1.12j Various issues with models operationnal stats

[Thrake]

I have noticed several designs with operationnal stats that look very wrong. I did not nail down the exact cause, however I can tell the following:
- when this happens, the design log is missing entries that affect the relevant attack/defense scores
- this affect multiple model types. I noticed issues with assault guns, quad machine guns, motorized quad machine guns and RPG.
- this seems to be linked to a combination of design variants, for exemple with assault guns, a combination of light laser guns, 150 mm polymer and light electric engines led to 3 designs missing the AFV/walker weapon modifier. This led to grossly inflated scores.
- this affects more combinations, only changing to triple electric engine led to a normal model, however keeping the light electric engine and going from 150mm to 200mm polymer still reproduce the issue. In that case the light electric engine is used on all the suspicious models, but I also have models with light electric that are fine.

Now for each individual issue:


Thunderstrike II is missing a weapon type penalty in the design log, this leads to no soft attack penalties.



Fourling III is missing the AG modifier, everyting but soft defense should be lower.



Speedgun is also missing the MG modifier. It has in common with fourling III the quad machinegun weapon variant.









I played around various design variants to try to nail down the issue here. All those that look off are missing the AFV/walker modifier. Light electric is shared by everything but other models with this engine do not have issues.

[Thrake]

Here's the save file.

[Thrake]

Another attempt at attaching the save, otherwise I will mail it.

[Vic]

Thanks Thrake!
Excellent feedback.
Tank/Assault issue was due to Immobile movement type not being properly modified.
Quad MGs had a glitch with the lowest tech version of the Quad MG.
Will be fixed upcoming patch

ps: the micro nuke doesn't have any weapon type modifiers

[Thrake]

Thanks for the quick fix.

I have also investigated the relation between armour strength and hit points.

I think there is an issue with monitor tanks and I can't make sense of how this is working for anti-tank guns, could there also be an issue somewhere or is there a more complex formula involved?

So far armour strength multiplied by armour design/100 gives me hit point versus non infantry, except for a few models that get an extra 50% it seems (this is a test game where I did not research linear techs).

se anti tank gun.jpg (93 KiB) Viewed 693 times

Now for the anti-tank gun, for PK, 150*0.49 = 73.5, this is the hit point versus non infantry I expect. In game this is 274, about 3.7 times what I calculated.

For trimmer gun: 1050*0.90 = 945.
2230 / 945 = 2.36 times more in game.

For PK 2: 350*0.58 = 203
532/203 = 2.62 times more in game

For PK 3: 1662*0.72 = 756
1662/756 = 2.19 times more in game

Hit point versus infantry is half the value against non infantry, it's the only part I understand.

se monitor.jpg (175.59 KiB) Viewed 693 times

Monitor tanks look to have a 50% hit point bonus against hard targets, except for bad boy 4: 450*0.94 = 423
This is equal to the in game hit point value.

Furthermore bad boy 4 is the only monitor tank which seems to have the walker/afv modifier. I'm not sure if it's related to what you already fixed.

I'm attaching the save again, I'm not sure if there are new models compared to the one I already uploaded.

[Thrake]

This time there should be the save...

[Thrake]

I generated more models with 1.12n. There seems to be an issue with immobile tank destroyers. Their weapon type increase hard scores and then they get the immobile/foot modifier which affects attack scores but not defense scores. This leads to higher hard defense than mobile destroyers which have the AFV modifier instead. I could not replicate the issue with an immobile assault gun or monitor tank which do not have a hard attack/defense increase through their weapon type.

save.zip

(3.31 MiB) Downloaded 17 times

[Vic]

Confirmed and adapting! Thanks for the QA with these immobile designs

[Thrake]

Sorry to insist with the anti-tanks, but there seems to be an issue with the hit points calculations.

I redesigned over and over the same model with a few subset of armours. In one instance, despite no change in the armour design, the hit points increased. All the sub sequent models featured the hit point increase while previous ones did not. Besides the model with the weakest armour had a bigger hit point increase. Pk8 has an extra 8 hit point versus non infantry than pk6, both using envirosuits. Pk9 has 4 more hit points versus non infantry than pk7 while both use padded envirosuits. As usual, no linear techs involved.

atg hp.jpg (91.17 KiB) Viewed 610 times

[Vic]

Thanks for insisting, but I do not see the issue with the AT hitpoints. Keep in mind that the infantry's suit/armour matters quite a bit in the AT hitpoint score calculation.