Fleet composition and General's skill

[Dreezzzzz]

If I understand correctly:
-my fleet composition in general shouldn't exceed the 12 hull size.
-Every point above 12 hull gives a 4% positioning penalty per point.
-A general's skill reduces this positioning penalty with 10% for each skill lvl.

1. While every General has at least a skill lvl of 1 does this mean I can always exceed the 12 point hull size by 2.5 points as long as I assign a leader to the fleet.

2. If general's skill and positioning penalty level each other, so positioning penalty is actually 0, does this make the best fleet composition or do you get a positioning bonus when skill exceeds hull size?

example:
3x BB + 6x DD = 15 hull size = 12% positioning penalty.
Skill 4 general gives 40% positioning improvement.
Compared to a 12 hull size fleet does my fleet get into position 28% quicker,
or
should I make my fleet bigger so skill positioning bonus matches
the hull exceeding positioning penalty.
4x BB + 12x DD = 22 Hull size = 40% positioning penalty - 40% from skill 4 general.

3. Is there an optimal capital / screen ratio. Right now I always try to have at least 2 screens for 1 capital.

 

[blue emu]

Partly the answers depend on whether that 40% positioning improvement is additive (in which case it removes the penalty, up to a 40% limit) or multiplicative (in which case it just lessens the penalty by 40%... eg: from -12% to -7.2%; or even turns a -12% penalty into a +23% bonus: Positioning x 0.88 x 1.40). Have you tested this? Post screen-shots of your tests.

 

[Dreezzzzz]

I haven't tested this yet.

I couldn't find anything in the manual, strat guide or wiki. It just states that with naval combat it is more important to have high skilled generals assigned to your fleet because of positioning.

I assumed some experienced player would have already figured this out.

Your solutions sound reasonable aswell and I am curious which formula the game uses.

At the moment I play 2.03c. Thusfar only played with Germany and no Navy.
Started a new game as Japan and will try to figure this out.
In the mean time any suggestions are welcome.

 

[jju_57]

I haven't tested this yet.

I couldn't find anything in the manual, strat guide or wiki. It just states that with naval combat it is more important to have high skilled generals assigned to your fleet because of positioning.

I assumed some experienced player would have already figured this out.

Your solutions sound reasonable aswell and I am curious which formula the game uses.

At the moment I play 2.03c. Thusfar only played with Germany and no Navy.
Started a new game as Japan and will try to figure this out.
In the mean time any suggestions are welcome.

In looking at actual game numbers it seems the admiral let's you add 40% more hull space. I haven't seen any bonus for having a hull size less then 12 so I doubt if there is one for less then new hull size based on leader.

Edit: Looks like I might be worng. Who really knows. Here is a link to further discussions on this topic.

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=485666

 

[Dreezzzzz]

Thx for the link jju.
The answer still isn't found.
I did some testing myself and were not able to find the correct formula.
I am getting close. Will post screenshots and findings tomorrow.
Hopefully other people participate and we solve this issue.
Strange that PI did not respond to the previous thread. Their manual is definetely not clear on the subject. That rises the question whether positioning penalty is really important in Naval battles.
:wacko:

 

[Dreezzzzz]

Hmmmmmmmm!!!!!!!!!
This is harder than I thought.
My wife and kid also need some attention so I will adress this later.
At the moment rereading manuals etc. Wil perform some more tests.
Seems a lot of variables are modifying the positioning and it seems partly random at start of battle aswell. Will let you know more asap!
Anybody else??????

Off topic:
How can I insert my screenshots in the thread. They are in my screenshot folder in the game directory. If I use insert picture the thread asks for an url, copy paste doesn't work either.

 

[blue emu]

How can I insert my screenshots in the thread. They are in my screenshot folder in the game directory. If I use insert picture the thread asks for an url, copy paste doesn't work either.

Upload your screen-shots to an online hosting site, like Photobucket. Copy the URL of the image once it's on that site, and add it to yuor post.

 

[Forgiven]

My 2 cents...
Since the 'past 12 hull size' was not in game originally, but techs have always had positive positioning modifiers as part of them, it must be possible to have positive positioning...
Thus I'd presume admirals skill is beneficial towards positioning even in fleets at or below the 12 hull size point.
This of course presumes the class specific positioning bonuses are same thing as that which is affected by admiral and fleet size...
And as straight forward guess I'd assume it's additive not multiplied, simply because most bonii in the game are

Absolutely no actual research was done towards this.

 

[blue emu]

And as straight forward guess I'd assume it's additive not multiplied, simply because most bonii in the game are

Name a few. As I recall, nearly all modifiers in the game are multiplicative. Leader skill, terrain, weather, day/night, Combined Arms, Experience... all are multiplied, not added.

 

[Dreezzzzz]

Still searching for the positioning formula.

