Talk:F6F-3/@comment-25174240-20161229035827/@comment-108.88.197.98-20161229054022

This logic doesn't hold up when the game also has the Stuka, Bf 109, Fw 190, and Re.2005 all with very good stats. The Bf 109T (Kai), in particular, is effectively a Bf 109E, a series that was heading towards obsolescence by the end of the Battle of Britain. Similarly, if a Reppu is superior to a Shiden Kai (in straight AA performance), then its weird to have the 1942-43 Re.2005 be superior to the Reppu. Then there's the Stuka, which was obsolete around the time Germany stopped fighting enemy air forces based around biplanes. It is given very nice stats, trading some DB for a gain of some accuracy compared to the D12A Suisei. Now, the Stuka may not have been a Schrodinger's Fireball like the Suisei, but otherwise the two aircraft were on completely different levels of performance.

So, I find this line of argument, the repetition that the F6F-3 should not have better a higher AA stat because it is only a -3 model or whatever, to be totally unpersuasive. I personally think an 8 AA is fine for realism and have no problem with it. I won't be bothering with getting a Hellcat unless it comes free, of course, but I don't mind the 8 AA on its own or compared to the Shiden Kai's 9 AA. My complaint here is that the "realism must be respected" argument is inconsistent with far too many other aircraft in the game, and of course with many other bits of equipment as well. Without throwing away the bulk of the game's equipment, it simply not a supportable position. So, if you want to complain about people complaining about planes in a game about sexually harrassing female child soldiers, I humbly ask that you, fellow teitoku, do so based on sound reasoning.