# ✅ The debriefing and pilot-record screens — `STAGE_RESULT`, `OVERVIEW`, `EX_OVERVIEW`

- **Where:** `tables.pak` (the menu config pak), records `STAGE_RESULT`, `OVERVIEW`,
  `EX_OVERVIEW`; key lists compiled into the executable at `sub_822814D8` and
  `sub_8227A3A0` (found by the base-solver, [[player-tuning-tables]]).
- **Related:** [[mission-scoring]] owns the *rules* (`Score_*` in the stage
  settings); this is the *readout*. [[savegame-format]] documents the same
  compiled-key-list shape for the LOAD/SAVE screen.

## The shape was already known — for other screens

[[savegame-format]] establishes it: *"the LOAD/SAVE screen's config key list is
compiled into the executable, as a pointer array of key strings — the same shape
as the Arsenal's (whose keys sit a few hundred bytes earlier and match the pak
record exactly)"*, run starting `0x820A0074`. **`sub_82286BC8`'s 18-name block is
exactly that list** — 17 of its 18 are a `tables.pak` field or record name, so it
is the documented save-screen list and nothing new. Its lone residual is
**`PLAYER_AMMO_LESS_10`**, which is not a `tables.pak` name at all.

## ✅ Two more screens, and the key lists match their records exactly

| block | names | all present in `tables.pak`? |
|---|---:|---|
| `sub_822814D8` | 24 | **24 / 24** |
| `sub_8227A3A0` | 21 | **21 / 21** |

And the arithmetic closes against the records themselves:

* **`sub_822814D8` = the debriefing screen.** 24 names = 2 screen ids
  (`STAGE_RESULT`, `EX_STAGE_RESULT`) + **21 `stage_*` fields** + one sound cue
  (`SE_BOSS_CORE_CHARGE`). The `tables.pak` record `STAGE_RESULT` has **exactly
  21 fields** (2 objects, both 21).
* **`sub_8227A3A0` = the pilot record / career screen.** 21 names = 5 screen ids
  (`LAST_RESULT`, `EX_BASE`, `EX_MAIN`, `EX_OVERVIEW`, `OVERVIEW`) + **7
  `ex_overview_*`** + **9 `overview_*`**. The records `EX_OVERVIEW` and
  `OVERVIEW` have **exactly 7 and 9 fields** (2 objects each).

`2+21+1 = 24` and `5+7+9 = 21`, with 21/7/9 measured independently off the pak.

### The debriefing readout, in full

```
stage_num_shoot_down_aircrafts   stage_points_shoot_down_aircrafts
stage_num_shoot_down_ships       stage_points_shoot_down_ships
                                 stage_points_shoot_down_others
stage_weight_shoot_down
stage_num_main_objectives        stage_points_main_objectives
stage_num_sub_objectives         stage_points_sub_objectives
stage_clear_time                 stage_points_clear_time
stage_shoot_down_ratio           stage_points_shoot_down_ratio
stage_damages_friendly_ships     stage_points_damages_friendly_ships
stage_damages_wingman            stage_points_damages_wingman
                                 stage_points_friendly_fire
stage_total_points               stage_rank
```

🔑 **Nine `num`/`points` pairs plus three points-only lines** — the screen shows
a raw count *and* its score contribution for kills by class, objectives, time,
ratio and both damage categories; `friendly_fire`, `shoot_down_others` and
`weight` have no counter column. That is the same partition
[[mission-scoring]] measures on the settings side.

### The career readout

`overview_points`, `_total_play_time`, `_clear_stages`, `_retry_times`,
`_shoot_down_aircrafts`, `_shoot_down_ships`, `_shoot_down_weight` — seven, and
`OVERVIEW` adds **`overview_rank`** and **`overview_medals`**. The `EX_` twin has
the seven and neither of the two, which is what makes `EX_` the reduced variant
rather than a different screen.

🟡 Not settled: what `EX_` means (a second profile? the online/leaderboard
variant?) — **but see
[stage-numbering-and-player-craft](stage-numbering-and-player-craft.md):
`_EXn` on an asset name is measured to mean "the n-th challenge mission", which
makes "`EX_` = the challenge-mission debriefing" a consistent reading of why
this twin drops `overview_rank` and `overview_medals`. Not adopted — the
selection has not been shown** — `EX_BASE`, `EX_MAIN`, `EX_STAGE_RESULT` and `EX_FONT` are keys with
**no record of that name**, so the prefix is a screen-id convention, not a table.
And `PLAYER_AMMO_LESS_10` is unexplained.

**Reproduce:** parse `tables.pak` with `tools/re-capture/unitgroup.py` and count
the fields of the three records; take the key lists from the `sub_822814D8` /
`sub_8227A3A0` / `sub_82286BC8` sections of [`../data/name-block-bases.txt`](../data/name-block-bases.txt).