FYI, Command Point penalty effect

[Gray Fox]

In another thread the effect of Command Point penalty was questioned. This is an examination of the movement
effect of increasing CP penalty. I used the starting force with Price in Fayette AR. I moved one Militia element
commanded by Price with zero CP penalty to Neosho MO, which took 6 days. I then increased the penalty by
adding one element at a time.

CP penalty - days travel
Zero - 6
5% - 6
10% - 7
15% - 7
20% - 8
25% - 10
30% - 13
35% - 14

Rail movement was not affected by CP penalty, as long as enough rail points were available.

P.S. From Cardinal Ape's good suggestion, I extended the journey to 51 days for the Zero and 5% penalty groups and there was still no change.

In addition, CP penalty affects initiative in combat.

http://www.ageod.net/agewiki/Combat_Explained

"Who goes first?
The order of fire is determined by the initiative-values of the elements: elements with higher initiative are likely to open fire before elements with lower initiative (there is a random factor involved though!). Each element has an initiative value that can be improved by some abilities or by experience, and can be degraded if the army is under commanded."

So a 5% CP penalty may cause no movement effect and little if any combat effect. However, a large penalty may slow a stack to a crawl and cause them to suffer firing last in combat.

[LCcmdr]

Great info! Thanks

[Cardinal Ape]

Thanks for the test, Gray Fox.

I usually avoid -35% CP stacks like the plague, if I have them they tend to be stationary. Never noticed the -35% CP was more than double on the movement speed. That is pretty steep.

I'd guess if you ran the test on a longer movement, say 20 days, you would get a more accurate read on what effect the smaller CP penalties have on movement.

[Straight Arrow]

Very useful indeed.

This test put to rest a nagging thought I was never able to put into words.

Thanks Gray Fox.

[Gray Fox]

You're all most welcome!

I tried to keep the test as simple as possible so that anyone could reproduce it.

[minipol]

Interesting info, thanks. A lot of good info on this forum seems to come from animals: we have a fox, a bear and an ape
Just joking, thanks guys.

[Cromagnonman]

Interesting info, thanks. A lot of good info on this forum seems to come from animals: we have a fox, a bear and an ape

That's because "Ageod" is French for "Narnia"

[LCcmdr]

That's because "Ageod" is French for "Narnia"

too funny!

[popejm]

Command Penalty apparently also affects Rate of Fire, It can affect how often you get hit during ranged fire calc according to this: "TCM = Total Command Modifier: 1+(relevant stackleader rating*0,05*(1-out of command penalty/100)+relevant unitleader rating*0,03)-(the respective ratings of the enemies commanders) The TCM can't be lower than 1 for the firing element (So your hitchance won't get worse through command penalties, but you'll be more likely to be hit if undercommanded). Note, that the exact impact of the leaders depends on the game. If unsure, consult the GameLogic.opt file.)"

Also the Assault phase is affected: TCM = Total Command Modifier, which is: 1+(relevant stackleader rating*0,05*(1-out of command penalty/100)+relevant unitleader rating*0,03)-(the respective ratings of the enemies commanders). This modifier can't be lower than 1 for the assaulting element. *CM = Cohesion Modifier. If the attacking element has less than 0,6/max cohesion, it starts to decrease slowly. With cohesion 0, it's 0.

The fire one is a bit weird because it says that it gives a negative for chance to hit during ranged combat, but the modifier has to at least be one so it doesn't affect it? But you can get hit more? I'm not sure what they're trying to say there.

It makes my head spin a bit to try and figure out the math on this. I just copy pasted stuff I found by doing a Ctrl+f on the page and looking for penalty. Let me know what you guys think about how this affects things.

[loki100]

just to add to this, at a 35% command malus you are guaranteed to only have a single fire chance per element. So an army that relies on artillery is going to be severely handicapped

[LCcmdr]

That's a terrifically important fact, stressing even further reasons not to over stack!

