Jump to content


Top 10 Most Played Planes

Top 10 planes most played yours

  • Please log in to reply
51 replies to this topic

NL_Celt #21 Posted 12 July 2019 - 03:16 PM

    Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 1106 battles
  • 98
  • Member since:
    10-05-2012

View Posttrikke, on 12 July 2019 - 01:21 PM, said:

let's try this    ty, imgur

 

 

 

not many battles in bombers, GA or MR

 

So what are the columns? Sorties, battles, ??



BB3_Oregon_Steel #22 Posted 12 July 2019 - 05:26 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 1171 battles
  • 358
  • [A-S-S] A-S-S
  • Member since:
    10-26-2015

This is all very embarrassing for a biplane noob girl such as myself, but it appears that ... maybe sometimes ... possibly ... way more than I imagined ... I will kind of fly ...  monoplanes.  Oh the horror of it all!!  :ohmy:

 

First Place: (Yes, a monoplane) :facepalm:

Heinkel He 112

 

Second Place: (and another) :(

Polikarpov I-16 (late mod.)

 

Third Place: (and yet more):hiding:

Curtiss P-36 Hawk

Curtiss Model 81A-1

Messerschmitt Bf 109 B

 

Tied for 6th place:

Mitsubishi A6M1 Zero

Mitsubishi A6M3 (experimental)

Curtiss P-36C Hawk

Polikarpov I-17

Vickers Venom

Mitsubishi A5M

Grumman XF4F-3

Republic P-43 Lancer

Hawker Hurricane IID

Curtiss F11C-2 (Finally, a biplane):great:

Grumman F2F (and another!!  Yay Me!!) :medal:

Blackburn Skua

 

Honorable Mention:

 

Most flown Heavy Fighters (yes they are monoplanes)

Focke-Wulf Fw 57

AGO Ao 192 Kurier

Most flown GAA (another monoplane ... just shoot me now please):(

Ilyushin BSh-2

Most flown Bomber (another monoplane because there are no bomber biplanes in game!!) :izmena:

Arkhangelsky/Tupolev SB

 

Given this data, it is clear that I must rededicate myself to my biplane brethern and once again endeavour to be the Angel of Death on TWO wings!!!  :kamikaze:


Edited by BB3_Oregon_Steel, 12 July 2019 - 05:29 PM.

"Don't mess with me because I can squish you like a bug, that is If I should decide to notice your existence in the first place".  

 

Yes, it's haughty and its arrogant but you're a battleship with 16 inch guns and Britannia Rules the Waves.  Maybe a bit of arrogance in this case is appropriate.  


qu33kKC #23 Posted 12 July 2019 - 10:15 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 6881 battles
  • 372
  • [OWSS] OWSS
  • Member since:
    10-14-2017

 

 

no real surprises there, US heavies and bombers, with a bit of Germany mixed in.

Attached Files

  • Attached File   10MostHoursWoWP.jpg   132.39K

Edited by qu33kKC, 12 July 2019 - 10:16 PM.


BB3_Oregon_Steel #24 Posted 12 July 2019 - 11:16 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 1171 battles
  • 358
  • [A-S-S] A-S-S
  • Member since:
    10-26-2015

Ok, this is better.  

 

That last bit of data shocked my poor bi-plane noob girl heart and made me reexamine my data.  I decided that to rescue my reputation, I'd need to include data from ver 1.9 and earlier.  Revised, and much to my biplane joy, here is how the combined data stacks up. 

 

1st Place:

Boeing P-12

 

2nd Place

Polikarpov I-5

 

3rd Place

Grumman F2F

 

Tied for 4rd Place

Arado Ar 65

Boeing P-26 Peashooter

 

Tied for 6th Place

Polikarpov I-15

Nakajima Type-91

Gloster Goldfinch

 

Tied for 9th Place

Curtiss P-23

Seversky P-35

 

Honorable Mention:

Most flown Heavy Fighter

AGO Ao 192 Kurier

 

Most flow GAA:

Kochyerigin TSh-2  (Yay, biplane!!!) 

