Training squadrons with 0 or 1 plane

[TulliusDetritus]

Maybe I'm asking too much, but have you tested -Infinite Monkey and GetAssista - the sufficient / insufficient air support impact on training?

Many thanks for your well reasoned effort / tests [:)]

[Alpha77]

This unit also arrived ca. a week ago (per normal queue), it has 27 planes per TOO, but was given only 6. It is a smaller airfield with only 10 AV. They train too with the 6, but quite slow somewhat faster than the no planes (everything logical so far) Below not seen on pic more pilots are in gree for asw:

[Alpha77]

I know it is not a real comparison but here a unit at Nagoya at 100% air HQ and 3 AF. Some of the guys below were drawn quite recently but I do not know when exactly. Also I put a recon guy in (67) as you can see he does not train air very well:

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

This unit also arrived ca. a week ago (per normal queue), it has 27 planes per TOO, but was given only 6. It is a smaller airfield with only 10 AV. They train too with the 6, but quite slow somewhat faster than the no planes (everything logical so far) Below not seen on pic more pilots are in gree for asw:

The small amount of air support should result in accumulating fatigue on the aircraft.
How many of the six aircraft are still in operation after a week?
Is your training set at 100% or ???
What altitude are they training at???? (I would have expected more gains in defensive skill but I always train low level - 2000 feet for land/naval bombing and 1000 for patrol/low level missions).

[GetAssista]

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus
Maybe I'm asking too much, but have you tested -Infinite Monkey and GetAssista - the sufficient / insufficient air support impact on training?

There are more pressing matters for testing, like commander skills/training modes/range so I'll do those first when have time for the game
For now, the logical assumption relevant to your question would be that lack of air support grounds planes and they are no longer useful for training. just the same as absent, so training will be slower

ORIGINAL: Alpha77
Ok, folks, YES no plane units train but slow.

They do train, no doubt about it. Just very slow

[InfiniteMonkey]

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

Ok, folks, YES no plane units train but slow. See this Mavis unit (transport - I do not have any IJN transport for a while so could not give them planes, they arrived a week ago, bought back, unit was overrun in the south). Note it is a 10 airfield with plenty of AV at Tokyo:

I am not denying that units without planes can train. I am merely contending that number of aircraft matters and that the effect is linear. If you look at the pilot management addendum, it is clear that leader's skill and and average group experience can contribute to the training of pilots without having any planes at all. I am merely trying to debunk the myth that a 0/1/2 plane squadron trains just as fast as a fully equipped squadron. It is simply not true and anyone that bothers to set up a controlled test can see it with little effort.

I will also note that you should be 100% training in this case, not 80 or some other fraction since the bonus's make a check against your training percentage per pilot before gaining skill. IMO the only time you should not be 100% training is when 1) your pilots are around 50 exp and you need to get their mission count up to keep the group exp and leader bonuses going, and 2) when you get to the point where "training" blurs into "real world".

[InfiniteMonkey]

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

Maybe I'm asking too much, but have you tested -Infinite Monkey and GetAssista - the sufficient / insufficient air support impact on training?

Many thanks for your well reasoned effort / tests [:)]

I have not. Nothing I've read or observed suggests there is an effect directly related to AV quantity or quality. However, planes have to be ready to fly. No AV means your planes should break eventually and will no longer be "Ready".

[InfiniteMonkey]

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

I know it is not a real comparison but here a unit at Nagoya at 100% air HQ and 3 AF. Some of the guys below were drawn quite recently but I do not know when exactly. Also I put a recon guy in (67) as you can see he does not train air very well:

All your pilots are training strafing, he will not gain "Air" at all while you are doing that, he will train "Staf". I note that within the last month, the pilot (Assuming D Eto is the pilot in question with 28 Air skill) gained skill in air, so I am assuming you switched and he did gain Air at one point. I can also tell from his stats that he was a replacement pilot and his air started in the teens, so he gained at least 10 points in Air before he switched.

I also want to note that you need to kick the 49 and 40 exp pilots out of that training group and into a lower level 1. They bring down the group average and make it harder to get the group exp bonus to kick in for that squadron of pilots.

[InfiniteMonkey]

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

This unit also arrived ca. a week ago (per normal queue), it has 27 planes per TOO, but was given only 6. It is a smaller airfield with only 10 AV. They train too with the 6, but quite slow somewhat faster than the no planes (everything logical so far) Below not seen on pic more pilots are in gree for asw:

Your fatigue is 0 in all the pilots I can see. If your planes flew, some of your pilots should show fatigue. With only 6 planes, the ones that have fatigue might not be visible. You should know that I typically see low exp pilots fly training while higher experience/low fatigue pilots fly other missions.

