Generally, attacking troops always take a bit more casualties if they are not an overwhelming force. Also, the engine sometimes shows the total number of troops in the area (95k for Nappy), while probably only a Corps or two (probably just Ney, who had less cohesion and power than Mack) actually engaged Mack. The results seems pretty believable to me in that case, depending on your cohesion, supply and when and who MTSG. Casualties should be tweaked, but maybe only for a few percents (for me for example, except once or twice, they have been pretty believable).
What really needs fixing is the insanely big NM loss/gain from naval battles. I am already almost at 140 NM as Britain after 5 turns and only three naval battles. Does not feel right, considering how long the campaign is.
-
Franz Ferdinand
- Sergeant
- Posts: 75
- Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2015 7:02 pm
Not in 3rd Coalition War IRL. I'm coming to the conclusion that National Modifiers, or at least many of them, aren't working as designed. I'm going through battle logs to see if I can gather any information from them.
Here's another example. I rolled back turn to turn 2. I ran it first with one corp attacking and the rest surrounding for MTSG. I ran a second time with 3 corp moving on Ulm with sync movement. Only 1 round of combat again, only one corp participated. That corp is decimated.
I need to say this again. 3 Corp with Nappy and Reserve Cav ready to MTSG and only 1 corp participated in combat, though there was sync movement and got splattered. Something is way off about this.
You have to look at it this way. There isn't much more the French player can do. If he can't bring the troop advantage to bear, at all, and even if only 1 corp participates, then there has to be a national modifier/leader/troop quality advantage. Obviously, neither is happening.
[ATTACH]36191[/ATTACH]
Here's another example. I rolled back turn to turn 2. I ran it first with one corp attacking and the rest surrounding for MTSG. I ran a second time with 3 corp moving on Ulm with sync movement. Only 1 round of combat again, only one corp participated. That corp is decimated.
I need to say this again. 3 Corp with Nappy and Reserve Cav ready to MTSG and only 1 corp participated in combat, though there was sync movement and got splattered. Something is way off about this.
You have to look at it this way. There isn't much more the French player can do. If he can't bring the troop advantage to bear, at all, and even if only 1 corp participates, then there has to be a national modifier/leader/troop quality advantage. Obviously, neither is happening.
[ATTACH]36191[/ATTACH]
- Attachments
-
Numerous issues that I'm seeing. France clearly has better leadership both at Army and Corp level. Yet this seems to be happening battle after battle.
9:09:13 AM (Reporting) Round: 0 France is committing 38 Lines SUs and 13 Supports SUs
9:09:13 AM (Reporting) Round: 0 Austria is committing 55 Lines SUs and 16 Supports SUs
Next problem. I looked at Battle Log for Hindenburg from EAW. In a battle, Germans consistently had the initiative, reflected in both the troops themselves (Germans are higher than Russians) and with a trait for Hindenburg himself. In this game, here's the results
9:09:13 AM (Reporting) AUS 1004463 IR 15 Charles-Riese II [Line] Round ROF: 2 Round Initiative: 9 BattleGround: Woods
9:09:13 AM (Reporting) AUS 1004467 IR 17 Reuss-Plauen [Line] Round ROF: 2 Round Initiative: 9 BattleGround: Woods
9:09:13 AM (Reporting) FRA 1001344 Tirailleurs Corse [Line] Round ROF: 2 Round Initiative: 8 BattleGround: Woods
9:09:13 AM (Reporting) AUS 1004464 IR 15 Charles-Riese III [Line] Round ROF: 2 Round Initiative: 8 BattleGround: Woods
9:09:13 AM (Reporting) FRA 1001404 4e Chasseur [Line] Round ROF: 2 Round Initiative: 6 BattleGround: Woods
9:09:13 AM (Reporting) FRA 1001394 26e Ligne/2 [Line] Round ROF: 2 Round Initiative: 9 BattleGround: Woods
9:09:13 AM (Reporting) AUS 1014189 Cuirassiers [Line] Round ROF: 0 Round Initiative: 8 BattleGround: Woods
9:09:13 AM (Reporting) FRA 1001347 Régiment Poitevin [Support] Round ROF: 2 Round Initiative: 9 BattleGround: Woods
9:09:13 AM (Reporting) AUS 1004341 Pioneers [Support] Round ROF: 2 Round Initiative: 6 BattleGround: Woods
9:09:13 AM (Reporting) AUS 1004454 6. Position Bte [Support] Round ROF: 2 Round Initiative: 7 BattleGround: Woods
9:09:13 AM (Reporting) FRA 1001388 18e Ligne/2 [Line] Round ROF: 2 Round Initiative: 8 BattleGround: Woods
Looking at French troops versus Austrian, there's no clear advantage. The French only survived because of their troop quality and Nappy. French leaders weren't nearly as good when away from Nappy. You've given France no troop quality bonus to speak of and you've given Nappy no init bonus. If there was one leader in the history of warfare that showed initiative, it was Nappy. So adjusting combat rounds won't be enough. Initiative determines who causes losses first. Very critical. The French lost mostly because they didn't have the manpower to defend their far flung empire, including Garrisons, etc.. and because Nappy couldn't be everywhere. It was only towards the end of the war that Russia became superior. In Spain, France didn't have enough troops. So this is major.
