But is it to much to ask for the ground vehicles to be useful and fun in their own right? Not to mention modelled with the same care and accuracy that goes into the planes?
This is not an intentional 'dig' at HT and company, but GVs as a whole seem incredibly screwed up, for lack of a better term.
For instance, we know (from extensive debate started by a 'whine' of mine) that a .50 caliber machinegun bullet CAN penetrate the armor of a Panzer IV. It can go through the top decking, and I believe the rear armor if the gun is close enough (I can't remember to be honest, it has been a while).
What effect would a 37mm AP shell have going through a M3? Well, it certainly seems that it would depend on where you hit it at- but it doesn't seem to. The M8's 37mm AP round does little or no damage to the M3 or M16, no matter where you hit it.
Similarly, we KNOW how the different rounds are modelled for the planes. For cannons, a 'composite' round is modelled based on what the typical belt was. Is it the same way for the Ostwind? would a 37mm AP round kill a plane in one hit no matter where you hit it? Or would it just make a 37mm hole and be on its merry way? One would certainly expect that a mobile AA gun would use High Explosive rounds, as these would seem to be far more damaging to rather fragile airplanes. But the Ostwind is, if not the most effective unit for killing other AFVs, at least a very close second. So this would lead one to believe that the Ostwind has AP rounds. Or does the Ostwind have HEAP rounds (which as far as I know were not even in existance in WW2, but I could be wrong)?
Also, some things just don't seem logical. How can a .50 caliber machinegun have more stopping power than a 37mm cannon? It doesn't you say? Take an M3 and go head to head with an M8, you will change your mind quickly.
I understand that the GVs are in Aces High primarily for 'flavor' as it were. I don't think that means that they should be neglected like they have been.