Quote:
Originally Posted by Feuerfalke
You read to many "[ENTER PLANE NAME HERE] won the war!"-Threads. 
The mission of a ground-attack-fighter is not to win a war but to destroy a ground-target. So the logic way to approach this would be to compare numbers of planes against numbers of ground-units destroyed compared to losses. |
Your probably right. My "Life coach" has told me not too but it's like waving a honey pot in front of Pooh Bear!
All I know is that ANY plane seams to be less effective when I in the virtual cockpit. Of course I do attract more small arms fire away from my team mates! That can only be a good thing!
Should we really have the 190 on the list? Didn't they only have a single hardpoint for ground attack weapons? That would be extremely limiting as a gound-attack aircraft. Even though its high speed would be a positive survival trait. It wouldn't be able to loiter around the battle field enguaging multiple targets. Keep it as a fighter I say.