TRACOM: to send or not to send? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message

mc3744 -> TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/2/2011 7:43:16 AM)

Ok, I got to the point in my first game with the AI (March '42) where I have some fighter pilots that can be sent to TRACOM (do the Japs have TRACOM too?).

Now the question is: do I want to deprive myself of the few good fighter pilots I have?
Is it worth it to send them to TRACOM?
I guess the answer would be yes if the squadron is to be withdrawn, but what about when it's not?

Thanks guys [:)]



inqistor -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/2/2011 8:41:21 AM)

It is really hard to actually run out of pilots in pool.

You could probably use TRACOM for low-pilot-production nations (like China), but you will hardly have any qualified pilots to send there [:D]


The only useful way, I have find, to use TRACOM, is to send there Japanese pilots, which should decrease training time, and by this, number of pilots in training queue, so saving Japan some HI for training.

EDIT:
Oh, and I am no sure it works, as it should. I have recently got BRITISH pilots accelerated, and I have NO British pilots in TRACOM (nor any other nation, except those Dutch, which somehow got there with 55 exp).



KenchiSulla -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/2/2011 9:30:23 AM)

As a japanese player I do stuff pilots in training command, if only to keep an operational reserve of above average pilots. It is where the 80+ pilots go anyway...



CV 2 -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/2/2011 10:17:30 AM)

I find it isnt worth the bother. The Japanese never actually runs out of pilots. I have pulled thousands of Jap naval pilots from the pool (in 1942) and their experience doesnt drop much below 20.

TRACOM is a complete total waste of time.



mc3744 -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/2/2011 10:19:23 AM)

What about the CW pilots?



USS Henrico -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/2/2011 1:11:15 PM)

As the Allies, you don't need to accelerate pilot training in the schools: you'll graduate enough of them. I use TRACOM as a waystation, before I send one of each of those pilots to on-map squadrons that are assigned to train flight school graduates. This allows the on-map squadrons to train faster.

For example in my PBEM game, Pappy Boyington is helping to train the pilots in a P-26 squadron at Pearl Harbor and Jimmy Thach is working with a Wildcat squadron on the West Coast. Neither are particularly happy with their assignments, but that's the best place for them.



mc3744 -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/2/2011 1:14:21 PM)

Sounds like a good idea.
However you deprive the front line of a valuable asset. Do you find the exchange profitable?



USS Henrico -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/2/2011 1:24:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mc3744

Sounds like a good idea.
However you deprive the front line of a valuable asset. Do you find the exchange profitable?


Yes. The point is to eventually create a lot of fighter pilots with 70 air skills and bomber pilots with 60+ skills in their specialty, as well as get their defense ratings up to whatever you deem acceptable. You'll need a pool of these types when you start getting the planes, quality and number wise, to actually compete with the Japanese in the air. Whatever you do to create these pools is more valuable than having a handful of super skilled pilots in the front line squadrons.




olperfessor -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/2/2011 2:48:38 PM)

I thought that posters in an earlier thread concluded that having 81+pilots in on-map squadrons we use for training did not accelerate training. Do they?



Chickenboy -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/2/2011 3:56:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CV 2

I find it isnt worth the bother. The Japanese never actually runs out of pilots. I have pulled thousands of Jap naval pilots from the pool (in 1942) and their experience doesnt drop much below 20.

TRACOM is a complete total waste of time.

Not my experience. Under scenario 1, I've run out of Japanese pilots in the pools in 1943 (IJAAF), resulting in their dropping of experience into the single digits on occasion. They can still be trained up and useful, but they'll take longer.

Not my experience with TRACOM either. Like Cannonfodder, I use them as a repository for my best and brightest, to shore up my forces for later in the war. As I've stated any number of times this subject has come up-would you rather have your 85 EXP / 85 A2A pilots in a Frank-B variant in 1944 or an Oscar Ib in 1942? The earlier aces will help your earlier efforts, but once they die, you'll have no functional high-quality reserves.

I've had good luck with the 'pull through' due to TRACOM too. I'm using a lot of pilots in training and dumping them into reserve. Having slightly better graduate pilots (and more of 'em available) is helpful.



