Research - Formulas and Changes Explained

[Hubert Cater]

Advancement proceeds from 0-100% and once 100% is achieved, you've reached the next level of research in that particular category. Advancement % per turn is relative to the research Progression % at the current level.

For example, research Progression % for the UK from Level-0 to Level-1 would be 5%. The lower advancement value would be 5 / 2 = 2.5 = 3 rounded. Upper advancement value would be 5 + (5/2).rounded = 8. Therefore a random number between [3,8] is applied for a regular advancement for this turn.

Research Progression % for a breakthrough determination, is multiplied by the number of chits applied. For example the UK has Infantry Weapons Level-0 with 1 chit invested, therefore the same 5% * 1 = 5% as above.

Thus, if a random number between 1-100 is determined to be less than 5%, a breakthrough is considered to have occurred. A breakthrough % is anywhere between [10,20] and can only occur after regular advancements are > 45%.

Again, once advancement reaches 100%, whether through regular advancement as shown above, or in combination with breakthroughs, the next level is achieved and advancement is then reset to 0% allowing for the process to repeat itself.

[Hubert Cater]

Highest Friendly Research Catch Up Bonus - Non mobilized majors will not benefit, and only the research levels from fully mobilized nations are taken into account that are set to 'share' research.

EXAMPLES
- UK and France are mobilized and are set to share research with each other. UK and France share research and a higher level between the two can help one or the other.
- UK is mobilized and the US is not. The US has a higher level of research in a particular category, the UK cannot benefit. The UK has a higher level of research in a particular category, the US cannot benefit.
- UK and the USSR are mobilized (or not mobilized), they are not set to share research with each other. Neither can benefit from the other from research level differences.


Highest Enemy Research Catch Up Bonus - Only the research levels from fully mobilized nations are taken into account.

EXAMPLES
- UK and Germany are fully mobilized. Higher enemy research levels will be taken into account for either nation.
- USSR is not fully mobilized, Germany is mobilized. Higher Soviet research levels will not benefit German research (no catch up bonus), but higher German research will benefit Soviet research (pre-war espionage takes this into account for a potential catch up bonus here)


Spying and Intelligence Bonus

EXAMPLES
- UK and Germany are fully mobilized. Higher enemy intelligence levels will be taken into account for either nation.
- USSR is not fully mobilized, Germany is mobilized. Higher Soviet intelligence levels will not have an effect on German research. Higher German intelligence levels will have an effect on Soviet research.

[Hubert Cater]

Further examples:

- UK has 1 chit invested in Amphibious Warfare, currently at Level-0
- Highest friendly level in Amphibious Warfare is 3
- Highest enemy level in Amphibious Warfare is 1
- UK has Spying and Intelligence Level-3, highest enemy Spying and Intelligence Level-2

Progression % for the UK at Level-0 to Level-1 is 5%
Progression % = 5 multiplied by 1 chit = 5%
Friendly Catch Up Bonus = 3 - 0 = 3
Enemy Catch Up Bonus = 1 - 0 = 1
Intelligence Bonus = 3 - 2 = 1

Regular advancement range = [(5/2).rounded, 5 + (5/2).rounded] = [3,8]
Modified advancement range (including bonuses) = [((5 + 3 + 1 + 1)/2).rounded, (5 + 3 + 1 + 1) + ((5 + 3 + 1 + 1)/2).rounded] = [5,15]

Breakthrough Determination = 5 + 3 + 1 + 1 = 10% chance there would be a breakthrough

[Hubert Cater]

Changes under consideration:

- Remove or lower the minimum threshold for a breakthrough which is currently at 45%. This will speed up research slightly by possibly having breakthroughs applied at any time during research advancement. The additional reason we are considering this change is that in versions prior to v1.16, the 45% threshold was required to achieve a full research level breakthrough (which made research quicker) and now the 45% threshold only applies to a breakthrough jump in advancement. Lowering this threshold a bit further will help to speed up research if it is indeed considered too slow.

- Increase the research breakthrough range from [10,20] to a set of values slightly higher to again speed up research as needed.

- Change the Spying and Intelligence bonus so that only the intelligence levels from fully mobilized enemy majors are taken into account. This would result in the USSR not being penalized by higher German Spying and Intelligence levels while it is not yet fully mobilized. If we implement the change this section would be reworded as follows:

Spying and Intelligence Bonus - Only the intelligence levels from fully mobilized enemy majors are taken into account.

EXAMPLES
- UK and Germany are fully mobilized. Higher enemy intelligence levels will be taken into account for either nation.
- USSR is not fully mobilized, Germany is mobilized. Higher Soviet intelligence levels will not act to reduce the German Spying and Intelligence bonus, and higher German Intelligence will also not potentially reduce the Soviet Spying and Intelligence bonus.

