The discussion was on aircraft upgrades in UV.
You are incorrect. This thread was initially "about" whether or not P38's can take on the Zero. Perhaps you should read again from the beginning. After that it was "about" the following observation vis Corsairs and a mixed force of Betties, and Zeroes, which subject was brought substantively into the discussion by the person who started this thread as follows:
I had forgotten just how true this was. Below is just obsene.
Air attack on TF, near Lae at 9,33
A6M2 Zero x 71
A6M3 Zero x 47
G4M1 Betty x 10
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 15
F4U-1 Corsair x 7
Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero x 18 destroyed
A6M3 Zero x 15 destroyed
G4M1 Betty x 3 destroyed
G4M1 Betty x 7 damaged
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 2 destroyed
Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1 Corsair x 2 destroyed
F4U-1 Corsair x 1 damaged
FO F.Short of VMF-124 is credited with kill number 8
LTJG L.Nakajima of F1/252nd Daitai bails out and is CAPTURED
BB Maryland, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
CA New Orleans
My reply to that was to in effect note that the only "obscene" result from that AAR in my view is the fact that one of a few surviving but crippled Betties was able to put a torpedo into Maryland. My reply was to OG, not you. IMO, prior to the kamikaze campaigns, the only thing a crippled Betty would have done with a torpedo would have been to salvo it and abort the mission, or else be shot down. The Zero losses seem a bit high, but the AAR does not discuss which aircraft fell to flak or otherwise, so I have no general problem with those results save for the fact that a damaged Betty got a hit. In my experience torpedo-lugging Betties are far too numerous compared to their historical use, and far too accurate as well.
Betty Bomber hit rate overated as well as Japanese power projection. Now who is not relevant?
You, clearly, because my post was on topic with the thread as initiated and modified by the person who initiated the thread. Perhaps you should reread from the beginning and 'retake the test' so to speak.
Obviously because you come to a game forum about a game you donīt even play, your only objective here is to debate ideas and theories with people, yes?
My objective is to encourage the design and development of a game that I feel is worth my time to play.
Why would game makers listen to your opinion when you donīt even play the games?
Because the game makers recognize that I have a track record for substantiating my observations and for quickly identifying problems with a design that almost inevitably come up in general discussions initiated by people other than myself.
< Message edited by mdiehl -- 5/19/2008 11:21:50 PM >
Show me a fellow who rejects statistical analysis a priori and I'll show you a fellow who has no knowledge of statistics.
Didn't we have this conversation already?