The two in the screenshot that improved did not improve from flying, they improved due to the leader bonus. (They do not get the group bonus because they are 39 exp and average group exp is 39. This is why I stratify my pilots.)

[InfiniteMonkey]

ORIGINAL: GetAssista

ORIGINAL: InfiniteMonkey
I invite anyone who doubts me to replicate the test. Create identical air groups in as close to identical conditions as the game allows using the scenarios editor, then vary ONLY the number of aircraft in the group and see what happens to pilots that train in those respective groups

Did not doubt you since training effectiveness depending on planes coincides with my observations. Yet did my own test in an editor just to confirm:

Set of identical conditions: 30 airgroups of 36-size IJA army Ki-27b fighter sentais with 38 pilots each, Train/Escort at 100% at 0 range at 5k, all groups tied to the same HQ which is present in the hex, 10 level airfield with excessive supply/support, 99 morale, 30 base xp (ranging from 21 to 37 for individual pilots), all commanders set at all skills 30, 1 turn run, scenario restarted 2 times (turns out no need for more for this particular test)

Difference: 10 sentais with 36 ready planes, 10 - with 2 ready planes, 10 - with zero planes

Results for average Air skill increases per sentai in 1 turn: 36 planes - 12.3, 2 planes - 0.15, 0 planes - zero.

Hypothesis of training not depending on # of planes can be refuted with 99+%. Alfred has a lot of theoretical knowledge but too big a mouth for his relevant empirical knowledge

Thank you for repeating the test and publishing the result.

However, please refrain from attacking Alfred (or anyone). I have found a GREAT many of his posts to be useful and accurate. I just wish he did it with a touch more humility and sensitivity.

[Alpha77]

@ BB Fanboy: "The small amount of air support should result in accumulating fatigue on the aircraft.
How many of the six aircraft are still in operation after a week?
Is your training set at 100% or ???
What altitude are they training at???? (I would have expected more gains in defensive skill but I always train low level - 2000 feet for land/naval bombing and 1000 for patrol/low level missions). "

I will check the fatigue next turn. I usually train air at 7-10k and str/def at 100ft usually at 100% training (in backwater areas, units nearer tothe front may train 70-80% to keep them fresh for an eventual enemy surprise or they need to be thrown in batte). My examples posted were all 100% training (otherwise one could not compare anyway)


@ InfiniteMonkey:
"he two in the screenshot that improved did not improve from flying, they improved due to the leader bonus. (They do not get the group bonus because they are 39 exp and average group exp is 39. "

"I also want to note that you need to kick the 49 and 40 exp pilots out of that training group and into a lower level 1. They bring down the group average and make it harder to get the group exp bonus to kick in for that squadron of pilots. "


Sorry I do not know about those bonuses, you say if they over 50 exp they get a some kind of bonus ? And yes you were right the Nate group was changed to 100ft for def skill but did A2A trining before that. I think def is more important to train and have now more training this skill than air (even if ato2 training also often improves def, but 100ft does faster). They can get a2a also while flying CAP but not def.

[InfiniteMonkey]

ORIGINAL: Alpha77
@ InfiniteMonkey:
"he two in the screenshot that improved did not improve from flying, they improved due to the leader bonus. (They do not get the group bonus because they are 39 exp and average group exp is 39. "

"I also want to note that you need to kick the 49 and 40 exp pilots out of that training group and into a lower level 1. They bring down the group average and make it harder to get the group exp bonus to kick in for that squadron of pilots. "


Sorry I do not know about those bonuses, you say if they over 50 exp they get a some kind of bonus ? And yes you were right the Nate group was changed to 100ft for def skill but did A2A trining before that. I think def is more important to train and have now more training this skill than air (even if ato2 training also often improves def, but 100ft does faster). They can get a2a also while flying CAP but not def.

Sorry, I got my threads confused a bit. I posted this in another thread:

ORIGINAL: InfiniteMonkey

ORIGINAL: Revthought
4. Is it better to concentrate solely on training mission skills for fighter pilots, or should I mix in some cap to my training missions? Currently I train as follows:

Dedicated: Air skill trainer, strafe trainer, cap trainer.

I train the pilots in either air or strafe squadrons once they hit 70 in the skill I flip squadrons until I have pilots around 70 air, 70 strafe, 70 defense. I then plop them into the cap squadrons and run cap missions until their overall experience is somewhere between 65 and 70 (depends on how badly I need pilot replacements).

