|
|
Post by ππ³π°π΅π΄π¬πΊ on Apr 14, 2021 19:59:13 GMT
In the end, all explanations for the min-dmg and not beeing multiplied with the Health-Factor, were just try's to explain the bug that min-dmg doesn't work correct / at all. Erich von MansteinA historic view explains so easy, how it has to be without bug:[Sspoiler] EW3 battles: [/spoiler] |
|
|
|
Post by ππ³π°π΅π΄π¬πΊ on Jul 4, 2021 15:02:07 GMT
I never give up, but even the latest google version of EW4 (1.4.30 B27) has still the bug, that min-dmg has no effect, Erich von Manstein. I just want to add, that I didn't notice that: Costal forts have a -50% dmg against targets on land (compared to other cannons). I updated the unit restraint reference. |
|
|
|
Post by pathdoc on Aug 26, 2021 12:11:07 GMT
With the HealthFactor π (1-5,1-6,1-7) the output looks like this: + π²[min - ( (max+ morale ) * π)] unit
+ β * π General
+ Attack Items General
- Defense Items defending general
- 2 * Chevrons defender
- morale * π defender ΒΉβ
--------------------
= #net dmg#
=============
Effective dammage =
#net dmg# * EvasionFactor* RestaintFactor * SkillFactorsΒ²
π = HealthFactor (units: 1-5,1-6,1-7 / general: 1-5)
Evasion Factor = (100% - evasion%); with corresponding skill = 100%
Evasion Factor for land troups at sea = 80% with Sailor or Armored Carrier 100%
morale: β¬β¬ =-2 β¬ =-1 normal =0 β¬ =1
1β only if bad defender morale makes this a +bonus
Β² Only if Skills (Spy, Steersmen) are active
Okay, let me see if I've got this right. Let's say I have a 5* general in perfect health, on a triple unit in perfect health whose damage range is 2-10, and he's up against a non-General enemy unit with three chevrons and no morale modifiers. His damage roll will be the average of two numbers between 2 and 10, rounded down to the nearest integer. Let's say that's six. So the first line is 6 x 7 = 42. Second line is 5 x 5 (five-star, perfect health) for another 25. Third line is zero (no enemy general) Fourth line is MINUS six (three chevrons on defender). Fifth line is zero (no morale modifiers) So what you call net damage, and I think should be called raw damage, or uncorrected damage, ought to be 61, and then you figure in evasion, restraint and skills. But if you're doing save-load, at least the raw damage gives you an idea of what you should retry for. (Also remember Snare Drum/Mass Fire sets health coefficient to maximum always.) |
|
|
|
Post by ππ³π°π΅π΄π¬πΊ on Aug 26, 2021 19:01:50 GMT
Okay, let me see if I've got this right. Let's say I have a 5* general in perfect health, on a triple unit in perfect health whose damage range is 2-10, and he's up against a non-General enemy unit with three chevrons and no morale modifiers. His damage roll will be the average of two numbers between 2 and 10, rounded down to the nearest integer. Let's say that's six. So the first line is 6 x 7 = 42. Second line is 5 x 5 (five-star, perfect health) for another 25. Third line is zero (no enemy general) Fourth line is MINUS six (three chevrons on defender). Fifth line is zero (no morale modifiers) So what you call net damage, and I think should be called raw damage, or uncorrected damage, ought to be 61, and then you figure in evasion, restraint and skills. But if you're doing save-load, at least the raw damage gives you an idea of what you should retry for. (Also remember Snare Drum/Mass Fire sets health coefficient to maximum always.) You got it quite correct. I will take rawDmg as this is the number is the factor for the multipler. As we finally know that min-dmg has no effect the random unit-dmg (first line) counts like this: Every formation row of your unit (HealthFactor [1 to 7]) attacks, and will deal between 1 and (maxDmg + morale) dammage. The sum is your unitDmg in row 1 So on average! the unit-dmg = Β½(maxDmg + morale) * formation It is extreme rare to get more than 90%. So rare like getting less than 10%. |
|
|
|
Post by pathdoc on Aug 27, 2021 13:24:22 GMT
An important thing to consider also is how much mitigation you can get. Two defence items of up to 4 each, 10 points from chevrons, and then fighting from a place which maximizes your evasion against a particular unit.
If you have attention to detail, it can influence exactly what square you land on to make your attack, and which units (if you have a choice) you attack with, all else being equal. I came across that last night; I was attacking cavalry and there was one square I could land on that gave better evasion against cav. Unfortunately, in that particular case to land on it would have put me between two enemies and decreased my own morale, but the possibility to gain the terrain advantage was there.
