Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Unless things have changed recently, I have to disagree with the losses when using 100% training in back areas where no operational sorties are being flown. I don't recall losing a single aircraft in training then, although some get pulled off-line to be repaired from time to time. That means you don't have to monitor it - it happens automatically.

What I do find affects the training is the leader skills in Leadership and Administration.

Even with this, some pilots will be nearly hopeless in the training for a specific skill and should be sent to one they are better at. AFAIK, the only way to tell which skill is their best to train is to put them in a squadron training "General Training" and after a few weeks check which skills they have been raising fastest. General training needs to toggle occasionally between training at 2000' or more, and training a 1000' (low level). Some of the mission types use skills that can only happen at/above or below the 2000' mark. Exception is strafe skill- trained and used operationally at 100'.

So if you are Allies and can afford to have a squadron sorting out the misfits, use that one to assess pilots who flunked out of their first training school!

quote:

ORIGINAL: rockmedic109

It is not linear. The lower the skill level, the faster the increase will be. 100% training will be hard on airframes and cause training losses. The 0 range will help keep fatigue down. I go with 50% training and train in specific skills. I think ground combat at 100' will train defense.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

LIke BBfB, I use 100% training, at zero range, and at 10,000 ft - no pilot fatigue, no ops losses. I agree you get the odd wood-duck, so swap them out.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rockmedic109

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Unless things have changed recently, I have to disagree with the losses when using 100% training in back areas where no operational sorties are being flown. I don't recall losing a single aircraft in training then, although some get pulled off-line to be repaired from time to time. That means you don't have to monitor it - it happens automatically.

What I do find affects the training is the leader skills in Leadership and Administration.

Even with this, some pilots will be nearly hopeless in the training for a specific skill and should be sent to one they are better at. AFAIK, the only way to tell which skill is their best to train is to put them in a squadron training "General Training" and after a few weeks check which skills they have been raising fastest. General training needs to toggle occasionally between training at 2000' or more, and training a 1000' (low level). Some of the mission types use skills that can only happen at/above or below the 2000' mark. Exception is strafe skill- trained and used operationally at 100'.

So if you are Allies and can afford to have a squadron sorting out the misfits, use that one to assess pilots who flunked out of their first training school!

I stand corrected. I have no proof otherwise, but that {50% training} is what I have always done, so I either read something wrong, read something that was wrong or just thought it was right. This was years ago and I have a hard time remembering what I had from breakfast.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chris21wen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

LIke BBfB, I use 100% training, at zero range, and at 10,000 ft - no pilot fatigue, no ops losses. I agree you get the odd wood-duck, so swap them out.

Pilots don't have a preferrence for particular skill do thay? It's always seemed to me the luck of the draw. Put them in another similar unit and they may well train up.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hano

Thanks thats great, I'm coming to the end of a full campaign (Mar 45) that I started last year against the AI as a learning experience. One of the things I noticed was that because as soon as units arrived I shipped them pretty much straight into combat a lot of my pilots are at circa 55%, so even with good quality aircraft they arent enjoying the superiority that they enjoyed in real life over the Japanese - Great Marianas Turkey Shoot. I acknowledge that the Japanese retained some highly skilled pilots for home defence and training such as Saburō Sakai, but I'm not getting the expected loss ratio of Japanese/US.

I'm starting a new campaign and want to learn from my mistakes...

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Don't expect real-life results - the historic game was modified to make it more playable for the Japanese player, and the game design erased a lot of Japanese mistakes. For example:

- IRL the Japanese were not prepared for a long war with tremendous losses in planes and pilots. They did not start a pilot training program until they were already short on pilots.
- IRL the IJN and IJA were separate fiefdoms that did not co-operate well with each other, jealously guarding what they thought was their purview and not combining their strength for tough battles or sharing intel.
- the Japanese lacked the kinds of resource materials needed to build high tech aircraft so their were inferior, especially in fireproofing.
- the Japanese did not train ASW for the first couple of years of the war because it was "defensive" and not worthy of a warrior's spirit
- the Japanese treated the people they "liberated" from European colonialists even worse than the Europeans did. In this there was a kind of racist arrogance that alienated them from potential allies.
- the Japanese were prone to "victory disease" which led to them underestimating what the enemy could do to them
- the Japanese neglected logistics as much as they neglected ASW. They were not prepared to sustain the conquests they made in the Pacific or the jungles of Burma and mountains of China and India.

The AI also has certain advantages that stem from not being able to assess the Allied player's intentions and form an appropriate response. The AI can teleport forces at a base or port to another base or port close to where they are needed because a human player would have assessed the need and started them moving much earlier.

So in the case of your 'turkey shoot', the AI gave itself pilots trained in a good training program, in numbers of good aircraft that they did not historically have, with better stats than the RL aircraft did. If that made you fight harder and make hard decisions, that is what the game is about! Enjoy the experience!