9:09:13 AM (Reporting) Round: 0 France is committing 38 Lines SUs and 13 Supports SUs
9:09:13 AM (Reporting) Round: 0 Austria is committing 55 Lines SUs and 16 Supports SUs
Next problem. I looked at Battle Log for Hindenburg from EAW. In a battle, Germans consistently had the initiative, reflected in both the troops themselves (Germans are higher than Russians) and with a trait for Hindenburg himself. In this game, here's the results
9:09:13 AM (Reporting) AUS 1004463 IR 15 Charles-Riese II [Line] Round ROF: 2 Round Initiative: 9 BattleGround: Woods
9:09:13 AM (Reporting) AUS 1004467 IR 17 Reuss-Plauen [Line] Round ROF: 2 Round Initiative: 9 BattleGround: Woods
9:09:13 AM (Reporting) FRA 1001344 Tirailleurs Corse [Line] Round ROF: 2 Round Initiative: 8 BattleGround: Woods
9:09:13 AM (Reporting) AUS 1004464 IR 15 Charles-Riese III [Line] Round ROF: 2 Round Initiative: 8 BattleGround: Woods
9:09:13 AM (Reporting) FRA 1001404 4e Chasseur [Line] Round ROF: 2 Round Initiative: 6 BattleGround: Woods
9:09:13 AM (Reporting) FRA 1001394 26e Ligne/2 [Line] Round ROF: 2 Round Initiative: 9 BattleGround: Woods
9:09:13 AM (Reporting) AUS 1014189 Cuirassiers [Line] Round ROF: 0 Round Initiative: 8 BattleGround: Woods
9:09:13 AM (Reporting) FRA 1001347 Régiment Poitevin [Support] Round ROF: 2 Round Initiative: 9 BattleGround: Woods
9:09:13 AM (Reporting) AUS 1004341 Pioneers [Support] Round ROF: 2 Round Initiative: 6 BattleGround: Woods
9:09:13 AM (Reporting) AUS 1004454 6. Position Bte [Support] Round ROF: 2 Round Initiative: 7 BattleGround: Woods
9:09:13 AM (Reporting) FRA 1001388 18e Ligne/2 [Line] Round ROF: 2 Round Initiative: 8 BattleGround: Woods
Looking at French troops versus Austrian, there's no clear advantage. The French only survived because of their troop quality and Nappy. French leaders weren't nearly as good when away from Nappy. You've given France no troop quality bonus to speak of and you've given Nappy no init bonus. If there was one leader in the history of warfare that showed initiative, it was Nappy. So adjusting combat rounds won't be enough. Initiative determines who causes losses first. Very critical. The French lost mostly because they didn't have the manpower to defend their far flung empire, including Garrisons, etc.. and because Nappy couldn't be everywhere. It was only towards the end of the war that Russia became superior. In Spain, France didn't have enough troops. So this is major.
-
JacquesDeLalaing
- Colonel
- Posts: 344
- Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 11:05 pm
- Location: Vienna (Austria)
@ post 32
Just some quick thougths: The battle took place in the terrain "woods" and two corps had to cross the Danube (one wihtout bridge) to get to the battle. That might explain why MTSG didn't work out that well (also depending on how many rounds the battle lasted and on weather, plus the stance and activation status of the corps leaders)?
And if Bonaparte did not MTSG, why is he shown as the C-in-C of the battle?
And I can't look it up right now, but I assume that woods do not count as open terrain? Thus a potentially huge frontage bonus (?) for Bonaparte might have been ruled out?
Just some quick thougths: The battle took place in the terrain "woods" and two corps had to cross the Danube (one wihtout bridge) to get to the battle. That might explain why MTSG didn't work out that well (also depending on how many rounds the battle lasted and on weather, plus the stance and activation status of the corps leaders)?
And if Bonaparte did not MTSG, why is he shown as the C-in-C of the battle?
And I can't look it up right now, but I assume that woods do not count as open terrain? Thus a potentially huge frontage bonus (?) for Bonaparte might have been ruled out?
[CENTER][color="#A52A2A"] S I L E S I A I N R U P T A[/color]
- a work-in-progress mod for Rise of Prussia - [/CENTER]
- a work-in-progress mod for Rise of Prussia - [/CENTER]
Sorry for getting technical, but this is what I do for work. Here's a sample combat from EAW. It makes a lot of sense, looking at the numbers. I'll explain the numbers.
First, firer base. Probably comes from unit itself. Then modified by terrain to 27.60. Then a comparison of leaders with the final number being 113%. 13% bump on the 27.6 rounds up to 31.19. Leader ability of 132% bumps this up by 32% to 41.17. A few other bumps for supply, etc., and final result is 52%, then 4 % is subtracted for various protections and then the roll.
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) *** Start of action # 264 1009397 Reserve Regiment vs 1007425 Reserve Regiment ***
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Attacker belong to a defending group SubType: Regular Defender belong to a attacking group SubType: Regular
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Leader Battle Bonus (attacker): OffFire(%): 132 DefFire(%): 132 Assault(%): 100 TQ Bonus(pts): 0 Prot Bonus(pts): 0
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Leader Battle Bonus (receiver): OffFire(%): 110 DefFire(%): 110 Assault(%): 100 TQ Bonus(pts): 0 Prot Bonus(pts): 0
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Terrain: Clear Weather: Clear Weather Complete list of values from TEC:
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Reserve Regiment (Fire: 115 TQ: 0 )
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Reserve Regiment (Prot: 0 TQ: 0 )
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Firer base fire: 24.00
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Firer value with terrain: 27.60
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Reserve Regiment - Commander: John D.P. French Cmd Coeff. %: 110
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Reserve Regiment - Commander: Max Fhr. von Hausen Cmd Coeff. %: 100
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Reserve Regiment - Unit Commander: Horace Smith-Dorrien Cmd Coeff. %: 109
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Reserve Regiment - Unit Commander: Günther Graf von Kirchbach Cmd Coeff. %: 106
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Battle effectiveness with leader rating: 113.00%
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Firer value with leader tactical rating: 31.19
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Firer value with leader battle ability: 41.17
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Firer value with TQ correction: 47.35
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Firer value with cohesion: 47.35
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Firer value with Supply Unit presence: 52.09
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Firer value with penalty from losses: 52.09
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Firer final fire value: 52.09
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Receiver base protection: 1.00
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Receiver protection with terrain: 1.00
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Receiver protection with entrenchment: 1.00
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Receiver final Prot value: 1.00
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) ToHitCoeff %: 100 ATK ROE %: 100 DEF ROE %: 100
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Attacker final To Hit (%): 47.00
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Attacker rolled a 56 and failed to hit
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) *** End of action ***
Now, let's look at WON battle report. You can follow the same formula as above and the final to high number, according these numbers, should be somewhere around 4%, but it looks like final protection is 4% reduced from 20% = 16%. But look at what I've highlighted. Everything is getting a 400% bump on final result for a total % chance to hit of 54%. No idea why but that is suspect for the high losses.