I'm not absolutely certain we've yet paid enough attention to how much damage we receive on the counterattack, and how we can decrease it. In an extended conquest, that might be as important as how much damage we deal. If we're speed-running for princesses, we can always save up medikits and spam them to keep our generals up to scratch, especially if we're playing on a platform that has daily ads to farm.
|
|
|
|
Post by littlecorporal on Sept 8, 2021 22:31:28 GMT
An important thing to consider also is how much mitigation you can get. Two defence items of up to 4 each, 10 points from chevrons, and then fighting from a place which maximizes your evasion against a particular unit. If you have attention to detail, it can influence exactly what square you land on to make your attack, and which units (if you have a choice) you attack with, all else being equal. I came across that last night; I was attacking cavalry and there was one square I could land on that gave better evasion against cav. Unfortunately, in that particular case to land on it would have put me between two enemies and decreased my own morale, but the possibility to gain the terrain advantage was there. I'm not absolutely certain we've yet paid enough attention to how much damage we receive on the counterattack, and how we can decrease it. In an extended conquest, that might be as important as how much damage we deal. If we're speed-running for princesses, we can always save up medikits and spam them to keep our generals up to scratch, especially if we're playing on a platform that has daily ads to farm. By "how much damage we receive" do you mean defense? It's more important in the beginning than at the end of your campaigns. Once your generals get 96+ health with high nobility they are difficult to kill by non general units. |
|
|
|
Post by pathdoc on Sept 9, 2021 1:05:29 GMT
An important thing to consider also is how much mitigation you can get. Two defence items of up to 4 each, 10 points from chevrons, and then fighting from a place which maximizes your evasion against a particular unit. If you have attention to detail, it can influence exactly what square you land on to make your attack, and which units (if you have a choice) you attack with, all else being equal. I came across that last night; I was attacking cavalry and there was one square I could land on that gave better evasion against cav. Unfortunately, in that particular case to land on it would have put me between two enemies and decreased my own morale, but the possibility to gain the terrain advantage was there. I'm not absolutely certain we've yet paid enough attention to how much damage we receive on the counterattack, and how we can decrease it. In an extended conquest, that might be as important as how much damage we deal. If we're speed-running for princesses, we can always save up medikits and spam them to keep our generals up to scratch, especially if we're playing on a platform that has daily ads to farm. By "how much damage we receive" do you mean defense? It's more important in the beginning than at the end of your campaigns. Once your generals get 96+ health with high nobility they are difficult to kill by non general units. Yes, that's what I mean. It's important to note that while you can powergrind nobility with clickbots, you cannot do the same with Rank. The Generals actually have to fight. Until they're buffed up, you do indeed have to watch out for their health. |
|
|
|
Post by ππ³π°π΅π΄π¬πΊ on Sept 30, 2021 16:58:43 GMT
Evasion: [...] and hidden evasion. In some conquest or campaign maps, the is an evasion covering all placed, to all units, selected percentage. When a block has other evasion already, the hidden evasion could add to that. The hidden evasion is different in different maps for different countries, mostly between 0-5%. Hidden evasion occurs in many maps. AS far as we know, the known maps without hidden evasion are all campaign in Imperial Eagle, Coalition, and Holy Roman Empire before Reconstruction of Empire, the amount of evasion can be changed in .btl file. To against these evasions, the game provides Bugle, Strike, Accurate, Siege Master and Sailor to deprive them. Bugle/Strike/Accurate: deprives all evasions on land. Siege Master: deprives evasions in buildings, you can see it as Bugle/Strike/Accurate lite version, does NOT deprive hidden evasion. Sailor: the output evades 20% when army units are in the ocean, the evasion will be deprived if you have sailor,Β does NOT deprive hidden evasion. I have a serious question Erich von Manstein: As we know, there is the hidden (country-) evasion. As I can see from an other older post, next to the Evasion there is a second factor for each country: strength. How is strength inflicted to the output calculation? (It has some effect) Do You know anything about this Erich von Manstein? |
|
|
|
Post by Erich von Manstein on Sept 30, 2021 18:50:44 GMT