Chickenboy -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/2/2011 3:58:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: olperfessor

I thought that posters in an earlier thread concluded that having 81+pilots in on-map squadrons we use for training did not accelerate training. Do they?



This is confusing to me too. Some earlier testing suggested it did. The Elf pooh-poohed that idea in subsequent conversations, IIRC.



Lam0ttePicquet -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/2/2011 4:00:00 PM)

It seems TRACOM doesn't boost japanese pilots training that much.
However, these elite pilots can be reused later in the game in defensive missions, and they can survive longer time in armored planes. 




Chickenboy -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/2/2011 4:00:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: USS Henrico

As the Allies, you don't need to accelerate pilot training in the schools: you'll graduate enough of them. I use TRACOM as a waystation, before I send one of each of those pilots to on-map squadrons that are assigned to train flight school graduates. This allows the on-map squadrons to train faster.


You mean TRACOM for your high experience pilots as a waypoint?



Shark7 -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/2/2011 4:02:02 PM)

As a Japanese player I use the TRACOM not so much for training, but as a way to preserve my really good pilots until they are needed (IE '44-'45). I tend to put pilots with 80+ experience and double ace status in the TRACOM, then I have them when I start getting planes they can take full advantage of.



USS Henrico -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/2/2011 7:16:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: USS Henrico

As the Allies, you don't need to accelerate pilot training in the schools: you'll graduate enough of them. I use TRACOM as a waystation, before I send one of each of those pilots to on-map squadrons that are assigned to train flight school graduates. This allows the on-map squadrons to train faster.


You mean TRACOM for your high experience pilots as a waypoint?


Yes. Usually I pull the pilots out of front line squadrons once eligible for TRACOM. Then I pull them from TRACOM into the on-map squadrons that I setup to train, one to a squadron. If I have a surplus of TRACOM pilots, they'll wait until a new squadron shows up that I want to use for training.

If I don't have a TRACOM eligible pilot available for a designated on-map training squadron, then I send a pilot from the pool with a high rating in the skill level I'm trying to train for, or leave the highest rated pilot in that skill in the squadron once I start pulling the trained pilots from the squadron to send to the pool.



JeffroK -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/2/2011 11:50:39 PM)

I've used TRACOM to pull out some, not all of my 80+ pilots.

It may help TRACOM but it also avoids my early war aces from being decimated in an AI orgainsed CAP ambush (In Burma I'm seeing 100+ Tony raids, my Hurris are getting weary!)

My USN pilots reappear when the Hellcat arrives, their experience plus the better aircraft makes them very effective.

Likewise the Aussies are waiting for the Spit Vc or VIII, the RAF has a long wait for the Spit Vc or VIII as well.



olperfessor -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/3/2011 2:46:35 PM)

Parking 81+ pilots in TraCom . . . Doesn't that mean that their own development is stopped, whereas an 81+ pilot in a rear-area on-map squadron can gain sills while being held back for use later in the war? I realize that once a fighter pilot reaches a certain air-to-air rating further training will not
Increase this skill, and I realize that training a fighter pilot in other skills is often irrelevant.

The only drawbacks I can think of to keeping aces training on-map are the slight chances of operational loss or surprise enemy raid if those grainy squadrons are not far in the rear.

Here's another TraCom puzzle to me: do 81+ pilots accelerate training of all pilots, regardless of type (fighter, bomber, patrol, transport)?



CV 2 -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/3/2011 2:50:44 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: olperfessor

Parking 81+ pilots in TraCom . . . Doesn't that mean that their own development is stopped, whereas an 81+ pilot in a rear-area on-map squadron can gain sills while being held back for use later in the war? I realize that once a fighter pilot reaches a certain air-to-air rating further training will not
Increase this skill, and I realize that training a fighter pilot in other skills is often irrelevant.

The only drawbacks I can think of to keeping aces training on-map are the slight chances of operational loss or surprise enemy raid if those grainy squadrons are not far in the rear.

