TRACOM Bug (Full Version)

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



Message

mind_messing -> TRACOM Bug (12/17/2020 11:43:26 PM)

I can provide independent evidence elsewhere that the TRACOM bug mentioned elsewhere (here, for example) appears to exists in the latest version (1.8.11.26b)

[image]https://i.imgur.com/ELx48Ao.png[/image]

Number of pilots in TRACOM when this screenshot was taken was:
IJA - 151
IJN - 429 (!)

As can be seen, adding a substantial number of pilots to TRACOM leads to large increases to IJN pilot skills, allowing unnamed pilots to be drawn from the replacement pool with EXP much higher than they should have. Range I have observed from drawing unnamed pilots was from 67 EXP down to 48 EXP.

Interestingly, IJA pilots do not seem to be affected by this large increase. However, it is possible that this is a reflection of smaller numbers of IJA pilots on TRACOM duty.

While it takes a fairly substantial effort on the part of a player to amass this number of pilots in TRACOM, it does pose the potential to be game-breaking in that large numbers of pilots can be churned out with high EXP values, and potentially (if sufficient pilots are added to TRACOM) to create a positive feedback loop by enabling pilots to be drawn from the replacement pool with EXP greater than 81, and then immediately be sent back into the pool to provide a further boost.



Kull -> RE: TRACOM Bug (12/18/2020 12:03:33 AM)

This is not a surprise. The only aspect which hasn't been proven is whether the bug also affects the Allies. And yes, it affects IJA equally - GetAssista's post (the one you linked) has screenshots which prove that.



GetAssista -> RE: TRACOM Bug (12/18/2020 2:24:02 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull
And yes, it affects IJA equally - GetAssista's post (the one you linked) has screenshots which prove that.


Umm, I think all of the screenshots there are about IJNAF affected. IJA sits near normal 35 xp in all of them. I'm swamped with work rn at the year end, but plan to do a clean experiment some time in the vacations for all the nations



mind_messing -> RE: TRACOM Bug (12/18/2020 2:09:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull

This is not a surprise. The only aspect which hasn't been proven is whether the bug also affects the Allies. And yes, it affects IJA equally - GetAssista's post (the one you linked) has screenshots which prove that.



No evidence to suggest that IJA is impacted by this also as of yet. Both myself and GetAssista's post show's IJA EXP fairly close to the mark.

As I have said, could be that it is not affected, could be that there's just not a critical mass of TRACOM pilots in the IJA TRACOM programme.



Lokasenna -> RE: TRACOM Bug (12/18/2020 2:28:20 PM)

Another thing that jumped out to me: there are hardly any IJN pilots in there, maybe the number of pilots has something to do with it.



Kull -> RE: TRACOM Bug (12/18/2020 2:36:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GetAssista

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull
And yes, it affects IJA equally - GetAssista's post (the one you linked) has screenshots which prove that.


Umm, I think all of the screenshots there are about IJNAF affected. IJA sits near normal 35 xp in all of them. I'm swamped with work rn at the year end, but plan to do a clean experiment some time in the vacations for all the nations


Yeah, the IJN numbers are more obvious, but even with the IJA we see that 100 pilots has edged the base-level experience to 36, which is one point higher than the supposed "cannot be exceeded under circumstances" maximum of 35 (see the graphic in my post, right below his).

So at least there we have an indication that the IJA is also affected. But yes, pumping a few hundred IJA pilots into TRACOM would confirm it, either way.



Kull -> RE: TRACOM Bug (12/18/2020 2:40:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

Another thing that jumped out to me: there are hardly any IJN pilots in there, maybe the number of pilots has something to do with it.


Not likely - see the graphics in GetAssista's linked post. He has 1561 IJN pilots in October 1943 and the base experience level is even higher than mind_messing's



mind_messing -> RE: TRACOM Bug (12/21/2020 4:53:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

Another thing that jumped out to me: there are hardly any IJN pilots in there, maybe the number of pilots has something to do with it.


Worth pointing out that this is roughly 12 months on from gutting the IJN replacement pool for to stack the resized groups.



michaelm75au -> RE: TRACOM Bug (12/12/2021 3:35:20 AM)

Is it possible to get a save showing this?



mind_messing -> RE: TRACOM Bug (12/12/2021 3:17:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm75au

Is it possible to get a save showing this?


Drop me a PM with an email address and we can discuss



michaelm75au -> RE: TRACOM Bug (12/30/2021 2:18:06 AM)

Can I get a save? I just need to see what players are seeing. There should be limit on the number of 'instructors' being use to do the calculation, so I need to understand what is happening.



michaelm75au -> RE: TRACOM Bug (12/30/2021 4:57:59 AM)

I have a few saves I will look at. There should be a cap on the number of 'instructors' being used. It isn't there as I don't think anyone expected players to load all their experienced pilots in Training Command in such volumes.
For the IJN, they didn't have many experienced pilots left after all the mid-war year losses in planes/pilots/carriers. Over weighting the Command I don't think was really expected.