[ArmChairGeneral]

Don't over stack, except when you don't have a choice, and your opponent is doing the same. Once Division formation comes along, there is no excuse to suffer command penalties, but pre-division, I often fight (and win) important battles at Manassas, Alexandria and Harpers Ferry using very large stacks with max CP penalty vs. very large enemy stacks that also have max CP penalty. The net effect of two stacks fighting with equivalent CP penalties is to reduce overall lethality for both sides, which is a slight advantage for the South as they need to conserve resources.

popejm:

The TCM itself is one term in the overall Fire and Assault combat calculations, which are entirely multiplication. If any term is less than one (.9 say) the overall percentage chance to hit decreases. If any term is above one, (1.05, say) the chance to hit increases. The base number all these terms are multiplying is the relevant offensive or defensive Firepower (or Assault) of the element in question. The result of the modified calculation is a number between one and 100 that is then rolled against as the percentage chance to hit.

In the case of the TCM portion of this calculation, the rules are such that the minimum TCM modifier is 1, so that losing in the TCM portion of the calculation (TCM is structured as a contest between the leadership of the two sides) will not make your % chance to hit any lower than it already was. If you win the TCM comparison, you get a bonus based on the amount you win by. If you lose, the TCM has no effect on your hit chances (the multiplier is just one). If the CP penalty increases the margin by which you lose TCM, you do not fight any worse, but your opponents hit rolls are that much better. There are definitely situations that arise where you can suffer CP penalties and still win the TCM comparison, but you will still be getting less of a bonus than you would have had if fully commanded.

TCM multipliers are typically pretty small, since it is based on the difference between the leaders, not raw scores. A TCM of 1.1 or larger represents a major command disparity between the two sides, roughly equivalent to the stack leader having a two point edge in the relevant stats vs his opponenet. Large TCMs are possible when the best generals in the game go up against the worst. Once rolled into the overall hit calculation, the TCM term has a very small effect on the total hit chance. That said, this is a game of inches. In order to win you need to accrue every tiny advantage you can in every place you can get it.

Bear in mind when assessing the importance of any modifiers that even small changes to the overall hit chances are a pretty big deal, since hit calculations are repeated a large number of times. Increasing a single roll by 1% is hardly noticeable, but applying that 1% to 1000 rolls (a totally reasonable number for a large battle) noticeably affects the total number of hits delivered. Compare a 20% chance to hit vs 21%. Repeated 1000 times you would most likely land 200 vs 210 hits, a 5% increase in the number of hits delivered.

loki100,

ROF of 1 is a really big penalty, a much more important effect than TCM. I do not doubt you, but that is news to me. I don't recall seeing it in any of the normal sources (although I admit it has been a while since I have given the Wikis a close read).

[loki100]

loki100,

ROF of 1 is a really big penalty, a much more important effect than TCM. I do not doubt you, but that is news to me. I don't recall seeing it in any of the normal sources (although I admit it has been a while since I have given the Wikis a close read).

discovered it when trying to mod/revise Pride of Nations but I believe its a general rule ... just one that you need to read the combat file to uncover

[Gray Fox]

ROF is always 1 except for the first round of combat each day.

http://www.ageod.net/agewiki/Combat_Explained

So a CP penalty may affect it, or this refers to something else. Hmmm...

I did a thread on the effect of commanders. By "undercommanded", does the phrase simply mean a General with lower stats than the enemy General.

"If you never say what you mean, then you can never mean what you say."

"1-out of command penalty/100" doesn't really make any sense.

Inserting 35% for the commmand penalty:

1- 35%/100 which is
1 - .35/100 or
1 - .0035 = .9965
Which the game mechanic may as well round up to 1.

Now if the term means "1 - command penalty number/100"

then inserting 35 would be "1 - 35/100" or .65, which would be a big loss. IMHO, this must be what was meant, otherwise it has little effect.

So from this thread:

http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?38273-The-effect-of-leadership-during-combat

Your best Generals vs. their so-so Generals gave this:

[(6 x 0.05 = 0.30) + (6 x 0.03 = 0.18)] = 0.48

versus an unfortunate pair of 3-1-1's

[(1 x 0.05 = 0.05 + (1 x 0.03 = 0.03)] = 0.08

gives a TCM (1 + 0.48 - 0.08) of 1.4 for the offense and a TCM (1 + 0.08 - 0.48) of 0.6 for the defense.

