Challenge and clan bonus mechanics (in General)

Are challenge and clan bonuses additive or multiplicative in relation to the NUB bonus? i.e. 700% NUB + 100% challenge = 1400%? Or 800%?

Additive

No they are cumulative

They are multiplicative

Additive/Cumulative (split the hair if you like ;-D)

700% NUB + 100% Challenge Bonus + 15% Clan Bonus = 815% Total Bonus

Multiplicative? In what way Duke?

I don't think you can really compare challenge bonus with the rest of the bonuses. First off, it is not additive as you purpose Zenai because if you have -100% challenge bonus you get zero rewards, even if you have 100000000000% Nub bonus :P

EoD who on CB, in their right mind, would actually fight with a -100% Challenge Bonus?

In the instance you propose yeah sure but otherwise it is additive.

What is it with ppl splitting hairs on this site? Just got to point out the "ONE" instance when it wouldn't apply directly? *Sighs*

From what i know from testing under the old NUB formula and before NCB.



A) base rewards are base on BA cost
B) fighting clan members give a bonus i do not know if its increase by NUB/NCB bonus or challange/clan bonus nor how its work but in my test under 160 % nub bonus at 100% challange bonus 14.6% clan bonus the increase was 32$
C) its seem that there 5 potential rewards for the same opponent.


The interaction between Ba cost and rewards is unknow but i think its somewhere from 20% to 40% of your BA cost. 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

When you get your base rewards * challange bonus * clan bonus then + clan member bonus if apply.

Under the old NUB formula the BA cost were * by NUB bonus so your bonus was not at the end of the formula but at the begining. Also the reason why you see a large increase in rewards after changing BA regen rate. Moving from 10/20 9/20 increase BA cost by about 20%.

My point was that it looks to not be additive due to effects of negative challenge bonus.

If you have -50% you get half the rewards, -100% you get no rewards, etc. Unless the positive values of a challenge bonus give you an additive result and the negative values give you a multiplicative result.

In either case, it is not solely additive.

It makes no sense for the N*B bonus and the rest of the bonuses combined to be additive instead of multiplicative - they NEED to be multiplied for any of the observed results to make sense.
How the rest of the bonuses (challenge bonus, displayed clan bonus, hidden clan bonus, BA cost modifier, enemy PR modifier) get combined, be it added, multiplied or some other weird way, that's another story.

Also, in the above example, more likely, a +700% NUB and a +100% CB would actually yield a +1500% overall bonus (i.e. x16 to rewards)-> (100%+700%)*(100%+100%)-100%

It's all bogus in my opinion. I'll be fighting through my list, and I usual delete anyone who gives me less than 1500 XP, so one fight, they give me 1100, but the next 2 fights, they give me 2100. and that person is -10%, while someone who is +10% is only giving me 1800 xp. it's soo random and all over the place.

This is before the yield gentlemen. In the end you add them.

Zenai, I don't think you understand what people are saying.

In the HYPOTHETICAL case of a few fights with a -100% CB opponent vs a +100% CB opponent when your N*B is +700%, if your hypothesis would be accurate, the variation you would notice could go from +600% to +800% of expected base reward (i.e. barely any difference at all) -- before the usual randomness (but that can be averaged out for actual measurements).
This is obviously NOT what you ever actually see, so your hypothesis must be wrong.

*Sighs* If you so..............

There is a large amount of randomness in rewards, but CB$ reward is always picked as fixed fractions of the average net rewards.
I don't recall from memory what the fraction are for sure, but it was something along the lines of 7/9, 8/9, 9/9=1, 10/9 and 11/9 of the average. I'm fairly sure it's not THOSE, but something similar.
Average XP reward is always a constant multiplied by average CB$ reward, but the actual values XP can take are far more numerous.
You will notice almost exactly the same numbers repeating a lot for CB$ rewards, with actual possible rewards clustered in only a few groups (variations mainly due to own VPR and opponent score changes altering average net reward very slightly), so in a few fights you can gauge what the actual average CB$ reward is if you keep track, and the average XP reward is proportional to that.

P.S. Hmm, they might actually BE those, but you also need to add 6/9 and 12/9 of average into the mix too (for 7 total possible CB$ reward values, not just 5).
Absolutely no clue what the weight of each multiplier is though, nor what multipliers are used for XP (it might even be a continous normal distribution for all I know, I haven't bothered plotting it from enough identical fights, doo tired and bored to do data re-collection).

The bonuses are multiplicative and there are 5 cbd reward options available to each base cbd reward. I always did it using the minimum value instead of the middle value so it was based upon 1.00, 1.25, 1.50, 1.75, 2.00 multiplied to the base value.

Damm i am good

This is not entirely true...

base rewards are actually based off of your power.

That being said.

If you have a high power and lose your challenge bonus you won't be receiving the highest possible rewards. You need to find a nice balance, the highest power possible while maintaining the highest challenge bonus possible. That will net you the best rewards.

What he most likely meant to say was that the primary reward multiplier is proportional to the BA purchase cost, which goes up radically as BA regeneration rate changes.
Given a certain fixed challenge bonus at various BA costs (obtained by hitting different targets in each case, obviously), better results can be obtained by having higher BA costs (i.e. having a higher VPR).