|
|
#1
14/03/2007, 11h53
|
||||
|
||||
Tentative de FAQ Militaire (traduction)
Bonjour,
Je me relance dans les traductions ...  Nota : afin de rendre le texte plus compréhensible, j'ai VRAIMENT privilégié l'esprit du texte et non une traduction mot à mot ce qui explique les différences sensibles entre les versions anglaises et françaises du texte. lien vers le texte original : site paradox ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Si vous pouvez apporter des informations sur les règles de gestion sur le moral, merci d'aller voir ce thread. Je vais faire un certain nombre de post dans ce thread qui, je l'espère, formeront ensemble une FAQ militaire efficace couvrant tous les aspects des opérations terrestres. Je n'ai fait, jusqu'ici, aucune recherche sur la partie navale, aussi ce secteur sera laissé vide. Quand j'écrirais de nouveaux posts pour la FAQ, je les ajouterai et les classerai ici. Quand les membres du forums posteront des corrections/suggestions, je mettrai à jour les posts principaux. Chaque post principal finira avec un rapport comme ci-dessous : « modifié pour tous le spots jusqu'au #nnn ». Si vous estimez qu'une question n'est pas traité à leur juste valeur dans les posts où je prétend l'avoir passé en revue alors vous êtes libre de les commenter. Toutefois, essayer, SVP, de réduire la répétition sur des sujets que je n'ai pas encore passés en revue. J'essayerai de maintenir un état des lieux dans cette première contribution afin que les lecteurs puissent suivre l'évolution de la FAQ. J'espère que ceci pourra finalement finir par "une sortie par le haut" et retrouver ce travail reposter dans la section de FAQ et/ou être transféré au wiki de l'UE III À de divers endroits dans les posts, je marquerai certains articles avec « Sneaky » pour présenter des techniques intelligentes afin d'exploiter le système dans le but d'obtenir de meilleurs résultats. Veuillez notez que les sections de FAQ peuvent être postés inachevées et incohérente. FAQ1 – Causes FAQ2 – Moral (bataille gagné) FAQ3 – Unités. FAQ4 – Déploiement sur le champ de bataille. FAQ5 – Exemples Status – post initial ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Auteur original: Kanitatlan Voili, voilou, bonne lecture ! 
__________________
Un Worms peut en cachez un autre 
|
|
#2
14/03/2007, 11h55
|
||||
|
||||
FAQ Mimlitaire Partie 1 - Causes
A FAIRE ------------------------------------------------------------------------------Introduction This post is concerned with the mechanism whereby units take casualties and how to understand the likely casualties your units will cause or take. The FAQ assumes that you have read the relevant section of the manual. The manual gives the raw statement about how combat work but this will leave most players with little appreciation of what this means in practice. Combat consists of a series of combat resolutions extending over a significant period in days. There is a single combat resolution for each 5 day period which is then applied in each successive days. Sneaky This has some interesting implications as it means that after day one you know what will happen in the next 4 days so you can actually break off from battle if the first day shows bad results. The combat types are currently 5 days shock action followed by 5 days fire action and repeat. This has some important implications for battle analysis. In particular . The number of fire days in a complete battle will almost always be less then the number of shock days and will certainly never be more . Combat against defeated and retreating enemies will always be shock days only as they are pushed into new retreats before the first fire day occurs How it works Be cautious in reading and understanding this section. Inflicting casualties is not the only issue in battles and you need to be conscious of winning the battle as well. That is covered by the morale section and results in some significantly different conclusions. Actual combat is resolved using the following formulae. The process is the same for fire days as it is for shock days, simply using fire factors instead of shock factors, so I will provide just the one general illustration. On each day the game evaluates how many casualties each side inflicts on the other by the following Attack+Dice+Terrain+Leader-Defence = score Where Attack = the attack rating of your unitOne of the most important issues to understand in this formula is which parts affect both attack and defence and which only effect one of them. This is because anything affecting both can be considered as twice as significant. Terrain, for example, affects both and therefore a –1 for terrain is worth 2 points and should be considered like a –2 on the dice rather than –1. (In actual fact it matches –1 on your dice roll PLUS +1 on the enemy dice roll). Attack factors, Defence factors and the Dice roll only have a singular effect and therefore they only count for one point per point. Leader values and terrain effects are applied to both attack and defence and therefore their factors apply twice and should be evaluated as worth 2 points each. This makes high grade leaders extremely powerful. Having calculated a score this is then looked up on the following tables to obtain the number of casualties inflicted on the enemy. The process is… 1) Look up the casualties per 10,000 on the casualty tableNote: I have used casualties per 10,000 so that the results are in whole numbers rather than fractions.  