thread all this plane needs is an option. At the very least make it an option of bombs, or more firepower. or buff both it's stock and upgraded firepower so that it's a better match against fighters and German heavies. Better damage for the guns, better accuracy on the 20 mm's.

 

Energy - Now, as someone who usually flies the A6M series and generally plays lower "energy" fighters or uses counter energy to beat opponents, the seemingly random unannounced changes to energy have actually sorta helped overall, but at the same time hurt in terms of having to relearn every plane because every plane was hit by it and found myself stalling my zero in turns I'd never stalled it in before due to rapid energy bleed and having "energy" fighters while using BnZ suddenly stall out when going vertical. While it's helped me force more over shoots, at the same time, I don't really like it. Not separating it out on this one, the energy/speed bleed needs to go back to what it was before 1.6.3/4.

 

 

National Park - On this one, I'm actually getting kind of fed up now. Please WG, optimize the crap out of this map. at this point it's the only one I have any real framerate issues on now that some have had a few GT's removed on them and all. I can play the 40-60 I get dependent on settings and map, but this 26 FPS nonsense on that map is getting to me.

 

Of another note, the map design irks me because it really isn't meant for some of the low alt fighters. My A6M1 is practically on the deck and is nearly over it's altitude band where it functions best unless I'm in the center canyon.

 

 

National Park (historic) - All seriousness, I don't care if you rename it, just call it historic, change the time of day, I want the old National park back. It was well designed and fun, and didn't force planes out of their altitude bands, especially with the current energy situation. I want this map back, especially because unlike it's replacement/update, I get a normal playable framerate.

 

I have copies of previous iterations saved for replays, if you need that for the game files for the old one I'll willingly send them, cause the current one is driving me up a wall - and into them.

 

------------

 

P39 Q-15 - simply put another plane that could use the buff similarly armed Russian fighters got.

 

Guns vs Cannons vs mixed and weapon range -

 

This one is easier somewhat easier to lump together than separate, and some of it kinda ties in. Trying to make up for lost time in the missions for the 3RD, I've resorted to manually keeping track of how much damage I'm doing in a match, to add up periodically till I hit the 13-14k I need a day to still get it. And I've noticed a general pattern. And while those numbers can be somewhat misconstrued due to my skill, their players skill, Luck, etc - However, the recent changes to primarily Russian aircraft has had me paying closer attention to all the weapons. Between this and the numbers, I'm seeing a general pattern.

 

Little history, I joined near the end of 1.1, where weapon balanced seemed fine. But 1.2 introduced module destruction to the live server while I was around, and the immediate change was that cannons were kings of the game. After a few patches we get to 1.4 where it was evened out again essentially. Cannons had terrifying destructive ability but progressively worse accuracy. MG's had lower damage, but could consistently hit a target. Two methods of thinking, both equally lethal. 1.5.1 however, shifted the power balance to MG's, and while steps have been made to bring it back into balance, as of yet it's improved, but not enough.

 

MG's as a whole right now seem to have the definitive edge with module destruction all but removed. .30/.303/7.92 mm are solid weapons but .50/12.7 mm and up are truly lethal weapons and can eat apart a plane in seconds. Truly horrific fire volume particularly from the US planes that carry 6 of them. I don't feel that it's the guns themselves are overpowered, but that cannons themselves are underpowered in most cases. They have a general lack of accuracy particularly bigger ones that without module destruction really have lost out their edge, massive critical damage to an enemy for the kill not simply peck at the hp bar.

 

That said, it also comes to a point where part of it seems to be either the weapons themselves, or the weapons set up. Best example is my A7M. The 4x 20 mm cannons are not quite as accurate as the MG's of my wildcat and M-105, but seem to be more accurate than various other planes 20 mm cannons, and can rip planes from the sky. Meanwhile planes with 20 mm mixed in generally seem to have accuracy issues, including ones like the Ki-88. As a whole the 20 mm cannons are still far better off and not as bad as the 30 mm and up guns still are, but those ones still in cases don't quite seem to have a balance that puts them on the same level as a MG for accuracy vs power. They hit hard still but not often enough to really justify use. I actually see more and more pilots using lower caliber weapons or in the case of the likes of the spitfire sticking with guns over cannons. Which leads to the 3rd part -

 

