Help the Germans with claim report

[Olham 164]

Just shot down two BE2c. Now I'd like to know, how to write the right things.

 

My report reads:

1 BE2c RFC-8 craft hit and destroyed at 08:33 h, near Lens.

1 BE2c RFC-8 craft hit and destroyed at 08:45 h, south-east of Lens; south of Haubourdin airfield.

 

Do you "crumpets" write "south-east" or "southeast", or maybe "S/E" ?

And how would "south-southeast" be right?

Is it better to name cities or airfields - or as many locations as possible?

 

Thanks in advance. Olham

[Wels 2]

Hello,

 

i always write 8h45 pm for time, since 18.30 did not win me any claim.

 

A typical report from me is like this

 

FE2b, 1, Encountered flight of 4 FE2b from RFC-22, near Cambrai at 6500 feet, at 6h30 pm fired 200 shots (you can say rounds, but makes no sense in german planes), observed plane smoking and spinning out of control, and crashing at 6h32 pm near aerodrome.

 

Oh, and do not forget to enter your comrades as witnesses in the field above ! Only forename and name, no rank and no second forename.

 

I would say 3/4 are being acknowledged this way.. but i would also like to know what is expected in terms of writing time (h, :, ., o'clock, pm/am ?), altitude (feet, meter ?) etc.

 

Greetings,

Catfish

Edited April 3, 2009 by Wels

[+Polovski 438]

Ah clues again you want eh? oh dear I think I left the tap running...

[Olham 164]

No, Pol, I did not request clues.

I want to know, how British or American pilots write "north-east, northeast, N/O"

or time and date: is it like WELS 8h 45; or like my 08:45 h, or different?

 

It would be only fair to clear at least that, what native English speaking people already know.

[Maeran 20]

In lots of ways, unhelpfully for you. (although never ever "N/O", possibly NE)

 

However, since we are assuming that the reports are based on historical reports, I refer you to the two connected with this thread.

 

http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?showtopic=38959

 

due north

 

Southwesterly (one word)

 

Over Lille (or wherever it may be) seems to be common from what I've seen. Not "north west of_____" but "over _____". I suppose they had more detailed maps.

[Ras 0]

No, Pol, I did not request clues.

I want to know, how British or American pilots write "north-east, northeast, N/O"

or time and date: is it like WELS 8h 45; or like my 08:45 h, or different?

 

It would be only fair to clear at least that, what native English speaking people already know.

 

 

Americans would generall write it as one word as in northeast or southwest

[Olham 164]

Thanks, Maeran and Ras

For the time, I think, Wels was right.

I should have given the briefing a better close look; cause there you read 12h 23 for time.

 

Thanks, Maeran and Ras

For the time, I think, Wels was right.

I should have given the briefing a better close look; cause there you read 12h 23 for time.

[Maeran 20]

Additional note on this.

 

Slightly vague; probably because I'm just back from the pub. I seem to remember the use of 'hours' in military reports. As in 08:30 am would be reported as 0830 hours.

[+Polovski 438]

As an Englishman I would write NE or North East personally probably wrong but hey..

 

That is nothing to do with what the claims may or may not want though!

 

:)

[Olham 164]

What do you mean with: ...probably wrong ? Do you get your claims confirmed or not?

 

But I see - I won't get anything out of you (Lol!)

And it's not so, that I didn't get mine confirmed - my best pilot so far had 7 confirmed, and 12 claims.

[Wels 2]

Hello,

 

you know what i would do with a squadron "mate" who does not answer my questions regarding claims and how to fill in the claim forms ?!!

 

18.30 does not work. 6.30 does not work either. 6.30 o'clock ? 6.30 pm ? 6:30 ? Or better 6h30 p.m. ? Or 6h 30 ? Or 6h 30 pm ?? or p.m. ??? or p. m. ???? See the difference ?

There are so much possibilities i do not believe OFF was programmed more permissive than Windows regarding text entries. And what about regional settings ? P3 was said to be independent from regional settings set to English (and if - english(US), english(England)? etc.) - is it independent from these settings?

 

I usually entered the altitude in meter - not one claim acknowledged. From the tableaus i take it your german is far from perfect, most times it is just ridiculous. There never was a "Snicklgruber" (maybe in the US?), there is no "Wetterschriftesatz", and "Weitemachen" is written wrong. So if you expect non-english people to use the claim system at all ... Guys if you want to sell this sim to new people who never played OFF in its former incarnations, a little bit of information - not only about this - would be a nice feature. The readme is still much too short, and the FAQs are far from explaining basic things of the sim. Even if i read the CFS3 manual it would not really help me.

 

Greetings,

Catfish

[Olham 164]

There, there, Catfish...

 

Don't you see? The crumpets are trying to keep every trick and chance for them, to maintain

air superiority (as if they didn't have it anyway - at least in numbers of planes).

I'll write the time now as it is in the briefing (Takeoff at 12h08). We'll see, how far I get.