That said, it occurs to me that there is duplication of effort because just flying cap also raises overall air skill.

In any case, I thought I would borrow on your collective wisdom since I'm fairly certain 85% of you are fonts of WITPAE knowledge. [&o]

ORIGINAL: Pilot Management Addendum.pdf

"Groups can fly normal Training missions (with a training percent) which occur in the AM and PM air phases. These gain both skill and experience points.

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:

1. if the pilot’s experience is less 50 (plus pilot’s missions and kills) and less than the overall group experience level

2. if the pilot’s experience is less 50 (plus pilot’s missions and kills) and less than the leader’s skill

3. if pilot is in a dedicated Training group with some Instructors (adds higher increments to accumulators)

4. if pilot is in a dedicated Training group without Instructors (higher success and slightly higher increments than a normal group)

5. if pilot is in a group with some training percent (number of veteran pilots (experience of 80+) increases chance of successful training)

So, flying gets you some exp and skill. You get some additional skill and exp for each of the additional cases specified. 3 & 4 do not apply since training groups were removed from scenario 1.

The wording on that section is not really clear, but I think this is what it means:

In case 1 & 2, each pilot gets the bonus if their experience/skill is less than 50 plus the pilot's mission and kill counts AND the pilot's experience is less than the average group experience/leader's appropriate skill (which is supposed to be Leadership). You may have seen posts in which some players talk about hitting a wall in experience gain around 50 experience. I think this is why: training missions do not accrue mission counts, so before they reach 50 exp you want to assign them orders that gets their mission count up. Some players swear by assigning their air groups to CAP: 20 as a way to increase experience gain. I am inclined to believe this is why they see more exp gain. I don't think the particulars are important - just get your mission count up before an individual pilot gets to 50 exp.

Specifically for case 1, I do something I call "Stratifying" my pilots. I throw every pilot in my replacement pool into the reserve pools, then draw them by experience for training groups. By doing that, all my pilots are within 1-2 points of experience of each other and I can assign a few high skill pilots to the training group to up the average to kick in bonus #1. If I did not stratify, I'd get pilots ranging from about 25 to 44 (at the extremes) in every squadron and half my trainee pilots would not get bonus #1 (the half that ruin the curve).

Finally, you have the option of putting 81 and up exp pilots in training squadrons to get bonus $5. You could also put them in TRACOM or keeping them in your active squadrons. I send them to TRACOM, but I have not tested the effect of 81 skill pilots on training so I'm not sure if it is a big deal or not.

Probably more than you wanted, but the above is my reasoning for the answer to your question: I would raise the mission count of all pilots to 20-25 as they approach 50 experience to maximize rate of exp/skill gain as defined in the addendum. I do it with NAV search range 0 (Adds 2 missions per day per plane). Have not tried CAP, so do not know how effective that is.

Experience is gained like leveling a character in an RPG, but with a sightly random component. I DO NOT KNOW HOW THE CODE ACTUALLY WORKS, but this is my interpretation/illustration based upon the description in the Pilot Management Addendum.pdf (You can read the manual entry yourself, it is in the /manual directory of your WitP:AE install):

1. Each skill and experience level has a number of experience points (ep) needed to be accumulated to get the next experience level (Exp). That amount is a function of level with a random component added. For example, pretend that the experience needed to increase Exp is current_level/2 + random(current_level). Further pretend that I am looking an an Exp = 30 pilot and my "random(level)" returns a 20. That pilot needs to accumulate 35 ep from training to advance to Exp = 31.
2. According to the Addendum, you accumulate the points needed 4 ways (Flying training missions, Leader bonus, group exp bonus, and Veteran bonus). Pretend that the way it works is this:
a. Pilots that fly a mission get d10 points. Keep in mind, you can fly one mission per phase.
b. Pilots that have experience < 50 + mission count and have a leader with Leadership > Exp get an additional amount once per day. Say d3.
c. Pilots that have experience < 50 + mission count and have a exp < the average experience in their group get an additional amount once per day. Also say d3.
d. For each Veteran (80+) pilot in the group, add d2-1 once per day.

So a pilot can get 2d10 + d3 + d3 + V(d2-1) points in a day. If a pilot gets 23 points one day and needs 35, the next day the pilot will increase a point of experience if he accumulates another 12 experience points. Let's say in day 2 he accumulates 10. Now he has 33, but needs 35. Day 3 comes along and he accumulates another 5, pushing him over the 35 and his Exp = 31 (He's now green).

