Battle Odds: 100.1%?!

[Ih8backstabbers]

Okay I had a samurai with many promotions aganst a warrior. I held down right click and I saw the combat odds:

100.1%.

How can this happen???

 

[Chieftess]

He's giving it extra effort. (It's probably due to one of the promotions that adds to the chances)

BTW, your sig is too long - 5 lines is the limit.

 

[Veteranewbie]

See if you can lose?

 

[salty]

The first strikes guarantee victory. I had a cho-ko-nu with something like 146% victory chance once.

 

[PieceOfMind]

The battle probability calculor is not accurate (ie. broken) when first strikes are involved. Hopefully it will be fixed with the next patch. I would suspect it is possible for a unit to lose a battle with greater than 100%, in the current version of the game.

 

[Bushface]

You only have to look at the Combat Log to see that the calculations often bear little or no relation to the displayed odds. I recall an occasion when I had a Modern Armour with Combat 3, undamaged at strength 52, attacking a slightly frayed SAM with a winning chance for my unit of 99% or so: one dead MA later, I checked the log and it showed a string of "your Modern Armour has been hit for 8% damage" entries with never a scratch on the SAM. Yech. But that's the "luck" I now expect.

 

[20past4]

I had a seal with a battle odds of 121% against a pikeman once.

 

[Meffy]

Motivational speakers and management types would just LOVE this. "See that, all you engineers and techies? It IS possible to give 110%! So there."

 

[Rex Tyrannus]

How does one visit the battle log? I've always wanted to see the details compared to the precalculated odds. To me, when invading a city, I'll often beat the first/best defender despite odds of 25% or so. Yet, I'll often lose to the fifth defender at 75%. It just seems to happen far more often than luck can account for.

 

[Breunor]

Interesting, I've never had odds greater than 100%. Mine seems to work pretty well, I always wondered why people got greater than 100%.

As many of you said, maybe its the first strike that messes things up. I practically never use that promotion.

Best wishes,

Breunor

 

[Ljdjr]

How does one visit the battle log?

Click on the paper and pencil above your research rate on the map screen.

Or hit CTRL + TAB.

Then go to combat log.

 

[enchanter100]

Due to a lot of people questioning the accuracy of the "right" click odds, I have been keeping track of 300+ battles in an excel Spreadsheet. I have a laptop right next to me and keep the info. So soon I will post my results. It's actually amazing how close the numbers are currently.

 

[Rex Tyrannus]

Click on the paper and pencil above your research rate on the map screen.

I'd never noticed that before. Yay observant me.

@enchanter100. I'd be very interested in that datasheet. Your saying that actual results line up with precalculated odds? I wonder if I just seem to remember the odd happenings better. Sort of like how a digital clock "always" shows 1234 or 911, but we really just don't realize how many times we look at a clock with a mundane print-out.

 

[BeefontheBone]

Ah, selective memory. Nearly as irritating as selective hearing...

@OP: Above posters are correct, first strikes aren't calculated properly. It's accurate if neither unit has first strikes (or if the unit without them is immune). However, greater than 100% chances can probably be safely treated as negligible chance of failure (but with an experienced Samurai against a warrior you knew that, right?)
In future please use the search function before posting, this has been covered many times.

 

[tombeef]

i lost a battle when my highly promoted axeman had a 99.9% chance for victory against some archers

I also have been keeping track of some interesting stats
In my last 60 battles where I am favored to win by 60-70% I have gone
21(Wins)-39(Losses)

I also have 2 wins and 4 losses in 50-50 battles, although that's not that bad since the sample size is so small.

 

[Snerk]

Is the combat odd you're given correct or not?. If its not, then why?
It seems im loosing most of the battles where i have a small advantage.. it doesnt make sense!

 

[ICBM'S]

lol i had my longbowmen have odds of 139.4% against a spearmen lol guess wat i managed 2 lose!

 

[crunch]

Above 100 % combat odds are fairly common. But what is the highest odds you had? Me: 197% with an expert drill catapult against some archers.

 

[BeefontheBone]

i lost a battle when my highly promoted axeman had a 99.9% chance for victory against some archers

I also have been keeping track of some interesting stats
In my last 60 battles where I am favored to win by 60-70% I have gone
21(Wins)-39(Losses)

If you read my post above, you'll see that you probably didn't have a 99.9% chance of winning since the archers' first strikes aren't calculated properly. For the same reason, anyone attempting to do any analysis on combat results needs to ensure that no first strikes are involved in order to make a valid comparison with the displayed odds - I'd be VERY surprised (Hat? I'd eat an entire outfit!) if a proper analysis (i.e. running a number of combats over and over with new random seeds in the WB) showed significant deviation from the displayed odds provided that no first strikes were involved.

EDIT: Ooooh, spooky - just noticed that the person I quoted there has a nick which is a combination of my real name and nick...

 

[tombeef]

thanks for the info BeefontheBone

about the name, I was just sitting around one day with a friend trying to come up with a corny, funny screename...

my friends name is Tom, I was hungry and Bam! tombeef