 

YES, much much better!!!! 

 

BIPLANES ATTACK!!!!   :izmena:


"Don't mess with me because I can squish you like a bug, that is If I should decide to notice your existence in the first place".  

 

Yes, it's haughty and its arrogant but you're a battleship with 16 inch guns and Britannia Rules the Waves.  Maybe a bit of arrogance in this case is appropriate.  


ClosedCoffin #25 Posted 13 July 2019 - 12:07 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 7712 battles
  • 309
  • [MRCS] MRCS
  • Member since:
    02-16-2013

View PostNL_Celt, on 12 July 2019 - 03:16 PM, said:

 

So what are the columns? Sorties, battles, ??


Total Sorties,   Times aircraft was selected at start of battle,   Most aerial targets destroyed per sortie



qu33kKC #26 Posted 13 July 2019 - 12:07 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 6881 battles
  • 372
  • [OWSS] OWSS
  • Member since:
    10-14-2017
@BB3, as a fan of shipgirls, I went and took a look at your namesake.  For a pre-Dread, she's a good looking ship.  I'll keep you in mind if I ever spot a kanmasu version of her.  :honoring:

Cardinal604 #27 Posted 13 July 2019 - 03:25 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 6560 battles
  • 100
  • Member since:
    03-24-2016


NL_Celt #28 Posted 13 July 2019 - 03:50 AM

    Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 1106 battles
  • 98
  • Member since:
    10-05-2012

View PostClosedCoffin, on 13 July 2019 - 12:07 AM, said:


Total Sorties,   Times aircraft was selected at start of battle,   Most aerial targets destroyed per sortie

 

OK, thanks. The last was the odd one to consider.



ClosedCoffin #29 Posted 13 July 2019 - 03:58 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 7712 battles
  • 309
  • [MRCS] MRCS
  • Member since:
    02-16-2013

View PostNL_Celt, on 13 July 2019 - 03:50 AM, said:

 

OK, thanks. The last was the odd one to consider.

Not sure if your aware but these stats are available here. https://worldofwarplanes.com/community/players/

Just type in your game name.



Stygian_Alchemist #30 Posted 13 July 2019 - 04:01 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 9161 battles
  • 1,722
  • [A-S-S] A-S-S
  • Member since:
    10-08-2018
Yup :) I was looking mostly for the hours played bit, because its a good indicator of planes you favor to grace with your effort in, but sorties chosen is a good metric for that too.

I'm legit fascinated by the variation in people's choices and digging that we've all got such distinctly -different- flight choices and preferences!

Mercsn #31 Posted 13 July 2019 - 05:42 AM

    Captain

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 2599 battles
  • 3,289
  • [A-S-S] A-S-S
  • Member since:
    04-17-2013
It's interesting to see that of the people posting in this thread, none of the planes are the "most played" per era according to the last couple reports that WG put out, iirc.

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.

Stygian_Alchemist #32 Posted 13 July 2019 - 05:45 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 9161 battles
  • 1,722
  • [A-S-S] A-S-S
  • Member since:
    10-08-2018

View PostMercsn, on 12 July 2019 - 11:42 PM, said:

It's interesting to see that of the people posting in this thread, none of the planes are the "most played" per era according to the last couple reports that WG put out, iirc.

I noticed that.

I also notice that many of the "most played" are not what a lot of people would consider "good" planes. I've got a bunch of those from 10-20 myself, though I'll admit my primary 10 are mostly "good" planes per meta agreement.



Captain_Rownd #33 Posted 13 July 2019 - 05:58 AM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 1823 battles
  • 817
  • Member since:
    09-28-2015

View PostStygian_Alchemist, on 12 July 2019 - 06:01 PM, said:

Yup :) I was looking mostly for the hours played bit, because its a good indicator of planes you favor to grace with your effort in, but sorties chosen is a good metric for that too.
 