Here's another TraCom puzzle to me: do 81+ pilots accelerate training of all pilots, regardless of type (fighter, bomber, patrol, transport)?


Thats the reason. Op losses. As I said already, I personally dont use TRACOM. And yes, the pilots moving through the pool have no affiliation to fighter, bomber, ect until they are actually drawn from the pool ao all would be affected. And for the record, you do NOT need pilots in TRACOM to get pilots acclerated. I just had 7 Chinese pilots accelerate last turn [:D]



Cap Mandrake -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/3/2011 5:16:50 PM)

BEDEVERE:
Exactly. So, logically...
VILLAGER #1:
If... she... weighs... the same as a duck,... she's made of wood.
BEDEVERE:
And therefore?
VILLAGER #2:
A witch!
VILLAGER #1:
A witch!
CROWD:
A witch! A witch!...
VILLAGER #4:
Here is a duck. Use this duck.
[quack quack quack]
BEDEVERE:
Very good. We shall use my largest scales.
CROWD:
Ohh! Ohh! Burn the witch! Burn the witch! Burn her! Burn her! Burn her! Burn her! Burn her! Burn her! Burn her! Ahh! Ahh...
BEDEVERE:
Right. Remove the supports!
[whop]
[clunk]
[creak]
CROWD:
A witch! A witch! A witch!
WITCH:
It's a fair cop.
VILLAGER #3:
Burn her!
CROWD:
Burn her! Burn her! Burn her! Burn! Burn!...
BEDEVERE:
Who are you who are so wise in the ways of science?
ARTHUR:
I am Arthur, King of the Britons.



Cap Mandrake -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/3/2011 5:24:20 PM)

There was a time I would have been impressed and slunk away, overawed, but now I know better.

I now realize nobody here know what the **** they are talking about. [:D]

Come on, admit it! It will be cathartic. Who will be the first?



vonTirpitz -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/3/2011 6:24:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mc3744

Ok, I got to the point in my first game with the AI (March '42) where I have some fighter pilots that can be sent to TRACOM (do the Japs have TRACOM too?).

Now the question is: do I want to deprive myself of the few good fighter pilots I have?
Is it worth it to send them to TRACOM?
I guess the answer would be yes if the squadron is to be withdrawn, but what about when it's not?

Thanks guys [:)]


I chose to make use of Tracom from the start and it seems to be doing a good job IMHO.

So far, the accelerated pilots have helped smooth out and reduce the HI spend each month and has helped pilot XP as the war progresses. Towards the end game I hope to still have enough elite pilots assigned to Tracom to make a difference.

In the end, the whole Tracom concept is simply another tool that can be used or not used however the player sees fit. While I have found it useful for my game I understand that others may not have the patience to fully appreciate the benefits it offers.

quote:


IJ Army instructors accelerate training of 150 pilots from month-cycle 10
IJ Army instructors accelerate training of 9 pilots from month-cycle 6
IJ Navy instructors accelerate training of 1 pilots from month-cycle 9
IJ Navy instructors accelerate training of 4 pilots from month-cycle 8
IJ Navy instructors accelerate training of 14 pilots from month-cycle 7
IJ Navy instructors accelerate training of 2 pilots from month-cycle 4
IJ Navy instructors accelerate training of 282 pilots from month-cycle 1




[image]local://upfiles/15649/87D441E5CD5C4B8EB100547304254FB0.jpg[/image]



Cap Mandrake -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/3/2011 6:36:21 PM)

Well...OK....maybe Von Tirpitz knows what he is talking about..but he is the only one!



Shark7 -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/3/2011 6:42:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CV 2

quote:

ORIGINAL: olperfessor

Parking 81+ pilots in TraCom . . . Doesn't that mean that their own development is stopped, whereas an 81+ pilot in a rear-area on-map squadron can gain sills while being held back for use later in the war? I realize that once a fighter pilot reaches a certain air-to-air rating further training will not
Increase this skill, and I realize that training a fighter pilot in other skills is often irrelevant.

