|
|
Post by NotRandom on Aug 17, 2021 4:10:58 GMT
Alright I've seen a lot of people saying that they got through the entire campaign with only Spruance as their allied naval general. But I checked through the cheaper generals today and realized that King may be an even better buy. Both have naval gun strikes, albeit King's is only level 1. This means that Spruance does 6 more damages than King on paper. However King also have torpedo expert, which is a +12% bonus agains ships.
Let's say King does 70 damage while Spruance does 76, however, King have torpedo expert, which would make his total damage 78.4, higher than Spruance. While destroy is inconsistent.
To top it all off, King is cheaper than Spruance, with him only costing 165 medals instead of 200.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admiral Aleksandr Kolchak on Aug 17, 2021 6:34:52 GMT
Alright I've seen a lot of people saying that they got through the entire campaign with only Spruance as their allied naval general. But I checked through the cheaper generals today and realized that King may be an even better buy. Both have naval gun strikes, albeit King's is only level 1. This means that Spruance does 6 more damages than King on paper. However King also have torpedo expert, which is a +12% bonus agains ships. Let's say King does 70 damage while Spruance does 76, however, King have torpedo expert, which would make his total damage 78.4, higher than Spruance. While destroy is inconsistent. To top it all off, King is cheaper than Spruance, with him only costing 165 medals instead of 200. So far I still trust Spruance more, he seems more reliable. If you want to go super cheap for navy maybe just get King and Cunningham is enough 😆 |
|
|
|
Post by Nobunaga Oda on Aug 17, 2021 12:46:27 GMT
I'd say neither and stick to Cunningham and Arnold if you really want to go for a more challenging experience. The free admirals and almost / only free air marshals route may not be for everyone, especially if you play at lvl 2 navy for the most part.
Otherwise, Dowding is Kesselring's slightly inferior Allied counterpart as an air marshal / air-inf hybrid while Mountbatten and Nimitz are the more expensive, but more powerful admirals.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonblend on Aug 19, 2021 22:14:02 GMT
Alright I've seen a lot of people saying that they got through the entire campaign with only Spruance as their allied naval general. But I checked through the cheaper generals today and realized that King may be an even better buy. Both have naval gun strikes, albeit King's is only level 1. This means that Spruance does 6 more damages than King on paper. However King also have torpedo expert, which is a +12% bonus agains ships. Let's say King does 70 damage while Spruance does 76, however, King have torpedo expert, which would make his total damage 78.4, higher than Spruance. While destroy is inconsistent. To top it all off, King is cheaper than Spruance, with him only costing 165 medals instead of 200. Looking at the dmg formula, torpedo expert is not applied to the +6/+12 boni. So in your example, King would be at 64*1.12+6=77.68. However, the key question is what unit you put him on and what's the navy tech aka the base damage. From my experience, that would be lv2 or lv3 and either a cruiser or a battleship (Cunningham might take that).
Also, Spruance can have +30% health while King is limited to +15%
Another thing I'm not sure about is the wording of the skills - it could be that the +6/+12 only applies on our turn while the +12%/+24% might also be active on AI turns, like some of the GCRome skills.
|
|
|
|
Post by randomperson on Aug 20, 2021 17:32:47 GMT
Alright I've seen a lot of people saying that they got through the entire campaign with only Spruance as their allied naval general. But I checked through the cheaper generals today and realized that King may be an even better buy. Both have naval gun strikes, albeit King's is only level 1. This means that Spruance does 6 more damages than King on paper. However King also have torpedo expert, which is a +12% bonus agains ships. Let's say King does 70 damage while Spruance does 76, however, King have torpedo expert, which would make his total damage 78.4, higher than Spruance. While destroy is inconsistent. To top it all off, King is cheaper than Spruance, with him only costing 165 medals instead of 200. Looking at the dmg formula, torpedo expert is not applied to the +6/+12 boni. So in your example, King would be at 64*1.12+6=77.68. However, the key question is what unit you put him on and what's the navy tech aka the base damage. From my experience, that would be lv2 or lv3 and either a cruiser or a battleship (Cunningham might take that).
Also, Spruance can have +30% health while King is limited to +15%
Another thing I'm not sure about is the wording of the skills - it could be that the +6/+12 only applies on our turn while the +12%/+24% might also be active on AI turns, like some of the GCRome skills.
I believe Naval Gun Strike only applies on your turn because it says "to attack" while Torpedo Expert and Destroy activate on all turns because it isn't specified. |
|
|
|
Post by jonblend on Aug 21, 2021 5:16:43 GMT
Exactly my thoughts, so I decided to do some testing.
Ozawa / Riccardi on a Japanese lv6 battleship (both 68-88 panel damage) vs. a lv0 destroyer during the first 1-3 turns of the 1942 campaign mission "Battle of Malaya"
Each of them attacked 20+ times during my turn and was attacked 20+ times during the enemy turn (thus triggering a counterattack) [20+ times so I could get 20 non-critical damage values and then calculate the average]
Ozawa: torpedo expert (+12% dmg versus ships)
"attacking": 70.61 "counterattacking": 71.38
--> within statistic accuracy, equal damage
Riccardi: naval gun strike (+6 dmg when attacking)
"attacking": 69.75 "counterattacking": 64.40
--> within statistic accuracy, there is a 6 dmg difference
There was one other thing that I noticed; it was the huge number of criticals (my turn and enemy turn combined) that I scored with Riccardi. So I calculated the critical hit rate for both generals.
