Re: 4th Heavy Beams

I accidentally saw my name mentioned:

Noam wrote:

>>> The better comparison is the SML+ Magazine, and that's so subject
to >>> random factors as to be hard to compare with confidence.
>> 
>>really? does anyone [1] think the SM(L+M) combination can be
>>analysed?
> 
>As you note, Oerjan may, but me as a mere mortal who dislikes SM's to
>begin with....

Sorry, no. I can't analyse the SMs properly - not if I have to include
the probability that they are on target, anyway, and that must be
included if you compare them to non-template weapons. Template-weapon
hit probabilities depends entirely on player skill, and I have too
little data on how good players are to get any meaningful results :-/

I haven't followed the HB discussion at all because of other projects -
too many posts in too short a time while I had too much else to do :-(
Will try to catch up some day, but it won't be this weekend.

Later,

Oerjan Ohlson
oerjan.ohlson@telia.com

"Life is like a sewer.
  What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
- Hen3ry