Slitherine

According to my testing, AA/AT support and interception works the way that
a) for naval, the two weakest units support
b) for ground, the three weakest units support (AA/AT)
c) for air, the three weakest units intercept

Yeah, it doesn't matter if more AA-support units than the mentioned maximum is around. Sure, it's a balance thing maybe.
However, no matter how many more powerful AA-capable units are in support-range, the weakest win what truly sucks³!
As long as this isn't changed, keep this in mind if you play that you should avoid crappy AA-support around your precious units! A mix of light and heavy AA produces exactly the same results that rather the weak heavy AA guns fire on small air targets. Better go with a single air defense type, like 40mm Bofors only, whatever is generally best suitable against expected air targets.
I don't mind so much the limit, but by all means, please the most effective one should support!

It's surely not such an issue for ground as you rarely have more than three AA units around, but rather for naval units where you often have plenty destroyers, and some carriers and maybe a seaplane tender close to each other. If you add speedboats to the mix, you can ruin your AA protection.
Similar for air interception, where interceptors with low AS could bugger up the escort protection if they hang next to bombers together with fighters. Can easily happen during reckless mass ground attacking of the AI.

Naval example: Fubuki (5 vs AS) vs Akizuki (10 vs AS)

Ground example: 20mm (7 vs AS) vs Triple-25mm (12 vs AS)

Looks like the code is similar for air interception:

Very interesting info. I had no idea...
+1

Maybe someone has wondered about AT-support how it works there.
The same bummer!
AT position doesn't really matter, like with the other support types.

Wow. Thanks, Horst, I've suspected something like that (I've always wondered why my DDs gave AA support instead of my carriers ), but never thought that it's really *just* the weakest units. Damn.

But in reality, this will only be relevant in naval engagements and maybe a very few air missions...
I mean, more than three AA or AT supporting units? Never happened to me. Usually one, sometimes two.

Still, devs, please change this.

There's one more thing I found strange with support fire (especially AA). I think it's not impeded enough by the unit's efficiency level. Like an enemy AA unit with zero eff. - unable to fire on its own - still does quite the (support fire) damage to attacking planes.

Hey, I'm not done here adding more ridiculousness to this!

Q: What about unit strength?
A: The fluffiest wins, as always!
If more than one unit-type of supporters are present, it is actually calculated who does the worst damage, so it's possible that normally stronger units with low strength are selected.
Q: What about unit efficiency?
A: Do you still have to ask?
Yeah, it's a trap for support units with 0 efficiency that they will never able to recover as long as they are forced to support.
I had this recently too in a scenario where I had to move the AA guns away for recovering.
The combat prowess during support is still bastically nill on 0 efficiency. Remember that the numbers displayed are rounded, so 0 could still mean 0.4 maybe. 10 unit strength and efficiency is rather calculated as 100, saving fractions.

Horst wrote: ↑Thu Dec 01, 2022 1:10 pm Remember that the numbers displayed are rounded, so 0 could still mean 0.4 maybe. 10 unit strength and efficiency is rather calculated as 100, saving fractions.

Okay, maybe. In my opinion the zero-efficiency support-fire still does too much actual damage. I don't know what the indicator tells you, but if you do attack, the support-fire *is going to* damage your plane.

It's zero-efficiency! If you attack with your ground troops, they'll suffer no return-damage.

It's true that AA(-support) from ground units can still do damage at 0 efficiency.
It's more apparent with very high attack values.
I've modified the 5-star AA gun to an attack value of 100 which drops about to attack value 20, I remodified it to that guessed value and recheck the results showing also 3 damage on attacker. The damage won't go down anymore on further turns.
With attack value 20, the AA-gun could also still inflict about 0.5 damage per turn on zero efficiency when directly attacking it.
I've tested this also with AT-support, but don't see any damage anymore, even when attacking the AT-gun itself, at 0 eff.

Thanks for the tests, Horst. Always a pleasure...

I don't want to bicker too much about this, as the AA-zero-efficiency-support-fire-issue's not really important IMO. It's just apparent to me, as I like to use the end-play of scens - when there's no enemy air left usually - to increase experience of my already deployed fighter units and use them to attack AT units or such. And of course I don't want them to take unnecessary damage whilst doing this... so I've learned by now to not attack AA units with planes even if they're very low on efficiency.

Whatever, this thread is a bit too much information anyways.

But, in short, I'm still with the OP and think that the *strongest* supporting units should be used by the game.

Oh wow I did not know that. Good to know, I usually have my entire fleet as one giant ball but it seems like there is little point in doing that then. Personally I think I would be ok with having 3 random units too not just the strongest since its not like one destroyer or AAA battery would be able to target plane in all the attack waves.

Couldn't really get smart of this weird sorting, so I simply raised the limit and only changed the AA-Support divisor.
It's basically still the same with only a single support/interception unit what is usually the ordinary event.
AT-support is still way more powerful compared to AA-Support/Interception that latter is cut in half.
As AA-ground + AA-naval + air-interception can sum up, I think it's still playable like before.
Most importantly, you don't get annoyed by this weakest-support selection anymore.

Happy New Year!