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Attacker belong to a defending group SubType: Regular Defender belong to a attacking group SubType: Cavalry
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Leader Battle Bonus (attacker): OffFire(%): 133 DefFire(%): 133 Assault(%): 133 TQ Bonus(pts): 0 Prot Bonus(pts): 0
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Terrain: Woods Weather: Clear Weather Complete list of values from TEC:
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Grenadieren IR8 (Fire: 105 TQ: 0 )
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) 13e Chasseur (Prot: 0 TQ: 0 )
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer base fire: 10.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with terrain: 10.50
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Grenadieren IR8 - Commander: Ferdinand Cmd Coeff. %: 88
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) 13e Chasseur - Commander: Jean Lannes Cmd Coeff. %: 130
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Grenadieren IR8 - Unit Commander: Wilhelm von Kerpen Cmd Coeff. %: 103
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) 13e Chasseur - Unit Commander: Jean-Louis Fauconnet Cmd Coeff. %: 106
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Battle effectiveness with leader rating: 100.00%
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with leader tactical rating: 10.50
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with leader battle ability: 13.97
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with TQ correction: 16.07
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with cohesion: 16.07
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with Supply Unit presence: 17.68
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with penalty from losses: 17.68
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with bonus from firing on passive posture target: 20.33
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer final fire value: 20.33
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver base protection: 4.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver protection with terrain: 4.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver protection with entrenchment: 4.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver final Prot value: 4.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) ToHitCoeff %: 400 ATK ROE %: 100 DEF ROE %: 100
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Attacker final To Hit (%): 54.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Attacker DmgDone: 2 CohDone: 12 AsltDmgDone 2 AsltCohDone: 16
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Attacker ToHit: 54.00 rolled a 44 scoring a hit Defender remaining Health&Cohesion 0 / 47
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Defender is destroyed
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Attacker has now 34 experience points
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) (group) Attacking Leader Ferdinand gained 2 XPs
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) (unit) Attacking Leader Wilhelm von Kerpen gained 2 XPs
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) (group) Defending Leader Jean Lannes has lost -1 XPs
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) (unit) Defending Leader Jean-Louis Fauconnet has lost -1 XPs
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) *** End of action ***
First, firer base. Probably comes from unit itself. Then modified by terrain to 27.60. Then a comparison of leaders with the final number being 113%. 13% bump on the 27.6 rounds up to 31.19. Leader ability of 132% bumps this up by 32% to 41.17. A few other bumps for supply, etc., and final result is 52%, then 4 % is subtracted for various protections and then the roll.
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) *** Start of action # 264 1009397 Reserve Regiment vs 1007425 Reserve Regiment ***
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Attacker belong to a defending group SubType: Regular Defender belong to a attacking group SubType: Regular
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Leader Battle Bonus (attacker): OffFire(%): 132 DefFire(%): 132 Assault(%): 100 TQ Bonus(pts): 0 Prot Bonus(pts): 0
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Leader Battle Bonus (receiver): OffFire(%): 110 DefFire(%): 110 Assault(%): 100 TQ Bonus(pts): 0 Prot Bonus(pts): 0
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Terrain: Clear Weather: Clear Weather Complete list of values from TEC:
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Reserve Regiment (Fire: 115 TQ: 0 )
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Reserve Regiment (Prot: 0 TQ: 0 )
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Firer base fire: 24.00
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Firer value with terrain: 27.60
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Reserve Regiment - Commander: John D.P. French Cmd Coeff. %: 110
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Reserve Regiment - Commander: Max Fhr. von Hausen Cmd Coeff. %: 100
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Reserve Regiment - Unit Commander: Horace Smith-Dorrien Cmd Coeff. %: 109
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Reserve Regiment - Unit Commander: Günther Graf von Kirchbach Cmd Coeff. %: 106
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Battle effectiveness with leader rating: 113.00%
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Firer value with leader tactical rating: 31.19
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Firer value with leader battle ability: 41.17
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Firer value with TQ correction: 47.35
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Firer value with cohesion: 47.35
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Firer value with Supply Unit presence: 52.09
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Firer value with penalty from losses: 52.09
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Firer final fire value: 52.09
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Receiver base protection: 1.00
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Receiver protection with terrain: 1.00
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Receiver protection with entrenchment: 1.00
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Receiver final Prot value: 1.00
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) ToHitCoeff %: 100 ATK ROE %: 100 DEF ROE %: 100
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Attacker final To Hit (%): 47.00
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) Attacker rolled a 56 and failed to hit
11:11:33 AM (Reporting) *** End of action ***
Now, let's look at WON battle report. You can follow the same formula as above and the final to high number, according these numbers, should be somewhere around 4%, but it looks like final protection is 4% reduced from 20% = 16%. But look at what I've highlighted. Everything is getting a 400% bump on final result for a total % chance to hit of 54%. No idea why but that is suspect for the high losses.
