Talk:Soldiers (EU2012) - Revision history

Oathed: /* Not Created Equal Aim Averages */ new section

2022-09-09T14:47:03Z

Not Created Equal Aim Averages: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:47, 9 September 2022
Line 76:		Line 76:

	What does this mean when it is next to your soldier in the barracks? --[[User:Ditto51\|Ditto51]] 09:02, 17 July 2013 (EDT)		What does this mean when it is next to your soldier in the barracks? --[[User:Ditto51\|Ditto51]] 09:02, 17 July 2013 (EDT)

			== Not Created Equal Aim Averages ==

			Not sure how to or where to format this properly but here are the average aim stats for each class, which can be a good tool to evaluate a new soldier rewarded from a mission in mid/late game when playing with Not Created Equal enabled:

			Assault S70 Cpl73 Sgt76 Lt79 Capt82
			Heavy S67 Cpl68 Sgt69 Lt70 Capt71
			Sniper S75 Cpl78 Sgt81 Lt84 Capt88
			Support S70 Cpl73 Sgt76 Lt79 Capt82

			[[User:Oathed\|Oathed]] ([[User talk:Oathed\|talk]]) 16:47, 9 September 2022 (CEST)

Ditto51: /* Active (1 Day) */ new section

2013-07-17T13:02:12Z

Active (1 Day): new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:02, 17 July 2013
Line 72:		Line 72:
	:Human error is always an easier explanation: I just checked the link and the value for promotion to squaddie is 75, not 90. I must have made a mistake, sorry. :) [[User:Hobbes\|Hobbes]] 05:21, 29 January 2013 (EST)		:Human error is always an easier explanation: I just checked the link and the value for promotion to squaddie is 75, not 90. I must have made a mistake, sorry. :) [[User:Hobbes\|Hobbes]] 05:21, 29 January 2013 (EST)
	::Ok, thanks, it all makes sense now ;) [[User:Kurzum\|Kurzum]] 03:23, 30 January 2013 (EST)		::Ok, thanks, it all makes sense now ;) [[User:Kurzum\|Kurzum]] 03:23, 30 January 2013 (EST)

			== Active (1 Day) ==

			What does this mean when it is next to your soldier in the barracks? --[[User:Ditto51\|Ditto51]] 09:02, 17 July 2013 (EDT)

Kurzum: /* Error in the experience calculations on c/i */

2013-01-30T08:23:23Z

Error in the experience calculations on c/i

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:23, 30 January 2013
Line 71:		Line 71:
	Just played classic/ironman. Nobody got killed during the very first mission. After the table here: http://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Soldiers_%28EU2012%29#Earning_XPs that would be 60 for mission + 20 for no KIAs amounting to 80 which would mean all 4 soldiers should have been promoted (requiring 75) . I had the feeling, that any mission with no KIA in nomral mode, always seemed to lead to rookie promotion, so there is an indication that there is a penalty on XP in classic. Can someone confirm? [[User:Kurzum\|Kurzum]] 04:41, 29 January 2013 (EST)		Just played classic/ironman. Nobody got killed during the very first mission. After the table here: http://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Soldiers_%28EU2012%29#Earning_XPs that would be 60 for mission + 20 for no KIAs amounting to 80 which would mean all 4 soldiers should have been promoted (requiring 75) . I had the feeling, that any mission with no KIA in nomral mode, always seemed to lead to rookie promotion, so there is an indication that there is a penalty on XP in classic. Can someone confirm? [[User:Kurzum\|Kurzum]] 04:41, 29 January 2013 (EST)
	:Human error is always an easier explanation: I just checked the link and the value for promotion to squaddie is 75, not 90. I must have made a mistake, sorry. :) [[User:Hobbes\|Hobbes]] 05:21, 29 January 2013 (EST)		:Human error is always an easier explanation: I just checked the link and the value for promotion to squaddie is 75, not 90. I must have made a mistake, sorry. :) [[User:Hobbes\|Hobbes]] 05:21, 29 January 2013 (EST)
			::Ok, thanks, it all makes sense now ;) [[User:Kurzum\|Kurzum]] 03:23, 30 January 2013 (EST)

Hobbes: /* Error in the experience calculations on c/i */

2013-01-29T10:21:51Z

Error in the experience calculations on c/i

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:21, 29 January 2013
Line 70:		Line 70:

