Difference between revisions of "Talk:Combat"
(→defenses same as ships?: new section) |
OBloodyHell (talk | contribs) (noted something in each case.) |
||
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
Removed the "(but unlikely)" phrase from how an artemis can destroy an atlas. There is, in fact, only a 12% chance the Atlas will survive. Here's the math - in order to survive all three rounds that it could be destroyed in, it must survive each round individually, one after another, of which the chances are 60% (0.6), 50% (0.5), and 40% (0.4), respectively. Thus, as these events are (in theory) independent, to find the chance of surviving all three, we multiply these together, 0.6 x 0.5 x 0.4 = 0.12. Thus, there is only a 12% chance of that atlas surviving, and 88% chance that it will not. Now, the definition of 'unlikely' may be debated by different people in the statistics field, but the HIGHEST number I've ever seen in a textbook as being defined 'unlikely' was 5%. | Removed the "(but unlikely)" phrase from how an artemis can destroy an atlas. There is, in fact, only a 12% chance the Atlas will survive. Here's the math - in order to survive all three rounds that it could be destroyed in, it must survive each round individually, one after another, of which the chances are 60% (0.6), 50% (0.5), and 40% (0.4), respectively. Thus, as these events are (in theory) independent, to find the chance of surviving all three, we multiply these together, 0.6 x 0.5 x 0.4 = 0.12. Thus, there is only a 12% chance of that atlas surviving, and 88% chance that it will not. Now, the definition of 'unlikely' may be debated by different people in the statistics field, but the HIGHEST number I've ever seen in a textbook as being defined 'unlikely' was 5%. | ||
+ | |||
+ | -- The above calc doesn't take into account the random chance a ship has for simply blowing up if its armor level is reduced by 30% or more. I haven't done the math to calculate its effects, but it's nontrivial. | ||
== defenses same as ships? == | == defenses same as ships? == | ||
I know for the firing and getting hit, defenses act the same as ships, but do they also have a chance to blow up when below 70% hull? | I know for the firing and getting hit, defenses act the same as ships, but do they also have a chance to blow up when below 70% hull? | ||
+ | |||
+ | -- Not a definitive answer, but that's the way to bet. No reason for them to be handled differently. They do, of course, have a chance to spontaneously regenerate after the end (a rather ludicrous thing in itself, as it happens instantly rather than over time) | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Ineffectiveness Rule == | ||
+ | |||
+ | How does the "ineffectiveness rule" work in combat. It is described in the wiki as, | ||
+ | "Any attack that does equal to or less than 1% of the maximum Shield Rating of a unit is absorbed. As an example, The Artemis Class has a base attack of 50 and the Large Decoy has a base Shield of 10,000. Since 50/10,000 = .005 (.5%), any number of Artemis could never damage a Large Decoy that still has its Shield even partially up." | ||
+ | |||
+ | So does that mean in each round all the ships do not fire at once? So if the Artemis happens to fire later in the round once the Decoy's shield is removed it will damage a Large Decoy. Or is the phrase "any number of Artemis could never damage a Large Decoy that still has its Shield even partially up" confusing because an Artemis can never damage a Large Decoy. | ||
+ | |||
+ | -- I do not believe the current description of the ineffectiveness rule is correct, unless it has changed in the last 6-8 months or so and I didn't notice. I do not believe weapons or shield tech levels are factored in at all, only the base rating is used for this calculation. |
Latest revision as of 23:55, 25 February 2012
Why doesn't this page contain information about the Bouncing Effect, where if the attack is <1% of the defender's shields it does nothing?
- If you know about it, then why don't you add it? That's why this is a wiki... --Rob 13:53, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Removed the "(but unlikely)" phrase from how an artemis can destroy an atlas. There is, in fact, only a 12% chance the Atlas will survive. Here's the math - in order to survive all three rounds that it could be destroyed in, it must survive each round individually, one after another, of which the chances are 60% (0.6), 50% (0.5), and 40% (0.4), respectively. Thus, as these events are (in theory) independent, to find the chance of surviving all three, we multiply these together, 0.6 x 0.5 x 0.4 = 0.12. Thus, there is only a 12% chance of that atlas surviving, and 88% chance that it will not. Now, the definition of 'unlikely' may be debated by different people in the statistics field, but the HIGHEST number I've ever seen in a textbook as being defined 'unlikely' was 5%.
-- The above calc doesn't take into account the random chance a ship has for simply blowing up if its armor level is reduced by 30% or more. I haven't done the math to calculate its effects, but it's nontrivial.
defenses same as ships?
I know for the firing and getting hit, defenses act the same as ships, but do they also have a chance to blow up when below 70% hull?
-- Not a definitive answer, but that's the way to bet. No reason for them to be handled differently. They do, of course, have a chance to spontaneously regenerate after the end (a rather ludicrous thing in itself, as it happens instantly rather than over time)
Ineffectiveness Rule
How does the "ineffectiveness rule" work in combat. It is described in the wiki as, "Any attack that does equal to or less than 1% of the maximum Shield Rating of a unit is absorbed. As an example, The Artemis Class has a base attack of 50 and the Large Decoy has a base Shield of 10,000. Since 50/10,000 = .005 (.5%), any number of Artemis could never damage a Large Decoy that still has its Shield even partially up."
So does that mean in each round all the ships do not fire at once? So if the Artemis happens to fire later in the round once the Decoy's shield is removed it will damage a Large Decoy. Or is the phrase "any number of Artemis could never damage a Large Decoy that still has its Shield even partially up" confusing because an Artemis can never damage a Large Decoy.
-- I do not believe the current description of the ineffectiveness rule is correct, unless it has changed in the last 6-8 months or so and I didn't notice. I do not believe weapons or shield tech levels are factored in at all, only the base rating is used for this calculation.