Matrix Games Forums

A look through the keyhole #10!The Age of Shadows on Distant Worlds starts now!Paypal System UpdateDistant Worlds: Shadows Final Teaser!Distant Worlds: Legends gets Updated!Recruiting Testers for Commander: the Great War on Mac!Armageddon invasion starts in 2014Command Rommels Panzers in Battle Academy!Servers UpdateThe Deal goes Fourth!		 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Why i don't like Named pilot pool...

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: Why i don't like Named pilot pool... Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Why i don't like Named pilot pool... - 5/20/2006 12:52:12 AM   
Oznoyng

 

Posts: 817
Joined: 4/16/2004
From: Mars
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DFalcon


quote:

ORIGINAL: Oznoyng

Okay, I am a Certified Jap Fanboy (tm), but I have to say this is nuts given the current state of things. This allows Japanese players to use bomb training to basically get themselves an endless supply of 90+ experience fighter crews.



Does this really change Japans ability to train pilots. Fighter planes can bomb too, and most players do just that. The types of planes used for training might change but not the trianing itself.

Yes, it does. Realize that the limiting factor in training is the number of Daitai you can train with and suitable bases to train. To train fighters, I have to take a Daitai off the line and set it to pound an undefended base or out of supply LCU. If Japan has 20 fighter Daitai, you have to move 5 to 10 of those to training to keep up with pilot losses. Now, I can put all my transport and bomber squadrons to work training my fighter pilots (set them to deliver supply to their own base in the home islands, when their experience level gets to an accceptable level, overstuff one unit and disband it into the historical pilot pool. Then just draw pilots as replacements. This can increase by 33 to 100 percent the available fighter Daitai the IJN player has.

Training fighter pilots as Japan requires a range 1 (or max 2) base, or ops losses will cause too many losses while training. That is not always as easy to find as you might believe. Now, Japan can train fighter pilots using recon, LBA, patrol, transport, etc. Daitai to a very high level of experience.

_____________________________

"There is no Black or White, only shades of Grey."
"If you aren't a part of the solution, you're a part of the problem."

(in reply to DFalcon)
Post #: 31
RE: Why i don't like Named pilot pool... - 5/20/2006 1:48:35 AM   
DFalcon


Posts: 318
Joined: 11/2/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Oznoyng

Now, I can put all my transport and bomber squadrons to work training my fighter pilots (set them to deliver supply to their own base in the home islands, when their experience level gets to an accceptable level,



But you still need transport, patrol and bomber aircraft to do other things than train fighter pilots. You will need pilots for your front line bombers as well. Your extra fighters will require even more trained pilots as replacements.

On going games will have an influx of pilots as previously unavailable pilots are now available. However the point at which it balances out will not be so far from where it is now. The methods used to train them will not change that much. Time will tell, but I really do not think it is as big a deal as it seems.


(in reply to Oznoyng)
Post #: 32
RE: Why i don't like Named pilot pool... - 5/20/2006 8:18:17 AM   
KDonovan


Posts: 1157
Joined: 9/25/2005
From: New Jersey
Status: offline 		seems to me that the Allies will be forever behind the Japanese in training pilots...which is absurd. Let me elaborate.

Japan has many, many more pilots at the start of the game that are +75 exp than the allies. Since both sides will be using the same newly added v1.81 "training program", japan will be able to add the same amount of trained pilots to their starting pool as the allies, so the allies will never catch up.

For arguement purposes only, lets imagine that japan as 200 elite pilots at the start and the allies have 0. Since the allies lack this starting pool of 200 elite pilots, the allies will forever be 200 pilots down (elite ones that is)

i sure hope i'm wrong in this arguement, so comments are much appreciated

(in reply to DFalcon)
Post #: 33
RE: Why i don't like Named pilot pool... - 5/20/2006 9:00:05 AM   
Charles_22


Posts: 3993
Joined: 3/12/2001
From: Dallas, Texas, USA
Status: offline 		No, it's simple really, only this method will likely excelerate things somewhat. The truth of the matter is that until the allies are willing to do at least a somewhat continuous job on fighting the IJAF, the IJAF will always stay ahead, but in the old manner of play that was just as true.

If the allies feel just fine with the IJ air training itself to death and not fighting them, unless the allies have -much- lower ops losses it probably won't ever catch up. The IJ planes have less durability for a start overall, training some of those pilots in transports instead of fighters, to some degree, will change that a bit, but then again so the allied training done the same way will see the most durable aircraft lowering the ops losses from training.

It is only when the allies are happy with fighting an aerial training war, as opposed to destroying enemy air, that they may not vault ahead of IJ in experience.

(in reply to KDonovan)
Post #: 34
RE: Why i don't like Named pilot pool... - 5/20/2006 12:05:11 PM   
Kereguelen


Posts: 1715
Joined: 5/13/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: KDonovan

seems to me that the Allies will be forever behind the Japanese in training pilots...which is absurd. Let me elaborate.

