From: Eric McDonald <mcdonald@phy.cmich.edu>
To: Hans Ronne <hronne@comhem.se>
Cc: xconq7@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: Major bug and what to do about it (long)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 21:14:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0408171616520.31852-100000@leon.phy.cmich.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <l03130303bd480ba4ce13@[212.181.162.155]>
On Tue, 17 Aug 2004, Hans Ronne wrote:
> >> >Why? Surely if you were firing at an individual unit, then the
> >> >chance of another just happening to be in its place coupled with
> >> >the chance of hitting the substitute unit should be smaller than
> >> >the hit chance of directly aiming at the substitute unit.
> >>
> >>not a
> >> fire-at action against the unseen unit (which would be impossible by
> >> definition). So the hit chance should really be the same regardless of
> >> where the unit is located in the cell.
> >
> >Only if the other units are seen and we are treating 'fire-into'
> >as chosing a random target from among the unit views. In the case
> >where the other units are not seen, then this makes no sense.
> >Unseen units should be very difficult to hit (unless they have a
> >very large target cross-section relative to the size of the cell).
>
>But this small chance would still be the same regardless of where
> the unseen unit is in the cell.
Well, no kidding. I am not sure how the position of an unseen unit
in a cell found its way into the this discussion. The only time
the "position" of an unseen unit in a cell matters is if we roll
the dice and the unseen unit is determined to be in the position
where the ghost unit was at, in the event of a 'fire-at' at the
ghost unit. In the case of a 'fire-into' (here meaning a random
barrage into a cell), the position of the unseen unit is totally
irrelevant.
>You seemed to argue above that we would be
> "directly aiming at the subsitute unit", but this is not possible if it is
> invisible.
Maybe the choice of wording made the meaning unclear. What I was
saying that, if you see unit X and aim directly at it, then the
chance of hitting it is determined by 'hit-chance' or
'fire-hit-chance'. If you think you see unit Y, aim directly at
it, but unit Y turns out to be a ghost and unit X happens to be
in the same cell, then the chance of unit X being considered to be
in the position of unit Y is really quite small in most cases, and
thus unit X should not be hit with the same chance from the
barrage intended for unit Y. Clearer or muddier?
Eric
prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-08-17 20:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-08-16 21:53 Hans Ronne
2004-08-16 22:14 ` Eric McDonald
2004-08-16 22:43 ` Hans Ronne
2004-08-17 0:33 ` Hans Ronne
2004-08-17 1:13 ` Eric McDonald
2004-08-17 1:39 ` Hans Ronne
2004-08-17 2:21 ` Eric McDonald
2004-08-17 4:28 ` Jim Kingdon
2004-08-17 5:17 ` Hans Ronne
2004-08-17 18:00 ` Eric McDonald
2004-08-18 5:26 ` Jim Kingdon
2004-08-18 11:11 ` Hans Ronne
2004-08-17 16:14 ` Eric McDonald
2004-08-17 0:35 ` Eric McDonald
2004-08-17 1:16 ` Hans Ronne
2004-08-17 1:46 ` Eric McDonald
2004-08-17 3:03 ` Hans Ronne
2004-08-17 3:56 ` Eric McDonald
2004-08-17 1:30 ` Eric McDonald
2004-08-17 2:52 ` Hans Ronne
2004-08-17 2:53 ` Eric McDonald
2004-08-17 4:42 ` Jim Kingdon
2004-08-17 16:37 ` Eric McDonald
2004-08-17 4:48 ` Hans Ronne
2004-08-17 16:42 ` Eric McDonald
2004-08-18 10:56 ` Jim Kingdon
2004-08-17 11:06 ` Stan Shebs
2004-08-17 15:29 ` Hans Ronne
2004-08-17 16:01 ` Hans Ronne
2004-08-17 18:57 ` Eric McDonald
2004-08-17 20:38 ` Hans Ronne
2004-08-17 21:55 ` Eric McDonald
2004-08-17 23:42 ` Hans Ronne
2004-08-18 0:49 ` Eric McDonald
2004-08-18 4:59 ` Hans Ronne
2004-08-18 15:28 ` Eric McDonald
2004-08-19 6:37 ` Elijah Meeks
2004-08-19 12:46 ` Hans Ronne
2004-08-19 16:46 ` Eric McDonald
2004-08-19 13:09 ` Hans Ronne
2004-08-19 16:05 ` Eric McDonald
2004-08-19 20:09 ` Hans Ronne
2004-08-19 23:37 ` Eric McDonald
2004-08-20 1:42 ` Hans Ronne
2004-08-20 3:29 ` Clearing the Air (long) Eric McDonald
2004-08-20 15:26 ` Stan Shebs
2004-08-18 5:30 ` Major bug and what to do about it (long) Jim Kingdon
2004-08-18 12:52 ` Hans Ronne
2004-08-17 18:23 ` Eric McDonald
2004-08-17 18:47 ` Hans Ronne
2004-08-17 18:59 ` Eric McDonald
2004-08-17 19:39 ` Hans Ronne
2004-08-17 21:14 ` Eric McDonald [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.44.0408171616520.31852-100000@leon.phy.cmich.edu \
--to=mcdonald@phy.cmich.edu \
--cc=hronne@comhem.se \
--cc=xconq7@sources.redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).