The new After roll bonus.

This is my understanding of arb. Can someone please confirm this?


A tank has an attack of 8, and an arb of 3.

This means that it will roll anywhere between a 1 and an 8.

And that it will have a 30% chance of having +1 arb

A 19.8% chance of having a +2 arb

And a 13.1% chance of having a +3 arb


And if LB is on, you can get +5 +6 arbs, with each additional arb having a 66% chance.

Is this right?

Correct. Don't know where you got the 66% figure though. It's always 30% for +1 and proportionally less for +2, +3 and so on.

Can you provide the calculations and the general thought of it, I can't follow you with just numbers.

Yeah. I'm in the dark about that 19.8% and 13.1%

Napisano od Ivan, 31.05.2011 at 02:11

It's always 30% for +1 and proportionally less for +2, +3 and so on.

Someone told me it was 66%.

When you say "proportionally less" for the successive ones, what you mean is that it's 30% for each sucessive after roll bonus, assuming that you get the previous bonus, right?

So:
30% for +1

30%*30% = 9% for a +2

30%*9% = ~3% for a +3

etc.

Please someone explain it in detail, if above post is right, +3 is very unlickely, what about destroyers who get +5 with NC if I recall correctly, that's strong on paper only.

Is the whole ARB bonus is decided in 1 roll? I mean, if it's one roll then all possibilities are summed and then you have, for max ARB 3, chance of ARB 1 + chance of ARB 2 + chance of ARB 3 out of 100 and for max ARB 1 only a chance of ARB +1 out of 100. That would mean higher max ARB also gives you less possibility of having no ARB at all.
Is that correct?

We need someone that made the game to come here and answer. I had sent a private message to amok about the FAQ not being up to date, check it:

Citat:

Battle mechanics
Unit's Attack and Defence represent the maximum amount of damage you deal to the opponent. Attack and defence are executed simultaneosly, so you're guaranteed to deal some damage in a battle. Each unit has Hit points - so damage is applied directly to Hit points, and if the unit runs out of them, it gets destroyed. The remaining damage is then transferred to the next unit.

So, for example, 1 Tank (9 HP) attacks 1 Infantry (8 HP) and 1 Militia (7 HP). Tank deals 6 damage (attacking), Infantry deals 4 damage (defending). Now Tank has 5 HP left and Infantry 2 HP. Tanks now deals 3 damage and Infantry also 5. Tank dies, Infantry dies, Militia takes 1 damage, but survives to fight another day. After the battle all HP is restored for surving units.

ARB (After-roll bonus)
ARB has around 20% chance to be applied to each attack/defence roll. Minimum is always 1, maximum is different for each unit.

Update and clear up the ARB issue please.

Seconded. Although, the battle mechanics are fine, I think, just not the ARB part.

I called the big guns, I hope my pms don't get ignored this time

Napisano od Aristosseur, 01.06.2011 at 10:17

I called the big guns, I hope my pms don't get ignored this time

I can't provide details on the ARB chance, since I'm a bit hazy about it as well. Amok was the one who programmed that part.

The chance that you will get 1 ARB is currently fixed at 25%. Then you have a 66% chance for each consecutive +1.
Example:
25% ? 1
66% ? +1
66% ? +1
66% ? +1
= 4 ARB in total.

So, total is:
+1 25%
+2 25%*66%=16,5%
+3 16,5%*66%=10,89%
+4 10,89%*66%=~7,19%

right?

Also, if the default attack of a unit is 7, does he always deal 7 or does he deal 1-7 +ARB?

Correct.
1-7 +ARB

Last question I think, how is the value 1-7 determined? Equal chance of 1,2,3,4,5,6,7? Or some other formula?

This help a lot to understand some weird battle results. Thanks.

Yeah, knowledge of the sort of distribution would be nice.

Napisano od Aristosseur, 01.06.2011 at 14:01

Last question I think, how is the value 1-7 determined? Equal chance of 1,2,3,4,5,6,7? Or some other formula?

It's a simple random. Each number have an equal chance, yes.

Amok, you realise that makes Lucky Bsstard quite possibly the worst strategy out there? Especially considering non-premiums have to buy it for 40K.

Napisano od BASED Ironail, 02.06.2011 at 19:05

Amok, you realise that makes Lucky Bsstard quite possibly the worst strategy out there? Especially considering non-premiums have to buy it for 40K.

A lot of us have known this since March or so.

LB used to be good, now it's pretty useless, for the most part. I think I'd rather go with no strategy.

Napisano od Vespre, 03.06.2011 at 21:15

I think I'd rather go with no strategy.

By the way, None is one of the best strategies, well balanced, fitting perfect in whole world maps, and I'm not being ironic

Napisano od Pinheiro, 03.06.2011 at 21:53

By the way, None is one of the best strategies, well balanced, fitting perfect in whole world maps, and I'm not being ironic

personally, I think GC > none as far as world/eurasia/euro maps go.
none is underrated, though, yes.

Wtf is ARB anyways? What does it do exactly?

It adds bonus to defense/offense.

Napisano od Aristosseur, 01.06.2011 at 12:43

So, total is:
+1 25%
+2 25%*66%=16,5%
+3 16,5%*66%=10,89%
+4 10,89%*66%=~7,19%

right?

Statistics can be tricky, and can be manipulated. In this case I think a little manipulation will shed some light on the general usefulness of ARB.

It's interesting to note that getting +2 ARB is more likely than getting +1 ARB. This is why I don't like the % progression of the above calculations. They aren't "wrong", but I think they make ARB look worthless, and I don't think it is.

Instead of starting the calculation with 25%, let's assume you're getting +1 ARB once every four attacks. 66% of the time you get it, you'll get +2 ARB. 2 out of 3 times. And again, 2 out of 3 times you get +2, you'll get +3. My point is basically that once you get the +1, you can go "on a roll".

Let's assume you attack 12 times with a stack of a unit with a max ARB of 3.

Theoretically, you will get +1 ARB once, +2 ARB once, and +3 ARB once (although you would have a 33% chance to instead get +2 again instead of +3).

Looking at this, it seems to me that a high ARB helps more in battles where many units are involved. I've noticed that when using destroyers in large stacks they seem to do much better than when in small stacks, while it seems to make less of a difference with tanks.