 

I'd say number of battles is the best metric of effort, if I'm understanding the numbers.  "Sorties" is going to be inflated somewhat for planes that get shot down more.  Hours varies with the length of matches.  It's a little hard to measure the effect of the latter two.  Number of battles measures how often you click the "battle" button for a given plane, which I think is the best measure of putting effort in. 

 


Specialist planes:

SPAD S.510 :: P-40 :: MiG-3 :: A6M1 :: XP-44 :: Fw 190 A-5 :: Me 209 V4 :: Venom :: Caudron C.714 :: Ki-88 :: Wirraway :: Tomahawk IIb :: TsKB I-7 :: Ki-5 :: F2A-1


hoom #34 Posted 13 July 2019 - 06:56 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 7708 battles
  • 1,570
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

This thread has shamed me into action!

I'm putting some of my favs that I've not been playing recently back into rotation so I can knock out some of those T3/4s :child:

 

First will be Tornado (currently 11th) then I-220.

Tu-1 and Vampire F1 are already rapidly approaching top 10 due to being my highest-tier Silver-printers and fun to fly.

Then I'll probably bring in Tempest & Typhoon too.

Might have to bring La-5 & 9 back into rotation to keep them in top 10 so I don't start looking like a Teaboo :sceptic:

A lot of the rest of my Hangar is a big step down in the 3-5hr played range.

If I get a spate of ground target Token missions my Il-40 might make it into top 10 too.


C'est magnifique, mais ce n'est pas le SerB.

Stygian_Alchemist #35 Posted 13 July 2019 - 06:56 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 9161 battles
  • 1,722
  • [A-S-S] A-S-S
  • Member since:
    10-08-2018

View PostCaptain_Rownd, on 12 July 2019 - 11:58 PM, said:

 

I'd say number of battles is the best metric of effort, if I'm understanding the numbers.  "Sorties" is going to be inflated somewhat for planes that get shot down more.  Hours varies with the length of matches.  It's a little hard to measure the effect of the latter two.  Number of battles measures how often you click the "battle" button for a given plane, which I think is the best measure of putting effort in. 

 

Possibly... I suppose time or battle count either is an effective metric. Time, actual -time- yes is modified by the length of a battle, but it's also determined by the time you actually have to play.



BB3_Oregon_Steel #36 Posted 13 July 2019 - 07:24 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 1171 battles
  • 358
  • [A-S-S] A-S-S
  • Member since:
    10-26-2015

View Postqu33kKC, on 12 July 2019 - 04:07 PM, said:

@BB3, as a fan of shipgirls, I went and took a look at your namesake.  For a pre-Dread, she's a good looking ship.  I'll keep you in mind if I ever spot a kanmasu version of her.  :honoring:

 

I am, and yes she was.  Third battleship built for the US Navy, exceptionally distinguished service during the Spanish American War where she earned the title of "McKinley's Bulldog" with active service through WWI.  Loaned to the state of Oregon as at museum ship, she was retained in that capacity through the beginning of WWII.  The Navy then decided that they needed her for her metal and took her back for scrapping but when she had been stripped down to her main deck, she was instead converted into a dynamite barge and spent much of the war at Guam.  She was then, after the war, sold to Japanese breakers for scrapping. 

 

Her mainmast was saved and is now installed in Tom McCall park along Portland's waterfront where she had once been moored during her museum days. A couple of her boilers, ships bell and a few other odds and ends likewise survived including a good deal of furniture fashioned from the material of her teak deck.

 

It's almost a criminal shame that she wasn't preserved.  If she had somehow managed to escape the Navy's bureaucracy, she would today be only one of two Pre-Dreadnoughts to be preserved (the other being the IJN Mikasa).  :honoring:

 


Edited by BB3_Oregon_Steel, 13 July 2019 - 11:58 PM.

"Don't mess with me because I can squish you like a bug, that is If I should decide to notice your existence in the first place".  

 

Yes, it's haughty and its arrogant but you're a battleship with 16 inch guns and Britannia Rules the Waves.  Maybe a bit of arrogance in this case is appropriate.  


Captain_Underpants53 #37 Posted 13 July 2019 - 09:08 AM

    First Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 20645 battles
  • 2,950
  • [A-S-S] A-S-S
  • Member since:
    04-17-2017

:medal:

 

:great:


MSgt, USAF, (ret)

NL_Celt #38 Posted 13 July 2019 - 08:05 PM

    Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 1106 battles
  • 98
  • Member since:
    10-05-2012

View PostClosedCoffin, on 13 July 2019 - 03:58 AM, said:

Not sure if your aware but these stats are available here. https://worldofwarplanes.com/community/players/

Just type in your game name.

Thanks for that!



BB3_Oregon_Steel #39 Posted 14 July 2019 - 12:08 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 1171 battles
  • 358
  • [A-S-S] A-S-S
  • Member since:
    10-26-2015

View PostStygian_Alchemist, on 12 July 2019 - 08:01 PM, said:

Yup :) I was looking mostly for the hours played bit, because its a good indicator of planes you favor to grace with your effort in, but sorties chosen is a good metric for that too.

I'm legit fascinated by the variation in people's choices and digging that we've all got such distinctly -different- flight choices and preferences!

 

Mine is actually pretty simple.  I start with the plane on the left most slot on my carousel then work my way right until I reach the right most plane on my carousel.  I then move back to the left and start the process all over again. 

 

Sometimes I will flight up and choose a plane that works better with my wingperson's plane and sometimes I'll get a new plane and just fly it around for a few times before inserting her into my normal line up rotation which accounts for some of the variation of the planes I fly.  My overall "Top" planes I fly are going to be skewed towards biplanes since that is where I started, flew a lot of missions before moving on and since my carousel approach gives them equal time in my rotation, they should end up near the top of the list of "planes I fly". 

 

My approach equally rarely impacts the planes I like to fly vs those that I don't like that much.  As such, I fly the planes I hate about as much as those I love.  Some of this is just stubbornness on my part, I am determined to figure out how to make the planes I hate successful which kind of precludes me concentrating on my favorite airplanes. 

 

On the other hand, I really love it when I finally figure out how to make a "hated" plane into a "liked" plane.  I just recently had a great mission with the Hurricane IID which has accomplished little for me since I first flew it other than the spectacular way it exploderates and sends me crashing to the ground in flames. This time however, I made sure to get in close and only when I was sure I had a good chance of getting those monster 40mm cannon to actually hit what I was shooting at, did I engage. Twelve downed red planes later I was all grins from ear to ear and that is one of the reasons I like to fly. 

 

Anyway, I will pretty much always be a statistical outlier when someone is examining my "choice" of aircraft and I should be able to hang on to the title of "Biplane Noob Girl" for quite some time as a result.  :great: 


Edited by BB3_Oregon_Steel, 14 July 2019 - 12:14 AM.

"Don't mess with me because I can squish you like a bug, that is If I should decide to notice your existence in the first place".  

 

Yes, it's haughty and its arrogant but you're a battleship with 16 inch guns and Britannia Rules the Waves.  Maybe a bit of arrogance in this case is appropriate.  


crzyhawk #40 Posted 14 July 2019 - 06:25 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 2193 battles
  • 249
  • [3D_MI] 3D_MI
  • Member since:
    05-08-2015
https://imgur.com/eByk2PK

Specialist A/C

USA: XP-31; F11C-2; F2A-1; XF4F-3; Hawk 81-A1 (XP-40); P-39N | UK: Goldfinch; Hurricane Mk I; Spitfire Mk I; Spitfire Mk Ia; Mustang Mk Ia |

Germany: FW-56; AR-67; BF-109B; BF-109E-3; Spitfire V DB605 | USSR: LaGG 3 (4) | Japan: A6M2; A6M3 (exp) | China: Hawk II; Tomahawk IIb





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users