Warspite**
Posts: 77
Joined: 2/26/2002
From: CA
Status: offline
|
My take on some of the arguments floating around here against free upgrade paths.
Borg argument: Kind of silly, but I’ll bite. I think the allies would beat the Borg, given the movie demonstrated that Borg are only immune to phasers while bullets kill them easily. Allies = lots of bullets = lots of dead Borg. None of us here are arguing for Borg, we just want to use what we are able to build. None of us have got to 1943 or 1944, so who knows are industry and merchant marine might be all but destroyed and we won’t be able to build it anyway. If we can though, let us use it.
Historical path argument: Firstly it’s inaccurate as the historical paths are inaccurate. For example the 1st Sentai upgrades to KI-43-II in the game, however they did upgrade to KI-84’s in real life. We could go on about this, but that’s one example. Secondly, even the Japanese were trying to covert over to better aircraft, but lacked the numbers. In 1944 they stopped producing the Hayabusa and turned production over to the Hayate. The bombs prevented them from producing enough to fully switch, so squadrons kept what they had. If no one is dropping bombs on me and I’m producing enough, let me switch.
Japan couldn’t win argument: I agree, but I don’t see the point. None of us are saying that we can win militarily. That’s not the point of this discussion, but since it was brought up. I don’t care if you gave me Reppus in 1941, I still couldn’t beat the allies. They have too much of everything and it’s all better than the Japanese equipment. This is a game based on trying to last longer than the Japanese did historically if your Japan, or conquering them more quickly if you’re the Allies. Again this has nothing to do with production, so my argument remains the same… if I build it let me use it.
The F/A-18 argument: nothing to do with us as this argument deals with R/D which should be another thread (though one could argue if the player was doing better than the Japanese, one should get advanced planes slightly earlier as your R/D factories wouldn’t be bombed and your test flights wouldn’t be interrupted constantly by roving P-51s). My response to the argument that production and research are one in the same and we wouldn’t know if it was good before we built it is simple: from an R/D point of view I agree, but see above, from a production point of view this makes no sense. You telling me that after it started being produced they couldn’t figure out what plane was good and what wasn’t. So, Bob and Frank are talking about the P-40 Bob used to fly and the P-51 his squadron is now flying and he tells Frank, “you know I really can’t tell ‘em apart. Speed, roll, climb, turn, high altitude performance be damned I think we should stick with the P-40”
I’m not asking for X-wings and god like powers here. I think there should be an IJN/IJA divide and a Commonwealth/USA/USSR divide. I think bombers should remain bombers and fighters… fighters. If I build it U.S. or Japan, let me use it.
|
Printable Version
RE: Aircraft Upgrades - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread