AGEOD Forums

After a battle in which losses were about equal, but mine were exclusively infantry, while my opponent lost several thousand horse, 21 cannon, and 12 elements wholesale (I lost none), I suffered a 3 step drop in NM. I was starting to wonder how this loss is determined? It would appear that my opponent's losses in this one were both more costly and more final than mine ...

I was also wondering after an earlier battle about which I don't recall all the details, but basically my force fought five times their number to a draw, yet we lost 4 NM. Such a feat, in my book, should rather raise NM.

what about the number of elements destroyed? For now, only destroyed elements count against losses.

Pocus wrote:what about the number of elements destroyed? For now, only destroyed elements count against losses.

Well, as I said, the enemy lost 12 elements, I lost none ... but I took the drop in NM.

Heldenkaiser wrote:Well, as I said, the enemy lost 12 elements, I lost none ... but I took the drop in NM.

There's something wrong with that. Since there isn't a screenshot, i have to ask this: Does this 3 NM loss write in the battle report, or is this the change in the NM screen?

If you lost 3 NM while destroying 12 elements, this is rather strange. I've never seen such thing before.

I will try to post a screenshot tonight of both the battle screen and the log message.

yup, and keep the save around in case of !

Here we go ...

I don't know the formula for nm loss, but I'd imagine that losing 2x your opponent and having those losses equal 1/3 of your force would be relevant factors.

anarchyintheuk wrote:I don't know the formula for nm loss, but I'd imagine that losing 2x your opponent and having those losses equal 1/3 of your force would be relevant factors.

Good point, but for one thing, French infantry and cavalry losses add up to 9,300 to my 9,800 infantry; the French lost 21 cannon, I none; and above all they lost 12 elements wholesale, I none. I believe Philippe said the latter is what should count, exclusively.

I think that 5622 men and 3718 horses mean 5622 men and 3718 horses, not 9350 men (5622 + 3718). Horses are not men. It seems the French lost 5622 men (infantrymen and riders) and 3718 horses. Most of the horses were from Cavalry units and some of them from artillery units, but the riders and artillery crews are already included on the total of 5622 men lost.

In sort you lost 9837 men (almost all of them infantry) while the enemy lost 5622 men (about 2000 infantry, 3400 cavalry and 200 artillery, I guess). It seems your force lost twice as much men as your enemy.

Fern wrote:I think that 5622 men and 3718 horses mean 5622 men and 3718 horses, not 9350 men (5622 + 3718). Horses are not men. It seems the French lost 5622 men (infantrymen and riders) and 3718 horses. Most of the horses were from Cavalry units and some of them from artillery units, but the riders and artillery crews are already included on the total of 5622 men lost.

In sort you lost 9837 men (almost all of them infantry) while the enemy lost 5622 men (about 2000 infantry, 3400 cavalry and 200 artillery, I guess). It seems your force lost twice as much men as your enemy.

That shouldn't matter, destroying elements is the only thing that has an effect on NM change, not the total men losses, as far as i know.

Fern wrote:I think that 5622 men and 3718 horses mean 5622 men and 3718 horses, not 9350 men (5622 + 3718). Horses are not men. It seems the French lost 5622 men (infantrymen and riders) and 3718 horses. Most of the horses were from Cavalry units and some of them from artillery units, but the riders and artillery crews are already included on the total of 5622 men lost.

In sort you lost 9837 men (almost all of them infantry) while the enemy lost 5622 men (about 2000 infantry, 3400 cavalry and 200 artillery, I guess). It seems your force lost twice as much men as your enemy.

That's the first time I hear that someone would count horses separately from their riders. I have always taken "men, horses, cannon" to mean infantry, cavalry, artillery. Who's interested in horses as horses?

But in any case, I have heard from several sides that only destroyed elements count. So the mystery remains ... why do I lose the NM, not the French?

Yes its kind of peculiar but its how it works on the games.
Check a cav unit and you will see they have 1000 men and 100o horses for example.
An a battery will have guns, men... and horses to draw the guns (i like this little detail!)
Cheers!

arsan wrote:Yes its kind of peculiar but its how it works on the games.
Check a cav unit and you will see they have 1000 men and 100o horses for example.
An a battery will have guns, men... and horses to draw the guns (i like this little detail!)
Cheers!

Funny! I wouldn't have thought. Thanks for the explanation.

Heldenkaiser wrote:That's the first time I hear that someone would count horses separately from their riders. I have always taken "men, horses, cannon" to mean infantry, cavalry, artillery. Who's interested in horses as horses?

It's a "shy" attempt to illustrate the fact that horses are really an important component of warfare during Napoleonic wars. And the remount system (not really implemented in NCP) efficiency was a constant concern for Napoleon.

Adlertag wrote:It's a "shy" attempt to illustrate the fact that horses are really an important component of warfare during Napoleonic wars. And the remount system (not really implemented in NCP) efficiency was a constant concern for Napoleon.

Yes, I realize horses were a primary concern for Napoleonic armies. I just thought they played no role, as such, in the game.

Seeing the screenshot I can't give you a blatant reason for your NM loss. Can you send me the save to pmalacher@age-studio.com, with a link to this thread?

Thanks Heldenkaiser.

Sent! Thanks for having a look.

got it thanks, I'll check asap

I got another result from the battle and everything seems right. Next time perhaps