It's quite clear me that there is a relationship between the subtypes and the ego and super-id. For example, the logical subtype of ENTp would probably get more satisfaction from the ethical subtype of ISFp than the sensing subtype. This would be because Ti seeks Fe to the same degree that it's present in the ego; if someone has leading Ti, they seek leading Fe types, and if someone has creative Ti, then they seek types with creative Fe. And so someone with a subtype that has more emphasis on Ti would seek a dual with more emphasis on Fe. This would also probably mean than an ENTp-Ti would find more satisfaction from an ESFj than an ENTp-Ne (who would probably find more satsifaction from an ISTp).
The relationship between subtypes and the super-ego is not as clear. In some ways, I don't see why an INTj-Ti would have to have more or less Fi, for example. Therefore, I think there is some need to talk about super-ego subtypes. An INTj-(Fi) would be someone who has a harder time with the ESFp-Fi subtype and perhaps a harder time with ISFjs than the typical INTj. As opposed to defining your strengths and who you are pulled towards, it defines your weaknesses and who you're turned away from. It would give an added dimension to each type.
On the other hand, I posted about subtypes here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ad.php?t=19764. If this theory is correct, and for example, the INTj-Ne approaches the ENTp-Ti subtype (and ENTps in general), then the INTj-Ne subtype will have slightly weaker Fi than the logical subtype, because it is close to the ENTp type. Therefore, there may be no need for super-ego subtypes. However, this might be false, because an INTj-Ne also shares a lot of similarity with the INFj-Ne subtype. If that's the case, such an INTj might have stronger Fi (or this might not say anything about the degree of Fi present).
Anyways, I'm interested to see what the members of this forum think about these concepts, and I'd like to know what conception you consider to be the most accurate.