@Hooves
The missions' design are imperative .. for me anyway... to achive some kind of sensation of accomplishment. That is why I prefer servers for IL2-1946 such as "Spit vs 109" / "Zeke vs Wildcat".. they are objective driven(!). For me it has the past 5-6 years only been "winning the mission" that is the main goal.. not scoring as many kills as possible. That is why
F19 and F16 (our squadrons ) get killed in droves online flying inferior bombers/attackplanes.... chasing to win the map.
In that aspect, IL2 1946 would never have been what it is to me and many others without the 3rd party development such as FBDj.
So far the multiplayer aspect of CloD is only in it's beginning in comparison; ATAG-server is pretty much the only server that comes even close to beeing objective driven -but then again; how many online servers are there? A handful?
So instead of balancing FM.. away from realism, MG should focus on developing tools for missionbuilders to design just that; objective driven missions.... with ..as u mentioned.. symmetry to objectives.
If they don't come up with these tools, I am sure the community will eventually - just as they did with IL2:1946. As I said - without US all servers for Il2:1946 would be quakewar.
EDIT: That particular IL2-T attack showed aboved was actually one of those missions in which we all survied when going for target
..NOT dying in droves
In short; I
prefer balancing mission objectives rather than "balancing" FM/DM and other characteristics of these historical airplanes we all love. We can never really simulate the actual war (too many aspects), but we can simulate the actual planes.