[Siggi 10]

Here's one of my shorter claims, confirmed:

 

3/;9/;1916 ;16h;55 ;Flanders ;Vraignes ;Balloon Defense ; Flying: Halberstadt DII. On this day claims: ;2 ;Nieuport N11 . ;While returning from balloon defence approx 20 miles north west of Vraignes our flight engaged a flight of scouts at low altitude. I engaged three successively performing hard maneouvres and was able to put bursts into them, driving two into the ground. Both were observed to crash and burst into flames.. Witnessed by: Hugo Leber. Gerhard Lange. Richard Barkusky. Status : Confirmed

 

Keywords:

 

20 miles north west of Vraignes

 

Engaged

 

flight

 

scouts

 

low altitude

 

bursts

 

driving

 

ground

 

observed

 

crash

 

in flames

 

Other good words:

 

down

 

out of control

 

seen to

[Hasse Wind 46]

Thanks for posting those keywords Siggi!

 

I've had several kills confirmed for multiple pilots, but I've never been exactly certain what is it that makes this claim reporting "tick"... As for time, I've usually used something like 8:45 AM or 12:55 PM and have definitely gotten confirmed kills that way, but I'm not at all sure how English-speaking people most commonly write the time. Some extra documentation wouldn't hurt OFF at all, and would certainly make it easier for new people to adapt to this excellent simulation (I speak from personal experience, as I've never played any of the earlier phases).

 

Still, I very much like writing my claims reports. It's one of the things that separates OFF from other simulations in a very positive sense of the word.

[Olham 164]

Thank you, Siggi! Now, that's what I call a good help! Should make it more successful now.

And you, Pol - take care, the tap isn't running, when you leave the flat!

[Interlocutor 0]

Another interesting thread, Olham :yes: .

 

For my claims, I've been getting well over 80% of them confirmed, but I have to admit that I'm a bit wordy . Here's a typical claim from the logbook of my current best pilot, who flies N11's for the LafEsc over Verdun in the spring of 1916. At the time this mission took place, I was still using the TAC on 2-mile radius to spot enemy formations, after which I would take it down; I was also using labels. I've since switched to full DiD, and now I'm getting far less kills (about 10 missions per kill instead of the former 2 missions per kill), but my claims are still getting confirmed above 80% of the time.

 

27/5/1916 6h11 Verdun Behonne Artillery spotting Flying: Nieuport 11 Bebe. On this day claims: 1 Fokker EIII . While leading my flight of 3 aircraft northwards for a patrol over German lines just west of Verdun, I sighted at about 06h35 a formation of 5 silver gray Fokker EIII's at our same altitude of 6000 feet, approaching from the north. The odds being long in my opinion, I led my flight away from the enemy back towards our own lines. However, my wingmen did not respond quickly enough to my signal to retreat, and though I got clear of the Fokkers, I could see behind me that Leblanc and Bertrand were in trouble. I turned back to help them, against my better judgement. Engaging two Fokkers who were pursuing Leblanc, I put two long bursts into one of them and saw him spiral down out of the fight, heading back behind German lines. I then saw another Fokker pursuing Bertrand and flew to assist him, firing a long-range burst of about 20 rounds which caused his pursuer to break off his firing pass. I looked around then and could not find Leblanc, but I noticed, well above and just to the north, another formation of 7 more Fokker EIII's coming to join the fight. I signaled to Bertrand to rejoin me, and dove for our own lines. Looking back, I saw Bertrand go down in flames just over our own lines. I now fled for home, pursued by a single Fokker. Once well behind our own lines, I turned to engage my single pursuer. I got behind him rather easily and put a burst of about 20 rounds into him, which caused his motor to begin smoking. But the Boche was very mordant, and continued the contest, which turned into a turn fight at low altitude. At about 06h48 I got behind him again and put another 20 round burst into him, at which point he rolled over and dove into the ground, about 1 mile north-northwest of Brocourt-en-Argonne airfield. My ammunition nearly expended, I then flew home to Behonne. Witnessed by: None Status : Confirmed .

 

Pol and the other devs have been very, ahh, circumspect about how claims "should be written" in order to maximize the chance of confirmation, and I respect that. It helps me with my sense of immersion to write epic lengthy claims reports , but I suspect that much less than the above is needed. However, I try to work the following items into every claim:

 

1) a reference to altitude, e.g., "6000 feet";

2) a reference to the color of any enemy aircraft, e.g., "silver gray";

3) the type of enemy aircraft;

4) the time of combats or victories in the format given in the briefing, e.g., "06h48";

5) the names of key geographic features near which the combat took place, e.g., "Verdun", "Brocourt-en-Argonne airfield", etc.;

6) a reference to ammunition used, such as "20 round burst"; I always use the words "burst" and "rounds";

7) some reference to a compass direction, in my case I spell out like this: "north-northwest" or "southeast";

8) some refernce to distance from a cited geographic feature where I saw an enemy plane crash, e.g., "about 1 mile north-northwest of Brocourt-en-Argonne airfield".

