Unit initiative stat.

[Wingnut]

Can anyone tell me if low or high is good?

[GIJoe597]

I do not think you are asking about a units statistic but instead are asking about the unit initiative stance setting in rules of engagement.. is that correct? If yes, Low means they do not act very independent, med, they act a little more and high they are very autonomous. It is not good or bad, but player preference.


From the manual;

"Military Initiative - Represents the independent decision-making of your
unit leaders.

• A low setting assumes that you will be directly controlling your military, and that your units will not take much action of their own accord.
  
  
• A high setting transfers more authority to your generals, giving them a far greater degree of autonomy. (Units will constantly be moving to where they are most needed.) You can set your military initiative separately for each branch of your military (land, air, and sea)."

[Wingnut]

I was asking about the units initiative stat not the rules of engagement setting.
As far as i can tell the unit initiative stat determines how fast a unit can fire but i cant see whether the number is the delay between shots (low is good ie faster firing) or whether the number is a ranking out of 10 for example (a higher number being quicker).
Do you know which is better?

[GIJoe597]

I seem to be thrown off by the terminology you are using.. Could you post a screenshot of where you see the "initiative" you are asking about?

[Wingnut]

Sorry for the confusion. Im referring to the initiative stat in the unit editor, i havent seen the stat in game but ive heard it as reaction time.

[GIJoe597]

I see. You are modding your game. I do not do that so I am unsure what that means in the editor. Mr. Latour or someone else may answer at some point. Good luck.

[Chris-BattleGoat]

According to the gamepedia; https://supremeruler.fandom.com/wiki/Equipment_List_Standards#Initiative

Initiative
Unit ‘Initiative’, generally 1 (low) to 8 (high)

- "First Shot / First Move" base value
- Higher val = more likely first shot & Faster Reloading
- Units without Combat capability get Initiative (1)

[Wingnut]

Thanks, that link is very useful :)

[Wingnut]

The more i look at the default.unit file the more puzzled i become. there are literally hundreds of entries that dont make sense to me.
eg why are there hundreds of units that have the 'no research' or the 'no build' flags?
Also a lot of the various attack ranges are just crazy. Pre ww1 escort ships with attack ranges of 15km when most post ww1 frigates have 2km range, There are some Russian pre ww2 battleships that have attack ranges greater than Yamato. US ww2 cruisers with greater surface attack rating than Yamato.
The list of baffling stats goes on and on.

It really seems like nobody actually went through all these stats and check them for mistakes.

And i havent even looked at the air or land units yet :/

[Chris-BattleGoat]

I can assure you that thousands of hours of research when into the file.

There are lots of units that are "no research" because they were after launch refits so should never be researched, they only exist historically in inventories of some countries. There are similar reasons for the "no build" flag. Ranges were researched based on weapon types.

There are over 5000 units in the file, each with more than 160 stats. To think that we as a small studio could create a flawless file is unreasonable. Instead of making a broad critique, maybe pick specific stats on a specific unit if you have questions.

We have always maintained a Unit Errata thread on our dev forums so that community members could offer input.
http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=72&t=21858
At the end of the day, we're not military analysts, we're game developers. We will sacrifice realism on stats for the sake of better gameplay if we judge appropriate.

[Wingnut]

It is abundantly clear that a lot of work was put into the default.unit file. It has a massive amount of information.
But there are also a lot of these stats that do not make sense to me. Which has left me puzzled. Obviously i am missing something.
Ill give some examples here.

No research and no build flags: Moltke class BC 1909, Vanguard class BB 1944, Courbet class BB 1910, Dougay-Trouin class CL 1944, Aigle Class DD 1928.

No build Flag: County class CA 1924, Leander class CL 1928, New York class BB 1911, Arethusa class cl 1933, Town class CL 1910, Shaekspeare and Scott class DD 1910.

Naval attack range comparisons: Sevastopol (gangut class BB) 1911: 44km (in reality it was 23km). Stalingrad BC 1951: 54km, Sovietsy Soyuz class BB 1940: 46km, Moskva class helo carrier 1962: 75km, Kynda class cruiser 1961: 85km, Andrea Doria class cruiser: 60km.
To put those stats in perspective compare with contemporay vessels: Iowa class BB 1943/1966: 38km, Yamato class BB 1937: 42km, Bismarck class BB 1939: 37km, KGV class BB 1937: 36km, Von Der Tann class BC 1913: 22km, Orion Class BB 1912: 33km, New York Class BB 1911: 32k, Wyoming Class BB 1912: 18km, Kaiser class BB 1912: 33km, Lion class BC: 22km, Bellerophon class BB 1909: 29km. Revenge class BB 1916: 30km.
Also there are around 30 pre ww2 cruisers (light and heavy) that have greater attack ranges than most of the contemporary BBs. eg Mogami, Tone, Sendai, Takao, Zara, Bolzano, Algerie, York, Omaha, Leander, Tromp, Portland, Northampton, Brooklyn, Nurnberg etc etc etc all from the 1920s and 1930s with ranges of 40km.
Oddly the York class CA has a range of 40km yet the County class CA only 26km, while they both use the exact same guns, turrets and rangefinders.

Also a lot of the early destroyers (classed as frigates in game) have some really odd naval attack ranges.
eg: Fubuki class DD: 1928 2km, Wickes class DD 1917: 2km, V&W class 1917: 2km, Porter Class DD 1933: 2km, Mahan 1934, Bagley 1935, Gridley 1935, Somers 1935, Hatsuharu 1934, Le fantasque 1935, Sims 1938, Z31 1942, Z35 1943, all 2km naval attack range.
A napoleonic smooth-bore cannon can fire further than 2km, a bolt action rifle can fire further than 2km.
And yet there are others of the same time period that have much higher ranges. eg Leningrad 1936: 20km, Soldato class 1937: 15km, Maestrale class 1931: 15km, Folgore class 1929: 15km, Navigatori class 1926: 15km, C/D/E/F classes 1932: 15km, Goteborg class 1934: 19km.

Also why do a lot of the light cruisers have greater naval attack ratings than battleships? eg: Worcester class CL(12 6in guns) 1944: 750 attack rating, Juneau CLAA (14 5in guns) 1943: attack rating 680. Chapaev class CL: rating 680, La Gallissionere 1944: rating 670.
Again compared to battleships of the period: Iowa class BB 1943: 570 attack rating, Yamato 1937: rating 600, Nelson 1927: 580, North Carolina, Littorio, Richelieu: rating 570, Nagato: 550. Queen Elizabeth and Revenge class BB which have the exact same armament have different attack values: 530 and 550.
Even comparing to other contemporary light cruisers the results are odd. eg: Sverlov: rating 500, Cleveland: rating 460, Brooklyn: rating 435, Town Class 1934: rating 405. Dido class CLAA: rating 400.

Now do you see why i am puzzled?

[Chris-BattleGoat]

I'm not going to try and address that giant wall of text. I'll take the first one;
https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Moltke-class_battlecruiser

This was likely added for SR Cold War when we needed the Goeben for the Turkish inventory. By that time it was so old that the Germany player should not be allowed to research it, so it was flagged "no research".

I won't be able to get into the stats discussion. The research and decisions on those were made sometime between 2012 and 2014. I have no idea what our sources were back then of if those sites still exist.

Consider that ranges in SR are based on hexes of 16km. Guns that fire 18km, 26km or 30km all fire "2 hexes".

[Wingnut]

I also remember from SRU Cold War that the Vanguard was not research-able, build-able nor was it possible to put it into reserve, for some strange reason.
I looked in the editor but cant find the flag for whether a unit can be put into the reserve, is that entry missing from the editor?

[Chris-BattleGoat]

Any unit can be put into reserve, there is no limit on that.

Yes, the Vanguard was one of those ships that started as one ship design, then completed as an entirely different ship design. Not really realistic to have a region producing a bunch more of these.
https://www.wikiwand.com/en/HMS_Vanguard_(23)

The US had a bunch of ships that were not supposed to be carriers, but when they needed carrier they took the hulls and changed their plans.

[Wingnut]

Originally posted by Chris-BattleGoat:

Yes, the Vanguard was one of those ships that started as one ship design, then completed as an entirely different ship design. Not really realistic to have a region producing a bunch more of these.

Thats really funny you saying that its not realistic, what about Montana, H44, Super Yamato, Sovietskiy Soyuz and Stalingrad ships? Paper designs never completed and yet they are in the game for the US, Germany, Japan and USSR to research and build as many as the player wants.
Where are the British, French and Italian paper ship designs?
Conspicuously absent.

And besides Vanguard didnt start as one design and was then completed as another it was an alternate design to use the 15in bl 42 guns. It was standard practice to have several paper designs as alternatives and it was common to alter the chosen design during construction, especially during wartime as new lessons were learned or if new technology was developed. All nations did it with their ship designs. Eg the Iowa class original design was a 'Treaty' battleship design under 35000 tons and ended up as a 48000 ton post treaty design.
Theres no reason why more Vanguards couldnt have been built, if the political will and the money was there, which should be up to the player dont you think?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKx11kxkYww

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R89zNg3WYko

This discussion is getting quite interesting :)

[Chris-BattleGoat]

Originally posted by Wingnut:

...Where are...

This all boils down to the same issue - small team, big project, limited time and resources. I stand by my judgement that we've done really well. That our average score on steam of 76% on about 950 reviews is an accurate rating for the game.