Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: tedrbr on July 25, 2007, 02:25:10 PM
-
After reading the Why is Allies vs Axis always empty ??? thread, among other topics, I looked at a few numbers and trends in the game.
The Allies have 54 vehicles and aircraft modeled.
The Axis have 31 vehicles and aircraft modeled.
The Allies have 49 vehicles and aircraft for European Theater of Operations (ETO) use.
The Axis have 23 vehicles and aircraft for ETO use.
The Allies have about 45 vehicles and aircraft for Pacific Theater of Operation Use.
The Axis have 8 vehicles and aircraft for PTO use.
The Allies have 5 aircraft (9 if you throw in Lend-Lease P40's, Hurris, Spits, and C-47's) to fly on the Russian Front, the Axis has about 16 or 17.
The Allies have 10 CV enabled planes to the Axis 4 CV planes.
The Allies have 3 heavy bombers to the Axis 1 heavy bomber.
The Allies have 5 land based medium buffs and heavy attack planes to the Axis 4 plus 1 jet bomber.
Versions and Additions.
04/2007 ver 2.10 Added Sherman Firefly
11/2006 ver 2.09 Added F4UA1
03/2006 ver 2.07 Added the Jeep, B-17 updated
11/2005 ver 2.06 Spit and 109 lineup changes: Added Bf 109G-14, Spitfire XVI, Spitfire VIII. Changed the 109G-10 to a 109K-4. Changed the Spitfire Vc to a Vb
07/2005 ver 2.04 P47N (?)
01/2005 ver 2.02 Added P38 F (? later G) and J
11/2004 ver 2.01 Added B24J, T34, and Ki84
06/2004 ver 2.00
before that was Beta
If anyone has a correction to that, or could add the history of additions prior to ver 2.00, please do.
That's 3 additions in the last 20 months, All Allied.
That's 12 additions in the last 37 months, 10 Allies and 2 Axis.
If these trends continue, what will the result be for AvA and SEA events? What about for the future ToD if it ever sees the light of day? Is the future of the game to be dominated by Allied aircraft facing off in the LW arenas?
I realize it is an American made game with an American player base slant, but wasn't "fair play" also once considered an American ideal (this is still a game)? If the Allied, especially Western Allied, plane sets continue to grow and the Axis sets stay stagnant, what will happen to AvA and SEA?
-
:aok
-
Good point there.
-
bnasty... shhh or I'll drive over from pasadena and steal your propeller :p
They had plans for a sub.... but that idea sank........
-
Seriously?
-
I agree with Ted.
Boston's were added in 2004 I thought.
-
If and when the allied set again gets more planes, I truly wish they would be early/mid war stuff for Eastern Front ;)
-
Axis needs some heavy bombers, ki67, Ju88, Ar 234 cant cause the destruction the massive Allied bombers reap.
-
in HTC's defense there really isn't a whole lot more stuff to add.
we could use some more axis heavy fighters and bombers for all of the axis nations but how much of an impact would that really make in the MA.
I'd love to see tante Ju (Ju52) but keep in mind that an IJ skin for the DC-3 would be accurate as the Japanese had license built DC-3s prior to the outbreak of hostilities. that actually makes the DC-3 an allied as well as an axis transport.
I would love to see more additions to axis line up but I'm not going to hold my breath until they are added.
we have a pretty darn good game as it is and I'm sure HTC will be adding more stuff in time.
I'm sure that they understand that life and this game are dynamic, if you aren't moving forward then you are falling behind.
-
Just out of curiousity and to play devils advocate.
What LW fighters would you add for example?
They had two main fighters the 109 and 190 of which there are numerous variants in AH
The best bomber they had is in the game with the 88. i suppose you could argue for some of the later solid nose night fighter versions.
They have the only jets in the game in the 163 and 262
What else would you add?
Consider that you didn't want the 25 because it would be a 'hanger queen' and useless for the MA.
Part of the problem is that there were that many more main Allied rides.
2 for the LW we have both and the 2 jets.
5 for the USAAF of which we have 4 (thinking P38, 39, 40, 47 and 51)
3 for the USN
So we have 7 of 8 US fighters and both the LW main rides. What else to add?
Throw in the RAF rides and the numbers are gonna slant Allied as they had that many more types in action.
The numbers are easy to twist if we only look at numbers.
What other rides are gonna work that are LW for example?
-
Originally posted by PanzerIV
Axis needs some heavy bombers, ki67, Ju88, Ar 234 cant cause the destruction the massive Allied bombers reap.
And what heavy bomber did they have?
Part of the LW's downfall was their shortsighted view of long range bombers.
He 177? We gonna model the problems that one had?
Condor? Never flew bombing raids. You wanna solo patrol the waters?
-
I would add the
Me410
He219 with the 6x20mm
Ju88 G-7 with 6x20mm
He129B-1
FiatG55
IAR80
Re2005
Later model of the Ki84
J2M3
a Ki whatever twin heavy fighter
and that would be about five years worth of code I guess so probably will never happen.
-
We already have the best in the 88. An He111 and Do17 would be a blast for scenario and AvA stuff.
I'd love a Ju52...just cuz I'm weird like that.
A Me410 would make my day, as well as any one of the upgunned Stukas. Now they did make a differance in the battlefront, and would be widely used I would think.
Panther of course.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
And what heavy bomber did they have?
Part of the LW's downfall was their shortsighted view of long range bombers.
He 177? We gonna model the problems that one had?
Condor? Never flew bombing raids. You wanna solo patrol the waters?
Piaggo P-108? it saw service and was every bit the equal of the B17.
-
Originally posted by Stampf
We already have the best in the 88. An He111 and Do17 would be a blast for scenario and AvA stuff.
I'd love a Ju52...just cuz I'm weird like that.
A Me410 would make my day, as well as any one of the upgunned Stukas. Now they did make a differance in the battlefront, and would be widely used I would think.
Panther of course.
Basically it comes down to one main point in adding planes.
Does it get added for the MA or does it get added for SEA, AvA and Scenario events?
I'm all for adding a ton of stuff for the latter, but if the MA is the goal, then the list gets awfully short because the majority of players want the latest and the best.
Personally i'd add a bunch of early war stuff when the issue was still in doubt or even pre US entering the fray stuff or even Spanish Civil war era stuff. Ratas and 109Bs, He 51s, some of the Curtiss biplanes, an F3F, a Nate, Oscar, CW-21 and those kind of birds just for the fun factor.
-
All of the above would be awesome. So would camels and Eindeckers :D
-
Yes, need more axis planes!
-
HE 111
-
the German Do 217M-1, it was successful and was faster than the Ju88 and carried more bombs.
About 1900 built, not as strong numbers as the Ju88 but still more than some twin prop bomber aircraft.
Although the He 111 could be successful and it looks nice and sleek.
-
Originally posted by Husky01
HE 111
That's all well and good for scenario use, but is it a viable MA bird?
Which is the priority?
If I'm a buff driver in the MA, which am I gonna take. A medium bomber with a single popgun on top for defense or a Medium or heavy with turrets mounting heavy caliber machine guns.
As a fighter driver, in particular in a late war cannon bird, all you are going to see is lunch when you see a 111.
Don't get me wrong. I'm much more oriented to scenario or early war birds. I'd love to see all those early war birds including the 111. I don't like flying the latest and greatest. but from HTC's perspective which is the best investment of their resources?
-
...always da money....always da money. Can't knock it too hard. we're all here. Great Game.
-
If you ask me, it's not the planes or the setup that kills the AvA, it's the attitude.
-
Im thinking Scenarios SnapShots FSO etc which a large part of the community are apart of and where the more long time player base comes from. IMOP. Again it depends on HTC view on things I cant try and read his mind.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
if the MA is the goal, then the list gets awfully short because the majority of players want the latest and the best.
ding ding ding
We have a winner.
