Agree with banana. I would actually put the TU and a Betty at top of the list. That way we've got a relatively heavy bomber for each major group.
I think the SBD would get a lot of use, if modelled correctly. Hortlund labelled it a suicide ride, and compared it to the TBM, a valid argument. But I see the TBM quite a bit in the MA, particularly with a CV close to land, flown it a bit myself. I think the lesson here is that people will fly "suicide" rides if there is a strategically necessary reason for doing so. After all, people fly the 110 all the time, and in most cases, apart from a high bomber intercept, it's pretty much certain death (or at least it has been for every one I've encountered).
The SBD also has one significant difference when compared with the TBM (and that's why I said, if correctly modelled). It could, in a pinch, dogfight. During WWII engagements, Coral Sea, etc., they actually racked up a quite respectable total of NME aircraft shot down. So it wouldn't be the lumbering target that the TBM is.
Cajun, yes, bi-planes would be a great idea, and the Swordfish is one that would enable us to do some really interesting scenarios (the channel dash, the Taranto raid, etc.). Personally, it's a plane I'm really keen on However they wouldn't get much use in the MA, not enough to justify their immediate inclusion. With your example, the biplane versus the Spit 14, the Spit wouldn't even try to turn, it would convert to a boom and zoom fighter. Yes, the Gladiator, for example, could out-turn a Spit, once it got turning, but it takes so long to get into the turn in the first place that there will be little fluttering pieces where yer arse used to be before you are fully committed to the maneuvre!
