RE: Re: Fighters

At 12:18 PM -0700 5/3/02, Brian Bilderback wrote:
>laserlight wrote:
>
>>Well, there's a difference between "not optimized" and "not 
>>usable".  Brit ships in WW2 weren't optimized for combat but they 
>>still were useful.
>
>True, but I haven't heard that the FB1 designs were useless, just 
>inferior.  Would you play a WWII ship combat game that skewed the 
>rules in favor of Brit ships, or US ships, or any other power, 
>rather than reflect the reality of the day?

I'd rather play a game that either accurately reflected the realities 
of things at that time or in the case of "what ifs" play out games 
that inserted later developments earlier to see how they worked. Say 
for example, if the two British Battleships (Prince of Wales and 
Repulse) that the Japanese sank off of Singapore had been fitted with 
better anti-aircraft armament.

-- 
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
- Ryan Montieth Gill			     '01 Honda Insight -
- rmgill@mindspring.com 			    '85 CB700S -
- ryan.gill@turner.com			 '76 Chevy Monte Carlo -
- www.mindspring.com/~rmgill		       '72 Honda CB750 -
-				      '60 Daimler FV701H Mk2/3 -
-				   '42 Daimler Scout Car Mk II -
-	      I speak not for CNN, nor they for me	       -
----------------------------------------------------------------
-    Smart ID cards in the US, Smart ID cards in Hong Kong,    -
-		      what is the difference?		       - 
----------------------------------------------------------------
-  C&R-FFL  /  Protect your electronic rights!	  \ EFF-ACLU   -
- SAF & NRA/  Join the EFF!  http://www.eff.org/   \ DoD #0780 -