Watch this.
Me telling you your feelings matter, me acknowledging your opinions and perspectives with equality, me taking responsibility for my thousands of typing mistakes every month, and me treating you as an equal is NOT gaslighting.
I don’t address false accusations against me anymore, if you want me to address points your posts will have the same level of civility everyone elses’ posts do.
I will not treat you differently than I treat myself and others just because you want my attention; getting my attention is simple: Be kind, and I’ll do my best to be kind.
Part of this is conditioning myself to not absorb the behavior of others.
The enemy teams did worse when you were in every other 7.7 and 8.0, and all other BRs as well.
@かがり Any tech tree gets something OP = correct its BR. Gripen, R2Y2, F-14A IRIAF, etc.
BRs aren’t dictated by win rate.
Yeah and Nah.
BR itself may not be dictated by win rate itself.
but the win rate can be a good indicator to look at other values which impact real BR changes.
With some exaggerations, the win rate can be indicator of both ‘average skill level of players’ and ‘average deck power’.
For example, if bad US players with low skill levels constantly feed enemies
then enemies WR, KD, average reward netting goes higher.
And enemies will get nerfed because average reward netting hits way higher than their counterparts.
‘Because they overperformed’
While US gets spoonfed buff ‘because they underperformed’
:/
the R2Y2’s should go to like 7.7 tops + airspawn or 7.3 with no airspawn given its being removed. and is kinda like a legacy to the R2Y2, of where it started and where it’ll finally rest at
And if I was to assess the performance of Vampire, I’d compare it to other jets you play.
After all, you’ll be facing American players for almost all other jets.
And the ultimate comparison will be my ability to do cross analysis.
If people keep calling those of us that want Mig-15 and Sabre moved up names because they’re upset that 7.0 - 8.0 is more balanced than 8.0 - 10.0… I don’t know.
My first ever post in this topic was about wanting the compression fixed at 9.3 which removes the OP 8.0s from 8.0.
And instead of people remembering that or being honest about my positions, there are posts actively lying about my positions and at this stage I am done addressing points that aren’t perfectly PG.
No accusations, no vulgarity, no raging at others.
I’m done. After 2 years of dealing with it constantly, I’m just done.
I’ll be kind, and I’ll expect that same behavior back at me.
My typing may slip and I’ll edit those mistakes out when I catch them or they’re pointed out; and I’ll do my best to remember to tell people I’ve corrected the post.
It’s okay to seemingly disagree with me about Sabres and Mig-15s, it’s not okay to insult me and rage at me because I don’t want the Griffon Spitfires to suffer from under-BR’d jets.
@かがり
The 7.7s of the game climb slower, rate slower, and/or go slower with worse guns than MD452 and R2Y2.
As I said previously, moving up the OP 8.0s - 10.3s fixes the 7.0 - 8.0 range of aircraft most.
@Leinadmix9_ツ
I gave you the parameters, and you refused. You want to edit the parameters to give the F-80C as much advantage as possible because you know WTRTI and Statshark are correct.
Me saying that Statshark and WTRTI are wrong would itself be wrong, so I cannot and will not say what you demand of me.
Here’s all the evidence I’ve supplied previously BTW:
As WTRTI and Statshark prove, the airframe performance when given equal fuel shows a slight bias toward R2Y2.
90 seconds of water injection is not enough to out-rate an R2Y2 if you get into a rate fight.
You have to intentionally bring less fuel, you have to intentionally make the F-80C have advantage.
Which has been my statement this entire time.
Oh, and if you don’t use water injection for your takeoff and initial climb, the R2Y2 out-climbs you, and climbs as well as the F-80C when the F-80C has minimum fuel.
So yeah, while Lein’s posts claim WTRTI and Statshark are wrong, and demands me I “admit” they’re wrong; I’ll stick to the evidence provided for the claim I made from the start; I’m not going to change goalposts just because someone demands me to.
I refuse to do comparisons of aircraft where one aircraft has fuel advantage, cause I want to know what the performance is like when the fuel time is equal.
This is how DCS 1v1s are done, which is where I started for 1v1s; and it’s the standard I supplied for War Thunder 1v1s with the slider.
With the R2Y2’s superior guns, as well as the slightly superior airframe performance, it warrants 0.3 above F-80C.
So yeah, I’m not interested in someone that claims Statshark and WTRTI are wrong, and the only way to prove that Starshark and WTRTI are wrong is to bail from the parameters given, and give F-80C advantage changing the goalposts.
Perfect. 14 minutes initial fuel for F-80C, fuel consumption will be on, and for fairness it’ll be a map we both takeoff on. That way you can choose to save water injection or not.
We’ll swap every 3 rounds.
I will grab the final performance mod on my F-80C for our 1v1, then we can do it. [Test drive is a spaded aircraft.]
I apologize if my posts sounded harsh to you, by the way. I saw unkind things and probably responded poorly to them myself, and that’s my mistake.
If you want to be at the same altitude, use water injection at the beginning. :)
If you want to know what the results would be if we do the 1v1 maps after those 9+ rounds, then we can do some 1v1 maps afterward. Fair?
So after the 1v1, I clearly have a skill issue over Lein in 1v1s still, as we both agree on.
I won 1 of the engagements, and that was with the R2Y2 playing more passively and using the rate advantage.
However, I did forget to include my suspicions of F-80C’s potential vertical capability.
It doesn’t change my conclusion, and if anything it at most changes where F-80C should be placed.
My statement [same fuel time for all] of R2Y2 and F-80C being equal climb to ~5000 meters stays true.
My statement of R2Y2 being a superior rate stays true.
The statement of F-80C being at least slightly superior in verticals gets added; I didn’t make a statement on this previously in any direction as I tend to keep speculation to myself.
My statement that R2Y2’s guns are superior stays true.
Now, if F-80C is as good as Lein claims, then it should be 8.0 with the R2Y2 and MD452.
Cause all other 7.7s are objectively inferior.
And my conclusion remains that R2Y2 is a perfect example of what an 8.0 jet should be, and the OP 8.0s should move up.
Cause out of these in this image, the red is objectively OP, the green is good examples of what’s allowable, and the purple is suspect.
Granted, there are some green I’d have to look into further. I feel like retesting the Vamps, and Sea Hawks, as well as all of the Meteors.
Out of 9, i played the F-80C 6 rounds and 3 on the R2Y2 V1, he used the V3, i won with the R2Y2 bc his lines were bad bad, Alvis has no idea how to play the F-80 passively.
He won that round bc i went aggressive a little early and after having my fuselage in black i survived another 3 minutes turn fighting him.
The F-80C is so supperior to the R2Y2 that on merch, after taking off and climb, at the same alt i was doing 756kmh and he was not even at 600kmh.
He’s the better pilot in both aircraft, but as I said in my posts this wasn’t about 1v1s it was about air RB, and in the air RB context the R2Y2 pulls slightly ahead.
And if F-80C is close enough, that can move to 8.0 at some stage if the statements I made are only marginal.
If anything this gives even more of an advantage to the F-80C in air rb. Speed is crucial to avoid getting swarmed. The R2Y2 is extremely poor at 8.0, going 1:9 against a 7.7 plane shows this too.
