Prev: Computer problems Next: Re: FT-Number crunching required (HELP)

# RE: FT-Number crunching required (HELP)

From: "Bell, Brian K (Contractor)" <Brian.Bell@d...>
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 08:38:17 -0400
Subject: RE: FT-Number crunching required (HELP)
``````
Beth,

How do you get an average damage of 15.75 from a single MT missile vs no
PDS?
They only get 2 dice of damage, so the MAXIMUM would be 12. Average the
average should be about 7.5 and the mean 7.

-----
Brian Bell
-----

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Derek Fulton [SMTP:derekfulton@bigpond.com]
> Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2001 11:57 PM
> To:	gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
> Subject:	Re: FT-Number crunching required (HELP)
>
> G'day
>
> Me stealing Derek's email here to correct myself!!
>
> I forgot to actually multiple my final results by the size of the
K-gun
> (so
> did the if less then class double damage adjustment, but not the
actual
> class value stuff.... ugh!)
>
> The table for an MTM-K3 SHOULD look more like....
>
> #PDS: 1 SM	3 MTM	 2 MTM	  1 MTM
>      0     12.25     47.25	 31.50	     15.75
>      1      9.75	39.38	  23.63       7.88
>      2      7.62	31.50	  15.75       3.94
>      3      5.85	23.63	   11.81      1.98
>      4      4.39	19.69	   7.88        0.99
>      5      3.24	15.75	   5.92        0.50
>      6      2.36	11.81	   3.94        0.25
>
> And the K2 version....
>
> #PDS: 1 SM	3 MTM	 2 MTM	  1 MTM
>      0     12.25     28.00	 18.67	     9.33
>      1      9.75	23.33	  14.00       4.67
>      2      7.62	18.67	  9.33	       2.33
>      3      5.85	14.00	  7.00	       1.17
>      4      4.39	11.67	  4.67	       0.59
>      5      3.24	9.33	   3.51 	0.29
>      6      2.36	7.00	   2.33 	0.15
>
> So in comparison to the normal MTMs with the table
> #PDS: 1 SM	3 MTM	 2 MTM	  1 MTM
>      0     12.25     21.00	 14.00	     7.00
>      1      9.75	17.50	  10.50       3.50
>      2      7.62	14.00	   7.00        1.75
>      3      5.85	10.50	   5.25        0.88
>      4      4.39	8.75	   3.50 	0.44
>      5      3.24	7.00	   2.63 	0.22
>      6      2.36	5.25	   1.75 	0.11
>
> You get the Mk-3 version at 2.25x as expensive and the Mk-2 version at

> 1.33x as expensive. Thus the k-3 version costs would be best modelled
by
> something like Mass 3, Cost of massx4.5, which is a bit difficult
under
> current FB integer costing system - so k-2 version is probably simpler
to
> go with at mass 2, cost of massx4.
>
> OK hopefully I go closer this time!! Sheesh!
>
> Beth
>
> Derek Fulton
> 12 Balaka st.
> Rosny, Hobart.
> Tasmania,  7018.
> Australia
>
> Phone; (03) 62459123
> Mobile; 0438459123
> Email; derekfulton@bigpond.com
> URL; http://www.users.bigpond.com/derekfulton/

``````

 Prev: Computer problems Next: Re: FT-Number crunching required (HELP)