RE: DS2: Design questions of my own.

>From: "B Lin" <lin@rxkinetix.com>
>Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
>To: <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
>Subject: RE: DS2: Design questions of my own.
>Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 15:27:47 -0700
>
>The difference here is the usage of %.
>
>The point I was making was the % chance of kill was increased by 25,
thus 
>25% increase.
>
>You are using % as a factorial increase - 50% increase over the 50% 
>baseline.
>
>Since there is an absolute limit to % kill, it makes more sense to use
100% 
>kill as the baseline and count absolute, not relational increases - so
a 
>25% increase means 25 more percent chance to kill compared to a 100%
chance 
>to kill rather than using a fractional description.
>
>If a weapon system was listed as being 500% better than another for
only an 
>increase of 50% mass it would sound good.
>
>Or would it be easier to rate if you stated that it increased the kill 
>percentage by 16% for a cost of 2 mass?
>
>Does it still sound as good if you find out it has an overall 20%
chance of 
>kill for 6 mass?
>
>Your usage depends on what number you are using for a baseline.

The weapons compared determine the baseline. The change between the two 
values is what you need to compare.  That's why the same criteria are 
applied to the kill % as to the mass increase.

As your baseline increases in value, the apparent value of the increases

goes down (i.e. 10 points compared to 10 points is 100%, but compared to
50 
is only 20%)

Just as 12 points compared to 15 is a certain %, but compared to 100 is 
different.  But the only relevant relationship is between the two values

compared.  But we're repeating ourselves.

When rolling % dice, what is important is that it is a 10 point or 10% 
difference, not that it is 10% depending on the baseline.

But when comparing two guns, what matters IS the baseline.

>The use of mass % is faulty for the same reason, as you get to larger
and 
>larger masses, the amount a single unit counts towards the percentage 
>change decreases.
>
>You can accurately compare Kill% to mass if you assume each item you
are 
>comparing starts with the same mass.
>
>Your calculation below is a correct way to compare systems - a %kill
rate 
>to a single mass unit.  In the case below you fixed the kill rate to
75%.

What you're missing is that if you compare kill% increase to mass
increase 
using the same relationship for each, you get the same comparison as
what I 
did with the algebra.

Brian B2

_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. 
http://www.hotmail.com