Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but...

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/30/2015 3:59:19 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 8752
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: online
Look at his stats. What is going on here? I mean, it's clearly based on a die roll, but this many days in a row? It's calling into question a lot of what we "know" about leaders. All of his stats are in the upper tier of what's available to US Army leaders. It shouldn't matter as far as the leaders(+/-) goes, but the unit hasn't been in rough shape at all through this. Fatigue was in the 30s while I was taking the base, and disruption in the mid-teens. Not anywhere out of the normal for units engaged in combat. And yet, here's the litany of combats and what leader(+/-) was received by the unit.

May 28: landing at Koepang
May 29: leaders(-)
May 30-31: no combat
June 1: no combat
June 2: leaders(+), fatigue(-)
June 3: no bonus or penalty
June 4: leaders(-)
June 5 through 7: no combat
June 8: leaders(-)
June 9 through 14: no combat
June 14: leaders(-)
June 15: leaders(-)
June 16: leaders(+), leaders(-)
June 17: leaders(-)




Attachment (1)
Post #: 1
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/30/2015 4:39:56 PM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 3943
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline
A drinking problem? Not unheard of with US Generals...

_____________________________


(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 2
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/30/2015 5:00:44 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 2390
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline
Timor, I think, is simply cursed for you...



The game (AFAIK) makes no distinction between what leaders value gets the penalty or bonus. I remember seeing cases where units could have both a + leaders and a - leaders

Considering how his Inspiration Value is only above average, it could just be the roll of the dice.

(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 3
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/30/2015 5:24:49 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
Had the same thing happen with Chester Pully against a Japanese BF...

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 4
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/30/2015 5:50:24 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 8752
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Timor, I think, is simply cursed for you...



The game (AFAIK) makes no distinction between what leaders value gets the penalty or bonus. I remember seeing cases where units could have both a + leaders and a - leaders

Considering how his Inspiration Value is only above average, it could just be the roll of the dice.



But every attack for weeks? And nah, I own Timor completely in this game. How is 65 Inspiration and 72 Land a leaders penalty for 7 out of 9 attacks (with bonuses in 2 out of 9)?

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 5
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/30/2015 6:23:59 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 5620
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline
You are asking us to assume that:

(a) Spraggins is the leader being checked against, and

(b) the only Allied unit present is the 1st Cav div

Alfred

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 6
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/30/2015 6:33:26 PM   
dr.hal


Posts: 3020
Joined: 6/3/2006
From: Covington LA via Montreal!
Status: online
Is it also possible that if there is more than one Japanese unit, it would depend upon which unit the Cav unit is being checked against?

_____________________________


(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 7
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/30/2015 6:43:08 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 5620
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

Is it also possible that if there is more than one Japanese unit, it would depend upon which unit the Cav unit is being checked against?


Whichever Allied unit/leader is being checked, it isn't against any enemy unit/leader.

Alfred

(in reply to dr.hal)
Post #: 8
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/30/2015 7:42:01 PM   
BattleMoose

 

Posts: 228
Joined: 2/17/2014
Status: offline
Is this the only allied unit in combat?

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 9
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/30/2015 7:55:10 PM   
dr.hal


Posts: 3020
Joined: 6/3/2006
From: Covington LA via Montreal!
Status: online
Interesting, that fact explains a lot. So the only way to ensure that your best leader is counted in the fight is to make him the ONLY leader in the fight (if there are other leaders, then put them into reserve).

_____________________________


(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 10
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/30/2015 8:40:52 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 6986
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: St. Petersburg, Florida, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

Interesting, that fact explains a lot. So the only way to ensure that your best leader is counted in the fight is to make him the ONLY leader in the fight (if there are other leaders, then put them into reserve).


Yea that would work if every fight could be won by a single unit.

Unfortunately, we need multiple units attacking to win most fights.

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to dr.hal)
Post #: 11
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/30/2015 8:51:26 PM   
dr.hal


Posts: 3020
Joined: 6/3/2006
From: Covington LA via Montreal!
Status: online
Yes Hans that's true, but if you have a particularly poor leader in a few units, it might be more advantageous to leave that unit on the sideline (or pay the PPs to get a new leader!).

_____________________________


(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 12
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/30/2015 9:12:24 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 6986
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: St. Petersburg, Florida, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

Yes Hans that's true, but if you have a particularly poor leader in a few units, it might be more advantageous to leave that unit on the sideline (or pay the PPs to get a new leader!).


Agreed.

However, it seems much more important to put the units with the highest disablements, fatigue and disruption in reserve to rest while other units carry the load.

