Would love to see additional tests using two different countries at different tech levels etc to see how what Johan says actually works.
Extensive combat testing in 1.22, and why combat number are so skewed
- Thread starter anomalacaris
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
It sounds like the weapon modifier is WAD, but how it works might be changed in 1.3.
As for combat ability, one of three things is happening:
- Combat Ability bonuses from ideas are shared by rebels from your lands, meaning that, all things being equal, you have absolutely no advantage against a rebel army since they'll know exactly what you know and cancel you out.
- Combat Ability bonuses from ideas are multiplied against the difference between attacker/defender weapon modifiers. This means that the utility of Combat Ability is limited to nations you already have a tech advantage against, since it will only apply a bonus when you are far enough ahead in tech to have a positive weapon modifier.
- Combat Ability bonuses are simply broken and do nothing. This would be a bug that would have to be fixed.
If the situation is #2, then Combat Ability is essentially a wasted bonus in most cases, since you'll only get a boost against countries you already have an advantage against. If Combat Ability bonuses are supposed to be derived from weapon modifiers at all, it might make more sense to apply them before comparing them to your opponent's army.
So, Combat Ability is either WAD but un-testable on rebels, WAD but tactically useless, or broken, but might be changing in 1.3 according to Johan.
Actually, when are the combat modifiers applied, before or after the game checks each sides weapon modifier ?
The Wiki isnt clear about that - it just states The Weapon Modifier is multiplied by Combat Ability - and if it applies before the check, couldnt it mean that the combat modifier do work? Thus making everything wad.
However that would only be the case if Rebels indeed get all the combat modifiers from Ideas.
"Scio me nihil scire"
I'm so confused... So how the combat actually really works? Does INF/CAV/ART combat ability works (and how it works)?
What causes rapid annihilation of one of the armies (assuming similar conditions, leader and ratio)? Are dice rolls so devastating that sometimes in one or two days stack of 10k is reduced to 1K?
And seriously... it is not whining. I just want to know to plan my army composition in early and late game. How can I judge which idea to take if I don't know its 'real' power/strength/impact?
I'm so confused... So how the combat actually really works? Does INF/CAV/ART combat ability works (and how it works)?
What causes rapid annihilation of one of the armies (assuming similar conditions, leader and ratio)? Are dice rolls so devastating that sometimes in one or two days stack of 10k is reduced to 1K?
And seriously... it is not whining. I just want to know to plan my army composition in early and late game. How can I judge which idea to take if I don't know its 'real' power/strength/impact?
Last edited:
It was shown that rebels don't get discipline from ideas, so we have every reason to believe they don't get combat ability from ideas either.
So the situation is likely, as described by Mann 42, one of the following:
- Combat Ability bonuses from ideas are multiplied against the difference between attacker/defender weapon modifiers. This means that the utility of Combat Ability is limited to nations you already have a tech advantage against, since it will only apply a bonus when you are far enough ahead in tech to have a positive weapon modifier.
- Combat Ability bonuses are simply broken and do nothing. This would be a bug that would have to be fixed.
Well... does that suggest if you face an higher-tech enemy, your combat ability work against you?
Combat ability of your army is only for the damage you make to the enemy. So it is just enemy get more damage, nothing relate to your own damage.
Can we just get an answer for combat ability if it works as intended? It means a lot to those of us who play Quality heavy games, I don't understand Paradox' silence on this issue when they answered about combat modifiers in the same thread already...
No. In all other cases in combat when modifiers are compared and the difference obtained, only the army with a positive modifier gets the difference as a bonus - the opposing army effectively stays at +0. (Example A = 5, B = 3. 5-3 = 2. A has +2. B has +0.) I'm assuming, based on what Johan said, that's how weapon modifiers work.
Therefore, in the above example, if A had Combat Ability bonuses, it would apply to the +2. If B had Combat Ability bonuses, it would apply to the 0, and effectively be 0.
At least, that's my thinking on it, if it even works as I surmised in #2.
lets say A and B have the same tech level and therefore the same combat modifier. A has 10 % extra combat ability, so A would have 10 % better combat modifier and does more damage, is this right? Seems logical to me.
