WIA (Full Version)

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



Message

BattleMoose -> WIA (12/23/2014 1:36:50 AM)

When pilots get WIA, I am really struggling to find any information as to the probabilities of what happens to them. What proportion of them can I expect will return back to active service? Diminished stats? Et cetera?



Alfred -> RE: WIA (12/23/2014 3:00:59 AM)

Has never been, nor never will be, elaborated upon by a dev.

The return of a MIA/WIA pilot is subject to die rolls.

Alfred



BattleMoose -> RE: WIA (12/23/2014 3:04:21 AM)

Okay, but people have been playing this game for a long time now. And people use clever things like tracker and like to follow their pilots and what not.

At the moment I can estimate that the percentage of my pilots that return from WIA status is somewhere between 0 and 100%. I would like to narrow that down a little bit. Can you help?



Alfred -> RE: WIA (12/23/2014 3:46:41 AM)

No.

It is a random and the "rnd" in the algorithm has never been disclosed.  You can't get it from Tracker or any other method either.  Plus the "rnd" may well not be the only, or even most significant part of the algorithm, as there may well be certain thresholds which have to be met.  Again never disclosed by a dev and not easy at all to attempt to reverse engineer.

You just have to accept that MIA/WIA means out of the game but with a small chance of a pilot subsequently returning and not bother with attempting to quantify the odds.

Alfred



BattleMoose -> RE: WIA (12/23/2014 4:00:20 AM)

I don't need to know anything about the algorithm. I will have X amount of pilots WIA and Y will return to duty. Y/X is essentially the number I am after. I would be happy to just have a clue. X is trivial to obtain.

I don't know how to get Y but I am confident there are ways to obtain it. I thought it would be very much quicker to ask the forums where I am also confident people have wondered this very question.

###

And I don't understand why you feel the need to hold out your knowledge on me. Even in your second post you lead with "No" but then later confess its a "small chance". Why don't you lead with "small chance" instead of trying to leave me with no clue? :-/



crsutton -> RE: WIA (12/23/2014 5:04:28 AM)

You are nitpicking here. What Alfred said is pretty clear. Nobody on this forum has a clue as to the probability for a WIA's return. I know that some of mine have but that is about it.



BattleMoose -> RE: WIA (12/23/2014 5:11:44 AM)

There a a very big difference between not knowing the probability or knowing there is a small probability.

I don't understand why people would tell me they don't know the probability when they do know that the probability is small to very small.

Telling me the latter is helpful.

###

Why was it so hard to get that information communicated to me? Why did it require nitpicking?



BattleMoose -> RE: WIA (12/23/2014 5:33:44 AM)

I found a journal article putting the RTD percentage for US combat casualties for WWII at 20%. For interest sake more than anything else at this point.



GreyJoy -> RE: WIA (12/23/2014 5:58:55 AM)

As far as i can tell from my experience, my take is that nearly 80% of the WIA pilots come back sooner or later, while less than 5% of the MIA pilots get rescued or escape captivity.
So i think the die&rolls work pretty well in this matter



Amoral -> RE: WIA (12/23/2014 3:15:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BattleMoose


Why was it so hard to get that information communicated to me? Why did it require nitpicking?


Because Alfred isn't able to answer like a human would, and no one is willing to contradict him because he gets grouchy.



Numdydar -> RE: WIA (12/23/2014 3:31:52 PM)

Of all the minutiae in this game, you need to worry about the return rate of WIA's/MIA's in the game. Are you that short of pilots? Really?

Sorry to be so sarcastic but several people, including Alfred, in what I consider very nice responses (before the nitpicking comment) and you still continued to push the issue. Instead of thanking them for their time for the response and information. Even if it is information you were not happy with or disagreed with. It is like arguing with your doctor about why you are sick. Or your wife about why you were wrong [X(]. Neither of these will work out well and the same thing occurred here.

If you want help, many here are willing to do so with no problems. Just don't continue to say 'why can't I find/do X' after you have gotten your answer. Even if you disagree with it. btw, that has happened to me a LOT [:)] Getting answers I disagree with here [:D]



witpqs -> RE: WIA (12/23/2014 3:47:45 PM)

The sniping at Alfred is unwarranted. He did answer "like a human would". He first gave a direct answer, which is usually what people want. Maybe he was short of time when he gave that direct answer and so did not elaborate. Humans often squeeze in the time to provide at least some type of answer even when lacking time to go full bore.