	Just played classic/ironman. Nobody got killed during the very first mission. After the table here: http://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Soldiers_%28EU2012%29#Earning_XPs that would be 60 for mission + 20 for no KIAs amounting to 80 which would mean all 4 soldiers should have been promoted (requiring 75) . I had the feeling, that any mission with no KIA in nomral mode, always seemed to lead to rookie promotion, so there is an indication that there is a penalty on XP in classic. Can someone confirm? [[User:Kurzum\|Kurzum]] 04:41, 29 January 2013 (EST)		Just played classic/ironman. Nobody got killed during the very first mission. After the table here: http://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Soldiers_%28EU2012%29#Earning_XPs that would be 60 for mission + 20 for no KIAs amounting to 80 which would mean all 4 soldiers should have been promoted (requiring 75) . I had the feeling, that any mission with no KIA in nomral mode, always seemed to lead to rookie promotion, so there is an indication that there is a penalty on XP in classic. Can someone confirm? [[User:Kurzum\|Kurzum]] 04:41, 29 January 2013 (EST)
			:Human error is always an easier explanation: I just checked the link and the value for promotion to squaddie is 75, not 90. I must have made a mistake, sorry. :) [[User:Hobbes\|Hobbes]] 05:21, 29 January 2013 (EST)

Kurzum: /* Error in the experience calculations on c/i */ new section

2013-01-29T09:41:35Z

Error in the experience calculations on c/i: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:41, 29 January 2013
Line 66:		Line 66:

	Feedback encouraged.		Feedback encouraged.

			== Error in the experience calculations on c/i ==

			Just played classic/ironman. Nobody got killed during the very first mission. After the table here: http://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Soldiers_%28EU2012%29#Earning_XPs that would be 60 for mission + 20 for no KIAs amounting to 80 which would mean all 4 soldiers should have been promoted (requiring 75) . I had the feeling, that any mission with no KIA in nomral mode, always seemed to lead to rookie promotion, so there is an indication that there is a penalty on XP in classic. Can someone confirm? [[User:Kurzum\|Kurzum]] 04:41, 29 January 2013 (EST)

Vallen Chaos Valiant at 01:00, 22 October 2012

2012-10-22T01:00:23Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:00, 22 October 2012
Line 44:		Line 44:

	I just hit an oddity, playing on normal with all colonels I should have snipers with 8 base health and the others with 9. Except I have one support with 10 base health. I infact have 2 supports with the same gear, rank, and abilities and one has 9 health and the other has 10. Float rounding error in my favor??? [[User:Mavoc\|Mavoc]] 06:47, 20 October 2012 (EDT)		I just hit an oddity, playing on normal with all colonels I should have snipers with 8 base health and the others with 9. Except I have one support with 10 base health. I infact have 2 supports with the same gear, rank, and abilities and one has 9 health and the other has 10. Float rounding error in my favor??? [[User:Mavoc\|Mavoc]] 06:47, 20 October 2012 (EDT)
			:::::There is supposedly a bug that made every new soldier you recruit to have Easy difficulty Base Health. I haven't confirmed it yet.--[[User:Vallen Chaos Valiant\|Vallen Chaos Valiant]] 21:00, 21 October 2012 (EDT)

	== Squad Leader ==		== Squad Leader ==

Mavoc: /* Rank bonuses */

2012-10-20T10:47:20Z

Rank bonuses

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:47, 20 October 2012
Line 42:		Line 42:

	: this matches with my numbers of (1-5) + 2 without the Iron Will. Which seems to suggest that the level up will increase is 1d5+2 without iron will and 1d10+2 with it. i am assuming that it isn't 2d5+2 which would cause the numbers to be a bit more clustered in the middle. So far I have not seen any will increase outside of rank up. Now we need to verify that and try to identify what effects cause loss to will and how much for each. [[User:Mavoc\|Mavoc]] 18:30, 16 October 2012 (EDT)		: this matches with my numbers of (1-5) + 2 without the Iron Will. Which seems to suggest that the level up will increase is 1d5+2 without iron will and 1d10+2 with it. i am assuming that it isn't 2d5+2 which would cause the numbers to be a bit more clustered in the middle. So far I have not seen any will increase outside of rank up. Now we need to verify that and try to identify what effects cause loss to will and how much for each. [[User:Mavoc\|Mavoc]] 18:30, 16 October 2012 (EDT)

			I just hit an oddity, playing on normal with all colonels I should have snipers with 8 base health and the others with 9. Except I have one support with 10 base health. I infact have 2 supports with the same gear, rank, and abilities and one has 9 health and the other has 10. Float rounding error in my favor??? [[User:Mavoc\|Mavoc]] 06:47, 20 October 2012 (EDT)

