|
InfiniteMonkey -> RE: Training squadrons with 0 or 1 plane (1/19/2017 12:27:00 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: bushpsu
InfiniteMonkey-
This was with dedicated UNITS as trainers, correct? The next step might be to track training within a unit that is also "on the line," with a percentage of pilots training and a percentage CAPping and/or resting.
What BBFanboy wrote meshes with my observations.
According to the pilot management Addendum, adjusting training percentage should be roughly the same as varying the number of planes for the percent of planes that are set to training. It is specifically noted there that the checks are made against the training percentage of the squadron. See 7. training section of that manual and note: "Groups will also gain skill and experience (after passing a training check against the training percent of the group) at the end of each day: ".
If you have a 36 max/48 plane/48 pilot squadron set to Escort with 50% training and 30% CAP and 20% rest, then you should get
- the training effects as if the squadron had 18 planes in it PLUS
- a 50% chance per pilot to get the leader bonus and group experience bonus
- the "real" experience as if it had roughly 10 planes at 100% CAP
I'm not a fan of hybrid approaches at the moment, though I have some other tests I want to run to confirm my reasons for that. The reason flying CAP is effective training as pilots become more experienced is twofold:
1. Flying CAP has the potential to increase Exp faster than training as Exp grows from 50? to 70+.
2. Mission count plus experience (plus kills, but trainees should not have those) must be less than the pilots experience to gain the Leader and group exp bonuses.
Let me state #2 more forcefully:
According to the Pilot Management Addendum, a 51 experience pilot with no missions or kills will never get the Leader bonus or Group Experience Bonus.
When you see some people talk about the "wall" that you reach when a pilot goes past 50 experience, I think what they are seeing is the fact that these training bonuses no longer apply. Add to that the effect of the "number of planes does not matter" myth and you have the perception of a wall at 50+ experience. You have some people saying it slows to a crawl and some saying "What wall?" If I asked the guys complaining about the wall, I'm guessing they would say they did not put full complements of aircraft in their training groups and never sent them on any kind of real missions. In those cases, the only pilots getting training advancement would be the ones flying the few aircraft in the squadron.
Now, my problem with the hybrid approach is that the more experienced pilots tend to fly missions. If you are flying 20% CAP and 80% training, your high exp pilots will tend to draw the CAP missions and the bottom 80% will draw training missions. (see BBFanboy's comment above). My preference is simply to assign pilots in the high 40's to milk run missions like Naval Search at 100% to get their mission count up to 70-75 range and then to return them to Training 100%. That way I can be assured they will continue to get the Leader and Group Experience Bonuses as they train above 50.
Is it worth it? Well, consider that this whole conversation started because of the perception that number of aircraft did not matter. I would contend that most of the training occurring in 0/1 plane training squadrons was occurring due to the Leader and Group Experience bonuses. It was significant enough that some argued the number of planes did not matter, so the amount of training from Leader and group experience observed up to 50 Exp was pretty significant.
|
|
|
|