Actually, when the arenas were first segregated into EW, MW and LW, I thought there would be new impetus for filling out the plane set (realistically, the 1945 operational plane set is already pretty complete except for some rare birds). But then HTC shuffled all the EW and MW planes back into the LW arenas, and we were back to where we started.
The second excellent point people have raised is that there just weren't that many widely-used Axis rides that aren't already represented. This is most obvious in PAC - sure, there were Tojos and some others, but the fact is that we've already got what the Japanese used for most of the war (except for the Oscar).
Russian planes are the ones that are genuinely underrepresented, I think, and it would be nice to see some of them.
- oldman
-
axis had no cv planes :p they had no cv's :confused:
-
Remember Pearl Harbor?
-
Originally posted by storch
I would add the
Me410
He219 with the 6x20mm
Ju88 G-7 with 6x20mm
He129B-1
FiatG55
IAR80
Re2005
Later model of the Ki84
J2M3
a Ki whatever twin heavy fighter
and that would be about five years worth of code I guess so probably will never happen.
Ki-45. Add the Ki-43,44,and 100 while we are at this.:aok
-
Originally posted by Stampf
Remember Pearl Harbor?
Stamp just owned benny lmao:rofl
-
Originally posted by BennyBeaver
axis had no cv planes :p they had no cv's :confused:
Just how in the hell do you think the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?
Ouch. Darn me for taking the time to actually red the thread to get my reply in :cry
-
Its ok Golfer, he was right. They weren't Axis, Dem der were Japaneese.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K92OVFeGgIE
(http://www.homevideos.com/freezeframes6/animalhouse347.jpeg)
Must I provide more proof that it was in fact the Germans that bombed Pearl Harbor?
-
Klassic! :rofl
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Just out of curiosity and to play devils advocate.
What LW fighters would you add for example?
They had two main fighters the 109 and 190 of which there are numerous variants in AH......Part of the problem is that there were that many more main Allied rides.
Another part of the problem was that the quality of Allied rides were generally better than Axis ones, and by LW Axis were totally on the defensive. This does pose limitations in possible additions. Allies built better and many more examples of each plane they did build. Best option Axis has are some of the lower (but not extremely limited nor experimental) production numbered niche planes. German's probably have the best already, but suffer in heavy bombers. The Japanese and Italians both have thin planesets that can be helped.
Which LW Axis fighters to consider adding? - Fiat G.55 - considered better than their German counterparts and very well armed. Best of the Italian rides.
- J2M3 Raiden "Jack" MW/LW Quick climbing (19,685 feet in just over 6 minutes) bomber interceptor (364mph at 17,388 for J2M3) , but short legs (1,025 naut miles for J2M3). Two wing-mounted 20 mm Type 99 Model 2 cannon and two wing-mounted 20 mm Type 99 Model 1 cannon (J2M3) OR Four wing-mounted 20 mm Type 99 Model 2 cannon (J2M3a)
- Nakajima Ki-44 IIc (or later version) Shōki "Tojo" Japanese B&Z Interceptor. Later version with heavy gun package of Ho-3's or Ho-5's.
- Ki-84-Ib 4X20mm version.
Those are the best ones I can think of at this time. Most of their LW fighters were cannon heavy to deal with American bombers. The production numbers of those suggestions are mostly all down around those of the N1K2-J we already have in the game.
The 262 and 163 I discount. 163 anchored close to HQ, and 262 is marginal in LW. Neither see much in the SEA. They are candy, but not real contenders except when flown by a few sticks. They are not real equalizers in the plane set.
The best bomber they had is in the game with the 88. I suppose you could argue for some of the later solid nose night fighter versions.
