lol... again no source!
As stated:
"Spitfire
The History"by Eric B. Morgan , Edward Shacklady.
I learned the 'comon knowledge' from in game that Spit16s didn't see combat.
Only a few completed before war's end, and never even saw an enemy fighter...
Your source is random guys in an internet game of unknown expertise on the subject on which they are pontificating? Ok then. I'll go with my source.
If you guys are splitting hairs about this stuff then it only proves the point, and any combat becomes 'myth'... as in one pilot's source or what what!
Spliting hairs would be saying that thirteen Spit XVI's saw combat, not twelve. No, we're correcting gross inaccuracies in the player base's knowledge. You say twelve and I say 2000 minimum, perhaps more than 3000 in the same configuration is not a difference of hairs. I have research supporting my claim, you have in game whines.
Examples:
There were about 1000 he-177s made, debugged ones (as much as any plane goes), and we don't have it,
We also don't have the Wellington (11,000 built), the Pe-2 (11,000 built) or the Beaufighter (6,000 built). Adding something like the Spitfire Mk XVI or Bf109G-14 is cheap and easy for HTC compared to a completely new airframe, particularly multi-station bombers.
but one spit16 pilot's myth and we get a spit16!!!
This is simply wrong. Spitfire serial numbers prove it so.
109g6's with taters, probably 1000 built also, no idea, but I'm sure it was a bunch, and we get the 150rpg and the 200rpg for the center 20mm, but not the tater? Booo!
When the Bf109s were redone CMs didn't have the ability to limit loadout availability and the Bf109G-6 in AH was supposed to represent an early version, so no 30mm option. Now that CMs have that ability the 30mm should absolutely be added to the G-6.
Far as you guys saying stuff being mislabled, like this conversation about spits, and others about "we never had a g10," then you guys need to take that stuff up with HTC!!! They said 'g10' so I'm saying g10, till HTC says otherwise!
Pyro, IIRC, made that point about the old AH1 Bf109G-10. Seriously, find a chart (German real data chart, no AH chart) in which a Bf109G-10 is shown to do 452mph at best altitude.
More myths?...
The 109k4 was NOT the only good 109!!! I say "109s sux in here" and you guys point and say "k4 is a monster..."
The Bf109 was a great fighter. The Bf109K-4 is one of the best prop fighters in the game. The Bf109G-14 is very good as well. The Bf109F-4 is, against its contemporaries, clearly the best fighter of 1941 as modeled in AH. I would love to see the Bf109G-6/AS added. The Bf109G-10 can be added or not, it is irrelevant to the game in my opinion.
I still say the k-4 is a tub, and that all these luft aces, from Battle for Poland, through the Battle of Britain, Marselies 17kills in one day in the desert, to Stalingrad, to defending Berlin in May 45, most luftwaffe were mostly flying all thr OTHER variations!!!
Have you tried the K-4's contemporaries? I know you're a Luftwaffe fan, but spend time in the P-47D-40, P-51D, P-38L and, yes, even the Spitfire Mk XIV and Mk XVI. All late war fighters are tubs compared to early war fighters. The Bf109K-4 is clearly superior as a fighter to the three American fighters I listed and is not inferior to the British interceptors.
Luft had all the aces
I can name many American, British, Finnish, Italian, Japanese and Russian aces.
required pilot, plane, amo, and bullet proof glass, etc, etc...
And the other air forces didn't? They all had this stuff.
And anyone saying "only luftwaffe saw other planes" is an fing joke!
For most of the war Luftwaffe pilots had much better access to enemy aircraft than did other sides. Obviously 1940 would be the other direction with the Brits having better access.
Anotherwords, allieds claiming a nation didn't see enemy fighters, on continental Europe durring ww2, is a joke!
Nobody claims that they didn't see enemy fighters. What we point out is that they saw fewer enemy aircraft. Another aspect is that there were fewer enemy aircraft to go around. Add to that the different policies allowed by the superior Allied position, Luftwaffe you fly until you die or are too badly wounded, American/British you fly a number of operations and then are done.
Check wikipedia.org, "list of ww2 flying aces"
Most nations involved were averaging 50-125 about losses per day, to the luftwaffes 50(? I forget) per day...
33,000 109s smoked 70,000 enemy planes bout, and considering the sway of stats do to losing at end, prooves the point, 109s and 190s were indeed uber alles!
*Edit, need to post that link for losses per day...
And?
109s and 190s PWNT alle das arses!!! Get over it!
Call out Franz stupid thread! 
You seem to conflate things at your convenience. You get frustrated that the German aircraft don't dominate in AH, primarily a fighter vs fighter game, so you turn to WWII kills and show how well they did against air forces as a whole, many, many bombers included, the admittedly poorly trained VVS included and think you've made a point.
Well, you do make a point, but not the one you think you're making.