As for "No" and then "confess", humans often preface an approximate answer (in this example the so-called 'confession') with a notice that they don't know a specific answer (the "No" in this case). It's courtesy. It's extra effort. It's taking time to avoid inadvertently misleading others.



witpqs -> RE: WIA (12/23/2014 3:48:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

Of all the minutiae in this game, you need to worry about the return rate of WIA's/MIA's in the game. Are you that short of pilots? Really?

Sorry to be so sarcastic but several people, including Alfred, in what I consider very nice responses (before the nitpicking comment) and you still continued to push the issue. Instead of thanking them for their time for the response and information. Even if it is information you were not happy with or disagreed with. It is like arguing with your doctor about why you are sick. Or your wife about why you were wrong [X(]. Neither of these will work out well and the same thing occurred here.

If you want help, many here are willing to do so with no problems. Just don't continue to say 'why can't I find/do X' after you have gotten your answer. Even if you disagree with it. btw, that has happened to me a LOT [:)] Getting answers I disagree with here [:D]

+1



Lecivius -> RE: WIA (12/23/2014 3:59:12 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar
It is like arguing with your doctor about why you are sick. Or your wife about why you were wrong [X(]. Neither of these will work out well and the same thing occurred here.



I would much rather argue with my wife, than with Alfred. Going at it with SWMBO is akin to swatting flies. Pointless, but at least you get the bugger from time to time. Arguing with Alfred will just make you feel like an idiot [:D] And in precise, concise terms [:'(]



dcpollay -> RE: WIA (12/23/2014 4:16:18 PM)

Here is my suggestion, Battlemoose. Since nobody, with the possible exception of GreyJoy, has a cogent answer, why don't you play your game and find X/Y? Track your wounded pilots throughout a game over several years (or several games, if you play that fast) and come up with the statistics. Someone may be interested in the final answer as a curiosity, though I suspect most don't really care enough to do the work themselves.

Edit: Spelling correction



Zorch -> RE: WIA (12/23/2014 4:54:09 PM)

The first rule of MIA/WIAs is that nobody talks about MIA/WIAs. [:D]



warspite1 -> RE: WIA (12/23/2014 7:14:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorch

The first rule of MIA/WIAs is that nobody talks about MIA/WIAs. [:D]
warspite1

What's the second rule?



Lecivius -> RE: WIA (12/23/2014 7:24:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorch

The first rule of MIA/WIAs is that nobody talks about MIA/WIAs. [:D]
warspite1

What's the second rule?



ALWAYS refer to rule #1 [;)]



Malagant -> RE: WIA (12/23/2014 7:27:08 PM)

Good question, BM! I understand the curiousity!

As a suggestion for calculating your X/Y, maybe you could use Tracker's Pilot's Data Base.

You might Export that database periodically during a game, and with some clever Sorting and Filtering you could find the WIA pilots, then see when their Fate changed from WIA. I don't know if it tracks MIA, but it may!

If you can then log it over a longish time frame, you'd have the answer, and know something even Alfred doesn't! :)




tiemanjw -> RE: WIA (12/23/2014 8:19:15 PM)

BattleMoose:
I believe tracker, in the alerts, section has 2 categories that could be used here to figure it out, assuming you could keep tracker going long enough (I have to wipe my database every month and half or so, game time).
Tracker will alert you when an ace is WIA (in the minor section), and alerts you "Pilot returns to action" in the information section. It isn't perfect, but you could at least see how many aces return over time. You could also export the pilot reserve database at regular intervals (or even just twice if separated by a good amount of time) and write a program to chug through them and see how many return. It won't give a perfect answer, but it will give you a ball park number.
I'd be curious to the answer.



tiemanjw -> RE: WIA (12/23/2014 9:39:12 PM)

Ok, I hate you Battlemoose. From my PBEM game:
On Jan 1, 1943 I had 257 wounded pilots.
On Aug 8, 1943:
The database found 254 of the 257 pilots in the exports from tracker.
129 of them did not meet the following conditions:
have flown more missions (indicating they became active at some point), or
have a different fate (such as a blank in the fate column, indicating they can be assigned / reassigned)

So this means I found 125 of the original 257 have returned to active duty (note some have since been killed, missing, or even wounded again)

So that would be just about 50% have returned in a little over 8 months. Some may take longer than 8 months to recover, which would increase this number - but this is at least a starting point.


