Yup. The only thing that I can add is something that's come up in these forums: the line stretch isn't just the amount of stretch that you get in the cable itself in similar circumstances. The line is effectively more springy because of drag -- it's bowed, and the more you pull on it the less it bows, and the less you pull on it the more it bows. That all adds up to a much more compliant system than just the cables being pulled on the ground.
That is true enough,, however I elected to ignore that point ,, my thinking being that the "bow" in the lines,, ( I cannot recall what its called, its not parabolic,, it has another name) would be fairly consistant with both systems,, but it certainly is an addative,, note also that thicker lines will have MORE arc given other factors remain constant,( weight, speed, line length,,), therefore have more compliance,,
Now,, where is the break point,, thinner lines have less drag,, so have less arc in them, but they stretch more than thicker lines given constants remain, well,,, constant,, so at some point, the reduced drag arc compliance,, and the stretch compliance should converge,, At MY piloting level, I have felt,, ( or beleived I felt) that the thicker lines feel more connected on MY airplanes,,, so that is where I go,, and now that I have moved up to larger airframes,, ( read heavier) I happily no longer have to be concerned with that decision,,
I should state that a lot of my thought process on line size was motivated by Dirt talking about using .012 lines versus .014 on his flight streaks and other smaller airplanes,, and the stretch that came from smaller lines,,