Japan has many, many more pilots at the start of the game that are +75 exp than the allies. Since both sides will be using the same newly added v1.81 "training program", japan will be able to add the same amount of trained pilots to their starting pool as the allies, so the allies will never catch up.

For arguement purposes only, lets imagine that japan as 200 elite pilots at the start and the allies have 0. Since the allies lack this starting pool of 200 elite pilots, the allies will forever be 200 pilots down (elite ones that is)

i sure hope i'm wrong in this arguement, so comments are much appreciated


Sorry, but I cannoth follow your math here. The Allies receive many more air groups during the game than the Japanese. I don't like the training-by-hitting-a-defenseless-base program, but against a Japanese player who uses this, I'ld simply extensively use the use-bombers-to-haul-supplies-to-their-own-base training method and disband those bomber groups when my units are sufficiently trained. Despite the withdrawal feature for Allied pilots that have hit 100+ missions, the Allies always would train more highly experienced pilots than the Japanese. Especially with the new feature: No way for the Japanese to win by having higher pilot quality...

K

(in reply to KDonovan)
Post #: 35
RE: Why i don't like Named pilot pool... - 5/20/2006 12:08:19 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 14610
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

....but what would rate float plane pilots as crack ones? landing on calm sea?).


Becoming an ace in air combat. Float pilots in this case refers to float fighter pilots.

(in reply to pauk)
Post #: 36
RE: Why i don't like Named pilot pool... - 5/20/2006 3:02:54 PM   
timtom


Posts: 2355
Joined: 1/29/2003
From: Aarhus, Denmark
Status: offline 		I know this sounds crazy, but how about restraining yourselves and not willfully exploit it

_____________________________

Where's the Any key?


(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 37
RE: Why i don't like Named pilot pool... - 5/20/2006 3:37:38 PM   
Halsey


Posts: 4872
Joined: 2/7/2004
From: Indianapolis Indiana USA
Status: offline 		You have just listed the main human flaw.
Restraint

Sorry, this one isn't hardcoded into everyones genes.

_____________________________

AE WITP Land Air Bitmap downloads

https://sites.google.com/site/aewitplandairartwork/home/ae-witp-bitmap-downloads

(in reply to timtom)
Post #: 38
RE: Why i don't like Named pilot pool... - 5/20/2006 5:08:45 PM   
irrelevant


Posts: 5498
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: astride Mason and Dixon's Line
Status: offline

Some of us have had every hint of restraint beaten out of us over the years at the hands of more skillful opponents.

Can't wait to see you as IJ, bro

_____________________________

Fear the kitten!

(in reply to Halsey)
Post #: 39
RE: Why i don't like Named pilot pool... - 5/20/2006 8:21:58 PM   
TheElf


Posts: 3812
Joined: 5/14/2003
From: Corpus Christi, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

As I posted in the "DO like" thread ...I see this as the genesis of dedicated training squadrons...




And as I posted in the "DO like" thread in response to your insightful post...

Yes,
Take advantage of this loophole while you can. I would bet that the on map training expediencies have their days numbered...

_____________________________

WAR IN THE PACIFIC: Admiral's Edition - Air Team Lead

IN PERPETUUM SINGULARIS SEDES



(in reply to treespider)
Post #: 40
RE: Why i don't like Named pilot pool... - 5/22/2006 5:26:37 AM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12098
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline 		Another reason why I'd love to see more penalties for upgrading units to different aircraft. Eac time there is an upgrade, perhaps pilots should lose a certain percentage of skill. Perhaps if the change is from a certain type (bomber to fighter) the reduction is more severe than within same plane typs (fighter to fighter).

Perhaps a delay should occur if sending pilots back to pool (at least to make up for instant access to new pilots).

_____________________________





Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to TheElf)
Post #: 41
RE: Why i don't like Named pilot pool... - 5/22/2006 1:33:31 PM   
michaelm


Posts: 8204
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline 		Not a bad idea.
Knock off a few points for the pilot getting use to a new craft.
Knock off a some more for changing type of craft (change of primary mission emphasis).

Michael

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)
Post #: 42
RE: Why i don't like Named pilot pool... - 5/22/2006 2:19:02 PM   
Mr.Frag


Posts: 13409
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline 		A already skilled pilot getting a better plane can get more out of it. They don't loose skill, they become more effective (combined).

You could make the same case in reverse and say that the enemy would have a skill loss the first time they went up against a plane they had never encountered before as they don't know how to fight it as they have not figured out it's weaknesses.

(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 43
RE: Why i don't like Named pilot pool... - 5/22/2006 3:59:12 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 12000
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline 		I don´t like the named pilot pool because this feature is broken. Lost pretty many pilots, as the pool was set to 0 next turn, and also lost the daitais that were in to arrive in 90 days (disappeared from the reinforcement list). That´s great when you spend a year RL for PBEMs and then you ruin your game with a new implemented feature.