Which with the above penalty would be 6 x .05 = .30 * .65 = .21
then .21 + .18 = .39

the TCM difference becomes (1 + 0.39 - 0.08) which is still a pretty good 1.31 multiplier for the offense and 1 + 0.08 - 0.39 = 0.87 for the defense.

Sooo...

Your best leaders vs. their so-so leaders still get a good TCM boost even with a 35% command penalty.

Or I am just totally wrong.

[ArmChairGeneral]

Fox,

I have always read it to mean .65, although it is only .65 of the stack leader's stat. So if a stack leader has a 2 in his Attack or Defense rating, and has an undercommanded stack (i.e. suffers command penalties) for a -35% penalty then his actual contribution toward his TCM calculation is 1.3 * .05 = .065 as opposed to the .1 he would have added without CP penalties. This is then added to .03 * (the Unit leader's stat, which does not have the CP penalty applied). Then the enemy stack undergoes the same calculation, and their result is subtracted from the friendly side. If the friendlies are higher, the difference is added to one to obtain the TCM bonus for the friendly side, while the TCM multiplier will be one for the opponenet. If the opposing side has a larger total (is better commanded) then your TCM multiplier is one and theirs is the difference between you added to one.

I can't speak for anyone else, but whenever I use the term "undercommanded" I am specifically referring to stacks that suffer penalties from not having enough command points. I don't have a term that I use for one side's generals being better than the others (and thus earning a TCM bonus). In this usage, you could be "undercommanded" but still win the TCM calculation and receive a (smaller) bonus because your generals are that much better that they still have a higher TCM than their opponents despite the CP malus.

I agree with your interpretation of ROF: When an element fires for the first time in a round, (when the range first decrements to their Range stat) everyone is loaded and can fire in a volley, so the element uses their full rate of fire that phase. After that, they all have to reload on-the-fly and their rate of fire drops to 1 each phase. After they close and fight an assault phase, the first round ends, and the range is set to 1 for all subsequent rounds (days) of the battle. Everyone fires at their full ROF for the Range 1 phase of these rounds, then the range decrements to another Assault phase, and then the next round (day) begins, again at Range 1, and again with everyone able to use their full ROF.

[ArmChairGeneral]

Fox,

Regarding your edit (we crossposted), I concur with your calculations, although the opposing side's .6 and .87 will still result in their getting a 1 for their TCM, since that is the minimum value.

[Gray Fox]

I wrote three training manuals for the Army. As a training developer/writer we could only have one fixed meaning for any term or phrase to prevent ambiguity, the KISS method (Keep It Simple, Stupid). If only the rest of the world followed that example.

P.S. "The TCM can't be lower than 1 for the firing element " who is the attacker. I believe the defender can have the TCM modifier less than 1.

[pgr]

Possibly a bit of off topic, but would a CP penalty impact the ability to retreat? (And how do they calculate retreat success anyway? I understand the calculations for making a stack want to retreat and where it retreats to, but what governs if a stack succeeds in retreating?)

I ask this out of a resent PBEM experience where I clobbered my opponent's stack, which was at 35% penalty. The man had divisions, but hadn't figured out we could do corps. He it an AoP corps with a 6 division army stack, all my Corps MTSG, giving me like 12 divisions to 6. Normally I would have expected his stack to retreat before the start of round 2, when all the MTSG corps showed up, but he hung in there for 6 rounds until routed. (netting me like 22,000 pows...it was crazy). Sadly we didn't have error logging on, so I couldn't see a detailed battle report, but there was nothing that should have prevented the retreat.

The only thing I can think of was that his CP penalty might have been preventing his successful retreat. (BTW once my friend formed corps, fights with those odds would last 3-4 rounds max before a retreat, which seems more "normal.")