Mixed weapons. A lot of the ones where accuracy really seems hard pressed is aircraft with mixed weaponry. Be it MG's and one or more cannons or 20 mm cannons and a 23 mm or higher, accuracy seems to be trickier here. Now, yes, I do get in terms of physics you have different velocity's which means different drop rates, etc, etc. Though even in the spitfire that has weapons with similar velocity's (why it was so effective when armed with 20 mm cannons in the war) I notice it generally seems to be a bit more off than it should be. And I know some pilots would change where their weapons converged at (such as the "Falcon of Malta", who actually tuned his guns for shorter range to save on ammo.) and I do believe that generally, weapons were set in a manner to try and have a point where even with different drop rates, the ballistic arcs could be made to converge on 1 target. Barring that I remember correctly that they did that historically, it's a game that needs balance. So I don't think it'd be too much to have a point where all the weapons really converge for a single aim point at a certain range and more or less lower. Which is where I will tie in range. If I recall the lead point marks an x where the weapons best converge (haven't used it in months, disabled it due to it being more distracting and eating into my frame rate), which if this is in fact a point where all the weapons converge like my above suggestion than it is far too close to the enemy. Up until at least 1.5 or 1.5.1, I recall hitting targets with relative accuracy with MG's at about 6-800m , and 1000+ with cannons. Since the 1.5 time frame, it's been knocked down that generally while I can aim out farther and score hits without use of the lead point, generally beyond 600m scoring hits is at best a pain. Even at 600m it seems to be a stretch at best. Honestly it felt way more competitive and fun when we had some longer range and better accuracy at it. I'd say meeting halfway would be beneficial. Bring the weapon ranges up from where 600m seems to be the point where fire starts be effective for cannons and maybe 4-500 on MG's to 1000m for cannons and 700 for MG's, with a converging point at approximately 4-600 meters. Possibly using weapons it uses to determine the general range I.E. a wildcat that has only MG's has a converging point at 400m, while a Ki-88 that has only cannons has it at 600m, and a Spitfire that's using mixed weapons has it at 500m.

 

-----------

 

What I have off the top of my head right this second, may add more as it comes to me or refine what I have above.


Edited by WanderingGhost, 03 January 2015 - 01:02 AM.

Aces/Destroyer/Ace(post1.9)(#of/#) - A6M1(7/1), P-36(1), BF-109b(3), Ao-192(1), beaufighter(3/1), BF-109z(2), P-12(2), A6M2(3), P-51a(4), Yak-7(2), Bf-110C-6(2), F4F(2/4), Blenheim(2), BSH-2(1), XP-50(1),  BF-109f(1), LA-5(1), Spitfire I(2), P-40 M-105(3), BF-110e(1), F4U-1(1), FW-190 A-5(4), I-16e.(1), XF4F-3(1), A6M5(5), F7F(1), XF4U-1(1), Bf-109E (1), A7M (2), I-16l (1), P-38f (1), P-40 (1), Mig-3 (1)


Noreaga #2 Posted 01 January 2015 - 08:01 PM

    Captain

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 8 battles
  • 3,038
  • [DRACS] DRACS
  • Member since:
    03-05-2012

nicely written!

 

agree with national park that was one of  the most fun maps the new one is just crap. simple fix start the planes closer together instead of isolated packs dotted around the map. 

 

37mm dmg is getting better, Russian planes are almost usable now, don't understand why all 37mm's didn't get a buff but the ki-88 isn't terrible in a flight.

 

all in all things are getting better and by that i mean almost back to where we were in beta. One day we will fix all those random meta changes  made after release (that should have been done in beta), I feel like i am stuck in ground hog day didn't we already do this and it didn't work?

 

 


Nimis obnoxii curare


WanderingGhost #3 Posted 01 January 2015 - 11:36 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 6 battles
  • 1,041
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:
    01-27-2014

Thank's Noreaga

 

And yeah, the Ki-88 isn't terrible, but still pretty far from the best. The buffs in the last patch and watching Rock18's guide after shelving it in 1.5.1 made me go look at things again.

 

Only Russian plane with a 30 mm+ cannon to get a buff was the 109 g and z, and the 1056.

 

Left out the P-39 Q-15, the Ki-88, the Hurricane, the P-38: Not usually the one to jump on the favoritism train but uh.... all pure Russian aircraft get a buff to 30 mm plus and only those 3 others is one of those points where I can see why people jump to that theory often.


