Odd Odds ...

[nukkxx5058]

Losing battle with 10:1 odds several times in a row. This defies laws of probabilities. Unless I'm missing something of course

Any idea why ?
Thx

[mroyer]

I've become disenchanted with the odds calculation as being almost meaningless.
I've had knock-out punch victories at 2:1 and suffered crushing defeats at 8:1.
So, I've taken to trying to ignore the odds and look at the array of offensive and defensive modifications instead.

(I say trying because I find it quite difficult to truly ignore - it's so big and green and in your face.)

-Mark R.

[eddieballgame]

First, don't be in a hurry to attack based on the 'Odds'.
The numbers to pay attention to are the 'Offensive & Defensive Mod' ones.
Depending on how many units are used in a particular encounter, make sure to enter them into the battle in a way as to improve those numbers more than just the overall 'Odds' number.
Sure 'Odds' of +20 to hundreds/thousands seems pretty clear.
Not so much in the 5-10 range...be warned. (only desperation will force me to fight at less 'Odds')

Many times I have had my 'Odds' number go down while raising the, aforementioned, 'Off & Def Mod' numbers with superior results...you can test it.
I have, also, found that when engaging the enemy (to include alien life forms) that it can be a much better strategy/tactic to play defense per results as opposed to simply attacking.
The 'Entrenchment' factor can make a huge impact.

[nukkxx5058]

OK at least it's not just me
Sometimes adding units reduces the odds. Does it makes sens ?

[eddieballgame]

ORIGINAL: nukkxx5058

OK at least it's not just me
Sometimes adding units reduces the odds. Does it makes sens ?

Maybe not if one relies only on the 'Odds' rating...I do not, so I don't worry about.
Remember, 'recon' is key per getting a more accurate reading on one's chances.

per the Manual:

The odds are an estimate of whether the combat will go in your favour.
It shows attacker strength: defender strength… ideally the attacker strength
will be higher than the defender strength.
Like 2:1, 3:1 or even better 4:1
(keep in mind it is an estimate and lack of recon and oddities of battles
might give different results than expected).

[tikhun]

I suspect that one important reason why odds often lie to you is commander rolls, which provide a lot of modifiers and can make a huge difference.
They are counted in expectations in this preview, but they still are random rolls after all, and due to mulplicative nature can really explode.

[KingHalford]

ORIGINAL: nukkxx5058

OK at least it's not just me
Sometimes adding units reduces the odds. Does it makes sens ?

This happens for several reasons: firstly, encirclement will increase the odds, read the manual for details exactly how that works.

Secondly, if you're using units from more than one HQ (whether that's different OHQs, or an OHQ and the SHQ) then you'll lose a large bonus. This is significant, again, read the manual for details.

There are a lot of other factors. Combat is pretty complex under the hood!

[Maerchen]

Always keep an eye on your ammo count and supply status of your units. the best tank is worthless without food, ammo and fuel.

[nukkxx5058]

ORIGINAL: KingHalford

ORIGINAL: nukkxx5058

OK at least it's not just me
Sometimes adding units reduces the odds. Does it makes sens ?

This happens for several reasons: firstly, encirclement will increase the odds, read the manual for details exactly how that works.

Secondly, if you're using units from more than one HQ (whether that's different OHQs, or an OHQ and the SHQ) then you'll lose a large bonus. This is significant, again, read the manual for details.

There are a lot of other factors. Combat is pretty complex under the hood!

Yes, I can easily imagine all that but the problem is that when I'm adding an unit to the roster, I don't see its stats so I have no idea what I'm actually adding.
Hence I have no ex-ante idea whether it will reduce (or increase) odds and why. Have to add/remove and without a clear picture of what is wrong with a given unit.

Or am I missing something important here ?

[nukkxx5058]

ORIGINAL: tikhun

I suspect that one important reason why odds often lie to you is commander rolls, which provide a lot of modifiers and can make a huge difference.

This might explain ! At least would make sens. A bad General will make wrong assessments of the battle perspectives. HEnce wrong odds. If it's confirmed to be the reason, then very well done the DEV !

They are counted in expectations in this preview, but they still are random rolls after all, and due to mulplicative nature can really explode.

You nearly never throw 5 sixes in a row with a fair dice. Here I'm losing 10:1 battles 3 times in a row., It's not randomness, it's biaiseness (unless the "Generals" explanation holds).

[mroyer]

If it's confirmed to be the reason, then very well done the DEV !

One of the frustrating things about this game from a player perspective is it's opaqueness - I generally find it is very difficult to figure out the reasons something is happening. That makes it very difficult to learn from mistakes.

On the flip side...
(a) ironically, that very opaqueness arguably makes the game a better model of reality, and
(b) if/when I do finally figure out what's going on, it almost always makes very good sense (so yes very well done DEVs!!).

