Paradropping broken?

[Ulsterman]

How about this?

For Battlefild Interdiction doctrine (ID 9100) change

command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = 0.3 } to
command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = [color=red]0.2[/color] }

For Infiltration Bombardement (ID=9360), Carousel Bombardement (ID=9370) and Keypoint Bombardement (ID=9380) change

command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = 0.1 } to
command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = [color=red]-0.1[/color] }

For Theater Operation (ID=17010) change

command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = 0.3 } to
command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = [color=red]-0.1[/color] }

For Blitzkrieg (ID=6260) and Deep Operatiopns (ID=6330) change

command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = 0.2 } to
command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = [color=red]-0.05[/color] }

This would give you an initial penalty of 45%. Each of the four mentioned air doctrines reduces this penalty by 10% to a 5% penalty. Either of the two land doctrines will erase the final 5% (Blitzkrieg is part of Spearhead, Deep Operations is part of Human Wave, so you can only get one of them).

It's not great, I know, but it should work.

 

[sbr]

How about this?

For Battlefild Interdiction doctrine (ID 9100) change

command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = 0.3 } to
command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = [color=red]0.2[/color] }

For Infiltration Bombardement (ID=9360), Carousel Bombardement (ID=9370) and Keypoint Bombardement (ID=9380) change

command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = 0.1 } to
command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = [color=red]-0.1[/color] }

For Theater Operation (ID=17010) change

command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = 0.3 } to
command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = [color=red]-0.1[/color] }

For Blitzkrieg (ID=6260) and Deep Operatiopns (ID=6330) change

command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = 0.2 } to
command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = [color=red]-0.05[/color] }

This would give you an initial penalty of 45%. Each of the four mentioned air doctrines reduces this penalty by 10% to a 5% penalty. Either of the two land doctrines will erase the final 5% (Blitzkrieg is part of Spearhead, Deep Operations is part of Human Wave, so you can only get one of them).

It's not great, I know, but it should work.

That looks like it should work out well. Very nice.

 

[unmerged(73622)]

Please Johan if you read this is there any chance of a quick update for this one problem? We have waited for long to play and this makes me very sad to have paradrops not working.

 

[icon41gimp]

Why would you make the doctrines do less than they are supposed to?

 

[sbr]

Why would you make the doctrines do less than they are supposed to?

Something is wrong with the formula so it takes a negative number to increase the efficiency.

 

[Adm. Spruance]

 

[unmerged(25936)]

How about this?

For Battlefild Interdiction doctrine (ID 9100) change

command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = 0.3 } to
command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = [color=red]0.2[/color] }

For Infiltration Bombardement (ID=9360), Carousel Bombardement (ID=9370) and Keypoint Bombardement (ID=9380) change

command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = 0.1 } to
command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = [color=red]-0.1[/color] }

For Theater Operation (ID=17010) change

command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = 0.3 } to
command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = [color=red]-0.1[/color] }

For Blitzkrieg (ID=6260) and Deep Operatiopns (ID=6330) change

command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = 0.2 } to
command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = [color=red]-0.05[/color] }

This would give you an initial penalty of 45%. Each of the four mentioned air doctrines reduces this penalty by 10% to a 5% penalty. Either of the two land doctrines will erase the final 5% (Blitzkrieg is part of Spearhead, Deep Operations is part of Human Wave, so you can only get one of them).

It's not great, I know, but it should work.

So this largely corrects the problem, restoring functionality (as intended) to Paratroopers?

And does this apply to current saved games or do I have to re-start my game? ( )


**Edit - Oh and thank you very much for taking the time to figure this out and put it together for the rest of us.

 

[MartinBG]

Another thing from my tests:

          airborne_assault   Airborne assault   Paradroping   Att. Eff.   Def. Eff.
          (in save-game)          (in-game)       (in-game)   (in-game) (in-game)
[COLOR=DarkOrange]ARM 1.1    1.5500                  155%                55           105%     204%[/COLOR]
ARM 1.2    1.5500                  155%               -155            1%*      1%*
ARM 1.2   -1.5500                 -155%                155          155%     302%
ARM 1.2   -0.6500                  -65%                65           100%     196%
ARM 1.2   -0.7300                  -73%                73           105%     205%
ARM 1.2   -0.7500                  -75%                75           106%     208%
[COLOR=DeepSkyBlue]ARM 1.2   -0.7200                  -72%                72           105%     204%[/COLOR]

[COLOR=DarkOrange][B]ARM 1.1    0.4500                   45%               -55           30%       59%
ARM 1.2    0.5500                   55%               -55           27%       53%

ARM 1.1    1.0000                  100%                 0           68%      132%
ARM 1.2    0.0000                    0%                 0           61%      119%

ARM 1.1    2.0000                  200%               100           135%     264%
ARM 1.2   -1.0000                 -100%               100           122%     237%[/B][/COLOR]          

[I]* Attack/defence effectiveness can not be less then 1%[/I]

It seems that formula used to calculate actual paradroping and attack/deffence effectivenes from airborne_assault values is changed too.

