Problem with warscore / battle result

[Cpack]

I have a problem, I don't understand:

1 occupy one system after the other, win one space battle after the other, but my exhausting rate went up faster than the enemy ones.

also after winning a battle, f.e. I annihilate his fleet, he rates better than me, and ofter it show I lost 2 ships and he 0 (?????? wtf). I realitiy I lost 5 ship and he 20 !!!!

So what's the point? Am I missing something????

 

[AlanC9]

It's a known bug. We've seen it for a while.

 

[ShaTiK]

Rate of passive Attrition gain is affected by a few techs, they might have them while you don't.
Another thing to consider is the fact that effect of losses in space battle on warscore is affected by your naval capacity: if you lost, say, 5% of your naval capacity in a battle and your enemy lost only 1% of theirs - that's how the score would be affected. You might even win a battle, but the perceived losses would be much higher - I mean, really, if you lost more than enemy did, you won tactically, but lost strategically. But these things could get very confusing when there are many sides, I don't know the exact maths. It should be 'total naval capacity' of each side of the war, but I don't know for sure.
Plus, right now the warscore is a bit wonky overall. Much of wargoals require you to both completely obliterate enemy fleet (it gives +50) and have 100% occupation (another +100), since simple 'demand surrender' is -100 for peace acceptance and any wargoal would be at least another -50. Most of the time you won't be able to totally dominate opponent, meaning you get +100 peace deal from War Exhaustion and another, say, 20 from Occupation, but you would need another +30 to get even the most basic wargoals like 'force ideology' or 'expropriate' for Crime syndicates. I found that status quo, when talking about standard war for territory is much better. Since the only thing you don't get is, afaik, enemy loss of their claims, but that's hardly an issue, they would claim stuff again anyway.

 

[Cpack]

Rate of passive Attrition gain is affected by a few techs, they might have them while you don't.
Another thing to consider is the fact that effect of losses in space battle on warscore is affected by your naval capacity: if you lost, say, 5% of your naval capacity in a battle and your enemy lost only 1% of theirs - that's how the score would be affected. You might even win a battle, but the perceived losses would be much higher - I mean, really, if you lost more than enemy did, you won tactically, but lost strategically. But these things could get very confusing when there are many sides, I don't know the exact maths. It should be 'total naval capacity' of each side of the war, but I don't know for sure.
Plus, right now the warscore is a bit wonky overall. Much of wargoals require you to both completely obliterate enemy fleet (it gives +50) and have 100% occupation (another +100), since simple 'demand surrender' is -100 for peace acceptance and any wargoal would be at least another -50. Most of the time you won't be able to totally dominate opponent, meaning you get +100 peace deal from War Exhaustion and another, say, 20 from Occupation, but you would need another +30 to get even the most basic wargoals like 'force ideology' or 'expropriate' for Crime syndicates. I found that status quo, when talking about standard war for territory is much better. Since the only thing you don't get is, afaik, enemy loss of their claims, but that's hardly an issue, they would claim stuff again anyway.

I would understand, if this is the case, but I don't only win the battles, they always loose way more ships than me.

some out of my mind created examples:

Losses me / losses him:
5 - 30
8 - 32
2 - 17

and in the warscores its shows (lost ships - ???)

0 - 0
3 - 0
2 - 1

As a result, my warscore goes up (negatively, because I lost "more" ships in the stats....but that has nothing to do with reality.
Are they counting only cruisers???? Than it could be, because I always had way more cruisers and destroyers, while the enemy looses way more corvettes....strange

 

[ShaTiK]

Maybe it have something to do with federation. It is my experience that federation really like to build corvette fleets. Maybe federation fleet losses does not count at all in warscore, since, iirc, federation fleet uses it's own naval capacity mechanic. So when it counts how much warscore was changed it tries to calculate the 'cost' of lost ship relative to overall naval capacity of it's owner, but since federation fleet have it's own naval capacity, it fails to attribute lost ships to any empire in particular.
Might be a bug in 2.2, 2.2.4 or even a bug from before then. I fought a few wars with federation in 2.2.4, but I always use Glavius AI (and he have a whole set of bugfixes) and I havent' payed that much attention to warscore at this point. It's an intresting issue thoght, if I'm right about them being federation fleets. Another possibility is about post-battle calculation - that thing I noticed myself, after some battles that clearly resulted in quite a few lost ships on both sides I only see my own lost ships in post-battle screen with 0 enemy ship lost, which is 100% not true. But I think these battles still contributed to warscore. Or maybe it was 'relative navy strength' that was much more important in the end of the day..

 

[metalosse]

Were the ships actually destroyed or did they only disengage?

 

[dostillevi]

I would understand, if this is the case, but I don't only win the battles, they always loose way more ships than me.

some out of my mind created examples:

Losses me / losses him:
5 - 30
8 - 32
2 - 17

and in the warscores its shows (lost ships - ???)

0 - 0
3 - 0
2 - 1

As a result, my warscore goes up (negatively, because I lost "more" ships in the stats....but that has nothing to do with reality.
Are they counting only cruisers???? Than it could be, because I always had way more cruisers and destroyers, while the enemy looses way more corvettes....strange

This is the known bug. War Exhaustion is not calculated correctly to match with the actual ships lost in combat. It makes war, one of the core elements of this game, broken beyond playability. I say that because sure you can fight a war, but most of the factors that are supposed to determine your success or failure don't calculate correctly.

Bug Thread: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...ll-ship-losses-counted.1142792/#post-25018434

 

[ShaTiK]

This is the known bug. War Exhaustion is not calculated correctly to match with the actual ships lost in combat. It makes war, one of the core elements of this game, broken beyond playability. I say that because sure you can fight a war, but most of the factors that are supposed to determine your success or failure don't calculate correctly.

Bug Thread: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...ll-ship-losses-counted.1142792/#post-25018434

Wow. I mean. Wow. It turns out even war is broken in 2.2. Dam. I have to sadly ask - what wasn't broken with hasted (by upper management) release of 2.2?

 

[AlanC9]

This bug predates 2.2. I think it predates 2.0.

Note that it's not a bug with warscore per se, it's a bug with the combat reports. It looks like ships are occasionally blowing up but not being added to the total number of ships destroyed in the battle.

The randomness makes me wonder if it isn't a matter of the game not being able to keep track of everything it's tasked with doing when the load gets too high for the CPU to process in time. I've seen this happen in a couple of other games, although not from Paradox. Bioware fans may remember that Dragon Age: Origins had a problem on medium-level rigs in big battles; sometimes animations would play but the action the animation represented would be skipped; for instance, a character would play the animation for using a healing poultice but not actually get any health back. Just a guess, but if this is the case then 2.2 would likely make the problem worse.