The call is entirely up to HTC.. but as long as the community is discussing, I see no reason why we keep limiting ourselves to the current agenda of '20% = unbalance' rule.
Maybe not all of the community supports to the '1943 arena' criteria I suggested... but IMO, lightly perking(max 4 points) the 10 post-'44 rides as I have suggested above, might help evolve the MA into something more interesting and fun.
It is no coincidence that among the 10 planes I suggested perked at 3~4 points, five of them can carry more than 2000lbs of ordnance. Currently, we have quite many interesting bombers and attackers that historically specialized in ground attacks, which are totally neglected in MA conditions because there are free planes flying around that are faster than most other fighters, can drop as much as ordnance as light bombers, and have fighting capabilities at the same time. Why up an A-20 or a Mossie when taking a F4U-1D or a Typhoon, or a P-51D can do the job and have even better survivability?
For one thing, lightly perking the 10 late-war rides might promote the usage of Mosquito, Bf110G-2, Fw190F-8, A-20G and a variety of ground attack specialists - because after the 10 have been perked, they will carry the most ordnance for free, and against non-perked planes, boast a bit higher survivability thanks to their speed.
Maybe there are possibilities of considering perks for the purpose of diversifying the MA, rather than the reason that a certain plane causes a 'nuisance' or a 'balance problem'?
Come to think of it, in the free C-hog days, there were still people wildly objecting to limiting its usage.. the same skeptical responses were there then, too. But after it was regulated through 8 perks, I don't see much people complaining anymore. Of course, the C-hog was claiming 20% of kills then, but basically the core of the skepticism then, is same as now.
...
What would you guys think about a mid/late 1943 MA environment? Wouldn't it offer a bit more chance of fun?