This table is at least very close to correct but I cannot be certain of exactness. The formula is (score-1) x 3.5 for scores of 2 and above (the figure 3.5 proven correct within about 2%) 3.5 for a score of 1 2^(score-1) x 3.5 for scores below 1 (this amounts to halving the casualties for each point below one)  The figures in this table can be looked up in the game files but are not visible in game. The table is incomplete and only covers tech levels up to 35 (year 1735). Actual tech levels in the game extend to level 59 BUT this is dated 1825 and hence not typically reachable. Worked examples This is all a bit complex for most players so here are a few worked examples simply designed to illustrate the workings of these formulae. This are not intended to provide insight into particular combat situations. 1. 1 Latin Knight fighting 1 Latin Medieval Infantry, both at full strength at tech level 0 2 examples with different dice rolls Knights: 1 attack + 5 dice = 6 => 5 x 3.5 x (Tech modifier) 4 = 70 Infantry: 0 attack + 5 dice = 5 => 4 x 3.5 x 0.5 = 7 Ouch Knights: 1 attack + 0 dice = 1 => 1 x 3.5 x (Tech modifier) 4 = 14 Infantry: 0 attack + 9 dice = 9 => 8 x 3.5 x 0.5 = 14 Best possible result its same casualties This nicely illustrates the situation at low tech-levels. The tech level modifier gives the cavalry an 8:1 advantage in causing casualties and this easily overwhelms all other factors. 1 Caroline infantry (5/4) fighting 1 Grenzer infantry (2/6), shock action Caroline: 5 attack + 6 dice – 6 defence = 5 => 4 x 3.5 x 1 (Tech) = 14 Grenzer: 2 attack + 6 dice – 4 defence = 4 => 3 x 3.5 x 1 (Tech) = 10.5 Difference is quite limited and easily overwhelmed by the dice roll. Now trying both of the above against 1 Latin Knight Caroline: 5 attack + 7 dice – 0 defence = 12 => 11 x 3.5 x 1 (Tech) = 38.5 Knights: 1 attack + 7 dice – 4 defence = 4 => 3 x 3.5 x 4 = 42 Grenzer: 2 attack + 7 dice – 0 defence = 9 => 8 x 3.5 x 1 (Tech) = 28 Knights: 1 attack + 7 dice – 6 defence = 2 => 1 x 3.5 x 4 = 14 (dice roll of 7 chosen to keep on the linear part of the casualty tree) The purpose of this example was to show that defence factors become more prominent when infantry fights cavalry than when they fight each other. See unit evaluation section for more details Repeating the above with lower dice rolls allows us to look at calculations below the linear section of the table. Using 1 Knight versus 1 Grenzer Knights: 1 attack + 9 dice – 4 defence = 6 => 5 x 3.5 x 4 = 70 Knights: 1 attack + 8 dice – 4 defence = 5 => 4 x 3.5 x 4 = 56 Knights: 1 attack + 7 dice – 4 defence = 4 => 3 x 3.5 x 4 = 42 Knights: 1 attack + 6dice – 4 defence = 3 => 2 x 3.5 x 4 = 28 Knights: 1 attack + 5 dice – 4 defence = 2 => 1 x 3.5 x 4 = 14 Knights: 1 attack + 4 dice – 4 defence = 1 => 1 x 3.5 x 4 = 14 Knights: 1 attack + 3 dice – 4 defence = 0 => 0.5 x 3.5 x 4 = 7 Knights: 1 attack + 2 dice – 4 defence = -1 => 0.25 x 3.5 x 4 = 3.5 Knights: 1 attack + 1 dice – 4 defence = -2 => 0.125 x 3.5 x 4 = 1.75 Knights: 1 attack + 0 dice – 4 defence = -3 => 0.0625 x 3.5 x 4 = 0.875 Grenzer: 2 attack + 9 dice – 0 defence = 11 => 10 x 3.5 x 1 (Tech) = 35 Grenzer: 2 attack + 7 dice – 0 defence = 9 => 8 x 3.5 x 1 (Tech) = 28 Grenzer: 2 attack + 3dice – 0 defence = 5 => 4 x 3.5 x 1 (Tech) = 14 Grenzer: 2 attack + 0dice – 0 defence = 2 => 1 x 3.5 x 1 (Tech) = 3.5 Notice how the more linear and closer spread of the Grenzer means that this combat is very strongly dependent on the cavalry dice role. An interesting side issue is that this combat can be dramatically affected by leadership. Give the infantry a level 6 leader against none for the cavalry and they are completely protected from the higher combat results. The cavalry will vary from ineffective to very moderate whilst the infantry will always achieve reasonable results. Do it the other way round and the cavalry are shifted to spectacular results as against modest for the infantry. This illustrates nicely that leadership is more significant for an effective tech level disadvantage in unit scores. It is not an illustration that leaders are more significant for cavalry. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Auteur original: Kanitatlan Voili, voilou, bonne lecture !
