Rating Fighters

[CapAndGown]

ORIGINAL: Tristanjohn

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown

Would it be possible to use the air balance numbers given for each base to try to figure out how various planes are rated? You could play H2H and park an equal number of Zeros and P40s, for instance, on adjacent bases and compare the air balance numbers. Do the same for Zeros and F4F4s and so on. Might this not reveal the relative ratings of the fighters?

I must be having a bad afternoon because I don't understand what you mean by "air balance numbers." What is that? Have I missed something obvious all along?

Whatever those air balance numbers are, how would we derive from these relative scores the truth as to how Gary plugged all that plane data in? Is that a logical step that I just can't see? Speak to me.

The "air balance numbers" are available at each base in the roll over text. Place your cursor over a freindly base and look at the number in the upper right corner. If positive, then the "air balance" at the base is in your favor. If negative, the "air balance" is in favor of the enemy. Now place the cursor over an enemy base. If the "air balance" number is positive, then it is in favor of the enemy. If it is negative, it is in your favor. I have no idea how these numbers are calculated. But perhaps they could provide the solution to "rating" the different aircraft.

[Feinder]

Air bal is a useful tool. If the airbal over your own base is negative, it means that you do -not- have local air superiority (despite however many fighters you have). If the number is low, say less than 20, it's only marginal. The higher it is, the "safer" you are. With a negative airbal, you're under a much greater threat of Level bomber attacks.

The wrinkle is that -ALL- planes project and airbal, out to their maximum range, and it diminishes as range increases. Patrols, DBs, Level-Bombers, Fighters, they all project air-bal. I haven't bothered to test if it's individual by specific class (ie Zeros projecting a different airbal than Oscars), or if it's just by type (fighter, patrol, DB, level-bomber, etc). Then multiplied by the number of active aircraft.

It's kinda hard to test tho, because Patrols project and airbal a LONG way (out the limit of the maximum range). You could verify that Perth and Karachi both have airbals of zeros when you start your test (I think they do). Then set up a sqdn of somthing in Perthand one in Karachi. Find out what the two airbals are. Again, it's harder to test Japan, because thier float planes project an airbal half-way across the empire (*snicker*).

[Tristanjohn]

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown

ORIGINAL: Tristanjohn

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown

Would it be possible to use the air balance numbers given for each base to try to figure out how various planes are rated? You could play H2H and park an equal number of Zeros and P40s, for instance, on adjacent bases and compare the air balance numbers. Do the same for Zeros and F4F4s and so on. Might this not reveal the relative ratings of the fighters?

I must be having a bad afternoon because I don't understand what you mean by "air balance numbers." What is that? Have I missed something obvious all along?

Whatever those air balance numbers are, how would we derive from these relative scores the truth as to how Gary plugged all that plane data in? Is that a logical step that I just can't see? Speak to me.

The "air balance numbers" are available at each base in the roll over text. Place your cursor over a freindly base and look at the number in the upper right corner. If positive, then the "air balance" at the base is in your favor. If negative, the "air balance" is in favor of the enemy. Now place the cursor over an enemy base. If the "air balance" number is positive, then it is in favor of the enemy. If it is negative, it is in your favor. I have no idea how these numbers are calculated. But perhaps they could provide the solution to "rating" the different aircraft.

Okay. I didn't remember that was what they're called.

And yes, figuring out Gary's formulas from that feature would be utterly impossible.