pompack > RE: AG Antonescu (2/23/2012 12:01:27 AM)

quote:
ORIGINAL: QBall quote:
ORIGINAL: pompack quote:
ORIGINAL: QBall The real question has to do with Overloading; I don't think I understand the penalties for overloading. smokindave brought up a very good question, that I asked a couple months ago, and I don't think anyone answered. Only the Devs can, really. Is an overloaded HQ with a good commander going to perform better than a nonoverloaded one with a crap commander? There have been a number of threads on overloading; unfortunately I can't locate any of them[&:] While I am not sure I have the correct process, I can describe the process that I think I understand which might be the correct process [:D]. Maybe [:D][:D] It is quite straightforward to compare the effects of two different leaders with two different loads; however it is timeconsuming to calculate 1. The probability that any given leader with characteristic X, NOT overloaded, and in direct command of a unit will make his die roll is X/10 2. This probability is divided by two for each link in the command chain above the first (e.g. Army in command of a Corps) 3. The probability that any given leader with characteristic X, overloaded by N points, and in direct command of a unit will make his die roll is X/(10+N) Note first that this formula states that there is always a nonzero probability that a leader will make his die roll no matter how overloaded the HQ So, the difference (D) in sucess probability for two leaders at the same level but with one better by X1 but over loaded by N is D= (X+X1)/(10+N)  X/10 (divided by the appropriate power of 2 due to the number of command links to the actual combat unit (see #2 above) or in a form which makes the relationships a little easer to see [:D] D = (X1 –N*X/10)/(10+N) So just to take a couple of quick examples: 1. if the bad leader has a rating of 4 (X) and a good leader a rating of 8 (X1=4), the good leader will give better results UNTIL he is overloaded by 10 2. If the same two leaders are used but use an overload of 20, then the bad leader will give better results by an increase in probabilityofsuccess by 4/30 or 0.133 or 13.3 percentage points divided by the right power of 2 for command links (for an AG example the POS difference would be 3.4 percentage points; an overload of 40 would only increase this difference to 6.0 percentage points) (Disclaimer: any algebraic mistakes are solely the fault of the poster who has not done anything like this in some decades [:)]) Finally someone trying to answer this question. Can anyone confirm Pompack is on the right track? If the critical number is overload by 10, then that must mean (If I understand correctly): Since AGS will generally overload by more than 10, you are better off assigning to AG Anton (at least until AB split) Since Corps will generally NOT overload by that, however, you are probably better off overloading a German Corps by 2 or so, rather than assign units to Romanian Corps Not sure on that last one, can someone move this forward? Careful. I am not disputing your conclusion, however remember that I was too lazy to look up the AG Anton ratings. My example was only valid for the specific cases where the AG Anton ratings were exactly half of the AGS ratings. For a case where the ratings are 6 and 4 respectively for example, the crossover point would be at N=5