[Hubert Cater]

There is one research bug as well that Crispy discovered that will be corrected for the next build. The good news is that this is a very old bug, likely going back quite a few years, and it is a rarer bug dependent on a few rarer combinations and doesn't affect the majority of research calculations.

[Sugar]

If I understand correctly the issue of slower research is a result of fewer turns and the changes in breakthroughs, thereby disadvantaging the Allies (who ironically demanded changes).

Why not simply return to the prepatch version of research to a system all players considered as well balanced, instead of patching the patch with further unforeseen outcomes? Especially the increase of breakthroughs could be seriuosly disadvantaging the Axis, since there are just 2 of them against 3 Allies most of the times.

[Taxman66]

Hubert,

Thank you that more complex formula explains how having a single +1 Catch Up bonus might still generate the minimum increase.

New Questions:
1. Manual (pg 97) states normal increase is random range of 2 - 7.
a. Is manual incorrect?; or
b. The formula (3-8) you provide above is a typo or incorrect (perhaps round down?); or
c. 3 - 8 (with above formula) a forthcoming change?

2. Post #2 example with the USSR not mobilized and behind GE in S&I appears to imply that the USSR suffers a research penalty of some sort.
a. Is it simply the case that any USSR S&I bonus would be negated (because level is equal to or lower than GE S&I)?; or
b. Something else? If so please provide an example.

3. UK S&I = 3, USA S&I = 2, USSR (mobilized/at war) S&I = 0, GE S&I = 2, IT S&I = 0
a. Is this correct: UK gets +1 Intelligence bonus, no one else does?; or (previous discussions seem to indicate this is the case but would like confirmation)
b. UK, USA & USSR (because mobilized/at war) all get +1 Intelligence bonus.

4. Do friendly (also known as Sharing) Catch Up, or Hostile Catch Up, or S&I bonuses apply to Breakthrough Chances?
a. No, purely 0% or 5% or 10% chance strictly based on having reached threshold and number of chits invested. (presuming this is the case, but would like confirmation)
b. Yes.

------
Perhaps 4b should be considered as a suggested change too.

-----
Comments on under consideration change to non mobilized USSR S&I accounting:
I'm not sure this would be worthwhile. USSR would have to invest 150 MPP, which doesn't occur immediately and also means delaying another Tech investment. In return, once it pays off the USSR would get +1 bonus from approximately January 1941 until the start of Barbarossa at which point it will go away. This is unlikely to provide more in Tech increases than simply investing in something else sooner. If you go this route I would suggest adding a starting chit to USSR S&I.

[Taxman66]

Sugar, the problem is that certain "full to completion" breakthroughs when near the low end of the threshold (particularly if you get multiple ones in the same category) are all but game enders.

[Hubert Cater]

ORIGINAL: Sugar

If I understand correctly the issue of slower research is a result of fewer turns and the changes in breakthroughs, thereby disadvantaging the Allies (who ironically demanded changes).

Why not simply return to the prepatch version of research to a system all players considered as well balanced, instead of patching the patch with further unforeseen outcomes? Especially the increase of breakthroughs could be seriuosly disadvantaging the Axis, since there are just 2 of them against 3 Allies most of the times.

Thanks Sugar and it is something we also discussed on our end as well.

One disadvantage of the previous setup was that it could produce more wild results once you reached 45% advancement and a breakthrough was achieved, which when this happened for some key techs, seemed to have led to the more vocal initial concerns/complaints.

The newer setup regulates the achieving of the next level a bit more, i.e. with less wild jumps, and will potentially provide a path forward that is more optimal in terms of finding the right pace for developments for all sides.

That's the leading thought on our end at the moment and we are running more extensive tests to hopefully to get a better idea before we finalize anything just yet.

[Hubert Cater]

Hi Taxman66,

1. The manual looks to be incorrect as [3,8] would indeed be the correct values. My mistake there as I simply provided the incorrect data for the manual.

2. I've edited my post #2 above and hopefully this clarifies it. To clarify further, no penalty here, it was just meant to imply whether there would be the potential for a higher enemy research catch up bonus to be applied.

3. The answer here would be a) as this is only based on your own level of Spying and Intelligence relative to the highest enemy level of Spying and Intelligence. I've detailed this more in my response to Crispy in post #16 here: tm.asp?m=4660888

4. The answer here b) or yes it does. I've modified post #3 to provide an example of this.

[Hubert Cater]

Comments on under consideration change to non mobilized USSR S&I accounting:
I'm not sure this would be worthwhile. USSR would have to invest 150 MPP, which doesn't occur immediately and also means delaying another Tech investment. In return, once it pays off the USSR would get +1 bonus from approximately January 1941 until the start of Barbarossa at which point it will go away. This is unlikely to provide more in Tech increases than simply investing in something else sooner. If you go this route I would suggest adding a starting chit to USSR S&I.