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Attacker belong to a defending group SubType: Regular Defender belong to a attacking group SubType: Cavalry
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Leader Battle Bonus (attacker): OffFire(%): 133 DefFire(%): 133 Assault(%): 133 TQ Bonus(pts): 0 Prot Bonus(pts): 0
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Terrain: Woods Weather: Clear Weather Complete list of values from TEC:
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Grenadieren IR8 (Fire: 105 TQ: 0 )
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) 13e Chasseur (Prot: 0 TQ: 0 )
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer base fire: 10.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with terrain: 10.50
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Grenadieren IR8 - Commander: Ferdinand Cmd Coeff. %: 88
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) 13e Chasseur - Commander: Jean Lannes Cmd Coeff. %: 130
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Grenadieren IR8 - Unit Commander: Wilhelm von Kerpen Cmd Coeff. %: 103
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) 13e Chasseur - Unit Commander: Jean-Louis Fauconnet Cmd Coeff. %: 106
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Battle effectiveness with leader rating: 100.00%
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with leader tactical rating: 10.50
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with leader battle ability: 13.97
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with TQ correction: 16.07
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with cohesion: 16.07
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with Supply Unit presence: 17.68
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with penalty from losses: 17.68
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with bonus from firing on passive posture target: 20.33
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer final fire value: 20.33
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver base protection: 4.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver protection with terrain: 4.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver protection with entrenchment: 4.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver final Prot value: 4.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) ToHitCoeff %: 400 ATK ROE %: 100 DEF ROE %: 100
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Attacker final To Hit (%): 54.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Attacker DmgDone: 2 CohDone: 12 AsltDmgDone 2 AsltCohDone: 16
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Attacker ToHit: 54.00 rolled a 44 scoring a hit Defender remaining Health&Cohesion 0 / 47
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Defender is destroyed
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Attacker has now 34 experience points
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) (group) Attacking Leader Ferdinand gained 2 XPs
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) (unit) Attacking Leader Wilhelm von Kerpen gained 2 XPs
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) (group) Defending Leader Jean Lannes has lost -1 XPs
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) (unit) Defending Leader Jean-Louis Fauconnet has lost -1 XPs
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) *** End of action ***
Here'a another example. Austrian Conscripts assault Elite French. The French should be receiving the Mixed Order National Modifier (+1) plus Bayonets Training (+5% Shock). Looking at these results, neither of these modifers are kicking in anywhere.
The losses were the same on both sides in spite of leader ability. Not entirely sure what the heck is going on here. But the conscripts has a final base of 3. The elites had a final base of 9. The assaulting unit has a "TQ LOW" and further reduced. Final result. Same damage done. Austrians take higher cohesion. Not clear at all what happened here.
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) *** Start of action # 356 1014191 Light Infantry (Conscripts) vs 1013674 Line Infantry (Elite) ***
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Attacker belong to a defending group SubType: Militia Defender belong to a attacking group SubType: Regular
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Leader Battle Bonus (receiver): OffFire(%): 121 DefFire(%): 121 Assault(%): 121 TQ Bonus(pts): 0 Prot Bonus(pts): 0
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Terrain: Woods Weather: Clear Weather Complete list of values from TEC:
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Light Infantry (Conscripts) (Fire: 105 TQ: 0 )
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Line Infantry (Elite) (Prot: 0 TQ: 0 )
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Assaulter base + BB-abi TQ: 5.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Assaulter TQ with terrain: 5.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Light Infantry (Conscripts) - Commander: Ferdinand Cmd Coeff. %: 88
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Line Infantry (Elite) - Commander: Jean Lannes Cmd Coeff. %: 130
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Light Infantry (Conscripts) - Unit Commander: Johann von Klenau Cmd Coeff. %: 112
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Line Infantry (Elite) - Unit Commander: Nicolas Oudinot Cmd Coeff. %: 112
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Battle effectiveness with leader rating: 100.00%
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Assaulter final TQ value: 5.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Assaulter base value : 3.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Assaulter value with cohesion: 3.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Assaulter value with penalty from losses: 3.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Assaulter final Assault value: 3.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver base + BB-abi TQ: 9.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver TQ with terrain: 9.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Line Infantry (Elite) - Commander: Jean Lannes Cmd Coeff. %: 130
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Light Infantry (Conscripts) - Commander: Ferdinand Cmd Coeff. %: 88
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Line Infantry (Elite) - Unit Commander: Nicolas Oudinot Cmd Coeff. %: 112
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Light Infantry (Conscripts) - Unit Commander: Johann von Klenau Cmd Coeff. %: 112
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Battle effectiveness with leader rating: 142.00%
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver TQ with leader tactical rating: 12.78
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver final TQ value: 12.78
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver value with cohesion: 10.78
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver value with leader battle ability: 13.04
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver value with penalty from losses: 13.04
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver final Assault value: 13.04
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) AssaultCoeff %: 80 Assaulter ROE %: 100 C-Assaulter ROE %: 100
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Attacker assaulting, TQ low, reduced value (%): 10.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) AssaultCoeff %: 80 C-Assaulter ROE %: 100 Assaulter ROE %: 100
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Defender assaulting, % chance): 133.32
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Attacker DmgDone: 1 CohDone: 6 AsltDmgDone 1 AsltCohDone: 6
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Attacker ToHit: 10.00 rolled a 7 scoring a hit Defender remaining Health&Cohesion 5 / 33
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Defender DmgDone: 2 CohDone: 10 AsltDmgDone 2 AsltCohDone: 15
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Defender ToHit: 133.32 rolled a 68 scoring a hit Attacker remaining Health&Cohesion 5 / 6
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) *** End of action ***
The losses were the same on both sides in spite of leader ability. Not entirely sure what the heck is going on here. But the conscripts has a final base of 3. The elites had a final base of 9. The assaulting unit has a "TQ LOW" and further reduced. Final result. Same damage done. Austrians take higher cohesion. Not clear at all what happened here.