	== Squad Leader ==		== Squad Leader ==

Arrow Quivershaft: /* Soldier Status */

2012-10-19T23:08:36Z

Soldier Status

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:08, 19 October 2012
Line 20:		Line 20:
	: The "Tired" and "Exhausted" are present in the game files but it seems that it isn't used, most likely a leftover from when the first game builds used TUs/Stamina before it was replaced with the Action system. [[User:Hobbes\|Hobbes]] 10:26, 16 October 2012 (EDT)		: The "Tired" and "Exhausted" are present in the game files but it seems that it isn't used, most likely a leftover from when the first game builds used TUs/Stamina before it was replaced with the Action system. [[User:Hobbes\|Hobbes]] 10:26, 16 October 2012 (EDT)
	Makes sense, but recently I had a soldier who was still deployable for missions that had "(1 day)" behind her name. She'd been deployed two or three times in less than five days. Perhaps this is "Tired" or "Exhausted"? Battle fatigue from repeated, close deployments? (Noone else was affected as the first mission was mostly B-team because most of my mains were in the hospital, but the latter two were with regular soldiers.) Unfortunately, I wasn't given an opportunity to deploy her in this status, and I haven't been able to replicate it, to it may only have been a bug. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft\|Arrow Quivershaft]] 14:51, 16 October 2012 (EDT)		Makes sense, but recently I had a soldier who was still deployable for missions that had "(1 day)" behind her name. She'd been deployed two or three times in less than five days. Perhaps this is "Tired" or "Exhausted"? Battle fatigue from repeated, close deployments? (Noone else was affected as the first mission was mostly B-team because most of my mains were in the hospital, but the latter two were with regular soldiers.) Unfortunately, I wasn't given an opportunity to deploy her in this status, and I haven't been able to replicate it, to it may only have been a bug. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft\|Arrow Quivershaft]] 14:51, 16 October 2012 (EDT)

			Further research seems to imply that "Wounded" and "Gravely Wounded" are differentiated by gross damage taken during a mission, with "Wounded" meaning "Took more damage than armor HP, but less than enough to kill them" and "Gravely Wounded" means "Took enough gross damage to be killed outright." Needless to say, the latter survived somehow, likely to do either Medikit intervention or getting a critical wound instead of just dying. (Don't Die On Me is AMAZING). [[User:Arrow Quivershaft\|Arrow Quivershaft]] 19:08, 19 October 2012 (EDT)

	== Rank bonuses ==		== Rank bonuses ==

Mavoc: /* Squad Leader */

2012-10-16T22:34:49Z

Squad Leader

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:34, 16 October 2012
Line 44:		Line 44:

	I noticed, that one of the soldiers in the squad have a yellow star on his icon. Looks like it indicates, that he is the leader. I also noticed, that he does more dmg, than other soldiers. My leader was a sniper, and could do around 2-3 more dmg to an enemy than my other sniper. Same weapon, normal shot. I'm gonna test this further.		I noticed, that one of the soldiers in the squad have a yellow star on his icon. Looks like it indicates, that he is the leader. I also noticed, that he does more dmg, than other soldiers. My leader was a sniper, and could do around 2-3 more dmg to an enemy than my other sniper. Same weapon, normal shot. I'm gonna test this further.

	: The soldier in front of all others in the pre-mission screen will be the leader. From what I've read it will really affect morale if it gets killed, but so far I haven't noticed any difference in stats. Let us know what you find :) [[User:Hobbes\|Hobbes]] 10:26, 16 October 2012 (EDT)		: The soldier in front of all others in the pre-mission screen will be the leader. From what I've read it will really affect morale if it gets killed, but so far I haven't noticed any difference in stats. Let us know what you find :) [[User:Hobbes\|Hobbes]] 10:26, 16 October 2012 (EDT)

	:: Hobbes this is incorrect. The far right guy for me, which stands in the back, is my sniper and he is the one that gets the star. From my experience, the system keeps giving soldiers XP even at Colonel and the soldier with he most XP gets the star. [[User:Mavoc\|Mavoc]] 18:34, 16 October 2012 (EDT)		:: Hobbes this is incorrect. The far right guy for me, which stands in the back, is my sniper and he is the one that gets the star. From my experience, the system keeps giving soldiers XP even at Colonel and the soldier with he most XP gets the star. [[User:Mavoc\|Mavoc]] 18:34, 16 October 2012 (EDT)