[Gray Fox]

I found this link:

http://www.ageod.net/agewiki/Retreat_and_Routing

I didn't see anything about CP penalty directly affecting retreat.

[ArmChairGeneral]

P.S. "The TCM can't be lower than 1 for the firing element " who is the attacker. I believe the defender can have the TCM modifier less than 1.

I interpret "firing element" as the element that is making its hit check at the moment. The other side becomes the "firing element" when it is their turn to fire according to the normal order (they don't get an extra attempt to hit you just because you hit them, they select targets and make their roll in the normal order the normal number of times).

Let's say your side has the better of the TCM calculation: you get a bonus when your elements are firing. When it is the other side's turn to fire back, they become the firing element, and their TCM is calculated along with the rest of their hit %. Their TCM will be (basically) the opposite of yours, but because they are now the firing element, (i.e. making a hit % calculation and roll) their TCM will have a floor of one, even though they would otherwise be below one since they have to subtract your (better) stats when they calculate TCM.

Assault phase operates with slightly different targeting rules, but the determination of who is the "firing element" is unchanged, it is the element making a roll. Defenders only roll on Assault when they are directly targeted by an enemy element. If they are not targeted, they do not get a chance to make a (defensive) Assault hit roll. If a defender is rolling to hit in the Assault phase, (because they were Assaulted by an enemy element) they are considered the "firing element" for their Assault calculation and roll.

pgr,
It may be that the CP penalty affects the % chance the leader has to successfully withdraw from battle, although if so it is not documented in the Wikis. It is also possible that the leader simply failed a succession of (otherwise normal) withdrawal attempts and that the result of this battle is a one-off low probability result that was just a coincidence.

I would imagine that on a successful withdrawal roll at max CP penalty the movement penalties could prevent him from being able to exit the region before the end of the turn, which is a different question than what you are asking, but is another reason not to fight with high CP penalties and one that is not cancelled out by the opposing stack having a matching penalty.

[Cardinal Ape]

The only thing I can think of was that his CP penalty might have been preventing his successful retreat. (BTW once my friend formed corps, fights with those odds would last 3-4 rounds max before a retreat, which seems more "normal.")

To me, that sounds like your opponent was using the hold at all costs posture.

[Cardinal Ape]

I mentioned in my first reply to this thread that I have never previously noticed that the movement penalty for -35%CP stack was more than double. I found that really surprising and was a bit skeptical. So today I finally loaded up CW2 for the first time in a good while. I ordered a big Union stack to move on Manassas, the travel time did not sync up to Gray Fox's test results.

While trying to replicated the test done by Gray Fox I came across an oddity. There are some boys from Texas in that starting force with Price in Fayette, AR. Being an out of state militia unit, they suffer a major movement penalty. Removing the Texas militia from the stack dramatically reduces the move time.

Using a stack comprised of standard conscripts the maximum movement penalty I can achieve is a 50% increase.


There is a lot of good data in this thread. It is rather difficult to figure out how to apply the knowledge in game, though. I think the main question for me is, Is it worth it to put a fifth division into a corps with a CP cap of 18, putting the CP penalty to -10%?

The movement penalty at -10% CP seems negligible. I used to think that cohesion had a linear effect on an elements to hit chance, but it doesn't apply a negative until it falls to 40% of its maximum cohesion. A well-rested force that spends a few extra days marching in clear weather will not have their combat performance hampered much.

The effect on initiative is a cause for worry, though. I can't seem to find any solid math on that topic.

I can see in the combat log where units have initiative scores that are far lower than their innate initiative values. I've no clue if the cause is from CP penalties or pure random chance. I'd guess one could test by comparing an army with no CP penalty and an army with maximum CP penalty, and tally how often a unit receives an initiative score below their innate value, and by how much. Not something you would want to do by hand.


Also, in CW2, the minimum chance to hit is 7%.

[Gray Fox]

Excellent observations!

Perhaps it would be necessary to form a stack and then experiment in game as to how well the stack works. Sort of fine tune your best stacks.