Aces/Destroyer/Ace(post1.9)(#of/#) - A6M1(7/1), P-36(1), BF-109b(3), Ao-192(1), beaufighter(3/1), BF-109z(2), P-12(2), A6M2(3), P-51a(4), Yak-7(2), Bf-110C-6(2), F4F(2/4), Blenheim(2), BSH-2(1), XP-50(1),  BF-109f(1), LA-5(1), Spitfire I(2), P-40 M-105(3), BF-110e(1), F4U-1(1), FW-190 A-5(4), I-16e.(1), XF4F-3(1), A6M5(5), F7F(1), XF4U-1(1), Bf-109E (1), A7M (2), I-16l (1), P-38f (1), P-40 (1), Mig-3 (1)


Carl_the_Cuttlefish #4 Posted 02 January 2015 - 01:56 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 12 battles
  • 1,416
  • Member since:
    11-06-2012

About the Blenheim, I always thought the brit HF line should have a GA variant loadout option and a HF option. The Blenheim was fun when it had the 9 MG option, and it was a competitive HF. But I think they could do a Blenheim airframe v1 that would allow for the 9 MG's or 4 + 2 cannons in a HF setup, and a airframe v2 option that allows for rockets and bombs to be mounted, but not the extra guns and is more HP's and less manuverable for a GA setup. Ditto with the Beaufighter and Mosquito, have additional airframes that allow for more ordinance and HP at the cost of reduced performance. 

 

I don't know much about the prem planes though.


"It's about to get real inky in here!!!"

- Carl the Cuttlefish, the artist formerly known as S01836775, now in an all new user friendly format.

I hope it doesn't sound like I'm whining in my posts 

And why do we balance???


losttwo #5 Posted 02 January 2015 - 11:18 AM

    which way do we go?

  • Community Ace
  • 3114 battles
  • 13,539
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:
    05-15-2012
Excellent summary and in total agreement.

IPlayWithAppleTree #6 Posted 02 January 2015 - 03:06 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 348 battles
  • 461
  • Member since:
    10-21-2012
Agree with National Park. I used to whine that it was too disadvantageous for GA, but now I'm doing it as a fighter, and the new national park is like impossible to group up, and looks annoying. Also, if one of the 3 groups you start with has 1 attack aircraft, vs 1 HF, it is screwed.

WanderingGhost #7 Posted 03 January 2015 - 01:05 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 6 battles
  • 1,041
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:
    01-27-2014

Glad to see others agreeing and I'm not getting flamed for any of my suggestions.

 

Also - added the P-39 to the "needs the USSR buff" list and added my observations on the general balance of MG's and Cannons that does seem to favor MG's more at the moment.


Aces/Destroyer/Ace(post1.9)(#of/#) - A6M1(7/1), P-36(1), BF-109b(3), Ao-192(1), beaufighter(3/1), BF-109z(2), P-12(2), A6M2(3), P-51a(4), Yak-7(2), Bf-110C-6(2), F4F(2/4), Blenheim(2), BSH-2(1), XP-50(1),  BF-109f(1), LA-5(1), Spitfire I(2), P-40 M-105(3), BF-110e(1), F4U-1(1), FW-190 A-5(4), I-16e.(1), XF4F-3(1), A6M5(5), F7F(1), XF4U-1(1), Bf-109E (1), A7M (2), I-16l (1), P-38f (1), P-40 (1), Mig-3 (1)


reptile2001 #8 Posted 09 January 2015 - 09:01 PM

    Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 24 battles
  • 54
  • [DRACS] DRACS
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

Very well thought out and explained. I also couldn't agree more with the national park map needing some changes. I agree with the altitude for sure - almost anything other than high-alt fighters are above or almost above their altitude bands from the start.

 

The size of the map and seemingly random placement of aircraft into the three groups boggles my mind. Shrink the map by about 25% and it wouldn't be as much of an issue. Or, If they're going to leave the map size as-is, the groups need to start closer together to make up for the random placement. 



Weapon_of_Proliferation #9 Posted 15 January 2015 - 04:05 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Alpha tester
  • 1 battle
  • 353
  • [S_S_G] S_S_G
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

I am a terrible tier 6 player, not enough experience, but I've played enough WG content to know the Ki-88 is a complete dog.

 

I regret buying it so badly.

 

EDIT: The map National Park, Lighthouse, and Asian Boarder need optimization for AMD videocards.

It not that they don't have the power, its that the game only offers NVIDIA's way of doing volumetric smoke (clouds), it needs an AMD codepath added.


