the calculation of net odds

[eyemooneye]

1.jpg (194.49 KiB) Viewed 329 times

I am trying to follow the formular of "net odds" to do some calculation.
I searched in the forum regarding HardFraction, and understood it is AT/Armor DF, but I am not sure.

Finally, my calculation result is 18.45:1, which is very different than the actual result 8.316:1.

I am totally lost where the problem is. the calculation is tedious, but I am obsessed with the mechanism.

thanks in advance for clarification.

[Curtis Lemay]

See the attached:

[eyemooneye]

Thanks, crystal clear, Lemay!!

in addition, in below example:

success probability.jpg (126.13 KiB) Viewed 281 times

Look, AR=18 is very low(I understood AR>=100 will get good benefits), in the meantime net odds=0.5 is also low.
but the probability of success is still "fair"!

three question:
1. does this "the probability of success" have something to do with AR value or net odds? or it is a measurement from another new dimension?
2. In the combat plan, how can I decide this combat is worth it or not according to these three parameters pointing to diverging direction?
3. I read somewhere in the forum if net odds>=3, the likelihood of enemy RBC will be very high? is it true?

regards,

[Curtis Lemay]

Thanks, crystal clear, Lemay!!

in addition, in below example:

success probability.jpg

Look, AR=18 is very low(I understood AR>=100 will get good benefits), in the meantime net odds=0.5 is also low.
but the probability of success is still "fair"!

three question:
1. does this "the probability of success" have something to do with AR value or net odds? or it is a measurement from another new dimension?
2. In the combat plan, how can I decide this combat is worth it or not according to these three parameters pointing to diverging direction?
3. I read somewhere in the forum if net odds>=3, the likelihood of enemy RBC will be very high? is it true?

regards,

1. The AR is not a predictor of success, but a low number can convert the assault into a bombardment - bad news if the defense is all armor (which this is).

2. Note that the units involved have combat values of "1". There is an underlying real number that generates the On-Counter number. The value that generates a 1 can be any non-zero value less than 1.5. 1/32000 to 1.5. That's a huge range to model with almost no dynamic range - making it very hard for the planner to make meaningful predictions. Not a good scenario design if this is typical. Also, the defender has only Armor DF = it's all armored stuff. (Yet depicted with an infantry icon). Only the Net Odds uses floating values internally, so it is the best predictor. It seems to say that the attacker AT is only half the defender armored DF. But the planner doesn't take into consideration the actual penetration comparison, making it hard to predict as well. You also don't know if the attacker AT is passive or active (towed gun or vehicle) - but you would know that from the equipment in the assault. Regardless, the Net Odds is the best predictor - other parts of the planner don't differentiate soft vs. hard factors.

3. Higher the odds the more chance of success with soft targets. Hard targets are more nuanced, as I've described above. For them, you must gather more info from other sources.

[eyemooneye]

got it more or less.

1. AR is messurement of level of benifits for enhancing attacker bomb and sucking defender supply cost, better to have AR >= 100 if you intend to have best artillery support and reduce enemy's supply most.
2. the best success predictor is the Net Odds, better to have net odds > 1:1 if you intend to win a combat.
3. as for the predictor of "losses will be probably ..." and "possibiility of success is ...", they are inheritance from old version before TOAW 4.0 without considering terrain and defender support, not as accurate as net odds but only for reference.

thanks again if I understood correctly.

[larryfulkerson]

New rule: we all gotta wear suits for our games.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CcQ4jKn8aE

temp.png (1.11 MiB) Viewed 121 times

[Curtis Lemay]

New rule: we all gotta wear suits for our games.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CcQ4jKn8aE
temp.png

Suits vs. skins: One side in suits - other side butt naked.