(in reply to Mr.Frag)
Post #: 44
RE: Why i don't like Named pilot pool... - 5/22/2006 4:06:55 PM   
michaelm


Posts: 8204
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline 		Send me your save and tell me which ones are lost.
michaelm75 @ hotmail.com

Michael
quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

I don´t like the named pilot pool because this feature is broken. Lost pretty many pilots, as the pool was set to 0 next turn, and also lost the daitais that were in to arrive in 90 days (disappeared from the reinforcement list). That´s great when you spend a year RL for PBEMs and then you ruin your game with a new implemented feature.


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 45
RE: Why i don't like Named pilot pool... - 5/22/2006 4:09:51 PM   
michaelm


Posts: 8204
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline 		For a feature that was put in handle the odd instances when a group or fragment needs to disbanded, it sure is getting a lot of work out.


Michael

(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 46
RE: Why i don't like Named pilot pool... - 5/22/2006 4:20:03 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 12000
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Send me your save and tell me which ones are lost.
michaelm75 @ hotmail.com

Michael
quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

I don´t like the named pilot pool because this feature is broken. Lost pretty many pilots, as the pool was set to 0 next turn, and also lost the daitais that were in to arrive in 90 days (disappeared from the reinforcement list). That´s great when you spend a year RL for PBEMs and then you ruin your game with a new implemented feature.




problem is, that I don´t know which exactly are lost, a couple of float fighters and a couple of transports. Around 150 planes and pilots.

(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 47
RE: Why i don't like Named pilot pool... - 5/22/2006 5:36:09 PM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12098
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

A already skilled pilot getting a better plane can get more out of it. They don't loose skill, they become more effective (combined).

You could make the same case in reverse and say that the enemy would have a skill loss the first time they went up against a plane they had never encountered before as they don't know how to fight it as they have not figured out it's weaknesses.


The suggestion was made to counter both the already near pointless skill range (0-99... pointless because all pilots either are assumed to be Adolf Gallands or can learn to become an Adolf Galland simply by crop dusting) and the lack of absolutely any squadron changeover/adjustment period.

You make a good point though.

Personally I'd just like to see skill reevaluated because it is waaaay too high IMO and it has such an effect on combat results. Should be much lower to start with (maybe reduced by 25% across the board) and be a very protracted process to increase and only to a maximum of maybe 55 or 60 for non A2A success for fighter types (bombers not included as gunners and flight crew are different folks) and only hits vs ships for 1E bomber tacticals.


_____________________________





Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to Mr.Frag)
Post #: 48
RE: Why i don't like Named pilot pool... - 5/22/2006 5:55:42 PM   
Mynok


Posts: 12069
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline
The best way, IMO, to model pilots would be to separate "skill" from "experience". Any pilot can get experience and experience only grows. Skill, however, is very subject to training and the pilots natural abilities. Some pilots should never be able to get above average skill levels, whereas every pilot's experience level would grow with actual combat missions.

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)
Post #: 49
RE: Why i don't like Named pilot pool... - 5/22/2006 6:56:19 PM   
Apollo11


Posts: 21618
Joined: 6/7/2001
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Status: offline 		Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm

Not a bad idea.
Knock off a few points for the pilot getting use to a new craft.
Knock off a some more for changing type of craft (change of primary mission emphasis).

Michael


I suggested this 12-18 months ago... people of power didn't like it because they though pilot is a pilot...


Leo "Apollo11"

_____________________________



Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!

A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE

(in reply to michaelm)
Post #: 50
RE: Why i don't like Named pilot pool... - 5/23/2006 3:16:47 AM   
Charles_22


Posts: 3993
Joined: 3/12/2001
From: Dallas, Texas, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

I don´t like the named pilot pool because this feature is broken. Lost pretty many pilots, as the pool was set to 0 next turn, and also lost the daitais that were in to arrive in 90 days (disappeared from the reinforcement list). That´s great when you spend a year RL for PBEMs and then you ruin your game with a new implemented feature.


It won't help your lost units, but by now you have heard that you have to use those pilots the same day, have you not?

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 51
RE: Why i don't like Named pilot pool... - 5/23/2006 4:18:49 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 12000
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Charles_22


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

I don´t like the named pilot pool because this feature is broken. Lost pretty many pilots, as the pool was set to 0 next turn, and also lost the daitais that were in to arrive in 90 days (disappeared from the reinforcement list). That´s great when you spend a year RL for PBEMs and then you ruin your game with a new implemented feature.


It won't help your lost units, but by now you have heard that you have to use those pilots the same day, have you not?



Well, unfortunately I´ve heard about it - just a bit too late.

(in reply to Charles_22)
Post #: 52
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: Why i don't like Named pilot pool... Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.693