And in case you are curious, for MIA it is 245 missing on Jan 1, of which 230 are still missing on Aug 8. A little over 6% have been found and reactivated or declared KIA.

And all 467 of my KIAs as of Jan 1 remain dead. No zombie pilots[:(].




BattleMoose -> RE: WIA (12/24/2014 4:26:40 AM)

Leave this thread for a day and look what happened to it.

Thank you Tiemanj, that is useful information indeed. :)

I came here with an honest question about the game which has now been addressed. So thank you for those who posted.



CaptBeefheart -> RE: WIA (12/24/2014 5:16:39 AM)

I've seen 99 EXP pilots go to 89 when they are wounded, so I'm pretty sure WIA pilots lose 10 EXP, but have no other effect other than being out of action for a while.

Cheers,
CC



KenchiSulla -> RE: WIA (12/24/2014 8:56:09 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BattleMoose

Leave this thread for a day and look what happened to it.

Thank you Tiemanj, that is useful information indeed. :)

I came here with an honest question about the game which has now been addressed. So thank you for those who posted.


Hi Moose, can't help but wondering why the information provided is useful. Will it change the way you play the game? Will you take a different approach to guiding your forces, training your pilots?

I can understand that you are curious about the way it works but just don't see how you could use the information...



BattleMoose -> RE: WIA (12/24/2014 10:04:40 AM)

When more than half of my casualties from an elite squadron get reported as WIA, I want to know what that means, what happens to that incredibly valuable asset that is an elite pilot. And yes it will change how I use those elite pilots. Do I use them on important offensive missions? Or do I use them defensively where they can be conserved? The attrition rates of those operations is of course relevant.



KenchiSulla -> RE: WIA (12/24/2014 11:50:53 AM)

Wounded pilots lose experience and might not be elite after that..

Pilots flying offensive operations have a high chance to go MIA (when not outright KIA). MIA means a very low base chance to get them back.

-In general after offensive operations you'll see KIA / MIA and only few WIA (most WIA are related to ops losses / landing accidents when returning from a mission).
-In general after defensive missions (over friendly troops) you'll see KIA / WIA and only few to non MIA

Still don't understand why WIA (this was your OP) is so important for you since there is no direct relation between WIA and offensive operations.

Whenever you commit forces in battle force yourself to think about the following:

- (potential) cost and chance of losses being high
- (potential) gain/effect and chance of enemy losses being high

So, you could use elite squadrons to attack an enemy airbase that you have not recced. This might be a good choice if:

- In support of a ground or strategic campaign

You'll take the losses (even elite pilots) because it helps you achieve a certain goal

Or you could choose not to attack if there is no particular goal involved (other then hoping to catch aircraft on the ground, annoy the enemy, fight boredom)



BattleMoose -> RE: WIA (12/24/2014 1:17:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cannonfodder

Wounded pilots lose experience and might not be elite after that..


That part of the question was also in my OP, which has also been addressed.

quote:

Still don't understand why WIA (this was your OP) is so important for you since there is no direct relation between WIA and offensive operations.


I have the option of using them offensively or defensively. I have a very great interest in conserving this resource. I was particularly alarmed at the high number of pilots I had WIA flying defensive operations. Unsurprisingly (?) I wanted to know what their prognosis was. If their survival rate for defensive operations is "low" then I might not choose to use them in that role.





HansBolter -> RE: WIA (12/24/2014 1:22:18 PM)

Beware relying on anecdotal evidence and limited iterations for drawing conclusions.

The best evidence to rely upon is your own experience.

Experiment and find the results you are seeking.

Then you can contribute a concise report to the community to enrich the experience of others.



rustysi -> RE: WIA (12/24/2014 10:22:57 PM)

Hey BM, I don't know if you're aware of it or not, but from what I've experienced on this site and about this game is that you're not going to get specific answers to certain things. What I'm trying to say is that there are a lot of things going on under the hood that will not be disclosed. So getting exact answers to questions will not always be possible. I'm pretty sure this is how the devs want it. You can go on empirical examples, but how accurate and precise they will be depends.



zuluhour -> RE: WIA (12/24/2014 11:36:00 PM)

+1 as it should be.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
3.671875