Views on Operational Units

As was said elsewhere, the idea with the 262 was to encourage/force (depends on your perspective) players to utilise the better allied fighters, rather than the highly points efficient middle range one - Looking at you mister Wildcat - the optimistic view behind that was that, players would need to make other concession to their fleets and hopefully even the field.

 MI Akagi is more like an RB's Operational units than most of the others done, it did leave an avenue of use for the Original;;
    BUT this is not the point the point is why are Operational units being done in the fashion they are;;

  RB's R Bismarck did not have the Operational date he was not going to run the line much longer, so it
was not a restraint on his product;;; IT IS for the forever moving forward expansion decks.
  
He did not obsolete the two original units with this operational units;; Expansion has with its!!

FOR example Graf Spee could have been done in a similar fashion as RB's R Bismarck;;
   Hood should have had the Operational date;;
 no matter that 90% of the players hated Fatal Flaw it would have left a choice;; to me a key in moving the game forward without
   obsoleting anything.

 I agree with some analogy's you are going to move forward with Operational units or eventually doing REFITS
   Depending on the Team members a lot of changes are coming how it effects the Forum or game is still up in the air.

Somethings should probably be discussed; I don't think we need another Pennsylvania situation because we refuse to change a date.
 It is certainly hard to improve some units use without obsoleting the original;;but it should be a teams top priority to try even if you have 
to move away from how it was done before.