|
Khan7 -> (8/2/2001 4:48:00 AM)
|
Quote from Mike Wood:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Hello...
When we modeled the high explosives system, we assumed that the round does not always land in the exact center of the hex or even in the portion of the hex which contains the target. In the case of smaller caliber ordinance, when this occurs, no casualties are produced. In the case of larger caliber ordinance, casualties in the target hex and adjacent hexes can still be produced, because of the size of the explosion. Within our system it is quite possible to kill no one in the target hex at all, and yet destroy a squad in the adjacent hex. In this case, the round landed near the edge of the hex and micro-terrain protected the unit in the target hex.
Hope this helps to understand our logic...
Michael Wood
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
RRRRrrrgg.. Okay, here is a semi-complex mathematical analysis of all this.
We assume in the following that the total significant blast radius is 25m (so that it would fill a 50m hex if it struck in the center).
The following was found with a bunch of math that I won't bother to write out here, but if feel like doubting it I'll show all my work.
25% chance of the shell landing within 12.5m of the center. We will assume that a shell landing in this range would significantly affect the target hex ONLY.
31.2% chance of the shell landing between 12.5 and 18.75m from the center. This would on average spread the blast about 2/3 in the target hex and 1/3 in ONE other hex.
43.7% chance of the shell landing between 18.75 and 25m from the center. We will assume that this affects the target and ONE other hex about equally, with a tendency to affect the target hex slightly more.
In situation one, a unit in the target hex would invariably be exposed to the blast and would not be able to escape it.
In situation two, a unit in the target hex would have a 1/3 chance of being completely out of the range of the blast, and a unit in the one other hex affected would have a 2/3 chance of being completely out of danger. The difference between target hex and other hex damage would be increased even more by the fact that the whole of the most intense part of the blast would be contained within the target hex.
In situation 3 a unit in the target hex and a unit in another affected hex would have about equal chances of being out of danger, and the blast would be approximately equally distributed between the two hexes. The target hex would of course have a tendency to take a slightly greater beating.
The anylysis above assumes that the shell will only ever affect one other hex, but this works for our purposes, as it could only ever realistically affect 2 other hexes, and if it did the affects would be divided between the two.
We must also remember that the unit in the adjacent hex can too take advantage of microterrain, a fact which Mike Wood seems bent on ignoring.
Conclusions:
-Damage can only be done to one or perhaps two adjacent hexes.
- .25 x 1 + .312 x .66 + .437 x .5 = .67742 = 67.742%
- Therefore the target hex will overall take somewhat more than 2/3 of the damage (remember also that they will take the more intense parts of the blast radius), meaning that the ratio between target and adjacent hex damage should be at least 2 to 1.
-The fact that the current system deals damage to ALL adjacent hexes at the ratio of 3.4 to 2.2, only about 1.5 to 1, is a very serious and damaging game flaw that cannot be overlooked.
I hope this finally puts all questions to rest on the matter.
|
|
|
|