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) *** Start of action # 356 1014191 Light Infantry (Conscripts) vs 1013674 Line Infantry (Elite) ***
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Attacker belong to a defending group SubType: Militia Defender belong to a attacking group SubType: Regular
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Leader Battle Bonus (receiver): OffFire(%): 121 DefFire(%): 121 Assault(%): 121 TQ Bonus(pts): 0 Prot Bonus(pts): 0
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Terrain: Woods Weather: Clear Weather Complete list of values from TEC:
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Light Infantry (Conscripts) (Fire: 105 TQ: 0 )
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Line Infantry (Elite) (Prot: 0 TQ: 0 )
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Assaulter base + BB-abi TQ: 5.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Assaulter TQ with terrain: 5.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Light Infantry (Conscripts) - Commander: Ferdinand Cmd Coeff. %: 88
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Line Infantry (Elite) - Commander: Jean Lannes Cmd Coeff. %: 130
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Light Infantry (Conscripts) - Unit Commander: Johann von Klenau Cmd Coeff. %: 112
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Line Infantry (Elite) - Unit Commander: Nicolas Oudinot Cmd Coeff. %: 112
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Battle effectiveness with leader rating: 100.00%
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Assaulter final TQ value: 5.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Assaulter base value : 3.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Assaulter value with cohesion: 3.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Assaulter value with penalty from losses: 3.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Assaulter final Assault value: 3.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver base + BB-abi TQ: 9.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver TQ with terrain: 9.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Line Infantry (Elite) - Commander: Jean Lannes Cmd Coeff. %: 130
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Light Infantry (Conscripts) - Commander: Ferdinand Cmd Coeff. %: 88
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Line Infantry (Elite) - Unit Commander: Nicolas Oudinot Cmd Coeff. %: 112
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Light Infantry (Conscripts) - Unit Commander: Johann von Klenau Cmd Coeff. %: 112
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Battle effectiveness with leader rating: 142.00%
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver TQ with leader tactical rating: 12.78
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver final TQ value: 12.78
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver value with cohesion: 10.78
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver value with leader battle ability: 13.04
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver value with penalty from losses: 13.04
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver final Assault value: 13.04
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) AssaultCoeff %: 80 Assaulter ROE %: 100 C-Assaulter ROE %: 100
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Attacker assaulting, TQ low, reduced value (%): 10.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) AssaultCoeff %: 80 C-Assaulter ROE %: 100 Assaulter ROE %: 100
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Defender assaulting, % chance): 133.32
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Attacker DmgDone: 1 CohDone: 6 AsltDmgDone 1 AsltCohDone: 6
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Attacker ToHit: 10.00 rolled a 7 scoring a hit Defender remaining Health&Cohesion 5 / 33
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Defender DmgDone: 2 CohDone: 10 AsltDmgDone 2 AsltCohDone: 15
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Defender ToHit: 133.32 rolled a 68 scoring a hit Attacker remaining Health&Cohesion 5 / 6
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) *** End of action ***
Here's an example of French Artillery Fire, which should receive the +10% bonus close support tactics national modifiers. Fire 100, should be 110, then bumped up because of leader and reduced by final protection. 13 x 400% = 51.
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) *** Start of action # 58 1001417 Corps Batterie 5C vs 1004502 Art. Rohan ***
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Attacker belong to a attacking group SubType: Artillery Defender belong to a defending group SubType: Artillery
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Terrain: Woods Weather: Clear Weather Complete list of values from TEC:
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Corps Batterie 5C (Fire: 100 TQ: 0 )
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Art. Rohan (Prot: 0 TQ: 0 )
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) The group of the firing/assaulting unit is crossing a river, adjusted Terrains effects are:
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Corps Batterie 5C Fire: 100 TQ: 0
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Art. Rohan Prot: 1 TQ: 0
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer base fire: 8.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with terrain: 8.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Corps Batterie 5C - Commander: Jean Lannes Cmd Coeff. %: 130
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Art. Rohan - Commander: Ferdinand Cmd Coeff. %: 84
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Art. Rohan - Unit Commander: von Hohenzollern-Echingen Cmd Coeff. %: 106
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Battle effectiveness with leader rating: 146.00%
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with leader tactical rating: 11.68
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with TQ correction: 12.85
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with cohesion: 12.85
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with Supply Unit presence: 14.13
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with penalty from losses: 14.13
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer final fire value: 14.13
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver base protection: 0.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver protection with terrain: 1.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver protection with entrenchment: 1.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver final Prot value: 1.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) ToHitCoeff %: 400 ATK ROE %: 100 DEF ROE %: 100
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Attacker final To Hit (%): 51.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Attacker DmgDone: 2 CohDone: 20 AsltDmgDone 4 AsltCohDone: 20
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Attacker ToHit: 51.00 rolled a 28 scoring a hit Defender remaining Health&Cohesion 2 / 40
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) *** End of action ***
10:58:26 AM (Reporting)
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) *** Start of action # 58 1001417 Corps Batterie 5C vs 1004502 Art. Rohan ***
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Attacker belong to a attacking group SubType: Artillery Defender belong to a defending group SubType: Artillery
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Terrain: Woods Weather: Clear Weather Complete list of values from TEC:
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Corps Batterie 5C (Fire: 100 TQ: 0 )
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Art. Rohan (Prot: 0 TQ: 0 )
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) The group of the firing/assaulting unit is crossing a river, adjusted Terrains effects are:
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Corps Batterie 5C Fire: 100 TQ: 0
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Art. Rohan Prot: 1 TQ: 0
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer base fire: 8.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with terrain: 8.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Corps Batterie 5C - Commander: Jean Lannes Cmd Coeff. %: 130
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Art. Rohan - Commander: Ferdinand Cmd Coeff. %: 84
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Art. Rohan - Unit Commander: von Hohenzollern-Echingen Cmd Coeff. %: 106
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Battle effectiveness with leader rating: 146.00%
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with leader tactical rating: 11.68
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with TQ correction: 12.85
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with cohesion: 12.85
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with Supply Unit presence: 14.13
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer value with penalty from losses: 14.13
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Firer final fire value: 14.13
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver base protection: 0.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver protection with terrain: 1.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver protection with entrenchment: 1.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Receiver final Prot value: 1.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) ToHitCoeff %: 400 ATK ROE %: 100 DEF ROE %: 100
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Attacker final To Hit (%): 51.00
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Attacker DmgDone: 2 CohDone: 20 AsltDmgDone 4 AsltCohDone: 20
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) Attacker ToHit: 51.00 rolled a 28 scoring a hit Defender remaining Health&Cohesion 2 / 40
10:58:26 AM (Reporting) *** End of action ***
10:58:26 AM (Reporting)
In summary,
1) Where is French initiative. Looking at battle logs, Austrians fire first pretty much across the board, causing the consistent higher damage. No amount of tweaking of routing rules is going to fix that
2) Why the 400% bump in final to hit results. Also very suspect to the high damage being caused.
