The problem, zapatista, is that for any data sheet on any possible topic you could find a contradicting set of data. In the end it would simply be a question of POV and/or a personal bias. I never understood the need to dissect the data base of a simulation as a whole, even though I agree with the question of being open to community input. However this input needs to be
a) done in a professional way (not the "You ain't no idea! You hate [insert nation here]!" way it was all too often done in the past)
b) contain plausible data with known origin (i.e. the famous british "620 kp/h for a Bf 109 G-6" test which claims this was achieved with a clean G-6 while the plane carried two gondola arms under its wings).
This is the greatest problem - the community is not a homogenous group, but a collection of various groups of interest, some of which would rather fight each other than get along. So how should Maddox Games be "open" for input when it would be misused for petty squabbling among board rivals (as it happened in the past)? It's easy to demand access to the basic data, but this also requires a certain level of maturity within the community and I am highly sceptical if this community could ever be this mature.
|