How is the AI getting full route efficiency?
- Thread starter Kryndude
- 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.
I am raiding. All the orange, yellow, green, blue fleets are currently raiding, red fleet on strike force mission for naval supremacy, naval bombers on naval strike mission, air superiority 100%.
Yeah, raiders aren't considered to be cutting off sea trade entirely, just catching the occasional convoy here and there.
- 2
The tooltip normally shows the supported supply capacity, not the actual supply available in the province. The 'Incoming' stat tells how much supply can potentially be brought in, not necessarily how much is actually incoming.
Assuming there are no convoys bringing supplies in because you are raiding them all, the province in your example still provides 2.00 local supply, which is probably enough to keep the defending units supplied.
To find out how much supply is actually brought in by convoy, you would need to look at the convoy route efficiency, which as far as I know, is only possible for your own country - it is not available for any other country, including countries in your faction.
So in conclusion, you cannot assume that the AI is getting 100% route efficiency simply by looking at the supply tooltip, and unfortunately there is no way to know what is the actual route efficiency of your enemy, or your friends, for that matter.
Assuming there are no convoys bringing supplies in because you are raiding them all, the province in your example still provides 2.00 local supply, which is probably enough to keep the defending units supplied.
To find out how much supply is actually brought in by convoy, you would need to look at the convoy route efficiency, which as far as I know, is only possible for your own country - it is not available for any other country, including countries in your faction.
So in conclusion, you cannot assume that the AI is getting 100% route efficiency simply by looking at the supply tooltip, and unfortunately there is no way to know what is the actual route efficiency of your enemy, or your friends, for that matter.
Last edited:
Thanks for the detailed answer, but the tooltip did show me reduced incoming route efficiency for the AI at some point. In a different game, I was able to bring it down to 5% and the AI troops starved because of it.
Last edited:
My mistake then, I thought all the fleets were on Strike Force since the icons are really similar.
I think to reduce route efficiency convoys have to be sunk. At least it's like that for me importing resources.
(Exception: Enemy has not enough convos. Then the efficiency is low anyway.)
This would imply: Until you haven't sunk a decent amout of enemy convoys he still gets his supplies.
(Exception: Enemy has not enough convos. Then the efficiency is low anyway.)
This would imply: Until you haven't sunk a decent amout of enemy convoys he still gets his supplies.
You mean something like this?
Hmm yes, I was wrong then. There is a way to find out the route efficiency of the enemy.
My guess is that there is no supply convoy route to that province. Either because it's not needed due the local supply available, or there are no convoys available.
The way I understand it, you can't tell the difference by looking at the tooltip between no supply convoy route at all or a supply convoy route operating at 100% efficiency.
This is an enemy province where I'm sure there are no units present, so there should be no supply convoy route to it:
This is my province with units present, and a supply convoy route at 100%:
They both show "Incoming" as the max possible value, even though in the first case, nothing is actually incoming, and in the second case, only 0.30 supply is actually incoming via convoy.
So this is all very confusing because the tooltips are a mess
Another example to illustrate my point. This is a friendly province with units on it, but the local supply is sufficient, so there are no convoys bringing supplies to it. The tooltip still shows the maximum incoming supply possible:
I think what we're seeing in your screenshots is for the same reasons. So yes indeed, the route efficiency is at 100%, but since there are 0 convoys required for the route, there are 0 convoys for your raiding fleets to sink.
And a remark I forgot to make before: naval supremacy has no impact on the enemy's naval route efficiency. Actual convoys sunk by convoy raiding task force mission or by naval strike air wing mission decrease route efficiency.
I think what we're seeing in your screenshots is for the same reasons. So yes indeed, the route efficiency is at 100%, but since there are 0 convoys required for the route, there are 0 convoys for your raiding fleets to sink.
And a remark I forgot to make before: naval supremacy has no impact on the enemy's naval route efficiency. Actual convoys sunk by convoy raiding task force mission or by naval strike air wing mission decrease route efficiency.