To clarify, this change is not necessarily under consideration only to aid the Soviets, it is a general change that will apply to all campaigns, and all Majors that are not yet mobilized. It is more of a correction than anything else, whereby for game play reasons it was just felt that a non mobilized major should not necessarily be penalized by higher enemy Spying and Intelligence (and vice versa) until they are formally at war.

Whether it comes into play will as you've mentioned all depend upon whether the Soviets, or even the US side invest in Spying and Intelligence, and if it is worthwhile for them. But if they do, they will no longer be penalized until they are at war, and they can no longer penalize their opponents either until they are fully at war etc.

[PvtBenjamin]

ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater


1. The manual looks to be incorrect as [3,8] would indeed be the correct values. My mistake there as I simply provided the incorrect data for the manual.

[3,8] = (3+4+5+6+7+8)/6 = 5 1/2 - if equal probabilities

[3,7] = 5

[3,7] maybe?

[Taxman66]

Hubert,

Thank you for all your responses!
That clears up all the outstanding questions I have. In particular
1. The true formula helps explain things as it turns out not to be simply A+B+C+D.
2. The apparently new clarification that only a single best 'Friendly' and a single best 'Hostile' Sharing/Catch Up bonus is applied.



As for the non-mobilized consideration (at least in regards to this product) lets be honest and take a look at all the non-mobilized/Neutral Majors at start (with current at start Tech investment chits):
Italy will be at war before she gets S&I level 1.
USSR Already analyzed above, very unlikely to get a positive feed back on investment before being at war and almost assuredly having her Tech subsumed by a higher one on the Allied side and also very unlikely to get ahead of the Axis. When reinvestment becomes available is the time when war with Germany is looming. Though I suppose in some cases where Germany is hot in a heavily contested Sea Lion the USSR might consider reinvesting a 2nd chit into S&I if they had already gambled by investing one earlier.
USA Here is who will likely get a benefit worthy of investment. Likely to see the benefits of S&I 1 for approximately a full year (all of 1941) before joining the war and likely being subsumed behind UK investment. USA also will be invested in enough Techs to make this broad increase more worthy than simply investing in something else sooner. Also note there is a rare possibility of the USA leapfrogging the UK due to breakthrough(s) but they start behind.

[Taxman66]

ORIGINAL: PvtBenjamin


[3,8] = (3+4+5+6+7+8)/6 = 5 1/2 - if equal probabilities

[3,7] = 5

[3,7] maybe?

Nope.
Hubert provides the formula from post #3:
Regular advancement range = [(5/2).rounded, 5 + (5/2).rounded] = [3,8]

*Notice the differences is the lower & higher end ranges you get when you start adding in the bonuses:
The example shows that the range is 5-15 with +5 in bonuses and not simply 8-13.
(5+5)/2 for the low end and ((5+5) + (5+5)/2) for the high end.

[PvtBenjamin]

missed that tnx

so its actually [2 1/2 - 7 1/2]

[Sugar]

Dear Taxman, your analyse would perhaps be right if an Allied player would indeed decide to not invest into S&I with the US and SU, but which serious player would do so? The only reason not to invest into S&I is if an Allie has already reached the highest lvl.

[PvtBenjamin]

ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater


For example, research Progression % for the UK from Level-0 to Level-1 would be 5%. The lower advancement value would be 5 / 2 = 2.5 = 3 rounded. Upper advancement value would be 5 + (5/2).rounded = 8. Therefore a random number between [3,8] is applied for a regular advancement for this turn.

Sorry I should have read this closer

[Taxman66]

Sugar,

I agree that the US should invest in S&I, just on the off chance that they leapfrog the UK. The rule that the developers are looking at would make it a no-brainer.

I find it more questionable for the Soviets to do so. Are you suggesting the USSR should invest a chit in S&I before Infantry Weapons (or as some do over Industry)? Even if they do the chance that they will leapfrog the UK is small. If they do manage to get ahead then they are looking at investing a 2nd chit at the exact time when units are desperately needed and existing units are needing upgrades. Additionally if the Soviets go for S&I then Infantry Weapons and all other Techs (Industry, Inf Warfare, Armor Warfare, AA, C&C) will be set back. Worse still is the progression to Infantry Weapons 2 & 3 will be set back due to the delay in getting Infantry Weapons 1.

[Sugar]

Why should the chance be small, if all invest in the first turn?

You don`t want to be faster in research than the UK, but the Axis. 3 Chits = 3 times the chance for a breahthrough against 2 times the Axis, or even to be faster without breakthrough. The goal is to reach every lvl of S%I at first, thereby slowing down the enemy's research and minimizing chances of a breakthrough.

If you succeed, the following researches are of course also accelerated, including ind.. If the outcome of the race for S%I is clear, you can resell the chits of the obsolet nations, they don`t count anyway anymore.

[PvtBenjamin]

Im sure Im missing something so please humor me

I havent done this in a REAL long time

How does a random number generator between 3 & 8 with equal probabilities return a mean of 5%