3) Not clear that national modifiers are coming into play. Nappy is an offensive genius meaning more units deployed. I see the ability brought in at beginning of battle log, but French had almost 1/2 the number of units deployed as the Austrians. Don't think that Modifier is working. There should be assault modifiers and shock modifiers applied for the French. Not seeing it in the results. I don't see the word "pursuit" anywhere. Shouldn't there be Cav pursuits, since that is another national modifier and the Austrians retreated? Not seeing light artillery bonus applied anywhere.
Guys, you have a lot more to work on than just breaking off combat.
1) Where is French initiative. Looking at battle logs, Austrians fire first pretty much across the board, causing the consistent higher damage. No amount of tweaking of routing rules is going to fix that
2) Why the 400% bump in final to hit results. Also very suspect to the high damage being caused.
3) Not clear that national modifiers are coming into play. Nappy is an offensive genius meaning more units deployed. I see the ability brought in at beginning of battle log, but French had almost 1/2 the number of units deployed as the Austrians. Don't think that Modifier is working. There should be assault modifiers and shock modifiers applied for the French. Not seeing it in the results. I don't see the word "pursuit" anywhere. Shouldn't there be Cav pursuits, since that is another national modifier and the Austrians retreated? Not seeing light artillery bonus applied anywhere.
Guys, you have a lot more to work on than just breaking off combat.
JacquesDeLalaing wrote:@ post 32
Just some quick thougths: The battle took place in the terrain "woods" and two corps had to cross the Danube (one wihtout bridge) to get to the battle. That might explain why MTSG didn't work out that well (also depending on how many rounds the battle lasted and on weather, plus the stance and activation status of the corps leaders)?
And if Bonaparte did not MTSG, why is he shown as the C-in-C of the battle?
And I can't look it up right now, but I assume that woods do not count as open terrain? Thus a potentially huge frontage bonus (?) for Bonaparte might have been ruled out?
He didn't MTSG, but his command range is such that he was in charge of the battle.
I am seeing leftovers from EAW in this combat system as well.
I ran French Cavalry reserve into Vienna after beating the Austrians in Bavaria. End of turn Murat in Vienna which the Austrians still garrisoned, Ney one province west and Davout, Soult two provinces west.
Next turn since a Russian force was one space from Vienna I ordered all 3 French corps into Vienna. 2 days for Ney, 4 for Davout and Soult. I ordered Murat defensive, fight and retreat, avoid combat and move into the spot south of Ney, which was not blocked whereas Ney's location was red/blocked for Murat.
Turn starts Murat is attacked on first day. Ney MTSG, I win, lose 6000 cavalry, 6000 infantry on the second day. Russians lose 17,000 men. 3rd day Murat is attacked again in Vienna, Ney was bounced back to his original province after the MTSG so Murat was routed and every element and a third of my leaders died in one day. Turn ends Davout and Soult are in Vienna and Ney is still in his start province.
Why did Ney never move after the MTSG? He was already in Vienna why bounce him back?
I removed the dismounted dragoons from Murat; why did Murat with all cavalry not leave Vienna as I told him? Why did he not retreat or avoid battle as I ordered him? Twice he fought for no reason.
I ran French Cavalry reserve into Vienna after beating the Austrians in Bavaria. End of turn Murat in Vienna which the Austrians still garrisoned, Ney one province west and Davout, Soult two provinces west.
Next turn since a Russian force was one space from Vienna I ordered all 3 French corps into Vienna. 2 days for Ney, 4 for Davout and Soult. I ordered Murat defensive, fight and retreat, avoid combat and move into the spot south of Ney, which was not blocked whereas Ney's location was red/blocked for Murat.
Turn starts Murat is attacked on first day. Ney MTSG, I win, lose 6000 cavalry, 6000 infantry on the second day. Russians lose 17,000 men. 3rd day Murat is attacked again in Vienna, Ney was bounced back to his original province after the MTSG so Murat was routed and every element and a third of my leaders died in one day. Turn ends Davout and Soult are in Vienna and Ney is still in his start province.