2. b. above is what I what I was referring to when I said the "Leader Bonus". 2. c. is what I was calling the "Group Experience Bonus".

[CaptBeefheart]

Thanks for the work, InfiniteMonkey. Pilot training is a bit of a grey area. Although anecdotally I noticed training squadrons with more airplanes trained pilots faster in general, it's good to see empirical evidence of that.

Cheers,
CC

[Chris21wen]

ORIGINAL: wdolson

Training while in transport is the same mode as training without aircraft and is intentional. A number of fighter units trained their pilots in aerial gunnery while on board ships by shooting skeet off the stern of the ship. Some resourceful units that didn't have enough aircraft did formation flight training with bicycles (though not on ships). Other ground training classes could be done while the unit is in transit.

Bill

Makes sense

[geofflambert]

1/3rd training in the air, 1/3rd training on the ground (or ship), 1/3rd at rest. 1/3rd complement of aircraft should be adequate. If the unit is doing regular missions as well you should have a full complement and cut the training to 20%. Opinion.

[1EyedJacks]

Bump. Why? Because I can. [:D]

[rustysi]

I typically have at least 1/3 the full number of A/C assigned to my training units and can see no apparent difference in training rates. As compared to a full TO&E.

I see in your tests you use either 1 A/C or 15 A/C. I was wondering if its not too much trouble to run the tests with differing numbers. In the lower group say 2, 4, 6, & 8. I believe it would give your hypothesis more credence if we can see the rates rise as the number of A/C increases. Also it could show the point at which more A/C in a unit may have no bearing on training rates, assuming that such a point existed.

If its too much trouble don't bother, but I was hoping.[:)]

[InfiniteMonkey]

ORIGINAL: rustysi

I typically have at least 1/3 the full number of A/C assigned to my training units and can see no apparent difference in training rates. As compared to a full TO&E.

I see in your tests you use either 1 A/C or 15 A/C. I was wondering if its not too much trouble to run the tests with differing numbers. In the lower group say 2, 4, 6, & 8. I believe it would give you're hypothesis more credence if we can see the rates rise as the number of A/C increases. Also it could show the point at which more A/C in a unit may have no bearing on training rates, assuming that such a point existed.

If its too much trouble don't bother, but I was hoping.[:)]

It is linear. The more planes you have, the more skill advancements you get. I just completed another test tonight where I ran 200 (10 x (15 + 5)) pilots for 9 days at Training 100/Sweep, and while I am still tabulating numbers, I can tell you this:

# planes:+Air/day/200 pilots
1:30
3:38
6:52
9:63
12:70
15:95

If you graph that out, it is pretty much a line. The test with 12 aircraft per squadron had a lot of bad weather days where planes did not fly (fatigue goes low when a plane/pilot does not fly). It is possible that other effects cause the process to reach some kind of "cap" on exp gain. I have not tested for that.

[rustysi]

Well the numbers seem to support what you say. Don't know what else to say. Thank you for the effort and I will keep this in mind while I play.

[InfiniteMonkey]

ORIGINAL: InfiniteMonkey

ORIGINAL: rustysi

I typically have at least 1/3 the full number of A/C assigned to my training units and can see no apparent difference in training rates. As compared to a full TO&E.

I see in your tests you use either 1 A/C or 15 A/C. I was wondering if its not too much trouble to run the tests with differing numbers. In the lower group say 2, 4, 6, & 8. I believe it would give you're hypothesis more credence if we can see the rates rise as the number of A/C increases. Also it could show the point at which more A/C in a unit may have no bearing on training rates, assuming that such a point existed.

If its too much trouble don't bother, but I was hoping.[:)]

It is linear. The more planes you have, the more skill advancements you get. I just completed another test tonight where I ran 200 (10 x (15 + 5)) pilots for 9 days at Training 100/Sweep, and while I am still tabulating numbers, I can tell you this:

# planes:+Air/day/200 pilots
1:30
3:38
6:52
9:63
12:70
15:95

If you graph that out, it is pretty much a line. The test with 12 aircraft per squadron had a lot of bad weather days where planes did not fly (fatigue goes low when a plane/pilot does not fly). It is possible that other effects cause the process to reach some kind of "cap" on exp gain. I have not tested for that.

After entering the values into the spreadsheet to get all the totals, I do not really have a ton to add to this. The only aberration from the curve was the 12 plane squadrons where I think weather (4 days of Thunderstorms in the base hex) threw the results off the line. The 15 plane squadron's results are actually a bit over the line.