Let me get my head around the current process, and what may be wrong or may need tweaking.



GetAssista -> RE: TRACOM Bug (12/30/2021 1:17:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm75au

Can I get a save? I just need to see what players are seeing. There should be limit on the number of 'instructors' being use to do the calculation, so I need to understand what is happening.

Woah, woah, you are on the .exe again, what a treat on the NY Eve! I'll get you my TRACOM save too, see attachment

Also, a while back I compiled the few of the left reproducible bugs/inconsistencies in the last beta https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4923122. Feel free to check in and see if something catches your eye

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm75au
For the IJN, they didn't have many experienced pilots left after all the mid-war year losses in planes/pilots/carriers. Over weighting the Command I don't think was really expected.

Stacking Tracom is what JFBs would naturally do while waiting for better (armored) planes for their early war aces

Regards, GA



Yaab -> RE: TRACOM Bug (12/30/2021 3:14:23 PM)

michaelm75au, are TRACOM effects relative to the number of pilots in replacemnt pool?

I just had 1 British pilot in TRACOM accelerate 19 pilots

[image]https://i.postimg.cc/KjS7LsRL/REASRT-XIV-1-brit-pilot-in-TRCAOm-yet-accelerated-copy.png[/image]



michaelm75au -> RE: TRACOM Bug (1/1/2022 3:11:12 AM)

The 'number' of pilots in TRACOM influences the speed of the monthly training cycle. Thus overloading it will speed up the overall training.
Even with one pilot there, it can 'speed' up the cycle if the month's experience level is one close to the national experience level.

As we only do this check on the first of each month, it may look strange sometimes.

Currently every pilot in TRACOM counts towards the 'instructor' count which is how overloading TRACOM is being 'misused'. [:D]
I am playing around with some tweaks on how it determines the instructors.
Currently I am going with:
1. must be in Training Command [as is]
2. must have flown more than 10 missions or had more than 10 kills [ must have flown some sort of mission in order to be a 'veteran']
3. must not be wounded [to cater for the possibility that a training mission injures them. As the next time this check runs will be a month later, the pilot will probably had returned to duty]
4. can be injured or killed while being treated as an instructor
In addition, there will be some randomness if the pilot will be included as an instructor for each of the 12 training cycles for the month.

quote:

Woah, woah, you are on the .exe again, what a treat on the NY Eve!


When you think it is behind you, you get pulled in again. [:D]



Nomad -> RE: TRACOM Bug (1/1/2022 3:27:03 AM)

I have had accelerated training for Chinese and Soviet pilots, I am very sure neither has any TRACOM pilots.



michaelm75au -> RE: TRACOM Bug (1/1/2022 3:52:31 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nomad

I have had accelerated training for Chinese and Soviet pilots, I am very sure neither has any TRACOM pilots.


You don't need TRACOM pilots to get 'accelerated'. If the normal experience improvement reaches the current national level, some pilots jump to the next level automatically.
TRACOM experience improvements allows this jump also.



Nomad -> RE: TRACOM Bug (1/1/2022 3:57:23 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm75au


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nomad

I have had accelerated training for Chinese and Soviet pilots, I am very sure neither has any TRACOM pilots.


You don't need TRACOM pilots to get 'accelerated'. If the normal experience improvement reaches the current national level, some pilots jump to the next level automatically.
TRACOM experience improvements allows this jump also.


This was supposed to be in response to Yaab, sorry I should have quoted him.



Kull -> RE: TRACOM Bug (1/1/2022 2:25:33 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm75au

3. must not be wounded [to cater for the possibility that a training mission injures them. As the next time this check runs will be a month later, the pilot will probably had returned to duty]
4. can be injured or killed while being treated as an instructor


It's interesting that TRACOM instructors will have the possibility of being injured or killed, because on-map training is completely penalty-free. You can run 100 air units at 100% training for the duration of the war, and won't lose a single airframe or trainee, much less an instructor. Nobody has ever listed this as a bug, but realistically? That's not very realistic. There should be *some* chance that bad things can happen. Even ships on normal supply runs can hit a whale every now and then.



BBfanboy -> RE: TRACOM Bug (1/2/2022 12:26:15 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm75au

3. must not be wounded [to cater for the possibility that a training mission injures them. As the next time this check runs will be a month later, the pilot will probably had returned to duty]
4. can be injured or killed while being treated as an instructor


It's interesting that TRACOM instructors will have the possibility of being injured or killed, because on-map training is completely penalty-free. You can run 100 air units at 100% training for the duration of the war, and won't lose a single airframe or trainee, much less an instructor. Nobody has ever listed this as a bug, but realistically? That's not very realistic. There should be *some* chance that bad things can happen. Even ships on normal supply runs can hit a whale every now and then.

That was answered in the past - along the lines of it would be too much coding to make it a feature of the game, so they adjusted the training numbers to account for the lost pilots and instructors and aircraft.