 

Everything else, for me, is just the fun of composing a realistic account of the combat. I suspect the game uses a simple parsing program to look for certain keywords, but more than that I don't really want to know...

[Siggi 10]

I don't think it matters much how you write the time, it's a small part of the totality of the report. Describe the combat, using those words that capture the flavour of the period. Hard for a non english speaker, as the "flavour of the period" is different to how english is currently spoken ("shot him down" vs "drove him into the ground" for example).

 

Use google to find some first-hand accounts of UK/US pilots describing their combats, and take note of the words they use etc.

[+Polovski 438]

IMHO Play the game work out the secret code, or play as a sim, up to you :)

 

If you are getting a good proportion of claims confirmed then you are there -what's the problem? It's meant to reflect the rough same proportions you would get. Sometimes it would be bad, sometimes good.

If you want to make all your claims come in 100% because you have all the possibile keywords or descriptions 100% perfect, then you are no longer playing it as a sim, you are playing to defeat a game. Set it to easy.

[Maeran 20]

Out of curiousity. Has anyone tried to submit claims in a non-English language?

 

Do any claims get accepted?

[Venator 0]

In the first few days of OFF3 before all the threads on this topic, I was (sadly) putting in a bare minimum of details, and got a few claims confirmed, others denied.

 

What I would REALLY like to know now is, if I shoot down 2 Fokker EIII's in a mission, do I enter it under one claim line (ie: choose 2 on the number of A/C drop down menu)

OR do I enter them separately on 2 claim lines (ie: choose 1 and 1 if they are the same a/c type)???

 

It seems to me that if claims are confirmed with some element of randomness (and this seems to be the case for me), that version 2 has a better chance of squeaking by at least one of them.

[Olham 164]

Imagine Pol sitting with a bowl of popcorn, and Winder with an ice cold beer,

reading our countless questions, giggling and chuckling ...

[Wels 2]

Hello,

 

Imagine Pol sitting with a bowl of popcorn, and Winder with an ice cold beer,

reading our countless questions, giggling and chuckling ...

 

LMAO hehe

Ahem thanks all for the input, the claim game is after all a very good idea, and i certainly can live with it, maybe my post was taken too seriously lol. I will have to put a after every sentence to be understood, maybe this german humour lol

 

Have a nice weekend,

Catfish

[Interlocutor 0]

What I would REALLY like to know now is, if I shoot down 2 Fokker EIII's in a mission, do I enter it under one claim line (ie: choose 2 on the number of A/C drop down menu)

OR do I enter them separately on 2 claim lines (ie: choose 1 and 1 if they are the same a/c type)???

 

I've entered claims for multiple kills (same type of enemy a/c) in a mission, and had them confirmed with the same frequency as single-kill claims.

[dixieflyer 0]

Hi guys, first posting here. I have a question for y'all since you're on the subject of the claim form. In the past I have filled them out both ways, singly, and as a group. All I ever write is "shot x number of (whatever a/c) and it was seen to crash". Period. No dates, altitudes, locations, etc. The only thing besides the above that I added were the names of the witnesses. Now, on my career in the French Air Service flying Nieuports that got me 18 victories with only one rejection.

 

Now, the other day I started an RFC career flying Pups. I put in claims for six a/c destroyed (one group of two, and one group of four). I wrote them up in the same was as those above, but all were rejected out of hand.

 

Is there something I am doing wrong? Both were written up the same way. I would be nice to know if the rejections we get are due to a mistake we are making in filling out the paperwork, or if there is a problem with the claim itself.

 

Olham, I always abbreviate NE,SE, NW, SW.

 

TIA for your help guys.

 

Warren

[Siggi 10]

I think Pol has made it abundantly clear, the system works randomly and you have to take the rough with the smooth. Write your reports as you would in real life and take what comes. Some will be confirmed, even if all you write is "I shot one down", others will be rejected even if you write a novella of a report.

 

Yes, the after-mission de-briefing tells you 100% for sure what you got. And your wingmen confirm it. But your claim is rejected. From the history of the Jasta Boelke, pilots made claims, confirmed by witnesses, but no wreck was found or another pilot claimed the same downed plane (in perfectly good faith). Some "definitely downed planes" actually made it home, but the claimee still got his confirmation.

 

Stop thinking there's some sort of magic formula. You may increase your odds by inserting certain key-words and/or phrases, but if you seek to do that deliberately you are gaming the game. Personally I can't be arsed with it anymore, but I DO know that the sim will only allow you to claim for what you actually shot down, so your recorded CLAIMS are as good a marker of your achievements as your actual confirmed kills.

 

Richthofen started off making a sport of it. He had cups made for each kill. Then he became sick of that and the kills no longer mattered beyond their usefulness from a purely military point of view. He stopped counting (plus he already had the top award, the Blue Max).

 

The aim of the game is to survive the war. Anything else is icing on the cake, a bonus. Think survival, not score.

 

My tuppence-worth.