Two heavy bomber options exist: The He-177 (sans early development problems) and the Do 217M that PanzerIV mentions. Neither would get the specially guided munitions (Fritz-X for example) in the game I'm sure. They would give Axis a second heavy bomber.
No real help out there for the Japanese in heavy bombers, they already have their best in the Ki-67, but the D4Y2 Judy is the best help their CV forces could get (anything beyond EW puts the PTO in SEA decidedly in the Allies favor).... and help the Blue Water Navy plane set in general for MW/LW.
Consider that you didn't want the 25 because it would be a 'hanger queen' and useless for the MA.
I want to stay away from that issue in this thread.
What other rides are gonna work that are LW for example?
On the Allied side, I'd like to see the Pe-2 complimenting the IL-2 and P-39 from Lend Lease in the Russian plane set for more Eastern Front SEA applications as well as MW and LW use. Which in turn would argue for the addition of the Me 410 Hornisse in response as well as adding the JU-87G with two 37 mm AT guns version for that front.
Limited additions over time won't see a lot on the ground side. BUT if SEA will continue to be mainly Germany on the defensive, as well as adding something for LW (and MW, and EW), I'd give the GVr's the German 88mm FlaK36 for artillery, long range direct fire, and manned puffy ack to 30+K feet altitude.
Planes I don't consider include the Ki-102 = too close to the existing Ki-61 in performance numbers. The Oscar is a lighter, less rugged, even more lightly armed version of the Zeke... I don't see the benefit in it's addition.
Night fighters, seaplanes, float planes, maritime patrol craft, and unarmed recon planes have very little use in the War Arenas or SEA events. Twin engined Axis fighters, especially those from Japan, were under performers, so no "Nick" or "Dinah", please.
The rest we usually see asked for are experimental or whose production numbers are in the ten's or even less, not the several hundreds or thousands.
-
"the best bomber was the 88 and we have that in this game"
??
Surely you don't think a late 1940 bomber version of the Ju88A-4 is the same as the high-alt, high-speed late war Ju-88S from 1943(44?) ??
Surely you don't compare an early, slow, heavy, clunky, version as comparable to a high speed, up-engined, streamlined, better-armed, longer-ranged later war variant?
A rose is not a rose is not a rose.
EDIT: Last I checked, the Japanese were considered axis. They weren't the original axis, but they became allied with them.
-
Originally posted by BennyBeaver
axis had no cv planes :p they had no cv's :confused:
are you stupid?
A6M2
A6M5b
B5N
D3A
-
Originally posted by tedrbr
Another part of the problem was that the quality of Allied rides were generally better than Axis ones, and by LW Axis were totally on the defensive. This does pose limitations in possible additions. Allies built better and many more examples of each plane they did build. Best option Axis has are some of the lower production numbered niche planes.
The only reason why Axis planes suffered from quality is when they started to feel the crunch of material shortages. To allude that from the onset Axis quality of their planes was lacking compared to the Allies is just silly.
ack-ack
-
Originally posted by Krusty
EDIT: Last I checked, the Japanese were considered axis. They weren't the original axis, but they became allied with them.
Nope, they were part of the Tripartite Pact of September 27, 1940. The Germany, Italy, and Japan pact and became known as the Berlin-Rome-Tokyo Axis, or Axis alliance.
ack-ack
-
The original term axis came from before the war, describing how Germany and Italy made an axis through the center of Europe. That's what I was thinking of, I guess.
But, Japanese were axis, so nobody can say "we have no axis CV planes!" :D
-
The Beave can.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
The original term axis came from before the war, describing how Germany and Italy made an axis through the center of Europe. That's what I was thinking of, I guess.
But, Japanese were axis, so nobody can say "we have no axis CV planes!" :D
Germany and Italy had an informal alliance in 1936, which was referred to as the German and Italy Axis but didn't formalize their alliance until 1939 with the "Pact of Steel" and then formally created the Axis Alliance with the Tripartite Pact on 1940.