-Mark R.

[solops]

It clearly states in the manual that there may be factors of which the player is unaware in the calculation of battle odds. One way to minimize these is better reconnaissance. You will never know everything and you may be mistaken about some things. Fog of war.

[solops]

ORIGINAL: mroyer

One of the frustrating things about this game from a player perspective is it's opaqueness - I generally find it is very difficult to figure out the reasons something is happening. That makes it very difficult to learn from mistakes.

-Mark R.

+2

[matt3916]

Here I'm losing 10:1 battles 3 times in a row., It's not randomness, it's biaiseness

Three times is far too small a sample from which to accuse the random number generator of not being random.

[solops]

ORIGINAL: solops

It clearly states in the manual that there may be factors of which the player is unaware in the calculation of battle odds. One way to minimize these is better reconnaissance. You will never know everything and you may be mistaken about some things. Fog of war.

Rephrase: The battle odds may not reflect factors of which the player is unaware.

[nukkxx5058]

ORIGINAL: matt3916

Here I'm losing 10:1 battles 3 times in a row., It's not randomness, it's biaiseness

Three times is far too small a sample from which to accuse the random number generator of not being random.

Of course, it's not a proof. But take a dice and throw 3 sixes in a row. You will see it won't happened very often. The probability it occurs (1/6)^3 which is very small (0.4%).
I didn't say the RNG is falty or non-random. It can't be because RNG are languages built-in functions and therefore can't be wrong. What I say is that some parameters are not correctly handled somewhere in the tables. It says it's 10:1 but in reality, it's not 10:1. Here is the problem.

[Paxtyliom]

I played a lot of games that made a good impression. Some of them got me really hooked and I have good memories with them. I remember playing Heartstone, grinding a lot of currency, just until they introduced the RNG. At one point there was so much RNG there that there was RNG in RNG ^^
My friends and I liked playing games, although we didn't spend much time on it. We played Path of Exile (PoE) together and looked for exalted orbs and the remaining PoE currency. Currency in PoE is very valuable and can be sold and bought with real money. My mom is very fond of cats and all cat related games. Generally, PC games are her passion. We buy PoE currency together on Odealo because it is the most trusted store I know.

[nukkxx5058]

I'm just saying: it's not 10:1

I don't mind and it's perfectly fine to me even if the game is programmed to cheat. But it should not say it's 10:1 because it's not 10:1. Except if the "bad general odds theory" is true.

A much better system would be: "our General estimates it's a 10:1 odd and this estimation has a subjective probability to be true of (for example) 0.8 [or 0.3, whatever...]. This would make sens, mathematically speaking. And would allow to take the decision of attacking or not.

For example a 10:1 estimated odd with a 0.2 probability to be true would be a no-go or me.

For now, the 10:1 figure has absolutely no meaning and is useless information. And losing despite huge odds occurs very often (just now again in my current game ...).

[solops]

And your 10-1 may have really been only 3-1.

[DTurtle]

Well, the odds are a relatively simple calculation:
Take the total (estimated) firepower of all units involved and simulate a single combat round that involves all positive and negative modifiers, including commander rolls. This simulated result is then displayed as positive and negative percentage modifiers of the original firepower. Multiply/add them altogether and get a total (estimated) modified firepower for each side. This modified firepower is then used to calculate the odds.

There are many things that can really make large differences between displayed odds and actual results appear:
1. Low recon: If you only know that there are units in a hex, the base firepower is calculated at 200 or so per unit. The real value can be completely different.
2. The effects of calibre and high hitpoints. Fights are always one subunit vs another subunit. A subunit has to actually make a hit/damage/destroy roll in a single attack. If your individual units are incapable of really getting hits in, it doesn't really matter what the odds are. Calibre has a huge effect here.
3. Leader rolls. It seems like only a single roll is made by the commanders and then applied to all subunits for the entire battle. Since all modifiers are multiplicative percentage modifiers, those modifiers can become insanely high (or low). Since they can have such a huge effect, having different rolls between preview and actual battle can make a huge difference.
4. The modified firepower has everyone fighting at basically "full strength." However, actual combat has the attacker see large negative modifiers in the first few combat rounds. Depending on the results in those rounds, the units never really fight at full strength - some might already be dead, retreating, or gotten severe readiness hits.
5. In addition, some units might simply not have enough AP to really attack well. 10 AP are used per combat round, if you only have 30 AP to attack with (the minimum), then they will never fight at full strength.
6. Low morale/readiness/ammo/fuel. The odds really underestimate just how big the effect the stacked negative modifiers are of troops that are out of supply, have low readiness or morale. Infantry can kill starving/hungry heavy tanks, tank destroyers and walkers that they wouldn't have a chance against normally. The odds don't reflect that enough.