Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator.

Message icon:

What is the fourth planet?:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview

Please read the rules before you post!

Topic Summary

Posted by: Akhillis
« on: March 10, 2017, 08:00:00 PM »

Political Reliability Bonus appears to be 6-7 times more significant for Ground Officers' promotion score compared to Naval Officers.

I suggest that Ground Forces Training Rating and Ground Combat Bonus should be weighted more heavily; this will have no effect on Naval Officer promotions and make the Ground Officer promotions less of an old boys club ;)

These numbers came from a game that's been going for 39 years. Samples were 12 out of 13 R2 Ground Officers, 13 of the 39 R2 Naval Officers and 10 of 13 R3 Naval Officers. None of them have been in combat, none have any medals giving promotion points and all are assigned a command.

The average promotion score for R2 naval officers was 2372.9 and the average Political Reliability Bonus was 11.15. Political reliability accounted for 5.24% of the average promotion score.
The average promotion score for R3 naval officers was 4711.2 and the average Political Reliability Bonus was 21.5. Political reliability accounted for 9.81% of the average promotion score.
The weighted average promotion score for R3 naval officers was 2957.5 and the weighted average Political Reliability Bonus was 13.4. Political reliability accounted for 6.38% of the weighted average promotion score.
The average promotion score for R2 ground officers was 619.3 and the average Political Reliability Bonus was 16.25. Political reliability accounted for 42.64% of the average promotion score.

Given the small sample sizes this isn't statistically perfect by any means, but given the significance of the result I doubt it would make much a real difference. The obvious reason for this is that Naval Officers simply have more abilities; leaving aside PRB, Naval officers get promotion points from 9 possible ratings/bonuses, Ground officers have just 2 (GFT and GCB). Additionally GFT rating is fairly rare (roughly 1 in 6 officers seems to have it) and lowly weighted.

Anyway, my suggestion is to change the weighting for GC to (Bonus*1.25)^2 and GFT to (Rating/4)^2.

Current Promotion Point rules - there's one error in these: Fighter Combat Bonus gives the same promotion score as Logistics et all.
Off-Topic: show
When being considered for promotion, a naval or army officer is scored according to his abilities, using the following rules. The officer with the most points will be promoted first. Administrators and Scientists do not receive promotions

(Crew Training Rating / 5) ^ 2

(Ground Forces Training Rating / 6) ^ 2

Fleet Movement Initiative Rating / 2

Ground Combat or Political Bonus ^ 2

Survey and Deck Crew Bonus: (Bonus * 0.75) ^ 2

Logistics, Operations, Communications, Intelligence: (Bonus * 0.5) ^ 2

Promotion points from any medals awarded to the officer

Years since last promotion x25 (max 100)

If currently assigned to a command: +25
Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54