Evasion: [...] and hidden evasion. In some conquest or campaign maps, the is an evasion covering all placed, to all units, selected percentage. When a block has other evasion already, the hidden evasion could add to that. The hidden evasion is different in different maps for different countries, mostly between 0-5%. Hidden evasion occurs in many maps. AS far as we know, the known maps without hidden evasion are all campaign in Imperial Eagle, Coalition, and Holy Roman Empire before Reconstruction of Empire, the amount of evasion can be changed in .btl file. To against these evasions, the game provides Bugle, Strike, Accurate, Siege Master and Sailor to deprive them. Bugle/Strike/Accurate: deprives all evasions on land. Siege Master: deprives evasions in buildings, you can see it as Bugle/Strike/Accurate lite version, does NOT deprive hidden evasion. Sailor: the output evades 20% when army units are in the ocean, the evasion will be deprived if you have sailor, does NOT deprive hidden evasion. I have a serious question Erich von Manstein : As we know, there is the hidden (country-) evasion. As I can see from an other older post, next to the Evasion there is a second factor for each country: strength. How is strength inflicted to the output calculation? (It has some effect) Do You know anything about this Erich von Manstein ? Unfortunately I haven't heard of it. But here's a very irresponsible guess. I've heard of modders from ancient games (EW3) that there's a coefficient that determines the aggressiveness of a country. Don't remember the exact number but I'll assume it's a scale of 1 to 5. When the aggressiveness is set to 1 the country will just passively defend, whereas countries with 5 aggressiveness will go all-out attack. Could this "strength" be that one? |
|
|
|
Post by ππ³π°π΅π΄π¬πΊ on Sept 30, 2021 19:46:59 GMT
I have a serious question Erich von Manstein : As we know, there is the hidden (country-) evasion. As I can see from an other older post, next to the Evasion there is a second factor for each country: strength. How is strength inflicted to the output calculation? (It has some effect) Do You know anything about this Erich von Manstein ? Unfortunately I haven't heard of it. But here's a very irresponsible guess. I've heard of modders from ancient games (EW3) that there's a coefficient that determines the aggressiveness of a country. Don't remember the exact number but I'll assume it's a scale of 1 to 5. When the aggressiveness is set to 1 the country will just passively defend, whereas countries with 5 aggressiveness will go all-out attack. Could this "strength" be that one? This is quite funny, because I had the same Idea in a post of AI agressivity. Posting the data for the 1798 conquest John Marston had the idea the numbers may work reverse. Not a bad idea: If I look at the first mission: Siege of Tulon, both: Spain and GB (with strength = 10%, France = 100%) are quite agressive. I was just curious how this factor works and if there is more information. |
|
|
|
Post by thefamemonster on May 15, 2022 13:57:54 GMT
Does this mean that if the unit have 5 max base damage and Mass Fire but no +1 max base damage, no leadership, no items, and no deprive evasion, will have the final max output damage of 12?
[(1*5) + (-2)] * [(1*5) - 0)] + (0) * (0.8) = 12
|
|
|
|
Post by ππ³π°π΅π΄π¬πΊ on May 16, 2022 1:49:13 GMT
Does this mean that if the unit have 5 max damage and mass fire but no +1 max damage, no leadership, no items, and no deprive evasion will have the final max damage of 12? [(1*5) + (-2)] * [(1*5) - 0)] + (0) * (0.8) = 12 The max dammage for the Unit is max5 * Formation (Add your general ) The formation (or without mass fire health-factor) is 5, 6 for double and 7 for tripple formation. In EW3 you have 5 Soilders, or 5 batteries on ship, and 5 dices giving the result. If the unit falls below 50% there only 4 soilders / dices and so on every 15% less health one soilder/dice less - with less than 5 % there is only one left. The chance to get the max-dmg is the chance to throw with all 5 dices (with 5 sides) the 5 in your example. Double annd tripple formation go in 15% upwards from the 50% - (65% 80%) this means: with 79% we lost already the 7th dice of a green unit. Battlewise with 79% is it only double - less than 65% all double or tripple formation is already gone. MassFire is very usefull for Tripple(7x) infantry Units. |
|
|
|
Post by thefamemonster on May 16, 2022 2:41:43 GMT
Oh sorry I wasn't clear on this one. I was talking about 5 as max base damage (like Militia with 1-5 range base damage).
|
|
|
|
Post by thefamemonster on May 16, 2022 2:43:45 GMT
I was trying to make a table of output damage. I'm not sure if my calculations were right.
|
|
|
|
Post by ππ³π°π΅π΄π¬πΊ on May 16, 2022 2:46:49 GMT
Oh sorry I wasn't clear on this one. I was talking about 5 as max base damage (like Militia with 1-5 dmg output).Β And this board-dmg (5) is multiplied with the formation (5-7). So a Militia on health has a max-dmg of 25 (30 dbl, 35 tri) |
|