- 2
Ah, you mean maximum possible value after the route efficiency is considered? That got me a bit confused there for a moment.
Didn't know that, thanks. If you look at my 3rd screenshot it doesn't count my NAVs despite the ongoing naval strike mission, is it because there are no convoys to attack?
By max possible value, I mean how much supply can possibly be brought into the province, limited by infrastructure or port capacity. This number is not the effective value, of how much supply is actually being brought in. In some cases, it is equal to the effective value, when the max capacity is reached, but most of the time, it's not.
In my last example above, it says "Incoming: +18". That doesn't mean there are 18 supplies coming into the province - in fact there are 0 supplies incoming, because all supplies are provided locally, enough for the units sitting in that province. It merely means that "up to" 18 supplies can be brought in if needed.
I don't know for sure that it takes into account the route efficiency, but it appears it does. I only have 100% and 0% examples available at the moment, so it's hard to draw a conclusion from that.
I guess so, yes.
- 2
I think it's maximum possible value including route efficiency. Units trapped in there aren't receiving supply penalty. This still doesn't solve the question why in the OP raiding weren't affecting route efficiency when via convoys was the only way AI could've received supply with its land route cut off.
- 1
Thanks for your screenshot.
I may be completely off the mark but it seems in all this discussion, you're apparently overlooking one crucial detail as you're fixating on the "Incoming" numbers.
That detail is the "Local" part of the supply tooltip. It shows the amount of supply that is available locally in the province itself. These supplies don't need to be brought in via land or sea from the capital, they're just "there". Think of them as food, medicine and fuel produced and/or stored in the province. Even if the province is completely cut off from the capital, these local supplies are still available in the province.
Look again at my last example above, there are 3 garrison units sitting in Honolulu. The supply tooltip shows "Local: +5". That means there are 5 supplies available in Honolulu. It also shows the 3 garrison units are consuming 1.30 supplies. Since 1.30 is lower than 5, the units only need to draw supplies locally. No additional supplies need to be brought in via land or sea. Since Hawaii is a set of islands, additional supplies, if needed, would require naval convoys. But as you can see in the screenshot next to the supply tooltip, the supply transfer route tooltip shows there are no supplies being transported, there are no convoys assigned to that route. Again this shows that the local supplies in Honolulu are sufficient for the units present there. Does that make sense?
Now back to your OP example with Chinese units trapped. It follows the same scenario as my Honolulu example. The Chinese units are simply using the local supply available and do not require additional supplies being brought in via land or sea. If you didn't attack them, they could stay trapped in their province forever without suffering lack of supply penalties and without needing any convoys at all.
Consider that the standard Chinese infantry division (6 INF, no support, 12-width) consumes 0.42 supplies.
1. In your OP example, we see "Local: +2" for the Ningbo province. Therefore, up to 2 / 0.42 = 4 Chinese infrantry divisions can be supplied locally.
2. In your last example, we see "Local: +3.45" for what looks like Shandong. Therefore, up to 3.45 / 0.42 = 8 Chinese infantry divisions can be supplied locally.
Lastly, in all my comments I spoke in terms of province, while supply is actually handled on a "supply area" basis. The distinction between the two is not important IMHO for this discussion.
Sorry for the wall of text.
I may be completely off the mark but it seems in all this discussion, you're apparently overlooking one crucial detail as you're fixating on the "Incoming" numbers.
That detail is the "Local" part of the supply tooltip. It shows the amount of supply that is available locally in the province itself. These supplies don't need to be brought in via land or sea from the capital, they're just "there". Think of them as food, medicine and fuel produced and/or stored in the province. Even if the province is completely cut off from the capital, these local supplies are still available in the province.
