The "Unreliable" Truth

[Horst]

Unreliable
Unit may lose extra efficiency points when moving

That's what everyone thinks at first about this trait, but no, there is more horror behind it. I did (again) a test after spying into the code where I found that the unreliable trait additionally gives a +10 (1 ingame) efficiency loss during combat, no matter if attack or defense.

To summarize it:
- Unreliable units have a 50% chance to lose 2 efficiency points (20 calculated) when moving, no matter how far
- Unreliable units lose 1 additional efficiency point (10) when attacking or defending (modified by experience and combat results somehow)
I tested a unit with unreliable trait and one without. I didn't bother so much about continuing with the reliable unit as the difference in efficiency loss is incredible high compared to an unreliable unit.

Code: Select all

  -   reliable 0-star: Atk 10 vs. Def 99: 9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1,0
  -   reliable 0-star: Atk 10 vs. Def 10: 9,9,9,9,9,9,8,...
  - unreliable 0-star: Atk 10 vs. Def 99: 8,6,4,2,0
  - unreliable 0-star: Atk 10 vs. Def 10: 8,7,6,4,3,2,1,0
  - unreliable 5-star: Atk 10 vs. Def 10: 9,8,8,7,6,6,5,5,4,4,3,3,2,2,1,1,0
  - unreliable 0-star: Def 10 vs. Atk 10: 8,7,5,4,2,1,0
  - unreliable 0-star: Def 99 vs. Atk 10: 8,6,4,2,0

What is also interesting that a huge difference between attack and defense, strangely no matter if attacker or defender, vastely exhausts units.
Keep it mind that experience gain during such tests has impact on the efficiency loss too, as the higher the experience/stars the lower the efficiency loss gets.
You can see that under normal circumstances, units battling each other with attack 10 vs defense 10, result in a huge difference if one has the unreliable trait. While a reliable unit can seemingly bash forever on an equal enemy in direct combat, the unreliable is down to 0 in only 8 attacks.
No idea if this is an undesired bug that large attack-defense differences cause such large efficiency loss, so it's rather bad if a unit is almost invulnerable compared to frequently lose strength. Or is it a kind of balance? Losing 2 efficiency per defense as invincible defender is definitely too much penalty if you ask me.

I personally like the general idea of the unreliable trait and could have played on with the 2 efficiency loss at 50% chance when moving, but the the combat penalty is too broken for me. There is no 50% chance during combat as far as I get it in the code and the tests have shown.
I already have cut both efficiency loss values down to half for my personal gameplay, but this is unfortunately not easily possible by simple file-mods like with other data.

[kondi754]

Do you think it is possible to create different levels of 'unreliability' for different vehicles?

[Horst]

Heck no, I'm already glad to be able to exchange a variable in the code. Creating new traits is beyond my humble hack & slash ability in such code.
I have added the trait to other units, like all T-34 versions until gear/cooler fixed in 43 version, all KV until fixed in KV-1s and KV-85, and most importantly recruits and similar, like the Soviet Conscripts. Especially the many engagements of the Conscripts made me suspicious that there must be more than simply moving around.

[kondi754]

Heck no, I'm already glad to be able to exchange a variable in the code. Creating new traits is beyond my humble hack & slash ability in such code.
I have added the trait to other units, like all T-34 versions until gear/cooler fixed in 43 version, all KV until fixed in KV-1s and KV-85, and most importantly recruits and similar, like the Soviet Conscripts. Especially the many engagements of the Conscripts made me suspicious that there must be more than simply moving around.

It's a pity, I thought the Panther D, A and G would be varied that way as the D version was hopeless but A and G slightly better, so this trait should be a bit gentler on them.
Likewise, the crews of the Tigers learned to operate these vehicles in the summer and fall of 1943, so unreliability should be the weakest for them since 1944.
Jagdtiger, Sturmtiger should have this trait very strong, while Tiger II strong and Jagdpanther average/medium like Panther A and G. Tiger I weak since 1944.

Similarly, we can distinguish between Soviet "unreliable" vehicles

[kondi754]

I have added the trait to other units, like all T-34 versions until gear/cooler fixed in 43 version, all KV until fixed in KV-1s and KV-85, and most importantly recruits and similar, like the Soviet Conscripts. Especially the many engagements of the Conscripts made me suspicious that there must be more than simply moving around.

Re: T-34 and KV
I support it, it's a good idea

Re: recruits
I have doubts because these rookie units have such terrible stats that this trait is unnecessary and excessive for them.
It would make sense if their stats were only slightly worse than regular infantry

[Horst]

Re: recruits
I have doubts because these rookie units have such terrible stats that this trait is unnecessary and excessive for them.
It would make sense if their stats were only slightly worse than regular infantry

I wouldn't make recruits with vanilla stats unreliable either. This is the disadvantage of the continuous inf-atk/def stats increase of many yearly infantry upgrades that recruits, cavalry, bautruppe, partisans, and importantly defensive structures without yearly upgrades become too weak over the years.

[cutydt02]

Idk if unreliable trait is popular if so, t-34 early version and kv-2 should have it too as IRL. But there’s no point in using such useless unit, even when it separates to reliable (lighly than normal) and very reliable version, the best choice still be using pz4 and stug to face endless wave of t-34-85 and is-2. And about panther G and A, its much more like third reich than technical problem, eg: short of needed marterial and spared parts, which never occurs when we can force ussr signs armistice

[kondi754]

I cannot agree as the main problems of Panther have never been fixed.
The only noteworthy improvement was to prevent snow build-up between the wheels and the hull in the fall of 1944

The overwhelming majority of changes in versions A and G concerned the safety and comfort of the crew

[Horst]

I've played on with my buggy T-34s and KVs the Soviet campaign and can't complain much anymore with the 1 eff-loss on move and 0.5 eff-loss during combat. They are still down to low effieciency in a couple of turns of combat, but at least it's not that instant-FUBAR like with vanilla settings anymore.
The flaweness of certain new tank designs is part of military history. While I don't really need a simulation in a TBS that simulates every loose screw and oil leak, a simple drawback on powerful units is a welcome balance and gives units more character. In case of Soviet campaigns, there are still Lend-Lease units that can somewhat compensate the early flaws until the Soviet war machine is ready to crush.
All you need is artillery and infantry anyway!

[WarHomer]

I never use units with the trait, so all it does for me is limiting the game.

[GabeKnight]

Thanks for the detailed info, Horst. Noted.

Yeah, I thought the combat efficiency loss was somewhat randomized, too.

I personally like the general idea of the unreliable trait and could have played on with the 2 efficiency loss at 50% chance when moving, but the the combat penalty is too broken for me. There is no 50% chance during combat as far as I get it in the code and the tests have shown.

Agree that this should be looked at by the devs!

Your solution (-1 move/-0.5 combat) sounds like a cool "lightUnreliable" trait compromise.

I never use units with the trait, so all it does for me is limiting the game.

Better an unreliable Tiger than no Tiger at all!