In Arm. 1.1 airborne_assault 1.5500 gives 55% paradroping bonus which leads to 105%/204% att./def. effectiveness.

(-1.0000 + 1.5500) x100 = (0.5500) x100 = 55%
or
(-1.0000 + airborne_assault) x100 = Paradroping, %

In Arm. 1.2 airborne_assault= -1.5500 gives 155% paradroping bonus which leads to 155%/302% att./def. effectiveness.

-(-1.5500) x100 = 155 %
or
-airborne_assault x100 = Paradroping, %

I have no clue how paradroping mission effectivenes is used to calculate attack/deffence effectivenes in both cases. :wacko:
From my tests I found that airborne_assault -0.7200 in Arm. 1.2 gives me the same attack/deffence effectivenes as airborne_assault 1.5500 in Arm. 1.1.

In my final tests i decide to compare attack/deffence effectivenes in Arm. 1.1&1.2 when paradroping mission effectiveness is the same:

          airborne_assault   Airborne assault   Paradroping   Att. Eff.   Def. Eff.
          (in save-game)          (in-game)       (in-game)   (in-game) (in-game)
[COLOR=DarkOrange][B]ARM 1.1    0.4500                   45%               -55           30%       59%
ARM 1.2    0.5500                   55%               -55           27%       53%

ARM 1.1    1.0000                  100%                 0           68%      132%
ARM 1.2    0.0000                    0%                 0           61%      119%

ARM 1.1    2.0000                  200%               100           135%     264%
ARM 1.2   -1.0000                 -100%               100           122%     237%[/B][/COLOR]

As can be seen from the table above the same Paradroping effectiveness (-55) in combat gives different Attack/Deffence effectivenes - 30/59 to 27/56 in Arm. 1.1 and Arm. 1.2, or to be more precise in Arm. 1.2 combat Attack/Deffence effectivenes is 10% less then in Arm 1.1 at the same Paradroping effectivenes. :wacko:

EDIT!!!
Just found where are these -10% in Arm. 1.2 from.
In my game in 1.1 I use modified difficulty.csv and save-game loaded in 1.2 gives me -10% combat panalty.
Sorry for that stupid mistake!
Please ignore Attack/Deffence effectivenes values for Arm. 1.2 in tables above. They are calculated the same way as in Arm. 1.1.

 

[Gormadoc]

hmm so you are saying that it is now in arma 1.2 possible to go below the old hardcoded cap of +5% mission efficiency into having negative mission efficiency's ?

 

[blue emu]

It seems that formula used to calculate actual paradroping and attack/deffence effectivenes from airborne_assault values is changed too.

I wonder if this change to the formula has addressed the "OCL support defense vs Paradrop attackers" problem?

 

[icon41gimp]

If that first chart is correct there are some serious nonlinearities with the mission efficiency formula...

 

[MartinBG]

I added two more tests with same Paradroping effectivenes to my previous post.

Just found where are these -10% in Arm. 1.2 from.
In my game in 1.1 I use modified difficulty.csv and save-game loaded in 1.2 gives me -10% combat panalty.
Sorry for that stupid mistake!

(its 4:20 AM here) :rofl:

hmm so you are saying that it is now in arma 1.2 possible to go below the old hardcoded cap of +5% mission efficiency into having negative mission efficiency's ?

I'm not familiar with that problem, but if I understand your question correct - yes, at least for airborne_assault missions.

Edit:
After some more tests I found what you are meaning and the answer is NO, in Arm 1.2 this harcoded cap of +5% is still present. I can set mission efficiency to what-ever I want in save-game and that value will be used in-game, but in-game with commands like

command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = -2.0 }

I can not set them below 5%.

blue emu, what is "OCL"?

 

[Jones944]

what is "OCL"?

Over Command Limit

 

[blue emu]

blue emu, what is "OCL"?

The problem I refer to can be reliably reproduced as follows:

Launch a land attack on a part of the opponent's front line. Once he starts moving in reinforcements under "Support Defense" or "Reserves", drop a Paratroop formation on top of the same target.

Suddenly his reserve units marching in are attacking your Paratroop... and they are ALL OCL (Over the Command Limit), regardless of the command-span of the leaders he is using!

 

[rebelito]

Simple?