__________________
Un Worms peut en cachez un autre
|
|
#3
14/03/2007, 11h56
|
||||
|
||||
|
Moral
A FAIRE ------------------------------------------------------------------------------Morale Unit Morale is an extremely important characteristic and a major influence on whether you win or lose a battle. If you go to your country tabs (click on the shield at the top left of the user interface) and select military you have a display of preferred unit types and other information. Hover your cursor over the stars for land units and you get a unit Morale tool tip as illustrated below. This will show you what your maximum morale is and how it is made up.  One of the most important things to understand from this is what all those percentages mean. They are very misleading as what they mean is a simple additive bonus to your morale level. +50% means that 0.5 is added to total morale. This makes some of those available bonuses rather less attractive than you might first think, especially the +50% for selecting military drill as a national idea. I think this display shows examples of all the possible sources of morale increases breaking down as follows.
A very important issue is the rising significance of the technology contribution, which will slowly reduce the importance of all the others. Also, rather obviously, maintenance has a profound affect on morale especially at low technology. Morale recovery rates are currently quite unclear and some player experimental data would be gratefully received. Morale increases on the 1st of each month the same as reinforcements are received. This occurs whether the unit is retreating or not and is therefore received every month no matter what. Some brief experiments suggest that the recovery rate is variable but may be something around 15-20% per month in enemy territory and twice that in friendly territory (not sure what the definition of enemy and friendly is in this context). I will update this post when proper information is available. IF YOU CAN DO SOME EXPERIMENTS OR SIMPLY COLLECT DATA AROUND THE TURN OF THE MONTH IN A GAME YOU ARE PLAYING THEN PLEASE POST IN THIS THREAD. If you do collect data then please provide Morale before/Morale after/Max Morale/Status (moving, stationary, sieging)/Province status (owned, allied, controlled, enemy)/Army maintenance level ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Auteur original: Kanitatlan Voili, voilou, bonne lecture !
__________________
Un Worms peut en cachez un autre
|
|
#4
14/03/2007, 11h57
|
||||
|
||||
|
Traduction à Faire ------------------------------------------------------------------------------Test worked example This worked example based on the first few days of the Battle of Alexandria is intended to demonstrate the accuracy of the casualty rules worked out so far and perhaps provide some insight into other factors. The battle is between a French cavalry army, tech level 25 galoop cavalry, under an excellent general fighting against a Kara Koyonlu mixed army of tech level 10.  After 1 day of battle  After 2 days of battle By inspecting individual units I can tell that the overlapping Qara Koyonlu end units have not been attacked and all units have attacked the enemy unit opposite to them or nearest at the ends except both the right hand French cavalry have been attacked by a Kara cavalry. The red lines on the display illustrate the apparent Kara lines of attack. This gives no immediate insight into the battle AI’s operation but does suggest that in normal battles nothing very weird is going on. Qara tech level 10, French tech level 25. Oddly enough these have no impact on shock modifiers. Infantry have 1.0 and cavalry have 4.0 for both sides. Qara units are cavalry 2/2/2/0 [morale a/d shock a/d] and infantry 3/2/1/0 whilst the French have 4/2/4/2. The dice roll appears to have compensated for the leader but the two are not actually equivalent. Our leadership increases the casualties that we inflict and decreases the casualties that the enemy inflicts whereas the enemy’s superior dice roll only improves the casualties that they inflict. Working out the battle we get… Casualties French Cav versus Kara Any = 4+3+2-0 = 9 -> 8x3.5x4 -> 112 For the whole force 112 x 7 x 6,845/7,000 = 767 casualties when, in fact, 762 were reported. This is assumed to be the result of rounding errors with casualties being evaluated separately for each unit. Kara Inf versus French Cav = 1+5-(2+2) = 2 -> 3.5 In fact, in the middle of the line the French cavalry took 3 casualties each on the first day and 2 on the second day. This clearly shows a casualty rate of 2.5 rather than 3.5 so there is a slight discrepancy here indicating that the FAQ is not entirely correct. Kara Cav versus French Cav = 2+5-(2+2) = 3 -> 2x3.5x4 -> 28 At the left flank this should be 80.8 casualties scaled for day 1 losses (all the exposed units in the Kara line are at 888 men). The actual losses by this end unit are 80 so we have as good as an exact match there. At the other end we have a similar match (worked out separately but seems correct). Over all losses are a reasonably good match