Should HTC model aircraft that did not meaningfuly affect the outcome of WW2?

[M.C.202]

That other thread is asking the wrong question.  

It does not matter if a plane "saw combat" , but what was the real physical effect on the final outcome of the war that a plane had. If a plane caused fewer losses to the enemy than they had from bad weather or pilot error, then don't add it.  

This is as valid an approch to aircraft selection as "saw combat". Odd thing to note in the responses to thread X, most of the no's are from , shall we say, a biased Axis  

Once the historic release dates and ratios in action of aircraft  used in a given area are not used, it is ALL make believe.

To me, if it reached full scale series production, it is a valid choice.

[funkedup]

Should HTC model aircraft that did not meaningfuly affect the outcome of WW2?

It's a bit too late to be asking this question, because there are some aircraft in the planeset already that fit this description.  

It's also not an easy question to answer for quite a few aircraft types and sub-types.

[Raubvogel]

Originally posted by M.C.202:
It does not matter if a plane "saw combat" , but what was the real physical effect on the final outcome of the war that a plane had.

I didn't realize you had been promoted to Grand Poobah of Modeling Rules  

I bet the guys who got shot down by the planes that saw combat thought it had a real physical effect on the outcome of the war. OTOH, I bet the V-1s didn't really give a rats bellybutton that a Meteor shot em down  

[J_A_B]

Funked got it right--AH already does model airplanes of the said description.

J_A_B

[Buzzbait]

S!

AH should model the frequently used aircraft before they bring in some one off rarity.

[K West]

Since the outcome of the war ended solidly in favour of the Allies why model any Axis aircraft at all?  

 Seriously. You would be in favour of elimiating any possible inclusion to AH aircraft from France? Polish? How about Rumanian, Czek? As well as just about anything Allied from 1939-1940 (except those from the UK, USSR). Wouldn't this have applied to Italian 1943 or 1944 designs? How about the small run Australian designs like the Whirraway or Boomerang?

 In reality about the only plane that had a direct and meaningful effect on the final outcome of the war was the B-29 with it's atomic bombload. Let's have an Elola Gay arena!

 Westy

[Maverick]

Define "meaningful effect on the war".

If you are worried about how many, how long they served or how popular then you have something that can be quantified. As for "meaningful", you'll have a hard time defending any determination. A good example of a small number of actual weapon systems that were in the war and is in the game, look at the osty. Less that 50 in the entire conflict but a MAJOR player choice in this game.

 

[funkedup]

Define "meaningful effect on the war".

For example, rescuing thousands of civilians from certain death by Nazi terror robots.

[M.C.202]

Hum... even with     and    the intent of my post seems to have been missed.  

The tille and opening were intended to show that "thread X" was starting from an unballanced position. By making light fun of it through a slight er... exageration of a contrary view, the intent was to get people to re-think the starting point of their own point.

Instead I got people thinking I meant it.

I did like my "Odd thing to note in the responses to thread X, most of the no's are from , shall we say, a biased Axis " though.

My real thoughts on what aircraft should be added is "To me, if it reached full scale series production, it is a valid choice."

O'Westy said:
Since the outcome of the war ended solidly in favour of the Allies why model any Axis aircraft at all?

He ALMOST got what I meant , by seeing the off the board end point of my  red herring, but not my  last line "To me, if it reached full scale series production, it is a valid choice", showing what I think should be used.

I guess I'll use a lighter iron next time I try irony  

[-=Silo=-]

I think a good rule of thumb would be use in combat, and placed in production.

That way you can avoid the "X number" made issue, which grossly favors countries whose industrial base was never hampered during the war.
Or even sqaudron service (whole squadrons of the same airplane), since some armed forces operated mixed sqaudrons because having whole squadrons of a particular type wouldnt be worthwhile in a given situation.

"Combat use" and "placed in production" would cover enough planes to select some good ones to fill vital roles in the game too... even if 5000 of that type never rolled off the assembly line.

For instance, which plane had the most meaninful outcome of the Pacific war for the U.S.? *shrug* I would say it was the U.S. submarines! They sank the replacement planes and parts being shipped to the Japanese, which enabled the U.S. to get the upper hand in the airwar.

Keeping it simple is the best way to go

<S>