I sense simplicity in the problem, but I'm not sure how to solve it. What is clear to me is that in this patch, Johan (?) somewhere changed a "1-x" formula to a "x" formula. Therefore, if you have an Airborne efficiency of 55% due to research, instead of becoming a 45% penalty (1-0.55), it becomes a 55% penalty (0.55).

So, if we find a way to restore that formula into the exe, problem solved (impossible?). OR, if we find a way to use the distorted formula to replicate and reverse the problem to achieve intended result, problem solved.

Let's see: if 25% is the default, and 30% is the first step in research to a total of 55% initial efficiency, that means we need to have a 45% penalty at that point. As 25% is the base, to get there we need the first tech to add 20% to that. Ergo,

For Battlefild Interdiction doctrine (ID 9100) change

command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = 0.3 } to
command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = 0.2 }

After that, same method. For the next doctrines, the efficiency steps should be simply all negative instead of positive. We go from 55% to 65% intended, so we need to substract 10% in Arma1.2 to get to 65% (-35%). And so on. Once the value becomes negative, it will turn into a positive (bonus) in the battle screen, because of the distorted formula in Arma1.2.

You see what I mean? I think this is the solution. I hope you understood my point (it's confusing, I know).

Thoughts?

 

[rebelito]

What I mean is this:

How about this?

For Battlefild Interdiction doctrine (ID 9100) change

command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = 0.3 } to
command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = [color=red]0.2[/color] }

For Infiltration Bombardement (ID=9360), Carousel Bombardement (ID=9370) and Keypoint Bombardement (ID=9380) change

command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = 0.1 } to
command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = [color=red]-0.1[/color] }

For Theater Operation (ID=17010) change

command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = 0.3 } to
command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = [color=red]-0.3[/color] }

For Blitzkrieg (ID=6260) and Deep Operatiopns (ID=6330) change

command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = 0.2 } to
command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = [color=red]-0.2[/color] }

 

[rebelito]

OK, I'm pretty sure this is the solution. Can someone test it?

 

[unmerged(57311)]

Please Johan if you read this is there any chance of a quick update for this one problem? We have waited for long to play and this makes me very sad to have paradrops not working.

I second that, please let us have an official comment about this issue.

 

[unmerged(73622)]

Has anyone mailed this as an official bug?

 

[MartinBG]

OK, I'm pretty sure this is the solution. Can someone test it?

This is at best just half solution because of the limitation mentioned by Gormadoc - look a few posts above.

Lets calculete airborne_assault values as they are now in Arm 1.1 and Arm 1.2:

 [B][COLOR=DarkOrange]                  Value          ARM 1.1  - Pardrop       ARM 1.2 - Paradrop[/COLOR]
Base value          0.25             25%       -75%          25%       -25%
Tech ID 9100      +0.3=0.55          55%       -45%          55%       -55%
Tech ID 9360      +0.1=0.65          65%       -35%          65%       -65%
Tech ID 9370      +0.1=0.75          75%       -25%          75%       -75%
Tech ID 9380      +0.1=0.85          85%       -15%          85%       -85%
Tech ID 17010     +0.3=1.15         115%       +15%         115%      -115%

Tech ID 6260      +0.2=1.35         135%       +35%         135%      -135% 
[COLOR=DarkOrange]or[/COLOR]
Tech ID 6330      +0.2=1.35         135%       +35%         135%      -135%[/B]

All values are calculated by formulas posted in my previous posts in this thread.

Now lets see what effect in-game will have your proposal:

[B]
                   [COLOR=DarkOrange]Value          ARM 1.2  - Pardrop  [/COLOR]      
Base value          0.25             25%       -25%           
Tech ID 9100      +0.2=0.45          45%       -45%          
Tech ID 9360      -0.1=0.35          35%       -35%          
Tech ID 9370      -0.1=0.25          25%       -25%           
Tech ID 9380      -0.1=0.15          15%       -15%           
Tech ID 17010    -0.3=-0.15=[COLOR=Red]0.05[/COLOR]      [COLOR=DarkOrange]5%        -5% [/COLOR]         

Tech ID 6260     -0.2=-0.35=[COLOR=Red]0.05[/COLOR]      [COLOR=DarkOrange]5%        -5%  [/COLOR]       
[COLOR=DarkOrange]or[/COLOR]
Tech ID 6330     -0.2=-0.35=[COLOR=Red]0.05[/COLOR]      [COLOR=DarkOrange]5%        -5%[/COLOR] [/B]

As you can see we can not set airborne_assault mission efficiency lower then 5% with command = { type = task_efficiency which = airborne_assault value = x.x} and this gives us max 95% Pardroping efficiency in-game using this "workaround".

We can not fix that by ourselves so Paradox MUST do it ASAP.