I would definitely choose spending the PPs for a decent/good leader over holding back a fresh unit.

I typically try to replace crappy leaders before sending a unit into the front lines, however sometimes the front lines come to the units with crappy leaders before I get a chance to replace them.



< Message edited by HansBolter -- 10/30/2015 10:12:51 PM >


_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to dr.hal)
Post #: 13
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/30/2015 9:15:08 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 8752
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

You are asking us to assume that:

(a) Spraggins is the leader being checked against, and

(b) the only Allied unit present is the 1st Cav div

Alfred


Sorry, I should have stated that explicitly. Yes, the only unit present at the hex is the 1st Cavalry. That's it. That's why this is so confusing to me.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 14
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/30/2015 9:18:27 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 8752
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: online
Actual combat reports:
quote:


Ground combat at Koepang (68,116)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 8850 troops, 106 guns, 166 vehicles, Assault Value = 398

Defending force 7439 troops, 40 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 62

Allied adjusted assault: 177

Japanese adjusted defense: 163

Allied assault odds: 1 to 1 (fort level 0)

Allied Assault reduces fortifications to 0

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(+), preparation(-), fatigue(-)
experience(-)
Attacker: leaders(-)

Japanese ground losses:
53 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 10 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

Allied ground losses:
58 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 11 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Vehicles lost 1 (1 destroyed, 0 disabled)

Assaulting units:
1st Cavalry (Spec) Cavalry Division

Defending units:
2nd Fleet
2nd Base Force
31st Special Base Force

quote:


Ground combat at Koepang (68,116)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 8718 troops, 106 guns, 167 vehicles, Assault Value = 374

Defending force 7024 troops, 40 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 59

Allied adjusted assault: 155

Japanese adjusted defense: 155

Allied assault odds: 1 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(+), preparation(-), experience(-)
Attacker: leaders(-)

Japanese ground losses:
97 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 14 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Allied ground losses:
89 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 12 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

Assaulting units:
1st Cavalry (Spec) Cavalry Division

Defending units:
2nd Fleet
2nd Base Force
31st Special Base Force

quote:


Ground combat at Koepang (68,116)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 8653 troops, 106 guns, 167 vehicles, Assault Value = 363

Defending force 6955 troops, 40 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 59

Allied adjusted assault: 152

Japanese adjusted defense: 153

Allied assault odds: 1 to 2

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), preparation(-), fatigue(-), experience(-)
Attacker: leaders(-)

Japanese ground losses:
123 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 20 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

Allied ground losses:
66 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 12 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 2 (1 destroyed, 1 disabled)

Assaulting units:
1st Cavalry (Spec) Cavalry Division

Defending units:
2nd Fleet
2nd Base Force
31st Special Base Force

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 15
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/30/2015 9:20:43 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 6986
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: St. Petersburg, Florida, USA
Status: offline
Scary seeing a leader that good get one minus after another.

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 16
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/30/2015 9:29:48 PM   
dr.hal


Posts: 3020
Joined: 6/3/2006
From: Covington LA via Montreal!
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

Scary seeing a leader that good get one minus after another.


I would say it is a lot more than scary, it's down right disheartening. If I expend the PPs to get a top leader in there, I would expect some sort of advantage. If it is really nothing more than a dice roll, why go to the bother??? You could have Col. Klink in there and do as much....

_____________________________


(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 17
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/30/2015 10:07:10 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 8752
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal


quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

Scary seeing a leader that good get one minus after another.


I would say it is a lot more than scary, it's down right disheartening. If I expend the PPs to get a top leader in there, I would expect some sort of advantage. If it is really nothing more than a dice roll, why go to the bother??? You could have Col. Klink in there and do as much....


I've never seen it happen like this, though. So many combats in a row. Am I just getting really unlucky? Is there some other factor involved, that from everything else I thought I knew shouldn't affect the particular leaders(+/-) modifier (no HQ present? compared to enemy LCU, which would be really wacko?)... Or what? I'd also like to note that the unit was/is prepped 100%, but that has its own thing (and for defensive AV only, or so I thought), so it shouldn't affect the leaders bonus/penalty, etc.

In the most recent combat that I just ran (June 19), there was no leaders(+) or leaders(-) for the attack.

In this particular instance, it's not really a big deal. It's just one unit at one relatively backwater base. But what if this was happening in another place where the stakes (and stacks) were much bigger? Just ugh.