They should have kept the Pact of Steel name, sounds much cooler than the Axis.
ack-ack
-
Id really love to se the JU52, ME-410, JU188//388, HE-111/177 to name a few.
-
How I would love the 188/388.... Such lovely lines :)
-
I knew you were into planepron too! :lol
-
I think what we really need is a few more versions of the P-38.
-
Originally posted by BennyBeaver
axis had no cv planes :p they had no cv's :confused:
but they DID have CV planes.. the 109 and Ju 87 were both made in CV aircraft but the ship was never finished...
-
Originally posted by USCH
but they DID have CV planes.. the 109 and Ju 87 were both made in CV aircraft but the ship was never finished...
And neither was operational on cv so we cant have it. I belive the 109T was a variation of the old crappy E (crappy by mid-late war standards) ended up in norway.
-
Originally posted by Grits
I think what we really need is a few more versions of the P-38.
No one likes you.
-
Originally posted by Slash27
No one likes you.
-
Originally posted by Grits
I think what we really need is a few more versions of the P-38.
Check is in the mail Grits :)
-
Originally posted by Grits
I think what we really need is a few more versions of the P-38.
After the addition of the B-25, we've got quite enough US bombers, TYVM.
-
Loving all the whining about what "we" need. I think any addition is
a good thing, period.
-
tedrbr,
Well, the Japanese could get the H8K2 'Emily' flying boat. It was kinda rare though. It was fully protected with crew armor and self sealing tanks. Had five 20mm Type 99 Model Is and a number of 7.92mm machine guns (including one ventral) for defensive fire. (Allied nickname was "Flying Porcupine") Was powered by four 1,800hp engines with a climb rate of over 1,500ft/min. It's bombload was eight 250kg (550lb) bombs or two 1,500kg (3,300lb) bombs, or two torpedoes.
As far as the Germans go, you overlooked the Ju188A. It was better then the Do217 and while perhaps not as good on paper as the He177, it was far better in actuality. More than 1000 built.
It is also one of the prettiest bombers of WWII.
-
Originally posted by BennyBeaver
axis had no cv planes :p they had no cv's :confused:
Axis includes both germany and japan along with italy and finland few others, not sure who, altho i believe finland primarily fought the russians, japan had plenty of cv's
-
Originally posted by SpikesX
are you stupid?
A6M2
A6M5b
B5N
D3A
Yes, he is.
No doubt the game is missing quite a few Axis rides. I'm not sure if it would help the AVA, because the majority of people want to fly MA where they have more choice............ Poor misguided individuals.;)
I'd love to see more axis planes added, and more attendance in the AVA. I just don't see it happening.
Nilsen is correct the Bf-109T was designed for use on the German carrier Graf Zepplin, which never became operational. The 109Ts were based on the 109E with a longer wingspan and aresstor gear for carrier ops. They ended up being used in Norway with JG-11, or JG-5.
-
Originally posted by yanksfan
Axis includes both germany and japan along with italy and finland few others, not sure who, altho i believe finland primarily fought the russians, japan had plenty of cv's
Just FYI:
Surely Finland is usually counted as an Axis country, but there is still a clear difference from how e.g. Italy, Hungary or Bulgaria belonged to the Axis ;)
Finland fought ONLY against the Russians, not just "primarily". Finland also never signed any treaty to join Axis, but remained a "brother in arms" in a joined fight against a common enemy.
This difference also made it more difficult for the Finns to buy weapons from Germany. Naturally Germans were more generous to their signed allies that to ones trying to stay outside.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
tedrbr,
Well, the Japanese could get the H8K2 'Emily' flying boat. It was kinda rare though. It was fully protected with crew armor and self sealing tanks. Had five 20mm Type 99 Model Is and a number of 7.92mm machine guns (including one ventral) for defensive fire. (Allied nickname was "Flying Porcupine") Was powered by four 1,800hp engines with a climb rate of over 1,500ft/min. It's bombload was eight 250kg (550lb) bombs or two 1,500kg (3,300lb) bombs, or two torpedoes.
Aside from discounting float planes, flying boats, and maritime patrol planes due to lack of historical missions for those plane types, and the limited development resources to bring to bear, there is yet another reason to avoid them: Wouldn't adding flying boats require a change to the way water is modeled in the game, and the water tiles, and all the maps? It would seem to be a big project to add one plane type to the game.
As far as the Germans go, you overlooked the Ju188A. It was better then the Do217 and while perhaps not as good on paper as the He177, it was far better in actuality. More than 1000 built.
It is also one of the prettiest bombers of WWII.
I don't discount the Ju188 (or the Ju88S), but the Ju188 was a continuation of the Ju88 design philosophy, whereas either the He-177(especially) or the Do217 would be a whole different addition. A whole new plane to play with. Add the Ju-188, you just send the Ju-88A to the back of the hangar to sit next to the Arado, Kate and Val. Why add a plane that will make an existing one obsolete in most cases, when you can add a totally new model? Personally, of the JU-88S, Ju-188, Do217, and the He-177, I prefer the He-177 because of it's speed and heavy load out, it could command a small buff perk price for it and drones.... and I still believe the buffs need another perk sink other than the Arado.
-
Originally posted by Shifty
Nilsen is correct the Bf-109T was designed for use on the German carrier Graf Zepplin, which never became operational. The 109Ts were based on the 109E with a longer wingspan and aresstor gear for carrier ops. They ended up being used in Norway with JG-11, or JG-5.
Yup. They were stationed at Lista, Herdla, Sola and Vaernes airfields in 1941. Cant find any records of them in 1942 so they were prolly replaced by newer models or moved again.
-
Originally posted by tedrbr
After reading the Why is Allies vs Axis always empty ??? thread, among other topics, I looked at a few numbers and trends in the game.
The Allies have 54 vehicles and aircraft modeled.
The Axis have 31 vehicles and aircraft modeled.
The Allies have 49 vehicles and aircraft for European Theater of Operations (ETO) use.
The Axis have 23 vehicles and aircraft for ETO use.
The Allies have about 45 vehicles and aircraft for Pacific Theater of Operation Use.
The Axis have 8 vehicles and aircraft for PTO use.
The Allies have 5 aircraft (9 if you throw in Lend-Lease P40's, Hurris, Spits, and C-47's) to fly on the Russian Front, the Axis has about 16 or 17.
The Allies have 10 CV enabled planes to the Axis 4 CV planes.
The Allies have 3 heavy bombers to the Axis 1 heavy bomber.
The Allies have 5 land based medium buffs and heavy attack planes to the Axis 4 plus 1 jet bomber.
Versions and Additions.
04/2007 ver 2.10 Added Sherman Firefly
11/2006 ver 2.09 Added F4UA1
03/2006 ver 2.07 Added the Jeep, B-17 updated
11/2005 ver 2.06 Spit and 109 lineup changes: Added Bf 109G-14, Spitfire XVI, Spitfire VIII. Changed the 109G-10 to a 109K-4. Changed the Spitfire Vc to a Vb
07/2005 ver 2.04 P47N (?)
01/2005 ver 2.02 Added P38 F (? later G) and J
11/2004 ver 2.01 Added B24J, T34, and Ki84
06/2004 ver 2.00
before that was Beta
If anyone has a correction to that, or could add the history of additions prior to ver 2.00, please do.
That's 3 additions in the last 20 months, All Allied.
That's 12 additions in the last 37 months, 10 Allies and 2 Axis.
If these trends continue, what will the result be for AvA and SEA events? What about for the future ToD if it ever sees the light of day? Is the future of the game to be dominated by Allied aircraft facing off in the LW arenas?
I realize it is an American made game with an American player base slant, but wasn't "fair play" also once considered an American ideal (this is still a game)? If the Allied, especially Western Allied, plane sets continue to grow and the Axis sets stay stagnant, what will happen to AvA and SEA?
