My apologies, Staga.
I see you answered the question totally and correctly. The only argument
EVER made against the -1C was total number of kills per tour. <cough> Not talking perk here, talking including it in the simulation at all.
I guess I'm incorrect in remembering all the arguments made about how the -1C was too small a percentage of the F4U production run to be included and, most recently, "chogs- with their tremendous service record in the war and all....."
I must have imagined all those numerous posts.

BTW, if you'll check the BBS records, you'll see I was "for" introducing the D9 unperked as well as the Me-262 unperked. I'm one of the original "fly what you want to fly" guys.
..and you can also check the tour stats to see how long it's been since I even flew a -1C. I think it was about July 2000. Haven't flown any "perk" fighter yet, in fact.
I don't care what they put in the game and PARTICULARLY I don't care at all what the other guy chooses to fly.

I just find some things really hilarious. This is one of them.

Now, I'll leave this thread as you wish.
Just wanted to point out the comparison in production numbers of these particular aircraft with their "tremendous service record in the war and all". Nice that they are all considered "acceptable" and the USN one isn't. That's quite fair, don't you think?

Oh, btw... on topic:
Stuka.
