Where my KI-43?

[Karnak]

He-111 (I'd take it over the Ju88 or Ki-67)

You're unusual in that.  It has nothing over either of them.

Ju-87G

It would get used, but not as much as all that, just not enough ammo or durability.

Ju-188

This might get decent use.

Ju-88G

Hangar queen, just like the Mossie VI.

Pe-2

Hangar queen, small bombload, weak guns.

Tu-2

This might get decent usage.

Mustang I (might be a dog, but people will fly it anyway for the 4x Hispanos)

It is unlikely to have have four cannons as very few did, most likely just MGs.

Sea Hurricane
D.520
IAR-80

All total hangar queens.  Slow, under gunned.

[Tank-Ace]

Karnak, the Ju-87G would probably be about comperable to the Il-2.

And the IAR-80C would be pretty decent. About comperable to some MW spitfires. Just because something isn't super-high-preformance doesn't mean it will be a hanger queen.

In the long run, I'd guess that just about everything on that list would see more use than the Ki-43. Fact is that manuverability just isn't enough on its own; while it could dominate the turning fight, it would have the exact same weaknesses shared with the A6M's that keep them from seeing heavier use, and almost any use aside from CV battles.



And again, even based on YOUR OWN REASONS (historical significance, advantages offered in the MA, and gap fillers) there are more deserving additions than the Ki-43.

[Squire]

I beleive historical significance has been covered several times. The rest of it is the usual "it doesn't dominate the MA" stuff we always see as a counter argument at the end of threads. Thankfully Hitech Creations has a more inclusive policy.

[Karnak]

Karnak, the Ju-87G would probably be about comperable to the Il-2.

And the IAR-80C would be pretty decent. About comperable to some MW spitfires. Just because something isn't super-high-preformance doesn't mean it will be a hanger queen.

In the long run, I'd guess that just about everything on that list would see more use than the Ki-43. Fact is that manuverability just isn't enough on its own; while it could dominate the turning fight, it would have the exact same weaknesses shared with the A6M's that keep them from seeing heavier use, and almost any use aside from CV battles.



And again, even based on YOUR OWN REASONS (historical significance, advantages offered in the MA, and gap fillers) there are more deserving additions than the Ki-43.

Some yes, but some, no.  The Ki-43-III would almost certainly see more use than the He111, Pe-2, Sea Hurricane and D.520.  As a last ditch base defender it would 1) get off the ground fast and 2) be able to dodge at least somewhat effectively immediately after getting off the ground.

[Wmaker]

Hanger Queen.

Example I-16, New and remodeled P40s, Brewster.

By this definiton, almost half of the AH's units are hangar queens in the LWAs.

[kilo2]

By this definiton, almost half of the AH's units are hangar queens in the LWAs.

 

[Wmaker]

Yeh, that's what you usually post as you aren't really able to contribute anything sensible anyway. Brewster's kills/deaths hover somewhere in the middle of the pack from tour to tour as does the Ta152's for example. So by your logic both are hangar queens. And that in itself is fine as I've yet to see any formal definition which constitues a "hangar queen" and yet, all you are capable of is rolling your eyes.

[kilo2]

Yeh, that's what you usually post as you aren't really able to contribute anything sensible anyway. Brewster's kills/deaths hover somewhere in the middle of the pack from tour to tour as does the Ta152's for example. So by your logic both are hangar queens. And that in itself is fine as I've yet to see any formal definition which constitues a "hangar queen" and yet, all you are capable of is rolling your eyes.

 

That better for you?

[Wmaker]

That better for you?

All same to me. You aren't capable of arguing your point.

[kilo2]

All same to me. You aren't capable of arguing your point.

I would rather not have an argument it's what you want.

I would rather just have my fun.

I will say there was two reasons I added the brewster. One was because to an extent the Brewster is a hanger queen. Two because I knew you would respond and I wanted to watch you take the bait like the fish you are.

[Wmaker]

I would rather not an argument is what you want.

I would rather just have my fun.

I will say there was two reasons I added the brewster. One was because to an extent a Brewster is a hanger queen. Two because I knew you would respond and I wanted to watch you take the bait like the fish you are.

Heh.

Like I said, as there's no formal definition of hangar queen I see no problem of listing Brewster as such. The problem then just is that half of the units would be hangar queens and that in itself would largely limit the choises of new units that wouldn't be considered as hangar queens.

Btw, I fly the planes I fly for my own reasons but I rather find it positive if they are a rare sight in the arenas, not negative.

[kilo2]

My point is there is planes that are used in the main now that are older models. I would prefer to see those upgraded before they add planes that will see most use in events.

Yaks/110s for example. C202/205 are another set.

[Wmaker]

Well, I disagree with that and prefer the route HTC has chosen, which is adding new units and updating the old models simultaniously. If they would only update the old ones it would be a long long time before anything new would get added. And as HTC has already chosen their policy, the Ki-43 isn't really taking anything away from updating old models per say. The discussion here is more about how to allocate the resources regarding adding new units.

I do think that updating Yaks and Macchis is long overdue due to how old their models are. They are clearly older (and worse looking) than the old P-40 models which were updated just recently.

[Bruv119]

Hanger Queen.

Example I-16, New and remodeled P40s, Brewster.

hmmm  i've seen enough of these 3 mentioned to not label them as hangar Queen especially the Brewster.   

[FTJR]

Hangar queen, just like the Mossie VI.

Surely thats a typo?