Its a nice try, but most of the time the AvA was ocupied by Axis squads hording picking and vulching.
Second, the fact that the Alies have more plains means nothing. How many of them are competitive or available in every AvA setting?
-
The Ju188 would no more or less send the Ju88 to the back of the hangar than the Do217 would. They fill the same roll.
-
Originally posted by storch
a Ki whatever twin heavy fighter
You talking about the Ki-46? If so, that'd be a fun one! As would the Ki-100.
-
Originally posted by BlauK
Just FYI:
Surely Finland is usually counted as an Axis country, but there is still a clear difference from how e.g. Italy, Hungary or Bulgaria belonged to the Axis ;)
Finland fought ONLY against the Russians, not just "primarily". Finland also never signed any treaty to join Axis, but remained a "brother in arms" in a joined fight against a common enemy.
This difference also made it more difficult for the Finns to buy weapons from Germany. Naturally Germans were more generous to their signed allies that to ones trying to stay outside.
I only said primarily as i was not sure, no offence, I appoligize and stand corrected. "S"
-
This is a lot of work you are talking about. It takes about as long to design and build a virtual plane as a real one (P51 took 6 months +/- IRL), so don't hold your breath!
-
Originally posted by PanzerIV
Axis needs some heavy bombers, ki67, Ju88, Ar 234 cant cause the destruction the massive Allied bombers reap.
http://members.tripod.com/darthvader_2/blohm_und_voss_bv141.htm Lets add this lethal killer then to the line up? I am kidding of course it is just such a strange looking plane just wanted to share the pics.
-
Early arena...mid war arena... and AvA would all see an increase in population if the plane sets were fleshed out more. Compared to MA's there is not much to do in either. It's boring only having a few planes to choose from.
-
Originally posted by BennyBeaver
axis had no cv planes :p they had no cv's :confused:
Axis had no CV's? hmmmm...pretty long flight to Hawaii from Japan. You perhaps meant GERMANY had no CV's... althought they did build one that never left port and navalized both the 109 and the 190.
-
Originally posted by Helm
Early arena...mid war arena... and AvA would all see an increase in population if the plane sets were fleshed out more. Compared to MA's there is not much to do in either. It's boring only having a few planes to choose from.
I can't agree. 1 in four planes flown each Tour consist of the Spit-16, Niki, Pony-D, and the La-7. The C-Hog usually comes in a close 5th place. Then usually the B-24 and Lanc in among the top 10. Considering the skew on the numbers the EW and MW arenas put on the overall tour numbers, that percentage probably goes up even more than 1/4.
A sizable majority of players are going with the so-called "uber-planes" most of the time. Those can only be found in the two LW arenas. The rest follow the crowd, as LW is where the numbers are and the fights.
A increase of EW planes may have a small tick in EW and MW usage go up, but even those flying EW planes will probably spend time pitting themselves and their skills in the challenge against the LW "dweebs" for bragging rights. Taking out a P-51D with an I-16 would certainly qualify.
An EW "plane pack" release.... say four EW fighters for use in war arenas, SEA, KoTH, and DA would be nice, but would the expenditure of those development resources (time, money, work, testing) actually benefit the business model for HTC? Only they have access to the numbers to make such a decision.
But, I don't believe in the "Build It and They Will Come" argument for EW additions for EW or MW arena benefit based on the plane use numbers found in scores.
-
As far as what we would like to see in the game, as far as planeset, the problem is the general ignorance by many people on what was flying and what was good in WW2. Most, especially our younger american population, will vote simply for every american choice of plane that comes up. Foreign planes, especially axis, will never get the votes or support required for HTC to bother anymore. Far too many paying customers are "american only", even though those that know know the american philosophy was overpowering with quantity, not quality of arms. Most axis front line stuff was at least 2-3 years ahead of allied designs.