Investigation of Battle Odds

[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.

[Atilius]

dismal,

OK, I guess my comments apply only to the "battle strength" indicator. Got carried away.

The number 1.5 would seem to be favorable to you, as you noted earlier. Did your general have a command value of at least 4 when you failed to win SOC?

[dismal]

dismal,

The number 1.5 would seem to be favorable to you, as you noted earlier. Did your general have a command value of at least 4 when you failed to win SOC?

I think he probably did at some point. The context of all this was that I was trying to make observations of different variables in my rebel v. general battles to see what made a victory "heroic", so I wasn't paying that much attention to command stars. But a couple of my generals worked up to 8 or so stars during this campaign, so I imagine they had more than a few battles above 4 stars. See thread:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=55824

[Atilius]

Here's an entry from the Events, Conditions, and Commands thread by Blitz576 in the Scriptorium (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=43121):

---------------------------------------------------
Identifier: BattleOdds
Trigger requirements: character_record
Parameters: logic token, test value
Sample use: BattleOdds > 5
Description: Test the odds to win i.e. 5 (5:1)
Battle or Strat: Either
Class: BATTLE_ODDS_TEST
Implemented: Yes
Author: Lee
---------------------------------------------------

Which connects the BattleOdds identifier to a ratio - it looks like the larger the number the greater your chance of victory.


Also: from export_desc_character_traits.txt:

;------------------------------------------
Trigger V0090_Standard_Battle_Any_Victory_VnV_Trigger
WhenToTest PostBattle

Condition IsGeneral
and WonBattle
and BattleOdds < 2.25

Affects GoodCommander 1 Chance 100

;------------------------------------------

This indicates that your general has a command trait increase if he wins a battle in which the odds are not too heavily in his favor.

Finally, from the same file:

;------------------------------------------
Trigger V0110_Standard_Risky_Battle_Attacker_Clear_Victory_VnV_Trigger
WhenToTest PostBattle

Condition WasAttacker
and IsGeneral
and WonBattle
and BattleSuccess = crushing
and I_ConflictType Normal
and BattleOdds < 0.5
and BattleOdds > 0.16

Affects GoodRiskyAttacker 1 Chance 100

;------------------------------------------
;------------------------------------------
Trigger V0150_Standard_Risky_Battle_Attacker_Crushing_Victory_VnV_Trigger
WhenToTest PostBattle

Condition WasAttacker
and IsGeneral
and WonBattle
and BattleSuccess = crushing
and I_ConflictType Normal
and BattleOdds <= 0.16

Affects GoodRiskyAttacker 2 Chance 100
Affects TacticalSkill 1 Chance 5

;------------------------------------------

Here your general gets rewarded if he wins a crushing victory in a "risky" battle, which evidently means battle odds of less than 1/2. Note that if the battle odds are less than 1/6, his reward is greater.

I conclude from this that if BattleOdds>1 you have an advantage, so you can win Son of Chinglu if the odds are in your favor. What has prevented you from winning it on the occasions you mentioned earlier, I can't say.

(I should mention that all these examples are from RTW 1.2, but I'd be surprised if they differed from BI.)

[dismal]

Interesting, if that is a comprehensive list (and it seems to be) of all the triggers, then there are only 2 related to your chances of winning a battle:

BattleOdds and this:

Identifier: I_BattlePlayerAllianceOddsInFavour
Trigger requirements:
Parameters: logic token
Sample use: I_BattlePlayerAllianceOddsInFavour > 5
Description: Odds in favour of the player i.e. 5 (5:1)
Battle or Strat: Battle
Class: BATTLE_PLAYER_ALLIANCE_ODDS_IN_FAVOUR
Implemented: Yes
Author: Scott

BattleOdds is both a strat map and battle map variable, whereas the one above is a battle map only variable.

Perhaps it's the I_BattlePlayerAllianceOddsInFavour variable that tracks the ebbs and flows in odds during the battle (and translates them to the red-blue slider in the battle map).

On the balance, I think you've made a decent case that the BattleOdds variable is driven by the strength rating you get before you enter battle, but I can't help but think it's not as simple as 3:2 = 1.5.

It just hasn't been my experience that you win those sorts of traits/ancillaries on even 1:1 battles, let alone those in your favor.

I think there is an issue of 1.2 versus BI we need to be careful about. I think the developers have acknowledged making it harder to get command stars.