Look again at my last example above, there are 3 garrison units sitting in Honolulu. The supply tooltip shows "Local: +5". That means there are 5 supplies available in Honolulu. It also shows the 3 garrison units are consuming 1.30 supplies. Since 1.30 is lower than 5, the units only need to draw supplies locally. No additional supplies need to be brought in via land or sea. Since Hawaii is a set of islands, additional supplies, if needed, would require naval convoys. But as you can see in the screenshot next to the supply tooltip, the supply transfer route tooltip shows there are no supplies being transported, there are no convoys assigned to that route. Again this shows that the local supplies in Honolulu are sufficient for the units present there. Does that make sense?
Now back to your OP example with Chinese units trapped. It follows the same scenario as my Honolulu example. The Chinese units are simply using the local supply available and do not require additional supplies being brought in via land or sea. If you didn't attack them, they could stay trapped in their province forever without suffering lack of supply penalties and without needing any convoys at all.
Consider that the standard Chinese infantry division (6 INF, no support, 12-width) consumes 0.42 supplies.
1. In your OP example, we see "Local: +2" for the Ningbo province. Therefore, up to 2 / 0.42 = 4 Chinese infrantry divisions can be supplied locally.
2. In your last example, we see "Local: +3.45" for what looks like Shandong. Therefore, up to 3.45 / 0.42 = 8 Chinese infantry divisions can be supplied locally.
Yes, but in the OP case, the AI doesn't necessarily need to receive additional supplies by sea.
Lastly, in all my comments I spoke in terms of province, while supply is actually handled on a "supply area" basis. The distinction between the two is not important IMHO for this discussion.
Sorry for the wall of text.
Last edited:
- 2
Thank you for your effort. But let me explain what I don't get. The way I see it, whether the local troops actually need the incoming supply or not does not matter in the game displaying trade route efficiency, as shown in my latest post's example. In it, Chinese units don't need the incoming 5.17 to supply themselves but the game still shows the reduced route efficiency, whereas in the OP example the game shows 100% efficiency despite my raiding fleets, regardless of whether the units actually need them. It could be because the game takes some time to update information. I did wait a few days before I took the screenshots but might take weeks to update and that might be the reason, otherwise I don't see a fitting explanation.
I've had similar issues, particularly when fighting Japan for some reason. The reality is that supply is super-bugged and the AI often gets fully supplied without having any way to get the supplies to its troops. The only solution is to save and relaod, which fixes the bug.
I don't know how to explain things better, at the risk of repeating the same arguments again and again.
In Nigbo (OP), there is a convoy route that you can't see that has 0 (zero) convoys, operating at 100% efficiency. Just like I showed you in Honolulu, where you can actually see the convoy route stats.
If you try to convoy raid a route with 0 convoys, what kind of results do you expect?
In Nigbo (OP), there is a convoy route that you can't see that has 0 (zero) convoys, operating at 100% efficiency. Just like I showed you in Honolulu, where you can actually see the convoy route stats.
If you try to convoy raid a route with 0 convoys, what kind of results do you expect?
In the second example, I got reduced efficiency despite AI presumably using 0 convoys since local supply was enough to maintain it's troops trapped in there, but I might have miscounted, and now I don't remember how many battalions there were. I get your point though, unless it's a bug it's probably what you explain. Just want to be 100% sure.
We don't know how many Chinese divisions there are because the tooltip is obstructing the view. So you can't assert that "AI presumably using 0 convoys since local supply was enough". It is evidently bringing in extra supplies via convoys, as indicated by the supply tooltip. And the convoys together with the local supply are enough to prevent a supply shortage (notice the supply icon is green, whereas it turns brown in case of shortage).
The second example is not good to help you understand the mechanics, as it doesn't provide the full picture.
Also, keep in mind that troops moving or in combat use +50% more supplies.
However, in the OP case, adjusting for increased supply use doesn't change the result:
3 divisions in combat in Nigbo, that is 3 x (0.42 + 0.21) = 3 x 0.63 = 1.89 supplies needed, still below the 2 supplies provided locally. No convoys needed.
- 2