The only drawbacks I can think of to keeping aces training on-map are the slight chances of operational loss or surprise enemy raid if those grainy squadrons are not far in the rear.

Here's another TraCom puzzle to me: do 81+ pilots accelerate training of all pilots, regardless of type (fighter, bomber, patrol, transport)?


Thats the reason. Op losses. As I said already, I personally dont use TRACOM. And yes, the pilots moving through the pool have no affiliation to fighter, bomber, ect until they are actually drawn from the pool ao all would be affected. And for the record, you do NOT need pilots in TRACOM to get pilots acclerated. I just had 7 Chinese pilots accelerate last turn [:D]


Exactly, I've lost good pilots to 'ops losses' before, even sitting in a backwater on just cap/training. You can risk an ops loss by leaving them in squadrons, or completely remove that risk in TRACOM. Plus in TRACOM they can't get hit by the occasional attack on the base that they would be subject too in an active group.

Save the good pilots for the good planes, during the first (and especially the middle) put mediocre pilots in mediocre planes.



vonTirpitz -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/3/2011 6:43:35 PM)

I cannot claim to fully understand what I am talking about though. [:D]

However, it is important to note that the advantages of TRACOM were not really that noticeable until I got into 43. Up until that point whatever advantages it gave me were much more subtle and less obvious to me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

Well...OK....maybe Von Tirpitz knows what he is talking about..but he is the only one!




CV 2 -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/3/2011 7:45:00 PM)

Any idea what fields I am missing trying to upload to post a .jpg? (and yes I know how to do it, but after I select the file and tell it to upload I get an error that says missing required fields).

Im not saying that TRACOM doesnt accelerate pilots. Im saying that accelerating them doesnt matter. I have a save from a ways back in a no-holds-barred game where I had put over 2000 navy pilots into squadrons for training (most have experience in the mid-30s). The pilots "In Pool" numbers were reduced, but the ones "in training" werent. If I can figure out what the "missing fields" error is, I'd post the screen shot.




WLockard -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/3/2011 7:47:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: vonTirpitz

I cannot claim to fully understand what I am talking about though. [:D]

However, it is important to note that the advantages of TRACOM were not really that noticeable until I got into 43. Up until that point whatever advantages it gave me were much more subtle and less obvious to me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

Well...OK....maybe Von Tirpitz knows what he is talking about..but he is the only one!






Can you tell us about how many pilots you have in TRACOM?



Sardaukar -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/3/2011 10:27:23 PM)

I used to use TRACOM as Allies to create pool of elite pilots you can use to reinforce front-line units in heavy combat with elite pilots easily. Allies can use just General Reserve  for that or Get Veteran (tho TRACOM makes it easier to find ones you want and prevents you accidentally assigning them into other units). And Allies really do not need TRACOM, it is more of tool for Japanese.



vonTirpitz -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/4/2011 3:50:43 AM)

quote:



ORIGINAL: WLockard

Can you tell us about how many pilots you have in TRACOM?


Over the first 12 months of the war I built up slightly under 300 IJN and 100 IJA pilots in TRACOM. About every 3-4 months I would grab as many veterans as possible and move them into training command. It was rather Ad Hoc as the methodology was fairly random over that time period. I haven't paid much attention to it outside of those moments.



HansBolter -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/4/2011 10:35:26 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: inqistor

(like China), but you will hardly have any qualified pilots to send there [:D]





Rare doesn't mean never though. Take a look at this screen shot where I have two Chinese pilots competing for the top pilot kill spot (in third and fourth places).

The AI decided to start sending unescorted Bettys to Ghengtu since I am landing supply there from Ledo.

The Chinese I-16 drivers rose to the occasion.

[image]local://upfiles/21458/CCE656C8E5AD4056BA60ED61CA8C5CA1.jpg[/image]



Shark7 -> RE: TRACOM: to send or not to send? (7/4/2011 3:01:23 PM)

Honestly, I think the Chinese AF would have done better given some better airframes to work with. Their pilots were probably trained as well as any pilot in the sponsor nations, but even a well trained pilot will have problems in airframes that are 2 generations obsolete.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.609375