Kull -> RE: TRACOM Bug (1/2/2022 2:06:24 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm75au

3. must not be wounded [to cater for the possibility that a training mission injures them. As the next time this check runs will be a month later, the pilot will probably had returned to duty]
4. can be injured or killed while being treated as an instructor


It's interesting that TRACOM instructors will have the possibility of being injured or killed, because on-map training is completely penalty-free. You can run 100 air units at 100% training for the duration of the war, and won't lose a single airframe or trainee, much less an instructor. Nobody has ever listed this as a bug, but realistically? That's not very realistic. There should be *some* chance that bad things can happen. Even ships on normal supply runs can hit a whale every now and then.

That was answered in the past - along the lines of it would be too much coding to make it a feature of the game, so they adjusted the training numbers to account for the lost pilots and instructors and aircraft.


Right, but that's the off-map pilot training, i.e. the stuff TRACOM assists with. I'm pointing out that on-map training is completely unrealistic since it's impossible to lose planes or pilots to training accidents - since there aren't any. Which is obviously ludicrous.

Edit: Just looking at the US alone, "over the course of the war 200,000 trainees flunked out or died in training accidents." That quote comes from an interesting article on that topic. Reading it carefully, you can see that a lot of the carnage is covered by "Ops losses" in AE and one could even make a case that the 200K trainees noted above are covered by the unseen offmap attrition. But even with that, it should be obvious that flight training is never a casualty-free exercise. Except in AE, where it is completely safe.



BBfanboy -> RE: TRACOM Bug (1/2/2022 3:17:09 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm75au

3. must not be wounded [to cater for the possibility that a training mission injures them. As the next time this check runs will be a month later, the pilot will probably had returned to duty]
4. can be injured or killed while being treated as an instructor


It's interesting that TRACOM instructors will have the possibility of being injured or killed, because on-map training is completely penalty-free. You can run 100 air units at 100% training for the duration of the war, and won't lose a single airframe or trainee, much less an instructor. Nobody has ever listed this as a bug, but realistically? That's not very realistic. There should be *some* chance that bad things can happen. Even ships on normal supply runs can hit a whale every now and then.

That was answered in the past - along the lines of it would be too much coding to make it a feature of the game, so they adjusted the training numbers to account for the lost pilots and instructors and aircraft.


Right, but that's the off-map pilot training, i.e. the stuff TRACOM assists with. I'm pointing out that on-map training is completely unrealistic since it's impossible to lose planes or pilots to training accidents - since there aren't any. Which is obviously ludicrous.

Edit: Just looking at the US alone, "over the course of the war 200,000 trainees flunked out or died in training accidents." That quote comes from an interesting article on that topic. Reading it carefully, you can see that a lot of the carnage is covered by "Ops losses" in AE and one could even make a case that the 200K trainees noted above are covered by the unseen offmap attrition. But even with that, it should be obvious that flight training is never a casualty-free exercise. Except in AE, where it is completely safe.

No, the adjustment was meant to cover on-map training too - because that is where you would need the coding to handle it. Just another abstracted shortcut to keep the game within size parameters and within budget.



michaelm75au -> RE: TRACOM Bug (1/2/2022 12:08:48 PM)

A group Training mission should have a chance to 'crash' a plane on landing as with any other landing. I'll have a look but I had thought there were Op losses happening during training.
Low experienced pilots have an increased chance of crashing a plane on landing. The reverse is also true that experienced pilots have less a chance to have a crash.
In-group training is more a case of honing skills rather than training how to fly from scratch.
The off-map training will 'drop' some pilots from each cycle - this represent those trainees washing out or being killed.



Kull -> RE: TRACOM Bug (1/2/2022 2:46:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm75au

A group Training mission should have a chance to 'crash' a plane on landing as with any other landing. I'll have a look but I had thought there were Op losses happening during training.
Low experienced pilots have an increased chance of crashing a plane on landing. The reverse is also true that experienced pilots have less a chance to have a crash.
In-group training is more a case of honing skills rather than training how to fly from scratch.
The off-map training will 'drop' some pilots from each cycle - this represent those trainees washing out or being killed.


Looking specifically at on-map training, one would expect that heavy use of airframes would increase airframe fatigue, and that Ops Losses would follow. No need for a separate mechanism to attrit on-map trainees, I completely agree. However, that's the problem. You can run training missions at 100% - forever - and airframe fatigue will never climb out of the low-to-mid teens. As an example, look at this P-39D unit in San Fran. It's been training at 100%, every day since the unit arrived in July 1942. It's now March of 1943, and look at the fatigue numbers. And that is not an outlier - all airframes, regardless of service rating, show similar effects.

[image]local://upfiles/25668/E3F64858E54146A0BE05145C94165EE0.jpg[/image]



Kull -> RE: TRACOM Bug (1/2/2022 2:48:31 PM)

And the result is exactly what I called out as a problem. No airframe or pilot losses. Not one. And that is true of every dedicated training unit.

[image]local://upfiles/25668/2B304D2604AB4EBD91DCB928FEE6F249.jpg[/image]



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.8125