Edited by Weapon_of_Proliferation, 15 January 2015 - 04:19 PM.


Lvcivs_Flavivs #10 Posted 29 January 2016 - 02:41 PM

    Senior Airman

  • Member
  • 680 battles
  • 29
  • Member since:
    08-23-2012

Got the Hurricane for "Xmas" and cannot seem to do anything with it.  Today is it's birthday and after a couple of tries I'm giving up on the free xp reward.  I don't want to just keep waiting for a team to carry me as I'm just useless.

 

Life is just too short to fly such a clumsy piece of junk with absolutely no redeeming qualities.

 

Too sluggish to dogfight, guns too inaccurate to snipe and overheat quickly, too slow for b&Z, sucks at GA for many many reasons.

 

Normally I would be happy for the free hangar slot, but as I have close to a hundred of them now, I will keep that plane to collect dust.

 

Sad, really.


"In the Game of Planes, you carry or you lose.  There is no middle ground".

BLUE_BEARD #11 Posted 29 January 2016 - 03:47 PM

    Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 9 battles
  • 44
  • Member since:
    05-30-2014
Very well thought out and explained I agree 100%, I had the Ki-88 sold it ,  all Jap. tiers need more hit points.

EspressoForHammy #12 Posted 29 January 2016 - 06:07 PM

    Captain

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 4 battles
  • 4,462
  • [3NIC] 3NIC
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
Ki-88 is OK now after 1.9 if you can aim high caliber weapons. The 20mm on it still suck, but that 37mm pops things like XP balloons.

"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!)

 


Pogo68 #13 Posted 29 January 2016 - 11:05 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 1649 battles
  • 1,377
  • [-BFS-] -BFS-
  • Member since:
    11-06-2012

View PostWanderingGhost, on 01 January 2015 - 11:18 AM, said:

So I'm posting this with my suggestion for things for the next update or two but before I get started because someone will inevitably post it -

 

I'm not including matchmaking in my list because we already have 1000's of threads on it so it's been done to death and they likely get the idea most people still have issues with it.

 

That out of the way. Some people have in other threads brought things up that may be on here, but generally what I was thinking and not as often talked about.

 

The Ki-88 - After the last patch of 1.6.3, this and the hurricane are kinda on my "wthguys" list. The Ki-88 has always had poor accuracy, and it's handling was okay, but the 20 mm's with the 37 mm made up for it in pure devastation if you could get hits. Then 1.5.1 happened. This plane has been shelved by most pilot's since due to module destruction becoming nearly non existent. This plane I think needs two things -

 

- Increased accuracy of 37 mm hub cannon and increased damages much he way the Russian MRF's and fighters got in 1.6.3. possibly an increase as well to 20 mm accuracy.

- better energy retention and possibly speed, it needs to at least be able to out climb the Russian fighters to stand a chance against them at that tier. As is can't out maneuver them or out run them, and can't at least try forcing them to stall.

 

Hurricane IID - The problem with this plane is despite being a MRF now, it's still dealing with an identity crisis. Not particularly well suited for a GA role, as expected of a more fighter type, but doesn't really excel at all in air to air combat. It's relatively flimsy despite that it now has the ability to turn inside of a wildcat in a continuous turn. What kills it is the accuracy of the 40 mm cannons, or rather the lack there of. It's not as terrible as it once was, but still needs work.

 

- This plane needs at the very least an increase of accuracy to the 40 mm cannons to make it more competitive as a MRF. or the bullet needs to be bitten and classify it as a GA again, and given that much better protection from AA, some more hitpoints, and any boost made to make GA better against ground or air targets.

 

 

I'd be ok with just dumping the 40mm's for the 12 .303 variant or the 4 20mm, both of those were the MRF version of the Hurricane and the had provisions to carry a bomb


DICTA BOELCKE for WoWP
    1. Try to secure the upper hand before attacking.
    2. Always continue with an attack you have begun
    3. Open fire only at close range, and then only when the opponent is squarely in your sights
    4. You should always try to keep your eye on your opponent, and never let yourself be deceived by ruses
    5. In any type of attack, it is essential to assail your opponent from behind
    6. If your opponent dives on you, do not try run away from his attack, but fly to meet it
    7. When over the enemy's lines, always remember your own line of retreat
    8. It is better to attack in groups of four or six. Avoid two aircraft attacking the same opponent




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users