This is the line from the Combat Explained thread about CP penalty and initiative:

http://www.ageod.net/agewiki/Combat_Explained#Who_goes_first.3F

"Who goes first?
The order of fire is determined by the initiative-values of the elements: elements with higher initiative are likely to open fire before elements with lower initiative (there is a random factor involved though!). Each element has an initiative value that can be improved by some abilities or by experience, and can be degraded if the army is under commanded. "

[LCcmdr]

This technical data is somewhat overwhelming, yet very interesting: as a new player, it informs me that offensive combat before corps is very risky, as is combat with stacks that have no generals or not enough. In this case, what you're accomplishing with newer, more recent purchasers of the AGE system, is of great benefit!

Thanks, this is helping me become a better player--if I could just get some breaks against Athena with my early Union armies.....

[Gray Fox]

Your question about the CP penalty effect led me to realize that I didn't know exactly what it was. It appeared rather bad and just leads anyone to avoid it. Upon closer examination, a well led stack may be able to get by with an extra Division. If CW2 is indeed a "game of inches", then this might be interesting. Any way, I believe it deserves closer examination than it has been given.

You might consider doing an AAR of a game against Athena. Others can examine your play and offer advice. Some players have "military secrets", but I am not one of those. Good luck!

[Cardinal Ape]

Yup, I second Gray Fox's statement. Keep the questions coming.

I suspect Gray Fox may be in the same boat as me: I enjoy figuring out game mechanics and learning how to play better just as much, if not more, than actually playing the game.

The discussion on initiative now has me really curious how the Surpriser ability functions. I doubt one could use it to compensate for the penalty on initiative from a -35%CP stack, but it should help, I'd guess.

[pgr]

To me, that sounds like your opponent was using the hold at all costs posture.

Well according to him, he was green/green. (Which would have switched to an attack stance as he tried to enter into my territory with less than 5%). In any event, I've already observed stack leaders change behavior depending on how the battle is playing out.

The AGE wiki does a good job describing to a stack decided to withdraw, but I only see this for withdrawal success:

Withdrawal Attempt Modifiers

A force that decides to withdraw must pass a Withdrawal check. The Withdrawal check is modified by:

the existence of an ‘Evade Fight’ Special Order,
the relative size of the opposing forces,
a commanding officer’s Strategic Rating,
the presence of cavalry (both friendly and enemy),
a successful ‘Ambush’ Special Order,
a Leader with a ‘Skirmisher’ Special Ability.

Of course that is just a description. I wonder if CP penalty impacts Strategic Rating somehow in the withdrawal calculation.

[Captain_Orso]

The only time a stack in PP (Green/Green) is ever changed from PP by the game is if it retreats within the region (enter region with 100% enemy MC -> change to OP -> fight battle -> lose battle -> change to PP -> retreat within the region -> change to DP).

You can enter a region with 100% enemy MC with a stack in PP and your stack will not got to OP. However, as soon as you change to DP, even if to leave the region, you will automatically go to OP, regardless of activation status, and have to attack.

[Cardinal Ape]

@pgr, My bad, when you said you had twice the numbers as your opponents I assumed you attacked him, sorry. If your opponent was in green/green that should have also increased his chances to retreat. Maybe he just rolled really bad.


I think generals with the Surpriser trait (provides a 20% chance to fire first for the stack under their command) are excellent candidates to command stacks over their CP cap. It can be a common problem for the CSA to not have enough corps commanders. If you have too many divisions and not enough corps, Stonewall and Magruder should deal better with excess divisions than other commanders. Both of these commanders have secondary traits to help even more. Stonewall has his very faster mover trait to make up for the movement penalty. Magruder has the deceiver trait, which could help hide his large force.

A 20% chance is too low to rely on, but if you get lucky it could be the deciding factor in this game of inches.

Edit: The surpriser ability does not work. See below.

[ArmChairGeneral]

Does Surpriser work properly now? I thought that it wasn't actually doing anything. There is an old mod by Ace that addressed this, IIRC, not sure if it got dealt with in a patch or if that mod still works on current versions.