Why did Ney never move after the MTSG? He was already in Vienna why bounce him back?
I removed the dismounted dragoons from Murat; why did Murat with all cavalry not leave Vienna as I told him? Why did he not retreat or avoid battle as I ordered him? Twice he fought for no reason.
With a working AGEOD combat system
1) Ney did an MTSG, lost cohesion and was unable to move after. The MTSG isn't a movement. The MTSG showed Ney in Vienna for the first combat, but he actually didn't move at time of combat. After combat, he lost cohesion and couldn't move.
2) Murat may have failed the evade roll (twice) and was forced to fight.
That's 400% bump up on the to hit I believe is causing havoc with the game. Everything is losing cohesion quickly and damage is extreme.
1) Ney did an MTSG, lost cohesion and was unable to move after. The MTSG isn't a movement. The MTSG showed Ney in Vienna for the first combat, but he actually didn't move at time of combat. After combat, he lost cohesion and couldn't move.
2) Murat may have failed the evade roll (twice) and was forced to fight.
That's 400% bump up on the to hit I believe is causing havoc with the game. Everything is losing cohesion quickly and damage is extreme.
I'm going to make a couple of suggestions
1) Decrease ToHit Coefficient from 400 down to 100
2) Bring over from EAW the 215-abiLand_CIC_Genius.abi and include the frontage bonus and init bonus. The strat bonus isn't needed because the french generals all start with pretty darn high strat ratings.
WON doesn't seem to have the CIC traits that EAW has, so I'm not sure how you want to implement. But Nappy needs the +1 init bonus and +5 frontage bonus along with the Offensive Tactician ability. I'd start with that and see if the combat results start coming into line.
1) Decrease ToHit Coefficient from 400 down to 100
2) Bring over from EAW the 215-abiLand_CIC_Genius.abi and include the frontage bonus and init bonus. The strat bonus isn't needed because the french generals all start with pretty darn high strat ratings.
WON doesn't seem to have the CIC traits that EAW has, so I'm not sure how you want to implement. But Nappy needs the +1 init bonus and +5 frontage bonus along with the Offensive Tactician ability. I'd start with that and see if the combat results start coming into line.
-
Captain_Orso
- Posts: 5766
- Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 5:02 pm
- Location: Stuttgart, Germany
From my understanding, the greatest issue with extremely high casualties is not really in the way hits are generated nor their affects; it lays in the fact that elements simply continue to march into the meat grinder almost regardless of their losses. Even the hardest, most veteran troops--especially them--know when a cause is hopeless. They are not cowards, they are simply not suicidal and know that blindly going forward, forward, forward with not attain their goal; only get them killed.
MTSG has always worked the way it does, and it is not to be taken too literally. The point of MTSG is far less to represent columns many miles apart coming to each other's aid, but to, in affect, allow the player to react to forces encountered during the execution of a turn, when the player would otherwise have to wait days for the end of a turn to react to new information. The spread of corps and army stacks over regions represents the area in which an army as a whole could operate by shifting toward an enemies encountered while during the turn execution.
Is it perfect? No, but it works.
That being said, some tweaking of things like the ToHit Coefficient may be in order. There's always room for improvement.
MTSG has always worked the way it does, and it is not to be taken too literally. The point of MTSG is far less to represent columns many miles apart coming to each other's aid, but to, in affect, allow the player to react to forces encountered during the execution of a turn, when the player would otherwise have to wait days for the end of a turn to react to new information. The spread of corps and army stacks over regions represents the area in which an army as a whole could operate by shifting toward an enemies encountered while during the turn execution.
Is it perfect? No, but it works.
That being said, some tweaking of things like the ToHit Coefficient may be in order. There's always room for improvement.
No issues at all with MTSG. The issue is the tohit coefficient. 400 means the final to hit is multiplied by 4. Every round, everything has a much higher likelihood to hit.
I just reduced the to hit coefficient and ran the same turn. Combat losses are still a little on the high side, but no corps obliterated right out of the gate. Simple fix and resolves a lot. I'm still seeing 1 round combats for ALL of combat. Figuring out why.
I just reduced the to hit coefficient and ran the same turn. Combat losses are still a little on the high side, but no corps obliterated right out of the gate. Simple fix and resolves a lot. I'm still seeing 1 round combats for ALL of combat. Figuring out why.
This definitely fixed the combat issue. I'm now seeing what I would expect not only from this game, but other AGEOD games as well.
What was happening is the Austrians have low percent chances to hit because of leader comparison to the French and don't bump up the to hit values. The French compared to the Austrians are much better overall and their base to hit IS bumped up. But when you multiply the Austrian to hit by 4 and give the majority of them first shot, it's removing the French leadership advantage because the French corp are getting decimated before they get a chance.
After this change, French initiative isn't no longer a big deal and can be put way down the priority list if at all (though I do think Nappy needs it simply because he showed incredible initiative) and French leadership is coming to bear on the battles. This also means that when encountering better troops such as Brits or late war Russian leaders, the French will take many more losses, which is historical.
If I were AGEOD, and the source control allows it, I'd stop all other fixes, put this 5 second fix in and deploy the first patch. Then go back to other issues. Even the replacement issue (which is still an issue) becomes less important when your corp are no longer being obliterated.
What was happening is the Austrians have low percent chances to hit because of leader comparison to the French and don't bump up the to hit values. The French compared to the Austrians are much better overall and their base to hit IS bumped up. But when you multiply the Austrian to hit by 4 and give the majority of them first shot, it's removing the French leadership advantage because the French corp are getting decimated before they get a chance.
