ORIGINAL: Alfred
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
Thanks Alfred, as always your explanations make sense. I have gotten into the habit of calling Experience, the abstract pilot skills, experience and the actual skills as training levels (in this case NavT).
The game is deep and nuanced there is always more to discover.[:)]