It is logical but It is still unknown if that 10% is multiple by 0 different or by the weapon modifier.
It looks like Paradox never tell what combat ability, what is fire/shock modifier in any of their games... They give us the numbers but never explain how it work. The wiki is just an unofficial way.
The only official answer from them is probably in 1.3 changelog: like "fixed bugs", or "Battles are now more bloody"...
Based on the current available data, it is currently giving you +0%. That's because, if A = 5 and B = 5, then 5 - 5 = 0. So both sides get a +0 bonus. If Combat Ability is +10% of the weapon modifier difference, then it's 0 * 1.1, which equals 0, and matches the data.
Or in simpler terms, they're useless unless you have higher tech and higher weapon modifiers. If that's how they actually work.
Now, what it should do, or what you expect it to do, well, that's all you.
i thought its 10 % of the weapon modifier of a given country. Not 10 % of the weapon modifier difference between two countries. I dont really get why this is calculated of the difference.
I dont really get this in a logical way. When Sweden uses its Weapons and gets 10 % better ones of their base combat modifier, they are still 10 % better, no matter what Weapons the Russians use. Even if they would use better ones, Sweden would still get 10 % better ones based on their combat modifier.
Last edited:
Because the person who designed the system clearly didn't think about what he was actually doing.
I really just hope I can finally enjoy this game when MEIOU is released this Saturday and not have to worry about combat being this stupid and broken. But odds are I won't be able to.
Well I dare hope that in developing a game, they know what they are doing; I suspect that there is a "good" reason for not releasing the entire code, the same reasons why the whole game is not entirely moddable/open source and, well, that has to do with intellectual property.
Why on gods green earth would these modifiers only affect damage when they are different?????
That absolutely is 100% the wrong way to do it.
That would explain why cavalry sucks late game. That would explain why cannons arent for killing, only sieging. That would explain halbers killing in the hundreds during the fire phase. I'm no math wiz, but halberds dont shoot anything. Yet we see HUGE casualties in the fire phase?
No mr dev. The fire modifier and the shock modifier need to work as labeled. That is why balance is so off. Early game infantry fire should be 1/4 damage against 2 even units of 2 even nations in western europe.
And late game cavalry needs to do 4 times the shock damage against even an exact mirror imaged unit.
That absolutely is 100% the wrong way to do it.
That would explain why cavalry sucks late game. That would explain why cannons arent for killing, only sieging. That would explain halbers killing in the hundreds during the fire phase. I'm no math wiz, but halberds dont shoot anything. Yet we see HUGE casualties in the fire phase?
No mr dev. The fire modifier and the shock modifier need to work as labeled. That is why balance is so off. Early game infantry fire should be 1/4 damage against 2 even units of 2 even nations in western europe.
And late game cavalry needs to do 4 times the shock damage against even an exact mirror imaged unit.
also i would'v add alot in ARTs cost and significance
they are in individual numbers those days!
when i'm running with 10inf6cav10art is something not even from ww2
well i could understand that this is all a schematism and they are like 10 big culevrins, but make them worth alot, as they were, or some building preqs
they are in individual numbers those days!
when i'm running with 10inf6cav10art is something not even from ww2
well i could understand that this is all a schematism and they are like 10 big culevrins, but make them worth alot, as they were, or some building preqs
This is a massive misunderstanding of several things.
1. Releasing the rules of the game has NOTHING to do with intellectual property. The rules of a game are not protectable. The code that implements the game rules is obviously protected IP, but the rules themselves are not.
2. When you're developing a game, you don't know what you're doing, and you don't until the game is released and people are playing it. You can have certain ideas and imagine certain things will work out a certain way, but especially in a game like EU4, you absolutely don't know what you're doing when you design the rules a certain way. If you think you do, you're just making your game worse by deluding yourself.
Wow. This is what really blows my mind. So countries like Poland have completely worthless ideas like +30% cavalry combat ability.
You're never going to be ahead of Western countries in tech, and barely if at all ahead of other Eastern countries., so Polish cavalry is good for stomping Muslims and that's it.
Paradox, does this make any sense at all?