obvert
Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Alfred
quote:
ORIGINAL: Lowpe
I am convinced that experience plays a huge multiplier effect on everything in this game...
The Betty Pilots, despite a 70 NavT training level, had only an average 56 experience. I am going to start a training program sending these groups to China to build experience as that would be faster than ASW/Nav Search I think.
Torpedoes also seem to be best at either larger, or slower ships, and cleanup.
Boy, I wish I had sent the KB in...what a time to do plane maintenance. Sigh.
The term "experience" is much bandied about by players, and often too loosely.
There is a difference between "Experience" and "experience". One is the overall quality of a pilot and is derived from the aggregate of his skill ratings, which could also be referred to as his "experience" level in those skills. The other is this somewhat artificial construct which exists by itself as a result of abstraction.
For game purposes, performance in combat is based on the relevant skill rating (or as it could be referred to were it not for the propensity to cause confusion, as the skill experience). The pilot field labelled "Experience" is a catch all term which covers the non combat performance. A pilot who nurses home a damaged plane may see his "Experience" rating increased because it is a non combat performance and is not covered by any of the specified skill ratings.
The Betty pilots would have performed much worse in combat if their "Exp" level was in the high 70s but their "NavT" level was in the low 30s.
Alfred
This makes me want to do a test to confirm.
My experience is most likely a lot less than Alfred's, (maybe a 61 to his 85) but I have seen the experience of pilots make up for their lack of skill in combat on numerous occasions and in very different ways, or perform better than pilots with similar skill sets but lower experience.
Firstly, I'm convinced (but happy to be proven wrong through tests or examples) that high experience pilots in combat continue to target more often in bombing runs regardless of their bombing skill ratings. I've seen this on the Allied side and the Japanese side. Late in game when I had numerous well trained bomber pilots the golden boys still got the job done more effectively even though their comparative bombing/defensive skill ratings were comparable.
Secondly, in A to A combat, high experience pilots seem to have more sticking power when their plane is damaged or when they are defending a bombing strike. Even in remarkably outclassed airframes an experienced pilot can fight and survive against something 80-100mph faster, more durable and better gunned, where a 50exp guy with the same air/defense skills will most often get flamed.
In terms of the above example, I don't think it's as usefull as asking would a 50exp/70 skill pilot fare better than a 70exp/50 skill pilot (as you wouldn't often put a 30 skill torpedo bomber pilot into a bombing group heading out on a strike anyway, but you might put that 70exp/50 skill guy in there just because you know he'll get to target more often). I'd definitely go with 70exp/50 skill pilots if all other factors were the same and they were expected to meet CAP.
_____________________________
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
|
Printable Version
RE: Conflict Marcus Island - 
Gone.
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread