If it is a bad idea, and this one is a very bad idea, and you post it on a public forum, people, some of who are very knowledgeable about the subject, will respond to it.
This is a bad idea. I am not as knowledgeable about this stuff as Guppy is, but I am pretty familiar with it and this is a bad idea across the board. It has not a single redeeming aspect to it. It wastes developer time. It fills no gaps for scenarios. It would be useless in the MAs. It was not historically significant. It would almost never be used to a degree than makes the B5N2 seem downright common.
It is a bad idea.
Sometimes you just have to man up and accept that you didn't have all the information and accept that other people are actually correct.
The fact that it is a bad idea is highly relative and in this case based on opinion. As far as information, I gathered all my information LONG before the advent of this game as I've always held a fascination for WW2 aircraft. I'm not arguing that the plane is worth a crap at air-to-air combat, but I think it would be an interesting addition. If it's a waste of the designers efforts, surely that's a decision that can be left up to the designers. I'm certain they can make that decision without your input.
This is a game and many of the planes here aren't here due to historical significance. For example, the P-47M had an almost non-existant impact on the air war over Europe due to its engine problems, the fact that it was introduced so late in the war and the fact that this particular model only accounted for 15 air-to-air kills. Add to that the fact that only 130 were built, and one could wonder why it is modeled in this game. Likewise the TA-152...less than 50 units actually delivered.
If you want to base the decision for a new plane on its merits, then the P-39 probably shouldn't be here either...nor should the I-16, or the Buffalo.
Again, disagree if you want, but your continued rants show a lack of self esteem and open-mindedness. Chill. Relax.
230G