Ozawa (no relevant skill)
3/49=6.12%
seems to be the base crit rate of 5%
Riccardi (Destroy +12%) 18/58=31.03%
--> that can't be explained with being lucky anymore!! Is the skill description wrong? Should it be Destroy lv2 (24%)? Is it only Riccardi or are other generals also affected?
(Oh and I gained one medal with Ozawa  )
|
|
|
|
Post by NotRandom on Aug 22, 2021 5:13:50 GMT
18/58=31.03%
--> that can't be explained with being lucky anymore!! Is the skill description wrong? Should it be Destroy lv2 (24%)? Is it only Riccardi or are other generals also affected?
___
Well if that's the case then Spruance would be absolutely god amongst mortals in terms of cheap generals. However, does that make level 2 destroy 48% or 24%? If it's 48% then Nagumo is probably going to be better than Donitz. But what's the standard crit chance anyways?
|
|
|
|
Post by stoic on Aug 22, 2021 18:05:06 GMT
18/58=31.03%
--> that can't be explained with being lucky anymore!! Is the skill description wrong? Should it be Destroy lv2 (24%)? Is it only Riccardi or are other generals also affected?
___
Well if that's the case then Spruance would be absolutely god amongst mortals in terms of cheap generals. However, does that make level 2 destroy 48% or 24%? If it's 48% then Nagumo is probably going to be better than Donitz. But what's the standard crit chance anyways?
Usually 10%. If a moral if a unit is high, it will be increased by another 10%. So, 24% is a fairly reasonable chance. I really like Kuribayashi therefore. His attacks are quite often critical and thus he's able to destroy units, increasing his unshakable moral and therefore a critical chance once again. |
|
|
|
Post by jonblend on Aug 22, 2021 18:43:08 GMT
18/58=31.03%
--> that can't be explained with being lucky anymore!! Is the skill description wrong? Should it be Destroy lv2 (24%)? Is it only Riccardi or are other generals also affected?
___
Well if that's the case then Spruance would be absolutely god amongst mortals in terms of cheap generals. However, does that make level 2 destroy 48% or 24%? If it's 48% then Nagumo is probably going to be better than Donitz. But what's the standard crit chance anyways?
More testing is needed to answer the questions.
First, my findings could theoretically be a highly unlikely result even with a +12% crit skill. The cumulative probability of getting 18 or more crits out of 58 attempts with a chance of 17% (=5%+12%) for each individual crit is roughly 0.7%
So, if someone else confirms the Riccardi results, we should dig deeper. This would mean testing a general with +24% and a general who is not Riccardi but also has +12% |
|
|
|
Post by jonblend on Aug 22, 2021 19:06:20 GMT
Usually 10%. If a moral if a unit is high, it will be increased by another 10%. So, 24% is a fairly reasonable chance. I really like Kuribayashi therefore. His attacks are quite often critical and thus he's able to destroy units, increasing his unshakable moral and therefore a critical chance once again. Where does this knowledge come from?  According to the damage formula link 5% is the base crit rate. ("usually in easytech games" being the reason) My results with Ozawa support this rather than 10% but 49 test results is not a good enough proof, I agree.
The additional 10% for high morale is completely new for me. (only from GCRome but we need a skill to utilize this condition)
Besides, during the tests no general had high morale.
|
|
|
|
Post by stoic on Aug 23, 2021 2:26:02 GMT
Usually 10%. If a moral if a unit is high, it will be increased by another 10%. So, 24% is a fairly reasonable chance. I really like Kuribayashi therefore. His attacks are quite often critical and thus he's able to destroy units, increasing his unshakable moral and therefore a critical chance once again. Where does this knowledge come from? According to the damage formula link 5% is the base crit rate. ("usually in easytech games" being the reason) My results with Ozawa support this rather than 10% but 49 test results is not a good enough proof, I agree.
The additional 10% for high morale is completely new for me. (only from GCRome but we need a skill to utilize this condition)
Besides, during the tests no general had high morale.
Yeah, it well may be 5%. It differs from game to game though as far as I remember. And we have discussed high moral/increased crit rate ratio in different ET games quite a long time ago. Perhaps Erich von Manstein could provide us with a more specific information about GoG3. But, again, usually units with high moral increase their crit rate. |
|
|
|
Post by jonblend on Aug 24, 2021 0:31:36 GMT
Sometimes I want to "understand whatever binds the world’s innermost core together" and it's frustrating to realize that "I know that I know nothing" |
|
|
|
Post by stoic on Aug 24, 2021 2:52:09 GMT
Sometimes I want to "understand whatever binds the world’s innermost core together" and it's frustrating to realize that "I know that I know nothing" "Reason's last step is the recognition that there are an infinite number of things which are beyond it" Blaise Pascal But, of course, game mechanics of ET games is none of them  We simply don't have enough information from ET, so, most of the time we are learning to walk in the dark... |
|
)
We simply don't have enough information from ET, so, most of the time we are learning to walk in the dark...
