From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27338 invoked by alias); 17 Aug 2004 19:29:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact xconq7-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: xconq7-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 27303 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2004 19:29:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO av15-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net) (81.228.10.102) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 17 Aug 2004 19:29:25 -0000 Received: by av15-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 664E837E47; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 21:29:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp4-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (smtp4-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net [81.228.10.181]) by av15-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5420C37E43; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 21:29:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [212.181.162.155] (h155n1fls24o1048.bredband.comhem.se [212.181.162.155]) by smtp4-1-sn4.m-sp.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F87337E46; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 21:29:24 +0200 (CEST) X-Sender: u22611592@m1.226.comhem.se Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 19:39:00 -0000 To: Eric McDonald From: Hans Ronne Subject: Re: Major bug and what to do about it (long) Cc: xconq7@sources.redhat.com X-SW-Source: 2004/txt/msg00933.txt.bz2 >> >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 at all. I am talking about a fire-into substitute action here, > >When we talk about 'fire-into' as it presently stands, it is >really 'fire-at-any'. > >>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). Exactly. But this small chance would still be the same regardless of where the unseen unit is in the cell. You seemed to argue above that we would be "directly aiming at the subsitute unit", but this is not possible if it is invisible. Hans