Reconnaissance Company Test

[Secret Master]

Do FMs even influence tactic choices (unless placed directly in command of the army)?

The tooltips say they do:

Those are FM only traits.

I suppose it's possible that the FM won't fire those tactics unless in a general position, but that would be really weird and terrible game design/tooltips/bug.

 

[bitmode]

Recon shines when you have a close attack/defense ratio, unlike your example. Because the +50 % damage Output from better tactics does nothing If SA is 1/3 of defense - then you're doing poorly, but slightly better. But if you are closer to 1:1, then suddenly tactics damage becomes the scale tipping Factor.

Tactics damage is not applied against breakthrough/defense, see https://hoi4.paradoxwikis.com/Land_battle#Damage_dealing:

The exact amount of damage done to HP and organization per hit is calculated by multiplying the obtained random integers and damage modifiers (the 0.05 base modifier, damage modifiers in tactics, -50% armor deflection factor when the armor value is greater than the opponent's piercing). Other modifiers affect the number of attacks, thus the number of hits but not the amount of resulting damage per hit.

In other words, tactics can not tip the scale.

 

[HugsAndSnuggles]

The tooltips say they do:

Sure, but doesn't commander who's leading a battle gets to decide on tactics on his own? Say, it's a general who is leading a battle, will FM really influence said general's choices?

 

[Secret Master]

In other words, tactics can not tip the scale.

Since I've got you here, and this stuff from the wiki is probably based on your work anyway, I'd like to clarify that the equation you reference affects both ORG and strength damage, right? It's not just ORG?

Sure, but doesn't commander who's leading a battle gets to decide on tactics on his own? Say, it's a general who is leading a battle, will FM really influence said general's choices?

Well, if the FM doesn't actually have any impact, then either the game is bugged, it's designed horribly, or the tooltip is incredibly misleading.

I haven't actually tested it, so I can't say if FMs with those traits are actually affecting tactics selection.

 

[Zauberelefant]

Tactics damage is not applied against breakthrough/defense, see https://hoi4.paradoxwikis.com/Land_battle#Damage_dealing:

In other words, tactics can not tip the scale.

Wait, if I don't do much damage because of a bad SA/def ratio, tactics don't help.
If I do have a good SA/Def ratio, Recon makes that better, because actual damage happening +50% is a lot, while little damage+50% stays little damage.

Right?

 

[HugsAndSnuggles]

Well, if the FM doesn't actually have any impact, then either the game is bugged, it's designed horribly, or the tooltip is incredibly misleading.

I haven't actually tested it, so I can't say if FMs with those traits are actually affecting tactics selection.

It's just that, IIRC, FMs used to take command of actual battle (to the point where it was hard to level an actual general) - logically, it would work it that scenario. Now I don't see FMs leading battles at all...

 

[bitmode]

I suppose it's possible that the FM won't fire those tactics unless in a general position, but that would be really weird and terrible game design/tooltips/bug.

So not exactly unheard of in hoi4?
I don't have WtT but doing a quick trace by placing Rommel under von Rundstedt, the has_trait trigger only looks at the 5 active traits of Rommel.

 

[bitmode]

Wait, if I don't do much damage because of a bad SA/def ratio, tactics don't help.
If I do have a good SA/Def ratio, Recon makes that better, because actual damage happening +50% is a lot, while little damage+50% stays little damage.

Right?

Yes, but that has no impact on OP's test. The test battles would simply be shorter if attacks were higher, but it would not give either side an asymmetric advantage.

 

[bitmode]

and this stuff from the wiki is probably based on your work anyway

Land combat formulas come from @xfs: https://hoi4.paradoxwikis.com/index.php?title=Land_warfare&diff=23959&oldid=23958

I'd like to clarify that the equation you reference affects both ORG and strength damage, right? It's not just ORG?

Yes, the tactics attack modifier goes into both org and strength damage values.

 

[Secret Master]

I don't have WtT but doing a quick trace by placing Rommel under von Rundstedt, the has_trait trigger only looks at the 5 active traits of Rommel.

How do you test that if you don't have WtT? You don't have access to the FM traits, right?

Or am I forgetting what is and is not in WtT?

 

[Zauberelefant]

Yes, but that has no impact on OP's test. The test battles would simply be shorter if attacks were higher, but it would not give either side an asymmetric advantage.

I don't quite get that: If attacks were higher, the damage output would be higher and tactics damage would be more prominent, or am I misunderstanding the system?