I wonder if there is a hard-coded modifier to the pre-battle strength assessment that is applied before testing for traits and ancillaries. I wouldn't be surprised if this modifier is based in on your difficulty setting. (e.g., on VH it may take a 1:1 strength assessment and multiply it by 2 so you don't qualify on BattleOdds<1.5)

I'm going to have to watch out for a battle that has all the other necessary elements but misses what appears to be a 100% chance. Since I'm playing Saxons, warlord_saxons would make a nice test. If I just have a 4 star non-leader/heir general it will be easy to find a few rebels to beat at 1:1.

[Atilius]

Dismal,

Concerning differences between 1.2 and BI - I only meant that BattleOdds is unlikely to have changed meaning. Thresholds for awarding traits certainly may have.

You mention that winning traits and ancillaries isn't as easy as the triggers seem to indicate. I think that's because it gets harder to gain each additional Command point. Suppose that your general never loses battles and only fights battles at with BattleOdds < 2.25 so that the
"V0090_Standard_Battle_Any_Victory_VnV_Trigger" always fires. If he starts the game with Command=0, he needs 1 victory to get Command=1 and 2 victories to get Command=2, but 4, 8, and 16 to go to Command=3, 4, and 5.
(These are for RTW 1.2 & 1.3)

The number of battle stars also don't equate directly to Command, since ancillaries influence battle stars on both maps and traits like GoodAttacker and GoodDefender influence them on the battle map. So, getting back to Son of Chinglu, my guess is that the Command >= 4 test refers only to the general's unmodified Command value. In RTW 1.3 this would mean he'd need to have the Great Commander, Legendary Commander, Legendary Warlord, or Military Genius traits.

You might test this by determining if these traits are still valid in BI, if they can apply to the Huns, and find out if there are BI-specific Command=4 traits. Then it's just a matter of checking if the general has the trait before battle.

Better yet, if you're comfortable with a slight mod, change one or more of your characters to have the trait (for example) GoodCommander 4 in desc_strat.txt. Then they will have the trait to start the game and you wouldn't have to check for it. I suppose they could lose it though.... Well, you get the point.

I'd be curious about what you find out.

[dismal]

Dismal,

Concerning differences between 1.2 and BI - I only meant that BattleOdds is unlikely to have changed meaning. Thresholds for awarding traits certainly may have.

You mention that winning traits and ancillaries isn't as easy as the triggers seem to indicate. I think that's because it gets harder to gain each additional Command point. Suppose that your general never loses battles and only fights battles at with BattleOdds < 2.25 so that the
"V0090_Standard_Battle_Any_Victory_VnV_Trigger" always fires. If he starts the game with Command=0, he needs 1 victory to get Command=1 and 2 victories to get Command=2, but 4, 8, and 16 to go to Command=3, 4, and 5.
(These are for RTW 1.2 & 1.3)

The number of battle stars also don't equate directly to Command, since ancillaries influence battle stars on both maps and traits like GoodAttacker and GoodDefender influence them on the battle map. So, getting back to Son of Chinglu, my guess is that the Command >= 4 test refers only to the general's unmodified Command value. In RTW 1.3 this would mean he'd need to have the Great Commander, Legendary Commander, Legendary Warlord, or Military Genius traits.

You might test this by determining if these traits are still valid in BI, if they can apply to the Huns, and find out if there are BI-specific Command=4 traits. Then it's just a matter of checking if the general has the trait before battle.

Better yet, if you're comfortable with a slight mod, change one or more of your characters to have the trait (for example) GoodCommander 4 in desc_strat.txt. Then they will have the trait to start the game and you wouldn't have to check for it. I suppose they could lose it though.... Well, you get the point.

I'd be curious about what you find out.

I think "natural" (meaning good commander line) 4 command generals are a thing of the past. I still get high star generals - even the occasional ten star - but they are usually from a combo of various ancillaries and other traits.

I'm pretty sure the guy I had who won "Son of Chinglu" was not any more than a Great Commander, if that. I don't believe I've ever made it to Legendary Commander in BI.

I'd also point out that the criteria test is ostensibly applied to the variable "Command", not the variable "GoodCommander".

I suppose you are right that someone with the skills and will could figure all this out by fighting a series of battles with a modded general plus an appropriate enemy, but I'm afraid that isn't me. Maybe when I finish my current campaign I will work on developing my modding skills.