for the FAQ going as 155/784 on day one and then 142/762 on day 2. The declining rate simply reflecting the shrinking size of the two armies. Moving on I want to have a look at morale losses and the analysis plus facts are as follows Either Kara Inf versus French Cav 3+5-(2+2) = 4 -> lose .25, .25 actual = {6.21 -> 5.96 -> 5.71} Or Kara Inf versus French Cav 3+5-(2) = 6 -> lose .25, .25 actual = {6.21 -> 5.96 -> 5.71} (no leader) Either French Cav versus Kara Inf 4+3+2-2 = 7 -> lose .8, .8 actual = {4.06, 3.26, 2.46} Or French Cav versus Kara Inf 4+3-2 = 5 -> Either 3 Kara Cav 2+5-(2+2) = 3 -> lose 2.4, 2.4 Or 3 Kara Cav 2+5-(2) = 5 -> lose 2.4, 2.4 If leaders don’t count but tech modifiers do and the formula is 0.05x(score-1) then we get values of – 5x.05=.25, 4x0.05x4=.8, 4x.05x4x3=2.4 which are the right answers. This seems to suggest that this is the right idea. Looking at the other end of the line we have 1 Kara Cav causing 0.8 morale loss to the end unit and 1 Kara Cav + 1 Inf causing 1.05 morale loss to the second one in. The formulae all add up again!! Next round a score of 4 for the Kara infantry has knocked 0.2 off a cavalry unit. This still matches my formula so, for the time being I am going to consider this correct. So the morale rules are the same as for casualties except that the multiplier is 0.05 instead of 3.5, leaders don’t count and unit strength doesn't count. Note that I have not managed to obtain a battle with terrain effects so I will be coming back to this issue ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Auteur original: Kanitatlan Voili, voilou, bonne lecture !
__________________
Un Worms peut en cachez un autre Dernière modification par Manu Militari ; 14/03/2007 à 16h35.
|
|
#5
14/03/2007, 16h33
|
||||
|
||||
|
Attrition (chapitre temporaire)
Traduction à Faire ------------------------------------------------------------------------------Attrition (Interim statement) This is an interim statement on attrition since the game clearly has a number of existing faults around this area. This FAQ section should at least give you some clues about the level of attrition and support capacity of various provinces. Investigation has shown the following facts. Attrition rates are as follows based on province and prevailing weather/climate conditions Base 5% mild winter +2% normal winter +5% severe winter +10% tropical +5% I can detect no other factors affecting attrition rate. Support capacity seems to consist of the following Base capacity = N Army camp gives +2 (unknown if this counts for non-controller of the province) If you control the province then + base tax rate x 0.2 (unknown if this counts for non-controller) If you are an owner occupier then x5 If you are the controller then x3 If stationary (besieging) then x2 Otherwise x1 + leadership effect (see below) Attrition occurs on the first day of every month and is evaluated based on the total number of units present as against your capacity. This means that quite a large enemy army can be present with no attrition whilst your army is being affected. If you exceed the capacity then you suffer attrition, there are no gradations, it is all or nothing. Leadership seems to be something of the order of +1.4 to +1.7 capacity per point of manoeuvre ability of the leader. This has only been evaluated in a single high capacity province so this may be rather inaccurate. Attrition is a highly important subject so I will be revisiting it later in the context of discussing strategy and tactics. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Auteur original: Kanitatlan Voili, voilou, bonne lecture !
__________________
Un Worms peut en cachez un autre
|
|
#6
14/03/2007, 16h40
|
||||
|
||||
|
Le positionnement sur le champ de bataille
Traduction à Faire ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I've been doing some investigation of battle deployments to see if I can work out exactly what the battle AI does. The above battle images rather tellingly indicate that the reality of the situation is that only very litmited superior force in terms of more regiments can be applied against the enemy. It looks very much like the larger force fills its front line to a 4 or 5 regiment overlap and then places units in the second line. The cavalry is always given priority on the flanks and, I suspect, priority in the frontline. The ultimate verdict from this is that the larger force will be able to apply up to 2 more infantry regiments than the enemy and 2 cavalry. This means that numbers of regiments is a very weak strategy for defeating an enemy force. I haven't done enough tests of this yet but my current game should sooner or later see Chinese hordes trying to defeat European armies which should reveal the sordid truth. If this really is the situation then this will be very serious for the low tech countries in the world and, of course, a happy hunting ground for sneaky strategies. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Auteur original: Kanitatlan Voili, voilou, bonne lecture !
__________________
Un Worms peut en cachez un autre
|
 |
|
|
Mode linéaire