 

[bitmode]

How do you test that if you don't have WtT? You don't have access to the FM traits, right?

Or am I forgetting what is and is not in WtT?

I set a break point in the code to see which traits the has_trait trigger in the tactic conditions is looking at. In this case my FM did not have the WtT-specific traits but the code was not looking at his traits at all. Nor were they appended to the subordinate general's traits to be handled there. It is possible that Aggressive Assaulter and Unyielding Defender have some super magic secret sauce causing them to be treated differently, but I doubt it.

I don't quite get that: If attacks were higher, the damage output would be higher and tactics damage would be more prominent, or am I misunderstanding the system?

If we assume two sides only to be different by one factor (the average value of the tactic selected), changing any of the other factors does not make the comparison more or less significant. Maybe someone else can explain it better.

 

[Secret Master]

It is possible that Aggressive Assaulter and Unyielding Defender have some super magic secret sauce causing them to be treated differently, but I doubt it.

Hmmm....

This is a Paradox game, so it's possible that there is something magic at work that treats them differently. It's worth me looking into, because this kind of little thing is actually important as it relates to tooltips and strategic choices.

Your help is appreciated, as I have no idea how to look at the code in this fashion.

 

[Riekopo]

Personally I would use Recon more if there wasn't an arbitrary 5 Support Company limit per Division. Can't build historically accurate Divisions with that limit.

 

[Toybasher]

On the subject of Recon, does upgrading your vehicles used in the recon support company help? I remember reading on a youtube comment if you get better light tanks and armored cars, it actually speeds up the recon company. Like an Armored Recon Company (Light Tanks) will be faster if you have light tank 3 unlocked compared to light tank 1.

However the online division designer and wiki doesn't seem to mention this.

 

[HugsAndSnuggles]

On the subject of Recon, does upgrading your vehicles used in the recon support company help? I remember reading on a youtube comment if you get better light tanks and armored cars, it actually speeds up the recon company. Like an Armored Recon Company (Light Tanks) will be faster if you have light tank 3 unlocked compared to light tank 1.

However the online division designer and wiki doesn't seem to mention this.

Since LaR, division speed is also limited by recon companies: horses going 6kmph will slow down most tank divisions, for example. Light tank divisions are, generally, held back by motorized, so researching faster light tanks won't really help there.

 

[Simon_9732495]

On the subject of Recon, does upgrading your vehicles used in the recon support company help? I remember reading on a youtube comment if you get better light tanks and armored cars, it actually speeds up the recon company. Like an Armored Recon Company (Light Tanks) will be faster if you have light tank 3 unlocked compared to light tank 1.

However the online division designer and wiki doesn't seem to mention this.

The speed of the recon support division is dependent on what equipment is actually used in the template. Researching only is not enough. You need the faster equipment in the division.
The armored car recon support division can limit the speed to 9km/h (AC1), 12km/h (AC2) or 15km/h (AC3).
The armored recon support division limits the speed to the speed of the light tank actually used in.

(There is a bug related to this: If you increase speed of motorized per doctrine, the speed of the recon support company is not increased: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...etting-10-speed-from-mobile-infantry.1401010/ )

 

[Morbus Bubbonicus]

Okay, one question. Recon advantage

To determine initiative, the leading generals' skill levels are compared. The side with the highest recon value in one of their divisions (including reserves) gets a bonus of 5 skill levels for this comparison. The side with the higher effective skill level gets Initiative.

That +5 levels applied to what exactly? It certainly not applied to combat bonuses, like flat +% to attack\defense etc. Does they count to tactics OPTIONS or what?
For example tactic A have a requirement of skill 4, general's skill 2, does that tactic became avaliable to said general?

 

[Simon_9732495]

Okay, one question. Recon advantage

That +5 levels applied to what exactly? It certainly not applied to combat bonuses, like flat +% to attack\defense etc. Does they count to tactics OPTIONS or what?
For example tactic A have a requirement of skill 4, general's skill 2, does that tactic became avaliable to said general?

Hm.
Seems pretty clear in that text: "for this comparison".
The bonus is only for the skill comparision to determine who gets the initiative to select tactics.

 

[Morbus Bubbonicus]

So it will only determine who will be able to reroll tactics? And lvl2 general won't be able to execute a tactic with lvl3 or 4 requirement? Welp, that makes recon even MORE worthless.