	::Also, you can find a small "+" next to a soldier's icon; testing has shown that this means the soldier has earned a (main class) promotion during the mission. So far, it appears soldiers are capped to one promotion per deployment, so consider moving this soldier to backfield covering duties, as any experience they gain will be 'wasted'. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft\|Arrow Quivershaft]] 14:54, 16 October 2012 (EDT)		::Also, you can find a small "+" next to a soldier's icon; testing has shown that this means the soldier has earned a (main class) promotion during the mission. So far, it appears soldiers are capped to one promotion per deployment, so consider moving this soldier to backfield covering duties, as any experience they gain will be 'wasted'. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft\|Arrow Quivershaft]] 14:54, 16 October 2012 (EDT)

Mavoc: /* Squad Leader */

2012-10-16T22:34:34Z

Squad Leader

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:34, 16 October 2012
Line 45:		Line 45:
	I noticed, that one of the soldiers in the squad have a yellow star on his icon. Looks like it indicates, that he is the leader. I also noticed, that he does more dmg, than other soldiers. My leader was a sniper, and could do around 2-3 more dmg to an enemy than my other sniper. Same weapon, normal shot. I'm gonna test this further.		I noticed, that one of the soldiers in the squad have a yellow star on his icon. Looks like it indicates, that he is the leader. I also noticed, that he does more dmg, than other soldiers. My leader was a sniper, and could do around 2-3 more dmg to an enemy than my other sniper. Same weapon, normal shot. I'm gonna test this further.
	: The soldier in front of all others in the pre-mission screen will be the leader. From what I've read it will really affect morale if it gets killed, but so far I haven't noticed any difference in stats. Let us know what you find :) [[User:Hobbes\|Hobbes]] 10:26, 16 October 2012 (EDT)		: The soldier in front of all others in the pre-mission screen will be the leader. From what I've read it will really affect morale if it gets killed, but so far I haven't noticed any difference in stats. Let us know what you find :) [[User:Hobbes\|Hobbes]] 10:26, 16 October 2012 (EDT)
			:: Hobbes this is incorrect. The far right guy for me, which stands in the back, is my sniper and he is the one that gets the star. From my experience, the system keeps giving soldiers XP even at Colonel and the soldier with he most XP gets the star. [[User:Mavoc\|Mavoc]] 18:34, 16 October 2012 (EDT)
	::Also, you can find a small "+" next to a soldier's icon; testing has shown that this means the soldier has earned a (main class) promotion during the mission. So far, it appears soldiers are capped to one promotion per deployment, so consider moving this soldier to backfield covering duties, as any experience they gain will be 'wasted'. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft\|Arrow Quivershaft]] 14:54, 16 October 2012 (EDT)		::Also, you can find a small "+" next to a soldier's icon; testing has shown that this means the soldier has earned a (main class) promotion during the mission. So far, it appears soldiers are capped to one promotion per deployment, so consider moving this soldier to backfield covering duties, as any experience they gain will be 'wasted'. [[User:Arrow Quivershaft\|Arrow Quivershaft]] 14:54, 16 October 2012 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:23, 30 January 2013
Line 71:		Line 71:
	Just played classic/ironman. Nobody got killed during the very first mission. After the table here: http://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Soldiers_%28EU2012%29#Earning_XPs that would be 60 for mission + 20 for no KIAs amounting to 80 which would mean all 4 soldiers should have been promoted (requiring 75) . I had the feeling, that any mission with no KIA in nomral mode, always seemed to lead to rookie promotion, so there is an indication that there is a penalty on XP in classic. Can someone confirm? [[User:Kurzum\|Kurzum]] 04:41, 29 January 2013 (EST)		Just played classic/ironman. Nobody got killed during the very first mission. After the table here: http://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Soldiers_%28EU2012%29#Earning_XPs that would be 60 for mission + 20 for no KIAs amounting to 80 which would mean all 4 soldiers should have been promoted (requiring 75) . I had the feeling, that any mission with no KIA in nomral mode, always seemed to lead to rookie promotion, so there is an indication that there is a penalty on XP in classic. Can someone confirm? [[User:Kurzum\|Kurzum]] 04:41, 29 January 2013 (EST)
	:Human error is always an easier explanation: I just checked the link and the value for promotion to squaddie is 75, not 90. I must have made a mistake, sorry. :) [[User:Hobbes\|Hobbes]] 05:21, 29 January 2013 (EST)		:Human error is always an easier explanation: I just checked the link and the value for promotion to squaddie is 75, not 90. I must have made a mistake, sorry. :) [[User:Hobbes\|Hobbes]] 05:21, 29 January 2013 (EST)
			::Ok, thanks, it all makes sense now ;) [[User:Kurzum\|Kurzum]] 03:23, 30 January 2013 (EST)