< Message edited by Lokasenna -- 10/30/2015 11:08:45 PM >

(in reply to dr.hal)
Post #: 18
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/30/2015 10:29:15 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 2390
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

Is it also possible that if there is more than one Japanese unit, it would depend upon which unit the Cav unit is being checked against?


Whichever Allied unit/leader is being checked, it isn't against any enemy unit/leader.

Alfred


Link to relevant developer comment please?

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 19
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/31/2015 1:15:27 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10373
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline
Looks like the unit just got a bunch of bad die rolls. If there was an HQ in range, some of those may come from HQ leadership fails, but it doesn't sound like that's happening unless there is an amphib HQ.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 20
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/31/2015 3:05:19 AM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 8752
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

Looks like the unit just got a bunch of bad die rolls. If there was an HQ in range, some of those may come from HQ leadership fails, but it doesn't sound like that's happening unless there is an amphib HQ.

Bill


Nope. No HQ anywhere remotely close, let alone prepped for that base.

So...just a string of terrible rolls on a leader who is, if Inspiration and Land are the skills for land combat, a great CO.

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 21
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/31/2015 4:18:07 AM   
BJStone


Posts: 135
Joined: 1/31/2009
Status: offline
Any leader that attacks against superior terrain and against a master of defense gets an automatic downgrade... Most people would just call him stupid.

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 22
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/31/2015 5:53:50 AM   
Yaab


Posts: 3862
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline
It is the Jap leader in the 2nd Fleet. His stats are probably even more obscene than Spragins's stats and the Jap gets all the good die rolls. In order of combat, Japs go first, so they should be also die rolling first. Poor Spragins.

(in reply to BJStone)
Post #: 23
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/31/2015 6:04:00 AM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 8752
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab

It is the Jap leader in the 2nd Fleet. His stats are probably even more obscene than Spragins's stats and the Jap gets all the good die rolls. In order of combat, Japs go first, so they should be also die rolling first. Poor Spragins.


But commanders are not supposed to be compared to each other for the +/- on leaders, or at least so we've been told.

(in reply to Yaab)
Post #: 24
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/31/2015 6:23:15 AM   
Yaab


Posts: 3862
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline
Comb the US Army leaders, both assigned and unassigned, and pick the best one to lead the 1st Cav. See if it helps.

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 25
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/31/2015 8:35:05 AM   
Chris21wen

 

Posts: 5620
Joined: 1/17/2002
From: Bexhill-on-Sea, E Sussex
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


quote:

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

Interesting, that fact explains a lot. So the only way to ensure that your best leader is counted in the fight is to make him the ONLY leader in the fight (if there are other leaders, then put them into reserve).


Yea that would work if every fight could be won by a single unit.

Unfortunately, we need multiple units attacking to win most fights.


One way to know who is to put the leaders name in the combat results.

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 26
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/31/2015 8:50:25 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10373
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chris H

One way to know who is to put the leaders name in the combat results.


Unfortunately is isn't that easy. There can be many leaders involved in combat. The + or - is an aggregate of every leader in the combat which includes HQs in range as well as every leader of every unit in the combat. When telephone pole stacks of units are duking it out, it can be a couple of hundred leadership checks in one battle.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to Chris21wen)
Post #: 27
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 10/31/2015 11:17:05 PM   
Feltan


Posts: 1150
Joined: 12/5/2006
From: Kansas
Status: offline
Maybe the devs have a special sense of humor. The 1st Cav Div is oft maligned by others.

If you look at the unit patch, you'll understand the quip one often hears on active duty: "The horse that wasn't ridden, the line that wasn't crossed, and the color of the patch will tell you why."

Maybe your leader is just fine, and the they programmed the 1st Cav Div to reflect (seemingly unfair and undeserved) criticism.

Regards,
Feltan

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 28
RE: Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... - 11/1/2015 8:06:04 AM   
Chris21wen

 

Posts: 5620
Joined: 1/17/2002
From: Bexhill-on-Sea, E Sussex
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chris H

One way to know who is to put the leaders name in the combat results.


Unfortunately is isn't that easy. There can be many leaders involved in combat. The + or - is an aggregate of every leader in the combat which includes HQs in range as well as every leader of every unit in the combat. When telephone pole stacks of units are duking it out, it can be a couple of hundred leadership checks in one battle.

Bill


I was referring to HQ leaders only but you would not know who the enemy leaders were anyway so it would be pointless. Forget what I said, it seemed like a good idea at the time.

< Message edited by Chris H -- 11/1/2015 8:11:43 AM >

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 29
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Leaders(-) for many days in a row, but... Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.164