I did find the way naval attack and defend modifiers work.
A unit starts with 100% attack and defend status.
Experience is added and all other influences are multiplied.
A admiral skill level is halved for a multiplying factor.
Example:
A unit with 30% experience has a 130% attack and defend modifier.
If you have a skill 5 admiral assigned to this fleet the 130% is multiplied by 25%.
I you have a skill 1 admiral assigned to this fleet the 130% is multiplied by 5%.
So the skill 5 admiral fleet has a 130 x 1.25 = 162.5 attack and defend modifier.
This is multiplied by the weather, night and dissent penalty modifier. So if you attack during night you get a 50% attack penalty. If rain gives you a 1.3% penalty. Your attack modifier will be 162.5 x 0.5 = 81.25 x 0.987 = 80.19
The game does round up most numbers. Therefore sometimes you will see slight differences in percentage numbers.
I hope the example is understandable, try to get a screenshot with it aswell.

This was a little bit off topic but I right now I am trying to understand the whole naval combat system.
Hopefully other people can use some of these findings else ignore my thread
:rofl::rofl::rofl:

@Blue: In my findings for Naval combat, experience is added other factors are multiplied

 

[blue emu]

@Blue: In my findings for Naval combat, experience is added other factors are multiplied

You're sure it isn't multiplied as well?

30% EXP would be a multiplier of 1.30, just as a skill-5 Admiral is a multiplier of 1.25

 

[unmerged(41582)]

Should a fleet have a range of ranking officers in it?
Like with the land unit HQ system with a theater on top of the hierarchy?

 

[Dreezzzzz]

You're sure it isn't multiplied as well?

30% EXP would be a multiplier of 1.30, just as a skill-5 Admiral is a multiplier of 1.25

You are absolutely right. You should multiply all factors. In my case it actually worked because I always add the experience first, which is the same as multiplying. 100% + 30% = 130%, 100 x 1.3 = 130%. It only works if experience is the first factor used.o Therefore one should always multiply all factors.

 

[Dreezzzzz]

Should a fleet have a range of ranking officers in it?
Like with the land unit HQ system with a theater on top of the hierarchy?

Some have argued about having different chain of Commands for Land / Naval and Air units like most of the time in real life happens. At the moment you have to assign your Fleet to an HQ which also is an HQ for land units. I don't know at what level you command your troops but I would suggest to assign your fleet to Army Group level while this lessens supplies.
Your question is a bit off topic but arises a other question with me.

Does a Fleet attached to a Theather HQ get into position earlier because of the leader reducing stacking penalty???

First I still have to search for the answer to my positioning question then this can be tested.

 

[Forgiven]

Name a few. As I recall, nearly all modifiers in the game are multiplicative. Leader skill, terrain, weather, day/night, Combined Arms, Experience... all are multiplied, not added.

As in combat efficiency is the 'only' modifier that multiplies components
(as in combined arms when it gets +10% from panzer leader changes from 20% to 30% not to 22%)
Examples of where percentages are added (and then the base multiplied with sum) would be at least IC and Leadership...

 

[Dreezzzzz]

I finally figured it out!!!!!!!!!

In the screen shot below you will see next to the commander's photo the number that represents the effective positioning of the fleet.

When you hoover your mouse over a ship you will see the ships effective positioning. Seen in the pop up near the ship together with the attack/defence modifiers.

Screen shot:

I tested with different fleet compositions and different Leaders.
Each fleet composition and leader are tested in different encounters.
Numbered from 1 to 5.
The first number, is the number next to the commander's photo, effective positioning of the fleet. The second number, is the effective positioning of the ship, seen in the modifier box.
Obviously I could not show all screenshots of numbers listed below but you can see for yourself next time you play

Fleet Composition test 1:
2x BB + 8x DD = 12 hull points = 0% penalty

No Leader
1. 47% - 62.7%
2. 41% - 56.1%
3. 50% - 66%
4. 40% - 55%
5. 40% - 55%

Skill 1 Admiral
1. 54% - 70.4%
2. 64% - 81.4%
3. 54% - 70.4%
4. 65% - 82.5%
5. 61% - 78.1%

Skill 2 Admiral
1. 73% - 91.3%
2. 68% - 85.8%
3. 75% - 93.5%
4. 66% - 83.6%
5. 66% - 83.6%

Skill 3 Admiral
1. 81% - 100.1%
2. 79% - 97.9%
3. 86% - 105.6%
4. 88% - 107.8%
5. 72% - 90.2%

Skill 4 Admiral
1. 86% - 105.6%
2. 83% - 102.3%
3. 96% - 116.6%
4. 94% - 114.4%
5. 91% - 111.1%

Skill 5 Admiral
1. 96% - 116.6%
2. 99% - 119.9%
3. 106% - 127.6%
4. 102% - 123.2%
5. 90% - 110%

If you take a close look at the numbers you will see that the starting effective fleet number (first number) is selected randomly by the game. Depending on the admiral you use for your fleet the set of numbers which are randomly chosen changes. I didn't find exactly in what range a certain skill level admiral gets his effective fleet positioning number randomized.
You will also notice that the second number is multiplied by the same factor every time.
40% becomes 55%
90% becomes 110%
If the first number changes by 50% the second changes with 55%
55/50=1.1
This happens each time. What we are missing now is a starting number, because
40 x 1.1 = 44. 55% - 44 = 11
try this with each combination. You start with the number 11 then every effective fleet percentage is multiplied by 1.1 and you get the ship's effective fleet percentage.
90% x 1.1 = 99 + 11 = 110%

You can always use this principle. The formula always works the same way.
Except the number which is added changes depending on doctrines.
Starting number 11 is used when your concentration doctrine give your ship a 0.10 positioning.
If your concentration doctrine gives your ship a 0.15 positioning the starting number is 16.5 + Ships effective positioning x 1.1.
My guess is that the starting number for a ship with concentration doctrine 0.2 positioning is 22

This doesn't answer the question but helps understanding the system.

