Re: 4th Heavy Beams

On Sat, 5 Feb 2000, Oerjan Ohlson wrote:

> I accidentally saw my name mentioned:

sorry!

> 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 :-/

this is true. might it be possible to work out what the damage per mass
is
assuming 100% hit rate, and then figure out what the hit rate would have
to be to make them balance with HBs? if it'a 0.9 or 0.1, then there's
clearly some unbalance, but if it's in the 0.3-0.7 range, it's probably
okay.

tom