We are delaying the late war split.

[richard_rd]

Toad, i agree with your statements 100%, good job!!!!!

[Baine]

TY for the changes. (And BTW, the F4U looks cool).

[Rocket]

Toad,

    I concur 100%.  

    Also very nicely made post with well thought out information posted in a format that even I can read and make sense out of.  


S!
Rocket

[jhookt]

after reading thru toads post twice to make sure i understood what he was saying i noticed his sig and returned to square 1

[Toad]

Originally posted by jhookt
after reading thru toads post twice to make sure i understood what he was saying i noticed his sig and returned to square 1

Fly what you like...just fly it in the proper arena.  

I may have to update my sig now that we have choice of time periods.

[Overlag]

nice U turn


thanks HT

[DREDIOCK]

Originally posted by jpeg
It is "too" not to, why is it so hard to push the o key one more time?!?

Imagine that. a New Yorker complaining about how people talk

[4510]

Originally posted by Toad
HT, all due respect sir, I have a question.

First a bit of data:




Now, the above data and opinions lead to the following question:

Would you consider moving the P-38G, Spit IX and Fw-1190A-5 out of the EW and into the MW?

Futher, would you consider perking the Spit V lightly and the Hurri IIC rather heavily to promote diversity in the EW arena?

I think these moves would make the EW a better arena, more in tune with the spirit of EW air combat.

Thank you for you consideration and time.

With a signature of...

Toad
13th TAS
No Mercy Asked....None Given!

Fly what you like. Like what you fly. Don't worry about what the other guy flies. It's a game.

Why does your signature seem so at odds with your request?

[Toad]

My request is for a reasonably balanced arena, one that promotes the style of fighting prevalent during the stage of the war the particular arena represents.

Not a very difficult concept is it? Early War planes in an Early War arena? Sort of makes sense, don't you think?


As for the sig, I probably ought to change it and I probably will. I think I've had that one since the early part of beta almost.

That was written way back in the days when guys played this game to fight. Didn't matter to me what you flew as long as you were there for the fight.

It's not as applicable in these days of guys that play to avoid the fight.

[68slayr]

i like the ENY thing in EW/MW.....woudl there be a way to do this inLATE2?  I was flying a 262 that costed me 8 perks today.  ENY....21.38:rolleyes:

it was
knights:1(me)
Bishops: 2
rooks:13
I'm not complaning bout the ENY today.  (i like flyin 262s vs P40bs..a6m2s..C202s spit1s and hurri1s) but i have had the same thing happen to me.

Any way to fix it?

[4510]

Originally posted by Toad
My request is for a reasonably balanced arena, one that promotes the style of fighting prevalent during the stage of the war the particular arena represents.

Not a very difficult concept is it? Early War planes in an Early War arena? Sort of makes sense, don't you think?


As for the sig, I probably ought to change it and I probably will. I think I've had that one since the early part of beta almost.

That was written way back in the days when guys played this game to fight. Didn't matter to me what you flew as long as you were there for the fight.

It's not as applicable in these days of guys that play to avoid the fight.

Or when the complaints about plane types didn't match your opinion the signature was valid, but now that the shoe is in the other cockpit it's different?

As for the time of war that you speak to, are you saying that early war saw massive furballs that went all the way to the deck?  That pilots fought with the obvious abandon that is displayed by the turn and burn, grab a new plane when you are shot down crowd?  I'd be interested in your historical sources that support that.

I think I understand the style of play that you want, but I don't agree with the method to legislate that type of play for everyone else.

[Oldman731]

Originally posted by Toad
Would you consider moving the P-38G, Spit IX and Fw-1190A-5 out of the EW and into the MW?

Futher, would you consider perking the Spit V lightly and the Hurri IIC rather heavily to promote diversity in the EW arena?

These are excellent suggestions.

- oldman

[Toad]

No, try to twist it as you will; it's a simple concept and your twists simply make you look foolish.

I flew from Beta on up to the recently deceased MA with that sig. What others flew in there didn't bother me. All planes were available from all periods of the war; that's the way it was and I had no problem with it.

Now try to follow this concept:

For reasons of his own, HT divided the single arena into three arenas each representing a particular period of WW2.

These are called Early War, Mid War and Late War.

Following so far?

What I have posted here is my opinion and reasoning on the planeset in the EW arena. I believe 3 of the aircraft are misplaced and should correctly be placed in the MW arena.

Even if those aircraft remain in the EW I will continue to fly there. It won't bother me if someone flies a 190 but I will still think two things:

1. The Fw-190A-5 should really be in the MW, (along with the Spit IX and the P-38G. The arena would have much better balance without them.)

2. Someone flying those planes really isn't in tune with the period the EW represents.

Now, here's a concept...why don't YOU try discussing what I posted instead of my sig?

Or are you totally bereft of the ability to carry on an on-topic discussion?

[4510]

I have no problem with discussing the content of your posts.

I'm not the one with a signature line that apparently is inconsistent with your current position, nor am I the only one who noticed the irony of it.
So I don't feel foolish at all.  I wouldn't want to be on your end of that argument tho.

I've neither agreed nor disagreed with your plane choices.  A leveling of the plane set in any arena is always worthy of discussion.  If you look at my two previous posts, they addressed your signature and your method of trying to legislate a STYLE of flying that you seem to feel represents the early war period.  

I'm not sure how you honestly can defend what your signature says and that of your current position and it is really irrelevant.  I'm not really interested in that per se.  However, I am interested in how you support your argument that points to a style of fighting that you seem to prefer.  My obvious assumption is that it involves a lot more turn fighting, which inevitably leads to a massive furball on the deck.  You allude to that style being prevalent for the period and I don't believe there are adequate historical references to support that position.

Now, if your position is just your opinion based upon what type of flying you WANT to see in the EW, every one is certainly entitled to that.
Whether I agree or not would of course be my prerogative.

I'm open to your thoughts, but I don't need you to tell me how I look, ask if I can follow, or question whether I can remain on topic.

[Roscoroo]

i "disagree" w/ Toad also .

for now til we get more early planes  those 3 arnt that much of a problem, they help keep the  Hohurri's in line ..

perk the spit 5 you gotta be kidding me ... why dont ya just ask for them to perk the whole planeset and scare all the newb's off .  

by  perking more of  the current rides in EW you may as well just close the arena  . IMRO

if they really go towards Toads direction ... then it would be best to toss the 3 countrys and go to 5 countrys and enable the planes in that catagory ...
(oh wait we have alled vs axis already)