As said before the effective fleet number is randomized within a certain box belonging to an admiral's skill. The hull penalty is minimized from the effective fleet number.

Fleet composed of 3BB + 6 DD = 15 hull points = 12% penalty

No Leader
1. 33% - 47.3%
2. 35% - 49.5%
3. 30% - 44%
4. 47% - 62.7%
5. 29% - 42.9

Skill 2 Admiral
1. 54% - 70.4%
2. 59% - 75.9%

Skill 5 Admiral
1. 87% - 106.7%
2. 88% - 107.8%

Fleet composed of 4x BB + 4x CL + 4x DD = 22 hull points = 40% penalty

No leader
1. 9% - 20.9% for BB pos 0.10 (concentration doctrine)
2. 19% - 31.9% for BB pos 0.10

1. 9% - 26.4% for CL pos 0.15
2. 19% - 37.4% for CL pos 0.15

Skill 5 Admiral
1. 53% - 69.3% for BB and DD
2. 59% - 75.9% for BB and DD

1. 53% - 74.8% for CL
2. 59% - 81.4% for CL

Conclusion:
- Commanders skill set you in a different randomized range of numbers belonging to the skill level.
- Hull penalty is minimized from the randomized fleet effective positioning number. (this answers the question).
- Naval stances have no influence.
- Traits don't effect the positioning at all.
- Weather doesn't influence positioning only attack / defence modifiers and firing range.

Now that I know how the naval combat system works, we have to find out,
which combination of Positioning and Fleet composition gives the best results
in naval warfare.

ps: I hope I am not boring people with my monologue but I remember better when writing, LOL.

 

[Forgiven]

After bit of testing, I came to annoying issue, there's something else that determines the effective positioning...
3 battles, in all fleet with 70% penalty from hull sizes, and skill 6 commander ->
Effective positioning started as 32% , 46% and 35%.
4 battles, in fleet with 62% penalty from hull sizes and skill 6 commander ->
Effective positioning started as 48,2%; 37,2%; 44,2% and 48,2%
And as side note, individual ships positioning was from 1.8% to 2.4% higher (when it had no tech to improve it) and from 12,3% to 12.9% when tech was supposed to give 10%...
Very difficult numbers to count anything sensible from as it's clear there's a factor missing. However, if the factor is fully random (and indeed, an integer number, as in both cases I had either ,0 at the end or ,2 at the end as fleets stayed the same) which varies from "0 to 14" (as per 7 battles, I suppose the range is really larger, but limited sample allows for that much)
OK, bit more numbers...
penalty 62%, commander skill 1:
2% and 4% (only 2 battles before I lost a ship)
penalty 62% commander skill 3;
14,2%; 25,2%; 23,2% and 25,2%
penalty 62%, commander skill 5;
41,2% and 43,2%

Thus we got enough points, I hope to get something out of for the relation of penalty and skill....
Futher testing and better math is required, but for now it would work with;
[(Base) - (Fleet hull size penalty) + (10 * commander skill)] + (random number)
Where Base is 39 (! might be 40 and my fleet hull size is actually 62,8 and for some reason not rounded up but just cut to 62), and random number is between 0 and 20... (edited with the added data post above from 18 to 20)
..oh and if the sum between [] is negative it's changed to 0, which would explain the leader skill 1 result ending with ,0 instead of ,2 (and other changes may apply like halving the random number for example as extra penalty, but insufficient data).
However, I grant you that existense of the large random factor might allow this to be multiplied instead of sum, but I'm trying to prove my case, not yours ...

Now you have some numbers from me, just fix the math for multiplied case if you insist it's thus :rofl:

 

[Forgiven]

I finally figured it out!!!!!!!!!

Oooh, so much numbers, now I can check my numbers too (and damn you for managing to write that while I was testing myself :rofl: )

Edit: and good, we figured out different things, that should be pretty complete now...

 

[blue emu]

As in combat efficiency is the 'only' modifier that multiplies components

Not so. Modifiers of THE SAME TYPE are added... this is not news, it's always been that way. Different sources of Combined Arms Bonus are additive WITH EACH OTHER, but the resulting total Combined Arms bonus is multiplied with other modifiers such as Experience, Leader skill, terrain, weather, etc. Similarly, different levels of Agriculture technology are additive, but the resulting bonus is multiplicative to your base manpower.

Give examples of DIFFERENT boni adding instead of myltiplying, please. Then you will be

 

[blue emu]

Fixed your screen-shot:

Screen shot:

You want the line inside the IMG tags to look like:

http://s998.photobucket.com/albums/af101/dreezzzzz/HoI3_1.jpg

... without the inserted ?PHP code.