After this change, French initiative isn't no longer a big deal and can be put way down the priority list if at all (though I do think Nappy needs it simply because he showed incredible initiative) and French leadership is coming to bear on the battles. This also means that when encountering better troops such as Brits or late war Russian leaders, the French will take many more losses, which is historical.
If I were AGEOD, and the source control allows it, I'd stop all other fixes, put this 5 second fix in and deploy the first patch. Then go back to other issues. Even the replacement issue (which is still an issue) becomes less important when your corp are no longer being obliterated.
Captain_Orso wrote:From my understanding, the greatest issue with extremely high casualties is not really in the way hits are generated nor their affects; it lays in the fact that elements simply continue to march into the meat grinder almost regardless of their losses. Even the hardest, most veteran troops--especially them--know when a cause is hopeless. They are not cowards, they are simply not suicidal and know that blindly going forward, forward, forward with not attain their goal; only get them killed.
MTSG has always worked the way it does, and it is not to be taken too literally. The point of MTSG is far less to represent columns many miles apart coming to each other's aid, but to, in affect, allow the player to react to forces encountered during the execution of a turn, when the player would otherwise have to wait days for the end of a turn to react to new information. The spread of corps and army stacks over regions represents the area in which an army as a whole could operate by shifting toward an enemies encountered while during the turn execution.
Is it perfect? No, but it works.
That being said, some tweaking of things like the ToHit Coefficient may be in order. There's always room for improvement.
They aren't marching into meat wagons. Within the battle logs, it's clear that the majority of battles are stopping after 1 round because of auto retreat conditions occurring. The massive casualties are being caused by the 4x multipler on the to hits.
-
Captain_Orso
- Posts: 5766
- Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 5:02 pm
- Location: Stuttgart, Germany
Battles start art full range, generally range 5, but it can be lower depending on weather and terrain. Each hour of battle goes through sever rounds, where the attackers approach the defenders until they break or go into melee at range 0. Sometimes there can be 2 rounds at range 0.
If the attacker is being slaughtered during the first 'round'--ie. at range 5--that would mean that only artillery is firing, and that's far too much damage for artillery, even in the best position.
From the above battle reports, having about a 50% chance of scoring a hit per shot is immense.
If the attacker is being slaughtered during the first 'round'--ie. at range 5--that would mean that only artillery is firing, and that's far too much damage for artillery, even in the best position.
From the above battle reports, having about a 50% chance of scoring a hit per shot is immense.
As others have said, thanks Vicberg for the work you are doing testing things out. Very helpful. This game looks very promising, I bought it and will play it a lot I am sure, it just needs some tweaks and bug fixes to be really playable. Those are not negligible issues, they are major ones, but all are fixable : casualties , diplomatic engine, proper chain of events with better explanations, fix to the "weakining long at sea british fleet problem" which let's the french player wack the Brits if he let's them spend close to a year out there getting attritioned blockading his fort AND the force management in ennemy territory after a peace treaty issue, because losing supply and suffering big winter attrition deep in Austria because the Pressburg piece took place in december makes no sense !
vicberg wrote:I'm going to make a couple of suggestions
1) Decrease ToHit Coefficient from 400 down to 100
2) Bring over from EAW the 215-abiLand_CIC_Genius.abi and include the frontage bonus and init bonus. The strat bonus isn't needed because the french generals all start with pretty darn high strat ratings.
WON doesn't seem to have the CIC traits that EAW has, so I'm not sure how you want to implement. But Nappy needs the +1 init bonus and +5 frontage bonus along with the Offensive Tactician ability. I'd start with that and see if the combat results start coming into line.
Where do you go to decreaste TOT hit ?Thanks
IN BoA, it's set to 100. In EAW, it's set to 100. In CW2, it's set to 125. In WON, it's set to 400.
go to c:\program files (x86)\matrix games\wars of napoleon\ngc\settings
Open GameLogic.opt using notepad
Find cbtHitCoef and change from 400 to 100
Save
Restart game
You'll see immediately what you would expect from an AGEOD game.
FYI, because the numbers aren't exactly the same across all games, final number may be different from the devs.
go to c:\program files (x86)\matrix games\wars of napoleon\ngc\settings
Open GameLogic.opt using notepad
Find cbtHitCoef and change from 400 to 100
Save
Restart game
You'll see immediately what you would expect from an AGEOD game.
FYI, because the numbers aren't exactly the same across all games, final number may be different from the devs.
This comes also from elements being killed before their cohesion runs out. We have doubled cohesion loss in the first patch. As for to hit percent, the lower you have it, the longer the battles take and watching the combat indicator for 10 mn, real time is not thrilling, so we try to have faster combats but with higher cohesion loss. If that's not enough, we will lower to hit coefficient in the 2nd patch.
Hofstadter's Law: "It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's law."
Pocus wrote:This comes also from elements being killed before their cohesion runs out. We have doubled cohesion loss in the first patch. As for to hit percent, the lower you have it, the longer the battles take and watching the combat indicator for 10 mn, real time is not thrilling, so we try to have faster combats but with higher cohesion loss. If that's not enough, we will lower to hit coefficient in the 2nd patch.
Fair enough, but combat length really isn't much of an issue, I mean even if a battle lasts a bit longer, turn resolution itsefl is still ways faster than turn loading !
The stacks committed in the battle may flee in the middle of a round of combat, or have to wait to finish the round to do it ?.
If they have to wait to finish the round of combat (range up to 0) to flee, with only 8 hits per element many will killed before the end of the first round of combat.
Maybe in the future it is necessary to raise hits per element, or lower loss per hit.
If they have to wait to finish the round of combat (range up to 0) to flee, with only 8 hits per element many will killed before the end of the first round of combat.
Maybe in the future it is necessary to raise hits per element, or lower loss per hit.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests