M
Mk2
Guest
Here is an example of a submitted claim that was confirmed (in another thread).
http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php?t=10423
http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php?t=10423
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
7
77Scout
Guest
Back in January Winder posted...
"I don't want to give too much away but you do not have to give a wingman's name - you can make it up. WM"
I know squat about how it works, but will take a wild guess from the above that you can probably type anything you want into the witness box (e.g. 'villagers', 'ground troops', 'my wingman', 'Easter Bunny', etc) with equal effect. I really have no idea...just my take on it.
There also seems to be no consensus regarding the 'magic words' for claims success...some people say long detailed claims work best, others have success with two word descriptions. The only pattern seems to be that there is no pattern. Leads one to suppose that it is largely a 'roll-of-the-dice type of algorithm, rather than a complex logical algorithm parsing your test for key phrases. Again, just my wild speculation.
Only the team knows for sure, and they are keeping this under wraps. Sometimes when you know how a thing works it loses it 'magic', so I can see why they haven't told all.
"I don't want to give too much away but you do not have to give a wingman's name - you can make it up. WM"
I know squat about how it works, but will take a wild guess from the above that you can probably type anything you want into the witness box (e.g. 'villagers', 'ground troops', 'my wingman', 'Easter Bunny', etc) with equal effect. I really have no idea...just my take on it.
There also seems to be no consensus regarding the 'magic words' for claims success...some people say long detailed claims work best, others have success with two word descriptions. The only pattern seems to be that there is no pattern. Leads one to suppose that it is largely a 'roll-of-the-dice type of algorithm, rather than a complex logical algorithm parsing your test for key phrases. Again, just my wild speculation.
Only the team knows for sure, and they are keeping this under wraps. Sometimes when you know how a thing works it loses it 'magic', so I can see why they haven't told all.
R
Rooster89
Guest
I dont know Scout, once I forgot to write my flight mates names down on my scratch pad. I got into a scrap over our drome and downed a Noop. On my claim I wrote in "Mechanics" and the claim was rejected a couple days later. Seems to me it works better if you put in a wingies name. Maybe Winder meant make up a name?
-Rooster
-Rooster
F
funkster319
Guest
Yeah I agree we dont want to know all the "ins and Outs" but I still feel we should have a bit more guidance as to what consitutes a good claim.
Does the claim detail even matter or is it the Proximity of credible witnesses? As said even the RL WW1 Pilots would have been guided as to what was needed for confirmation surely.
Come on Pol ..give some direction.:gossip:
Does the claim detail even matter or is it the Proximity of credible witnesses? As said even the RL WW1 Pilots would have been guided as to what was needed for confirmation surely.
Come on Pol ..give some direction.:gossip:
7
77Scout
Guest
Maybe Winder meant make up a name?-Rooster
Hi Rooster:
Yes, I think that is probably exactly what he meant.
But then how would the system know the difference between the made up names 'John Smith', 'Ground Troops', or 'Easter Bunny'.
Is it smart enough to recognize that the first might be a wingman and the other two are not? Probably not.
R
Rooster89
Guest
Good point Scout. Didn't think of that. As long as its 2 words I dont think it would know the difference either. So "mechanics" doesnt work. lol.
-Rooster
-Rooster
7
77Scout
Guest
As long as its 2 words I dont think it would know the difference either. So "mechanics" doesnt work. lol.
-Rooster
:typing: Maybe so! You should have tried 'My Mechanics', ha ha.
S
Siggi
Guest
Here's mine:
1
12/;12/;1917 ;9h;37 ;Flanders ;Bruay ;Patrol Behind Friendly Front Lines ; Flying: Sopwith Camel. On this day claims: ;1 ;Pfalz DIIIa . ;Observed a number of enemy scouts attacking our ground positions west of the lines. Engaged one scout at low altitude and fired continously into him from behind at close range until he went down out of control and crashed approximately one mile east of Hervilly/Montigny Ferme aerodrome.. Witnessed by: Peter Sellick. Kendrick Ackerman. Daniel Stevenson. Status : Pending ;80
Shows Pending 80, hopefully that's a good sign (higher the number, greater the chance of confirmation?).
1
12/;12/;1917 ;9h;37 ;Flanders ;Bruay ;Patrol Behind Friendly Front Lines ; Flying: Sopwith Camel. On this day claims: ;1 ;Pfalz DIIIa . ;Observed a number of enemy scouts attacking our ground positions west of the lines. Engaged one scout at low altitude and fired continously into him from behind at close range until he went down out of control and crashed approximately one mile east of Hervilly/Montigny Ferme aerodrome.. Witnessed by: Peter Sellick. Kendrick Ackerman. Daniel Stevenson. Status : Pending ;80
Shows Pending 80, hopefully that's a good sign (higher the number, greater the chance of confirmation?).