Investigation of Battle Odds

[dismal]

This may be a stupid question, but where is it possible to see the battle odds directly?

I presume the comments "Defeat is a distinct possibility", etc. reflect a certain range of Battle Odds, but it would be useful to observe the raw number.

[Red Harvest]

This may be a stupid question, but where is it possible to see the battle odds directly?

I presume the comments "Defeat is a distinct possibility", etc. reflect a certain range of Battle Odds, but it would be useful to observe the raw number.

If you hover over the "strength bar" before the battle, you will see the odds in a small display.

[dismal]

If you hover over the "strength bar" before the battle, you will see the odds in a small display.

Thanks. Any idea how "strength" translates to BattleOdds?

For example, to win "Son of Chinglu" you need BattleOdds of <= 1.5. Presumably this is a reward for winning against long odds.

Does the 1.5 simply translate to a going-in "strength" of 2:3 or worse?

(Keeping in mind that it appears 2:3 may actually be 1.46 with rounding.)

[Simetrical]

2:3 = 2/3 ≈ 0.67, surely? That's the normal meaning of a colon in this kind of context, to indicate a ratio.

[Yukon Cornelius]

A 2:3 ratio suggests that the opponent has 3 "combat strength points" for every 2 of yours, so he has 1.5 times your "combat strength." So if you attack someone with a 10:1 ratio, you're 10 times as strong as your opponent. That's how I read it anyway.

[Kraxis]

Well, if your enemy is having 1.5 times your strength it is equal to you having 2/3 (~0.67) of his...

[dismal]

2:3 = 2/3 ≈ 0.67, surely? That's the normal meaning of a colon in this kind of context, to indicate a ratio.

Yes, that would seem to make sense, but that would mean you could win the "Son of Chinglu" by winning a battle where the odds were in your favor. Since it's a 100% chance, you'd be winning it all the time.

However, the BattleOdds test was <1.5, so my theory is clearly busted. If 2:3 = 1.5, then 2:4 = 2.0 which is obviously more desperate odds but going in the wrong direction for a "less than test".

I am beginning to come to the conclusion that BattleOdds variable in the VnV tests and the Strength Ratio on the red-blue slider are not the same thing.

I have been carefully noting the stength ratios and initial "possibilities" going into my general/rebel battles and have seen a 1:1 strength ratio translate into any of "defeat is a distinct possibility", "the forces are evenly matched", and "victory is a distinct possibility". This seems to indicate more than rounding is at work.

My theory is that the probability assessment takes into account more factors than the strength ratio. Who is on offense, the terrain, the weather, specific bonuses such as spears v. cav, etc.

[Atilius]

It's true that 2:3, would indicate that the ratio of your strength to your opponent's strength (0.67), but for the chance of victory you would want something like the ratio of your strength to the total strength of both armies.

If forces are equal (1:1) you have 1/(1+1) = .5 (50%) chance of victory.
For the 2:3 case you have 2/(2+3) = 0.40 (40%)
For the 2:4 case 2/(2+4) = 0.33 (33%).
9:1 = 90%

You get the picture.

Having said that - I doubt it means much. I could make a case that it would be better to use the squares of the numbers above - I'll bet you'd win more than 90% of the battles you fought if your strength was 9 times that of your opponent's. So maybe 2:3 -> 4/(4+9) = 31%. In addition, it's never appeared to me that this ratio took any account of terrain effects which make a big difference in the outcome of a battle.

So, it's probably best not to try to translate this strength ratio directly to the chance for victory - its not clear how to do it exactly and there are qualitative factors to take into account.

[dismal]

Atilius, just to avoid confusion, let me make it clear that I'm talking about at least 2, maybe 3 different things.

1) The "battle strength" indicator, which appears as a number in "Vegas odds" form (e.g., 1:1, 2:3) when you hold your cursor over the red-blue slider on the scroll before the battle map is entered

2) The "initial probability assessment", which is a phrase like "defeat is a distinct possibility" or "the balance of forces is evenly matched" when you gold your cursor over the red-blue slider during the troop deployment stage.

3) The "BattleOdds" variable, which can be observed in various scripts as a trigger for gaininfg retinues

Trigger trigger_office_son_of_chinglu1
WhenToTest PostBattle
Condition WasAttacker
and IsGeneral
and WonBattle
and BattleSuccess >= clear
and I_ConflictType Normal
and BattleOdds < 1.5
and CultureType hun
and PercentageEnemyKilled >= 51
and not IsFactionLeader
and not IsFactionHeir
and not FactionwideAncillaryExists office_son_of_chinglu1
and Attribute Command >= 4

AcquireAncillary office_son_of_chinglu1 chance 100

After observing various diverging examples of #1 and #2 for the same battle (that is, 1:1 can be anything from "defeat is a distinct possibility" to "vistory is a distinct possibility), I'm convinced that they are separate but related calculations - with #2 likely taking into account more factors related to the specific battle besides raw troop strength.

Exactly what #3 is remains a bit of a mystery. But it seems to be more related to #2 than #1. It wouldn't surprise me if the game calculates "BattleOdds" then translates it to a saying something like "defeat is a distinct possibility" within a certain range.

The one time I won "Son of Chinglu", I started with "Defeat is almost a certainty" and won.